Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A nonverbal test of knowledge attribution: a comparative study on dogs and children

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Animal Cognition Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The sensitivity of eleven pet dogs and eleven 2.5-year-old children to others’ past perceptual access was tested for object-specificity in a playful, nonverbal task in which a human Helper’s knowledge state regarding the whereabouts of a hidden toy and a stick (a tool necessary for getting the out-of-reach toy) was systematically manipulated. In the four experimental conditions the Helper either participated or was absent during hiding of the toy and the stick and therefore she knew the place(s) of (1) both the toy and the stick, (2) only the toy, (3) only the stick or (4) neither of them. The subjects observed the hiding processes, but they could not reach the objects, so they had to involve the Helper to retrieve the toy. The dogs were more inclined to signal the place of the toy in each condition and indicated the location of the stick only sporadically. However the children signalled both the location of the toy and that of the stick in those situations when the Helper had similar knowledge regarding the whereabouts of them (i.e. knew or ignored both of them), and in those conditions in which the Helper was ignorant of the whereabouts of only one object the children indicated the place of this object more often than that of the known one. At the same time however, both dogs and children signalled the place of the toy more frequently if the Helper had been absent during toy-hiding compared to those conditions when she had participated in the hiding. Although this behaviour appears to correspond with the Helper’s knowledge state, even the subtle distinction made by the children can be interpreted without a casual understanding of knowledge-formation in others.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agnetta B, Hare B, Tomasello M (2001) Cues to food locations that domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) of different ages do and do not use. Anim Cogn 3:107–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bräuer J, Call J, Tomasello M (2004) Visual perspective taking in dogs (Canis familiaris) in the presence of barriers. Appl Anim Behav Sci 88:299–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Call J (2001) Chimpanzee social cognition. Trends Cogn Sci 5:388–393

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Call J, Agnetta B, Tomasello M (2000) Cues that chimpanzees do and do not use to find hidden objects. Anim Cogn 3:23–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Call J, Bräuer J, Kaminski J, Tomasello M (2003) Domestic dogs are sensitive to the attentional state of humans. J Comp Psychol 117:257–263

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter M, Call J, Tomasello M (2002) A new false belief test for 36-month-olds. Br J Dev Psychol 20:393–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandler M, Fritz AS, Hala S (1989) Small-Scale Deceit: Deception as a Marker of Two-, Three- and Four-Year-Olds’ Early Theories of Mind. Child Dev 60:1263–1277

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Clements WA, Perner J (1994) Implicit understanding of belief. Cogn Dev 9:377–395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper JJ, Ashton C, Bishop S, West R, Mills DS, Young RJ (2003) Clever hounds: social cognition in the domestic dog (Canis familiaris). Appl Anim Behav Sci 81:229–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunham P, Dunham F, O’Keefe C (2000) Two-year-olds’ sensitivity to a parent’s knowledge state: Mind reading or contextual cues? Br J Dev Psychol 18:519–532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiset S, Beaulieu C, Landry F (2003) Duration of dogs’ (Canis familiaris) working memory in search for disappearing objects. Anim Cogn 6:1–10

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gácsi M, Miklósi Á, Varga O, Topál J, Csányi V (2004) Are readers of our face readers of our minds? Dogs (Canis familiaris) show situation-dependent recognition of human’s attention. Anim Cogn 7:144–153

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Garnham WA, Ruffmann T (2001) Doesn’t see, doesn’t know: Is anticipatory looking related to understanding of belief? Dev Sci 4:94–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gergely Gy, Csibra G (1997) Teleological reasoning in infancy: The infant’s naive theory of rational action. A reply to Premack and Premack. Cogn 63:227–233

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez JC (1996) Nonhuman primate theories of (nonhuman primate) minds: some issues concerning the origins of mindreading. In: Carruthers P, Smith PK (eds) Theories of theories of mind. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 330–343

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomez JC (1998) Assessing theory of mind with nonverbal procedures: Problems with training methods and an alternative “key” procedure. Behav Brain Sci 21:119–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez JC, Teixidor P (1992) Theory of mind in an orangutan: A nonverbal test of false-belief appreciation? Paper presented at the XIV. Congress of the International Primatological Society, Strasbourg

    Google Scholar 

  • Hare B, Brown M, Williamson C, Tomasello M (2002) The domestication of cognition in dogs. Science 298:1634–1636

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hare B, Call J, Tomasello M (1998) Communication of food location between human and dog (Canis familiaris). Evol and Comm 2:137–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Hare B, Call J, Tomasello M (2001) Do chimpanzees know what conspecifics know? Anim Behav 61:139–151

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hare B, Tomasello M (1999) Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) use human and conspecific social cues to locate hidden food. J Comp Psychol 113:1–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Held S, Mendl M, Devereux C, Byrne RW (2001) Behaviour of domestic pigs in a visual perspective taking task. Behaviour 138:1337–1354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heyes CM (1993) Anecdotes, training, trapping and triangulating: do animals attribute mental states? Anim Behav 46:177–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heyes CM (1994) Cues, convergence and a curmudgeon: a reply to Povinelli. Anim Behav 48:242–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heyes CM (1998) Theory of mind in nonhuman primates. Behav Brain Sci 21:101–148

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hirata S, Matsuzawa T (2001) Tactics to obtain a hidden food item in chimpanzee pairs (Pan troglodytes). Anim Cogn 4:285–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuroshima H, Fujita K, Adachi I, Iwata K, Fuyuki A (2003) A Capuchin monkey (Cebus apella) recognizes when people do and do not know the location of food. Anim Cogn 6:283–291

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuroshima H, Fujita K, Fuyuki A, Masuda T (2002) Understanding of the relationship between seeing and knowing by tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Anim Cogn 5:41–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miklósi Á, Kubinyi E, Topál J, Gácsi M, Virányi Zs, Csányi V (2003) A simple reason for a big difference: wolves do not look back at humans but dogs do. Curr Biol 13:763–767

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miklósi Á, Polgárdi R, Topál J, Csányi V (1998) Use of experimenter-given cues in dogs. Anim Cogn 1:113–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miklósi Á, Polgárdi R, Topál J, Csányi V (2000) Intentional behaviour in dog-human communication: an experimental analysis of ‘showing’ behaviour in the dog. Anim Cogn 3:159–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miklósi Á, Topál J, Csányi V. (2004) Comparative social cognition: what can dogs teach us? Anim Behav 67:995–1004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill DK (1996) Two-Year-Old Children’s Sensitivity to a Parent’s Knowledge State When Making Requests. Child Dev 67:659–677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill DK, Astington JW, Flavell JH (1992) Young children’s understanding of the role that sensory experiences play in knowledge acquisition. Child Dev 63:474–490

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Perner J (2000) Memory and theory of mind. In: Tulving E, Craik FIM (eds) The Oxford handbook of memory. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 297–312

    Google Scholar 

  • Povinelli DJ (1994) Comparative studies of mental state attribution: a reply to Heyes. Anim Behav 48:239–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Povinelli DJ, Bierschwale DT, Cech CG (1999) Comprehension of seeing as a referential act in young children, but not juvenile chimpanzees. Br J Dev Psychol 17:37–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Povinelli DJ, deBlois S (1992) Young Children’s (Homo sapiens) Understanding of Knowledge Formation in Themselves and Others. J Comp Psychol 106:228–238

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Povinelli DJ, Nelson KE, Boysen ST (1990) Inferences about guessing and knowing by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Comp Psychol 104:203–210

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Povinelli DJ, Parks KA, Novak MA (1991) Do rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) attribute knowledge and ignorance to others? J Comp Psychol 105:318–325

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Povinelli DJ, Vonk J (2003) Chimpanzee minds: suspiciously human? Trends Cogn Sci 4:157–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Premack D (1988) “Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?” revisited. In: Byrne RW, Whiten A (eds) Machiavellian intelligence. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 160–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Premack D, Woodruff G (1978) Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behav Brain Sci 4:515–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson L, Smith L (1998) Memory and attention make smart word learning: An alternative account of Akhtar, Carpenter and Tomasello. Child Dev 69:94–104

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schleidt WM (1998) Is humaneness canine? Human Ethol Bull 13:1–4

    Google Scholar 

  • Shatz M, O’Reilly AW (1990) Conversational or communicative skills? A reassessment of two-year-old children’s behaviour in miscommunication episodes. J Child Lang 17:131–146

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Soproni K, Miklósi Á, Topál J, Csányi V (2001) Comprehension of Human Communicative Signs in Pet Dogs (Canis familiaris). J Comp Psychol 115:122–126

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Soproni K, Miklósi Á, Topál J, Csányi V (2002) Dogs’ responsiveness to human pointing gestures. J Comp Psychol 116:27–34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tomasello M, Call J, Hare B (2003a) Chimpanzees understand psychological states—the question is which ones and to what extent. Trends Cogn Sci 4:153–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomasello M, Call J, Hare B (2003b) Chimpanzees versus humans: it’s not that simple. Trends Cogn Sci 7:239–240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Topál J, Miklósi Á, Csányi V (1997) Dog-human relationship affects problem solving behavior in the dog. Antrozoos 10:214–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Vilà C, Savolainen P, Maldonado JE, Amorim IR, Rice JE, Honeycutt RL, Crandall KA, Lundeberg J, Wayne RK (1997) Multiple and Ancient Origins of the Domestic Dog. Science 276:1687–1689

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Virányi Zs, Topál J, Gácsi M, Miklósi Á, Csányi V (2004) Dogs can recognize the behavioural cues of the attentional focus in humans. Behav Proc 66:161–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wellman HM, Phillips AT (2001) Developing intentional understandings. In: Malle BF, Moses LJ, Baldwin DA (eds) Intentions and intentionality: foundations of social cognition. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 125–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Whiten A (1996) When does smart behaviour-reading become mind-reading? In: Carruthers P, Smith PK (eds) Theories of theories of mind. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 277–292

    Google Scholar 

  • Whiten A (2000) Chimpanzee cognition and the question of mental re-representation. In: Sperber D (ed) Metarepresentation: a multidisciplinary perspective. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 139–167

    Google Scholar 

  • Wimmer H, Hogrefe G, Perner J (1988) Children’s understanding of informational access as source of knowledge. Child Dev 59:386–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (F01031) and an OTKA grant (T029705). This research complies with the current Hungarian laws on animal protection.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ethology, ELTE University Budapest, Pázmány P. sétány 1/C, H-1117, Hungary

    Zs. Virányi & Á. Miklósi

  2. Comparative Ethology Research Group, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Hungary

    J. Topál & V. Csányi

Authors
  1. Zs. Virányi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Topál
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Á. Miklósi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. V. Csányi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zs. Virányi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Virányi, Z., Topál, J., Miklósi, Á. et al. A nonverbal test of knowledge attribution: a comparative study on dogs and children. Anim Cogn 9, 13–26 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-005-0257-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-005-0257-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation