Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Discrimination of human and dog faces and inversion responses in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris)

Animal Cognition Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Cite this article

Abstract

Although domestic dogs can respond to many facial cues displayed by other dogs and humans, it remains unclear whether they can differentiate individual dogs or humans based on facial cues alone and, if so, whether they would demonstrate the face inversion effect, a behavioural hallmark commonly used in primates to differentiate face processing from object processing. In this study, we first established the applicability of the visual paired comparison (VPC or preferential looking) procedure for dogs using a simple object discrimination task with 2D pictures. The animals demonstrated a clear looking preference for novel objects when simultaneously presented with prior-exposed familiar objects. We then adopted this VPC procedure to assess their face discrimination and inversion responses. Dogs showed a deviation from random behaviour, indicating discrimination capability when inspecting upright dog faces, human faces and object images; but the pattern of viewing preference was dependent upon image category. They directed longer viewing time at novel (vs. familiar) human faces and objects, but not at dog faces, instead, a longer viewing time at familiar (vs. novel) dog faces was observed. No significant looking preference was detected for inverted images regardless of image category. Our results indicate that domestic dogs can use facial cues alone to differentiate individual dogs and humans and that they exhibit a non-specific inversion response. In addition, the discrimination response by dogs of human and dog faces appears to differ with the type of face involved.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adachi I, Kuwahata H, Fujita K (2007) Dogs recall their owner’s face upon hearing the owner’s voice. Anim Cogn 10:17–21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brigham JC, Maass A, Snyder LD, Spaulding K (1982) Accuracy of eyewitness identifications in a field setting. J Personal Soc Psychol 42:673–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown SD, Dooling RJ (1992) Perception of conspecific faces by budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus): I. Natural faces. J Comp Psychol 106:203–216

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bruce V, Young AW (1998) In the eye of the beholder: The science of face perception. University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coulon M, Deputte BL, Baudoin C (2009) Individual recognition in domestic cattle (Bos taurus): evidence from 2D-images of heads from different breeds. PLoS One 4:e4441

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Davis SJM, Valla FR (1978) Evidence for domestication of the dog 12, 000 years ago in the Natufian of Israel. Nature 276:608–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dufour V, Pascalis O, Petit O (2006) Face processing limitation to own species in primates: a comparative study in brown capuchins, Tonkean macaques and humans. Behav Process 73:107–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott ES, Wills EJ, Goldstein AG (1973) The effects of discrimination training on the recognition of white and oriental faces. Bull Psychon Soc 2:71–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagan JF (1973) Infants’ delayed recognition memory and forgetting. J Exp Child Psychol 16:424–450

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fantz RL (1964) Visual experience in infants: decreased attention to familiar patterns relative to novel ones. Science 146:668–670

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Farah MJ (1996) Is face recognition ‘special’? Evidence from neuropsychology. Behav Brain Res 76:181–189

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Farah MJ, Wilson KD, Drain M, Tanaka JN (1998) What Is” Special” about face perception? Psychol Rev 105:482–498

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Feddersen-Petersen DU (2005) Communication in wolves and dogs. In: Bekoff M (ed) Encyclopedia of animal behavior, vol I. Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc., Westport, pp 385–394

    Google Scholar 

  • Furton KG, Myers LJ (2001) The scientific foundation and efficacy of the use of canines as chemical detectors for explosives. Talanta 54:487–500

    Article  CAS  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 

  • Gibson EJ, Walker AS (1984) Development of knowledge of visual-tactual affordances of substance. Child Dev 55:453–460

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gothard KM, Erickson CA, Amaral DG (2004) How do rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) scan faces in a visual paired comparison task? Anim Cogn 7:25–36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gothard KM, Brooks KN, Peterson MA (2009) Multiple perceptual strategies used by macaque monkeys for face recognition. Anim Cogn 12:155–167

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Guo K, Meints K, Hall C, Hall S, Mills D (2009) Left gaze bias in humans, rhesus monkeys and domestic dogs. Anim Cogn 12:409–418

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter MA, Ames EW (1988) A multifactor model of infant preferences for novel and familiar stimuli. Adv Infancy Res 5:69–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Hussain Z, Sekuler AB, Bennett PJ (2009) How much practice is needed to produce perceptual learning? Vis Res 21:2624–2634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendrick KM, Atkins K, Hinton MR, Heavens P, Keverne B (1996) Are faces special for sheep? Evidence from facial and object discrimination learning tests showing effects of inversion and social familiarity. Behav Process 38:19–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marinelli L, Mongillo P, Zebele A, Bono G (2009) Measuring social attention skills in pet dogs. J Veterinary Behavior: Clin Appl Res 4:46–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin-Malivel J, Fagot J (2001) Perception of pictorial human faces by baboons: effects of stimulus orientation on discrimination performance. Anim Learn Behav 29:10–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin-Malivel J, Okada K (2007) Human and chimpanzee face recognition in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): role of exposure and impact on categorical perception. Behav Neurosci 121:1145–1155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy G, Puce A, Gore JC, Allison T (1997) Face-specific processing in the human fusiform gyrus. J Cogn Neurosci 9:605–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKone E, Kanwisher N, Duchaine BC (2006) Can generic expertise explain special processing for faces? Trends Cogn Sci 11:8–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meints K, Woodford A (2008) Lincoln Infant Lab Package 2008: A new programme package for IPL, Preferential Listening, Habituation and Eyetracking [WWW document: Computer software & manual]. URL: http://www.lincoln.ac.uk/psychology/babylab.htm

  • 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, Kubinyi E, Topál J, Gácsi M, Virányi Z, Csányi V (2003) A simple reason for a big difference wolves do not look back at humans, but dogs do. Curr Biol 13:763–766

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller PE, Murphy CJ (1995) Vision in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 207:1623–1634

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moscovitch M (1997) What is special about face recognition? Nineteen experiments on a person with visual object agnosia and dyslexia but normal face recognition. J Cogn Neurosci 9:555–604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neiworth JJ, Hassett JM, Sylvester CJ (2007) Face processing in humans and new world monkeys: the influence of experiential and ecological factors. Anim Cogn 10:125–134

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • O’Toole AJ, Deffenbacher KA, Valentin D, Abdi H (1994) Structural aspects of face recognition and the other-race effect. Mem Cogn 22:208–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Parr LA, Heintz M (2008) Discrimination of faces and houses by Rhesus monkeys: the role of stimulus expertise and rotation angle. Anim Cogn 11:467–474

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parr LA, Dove T, Hopkins WD (1998) Why faces may be special: evidence of the inversion effect in chimpanzees. J Cogn Neurosci 10:615–622

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parr LA, Winslow JT, Hopkins WD (1999) Is the inversion effect in rhesus monkeys face-specific? Anim Cogn 2:123–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parr LA, Winslow JT, Hopkins WD, de Waal FBM (2000) Recognizing facial cues: individual discrimination by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and Rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). J Comp Psychol 114:47–60

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parr LA, Heintz M, Akamagwuna U (2006) Three studies on configural face processing by chimpanzees. Brain Cogn 62:30–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parr LA, Heintz M, Pradhan G (2008) Rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) lack expertise in face processing. J Comp Psychol 122:390–402

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pascalis O, Bachevalier J (1998) Face recognition in primates: a cross-species study. Behav Process 43:87–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pascalis O, de Haan M (2003) Recognition memory and novelty preference: what a model? In: Hayne H, Fagen J (eds) Progress in infancy research, vol 3. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey, pp 95–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Pascalis O, de Haan M, Nelson CA (2002) Is face processing species-specific during the first year of life? Science 296:1321–1323

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pascalis O, Scott LS, Kelly DJ, Shannon RW, Nicholson E, Coleman N, Nelson CA (2005) Plasticity of face processing in infancy. Proc Natl Acad Sci 102:5297–5300

    Article  CAS  PubMed  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 

  • Riesenhuber M, Wolff BF (2009) Task effects, performance levels, features, configurations, and holistic face processing: a reply to Rossion. Acta Psychol 102:286–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossion B (2008) Picture-plane inversion leads to qualitative changes of face perception. Acta Psychol 128:274–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossion B (2009) Distinguishing the cause and consequence of face inversion: the perceptual field hypothesis. Acta Psychol 132:300–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossion B, Gauthier I (2002) How does the brain process upright and inverted faces? Behav Cogn Neurosci Rev 1:62–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sangrigoli S, Pallier C, Argenti AM, Ventureyra VAG, de Schonen S (2005) Reversibility of the other-race effect in face recognition during childhood. Psychol Sci 16:440–444

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schoon A (1997) The performance of dogs in identifying humans by scent. Ph.D. Dissertation, Rijksuniveristeit, Leiden

  • Sekuler AB, Gaspar CM, Gold JM, Bennett PJ (2004) Inversion leads to quantitative, not qualitative, changes in face processing. Curr Biol 14:391–396

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Soproni K, Miklósi A, Topál J, Csányi V (2001) Comprehension of human communicative signs in pet dogs (Canis familiaris). J Comp Psychol 115:122–126

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sugita Y (2008) Face perception in monkeys reared with no exposure to faces. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105:394–398

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka JW, Kiefer M, Bukach CM (2004) A holistic account of the own-race effect in face recognition: evidence from a cross-cultural study. Cogn 93:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tarr MJ, Cheng YD (2003) Learning to see faces and objects. Trends Cogn Sci 7:23–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tibbetts EA (2002) Visual signals of individual identity in the wasp Polistes fuscatus. Proc R Soc Lond, Ser B: Biol Sci 269:1423–1428

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsao DY, Freiwald WA, Tootell RBH, Livingstone MS (2006) A cortical region consisting entirely of face-selective cells. Science 311:670–674

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Valentine T (1988) Upside-down faces: a review of the effect of inversion upon face recognition. Br J Psychol 79:471–491

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vila 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  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Virányi Z, Topál J, Gácsi M, Miklósi Á, Csányi V (2004) Dogs respond appropriately to cues of humans’ attentional focus. Behav Process 66:161–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner SH, Sakovits LJ (1986) A process analysis of infant visual and cross-modal recognition memory: implications for an amodal code. Adv Infancy Res 4:195–217

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin RK (1969) Looking at upside-down faces. J Comp Psychol 81:141–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Yovel G (2009) The shape of facial features, the spacing among them generate similar inversion effects: a reply to Rossion (2008). Acta Psychol 132:293–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. Olivier Pascalis for advice on experimental design and comments on the manuscript; Fiona Williams for helping data collection; and Sylvia Sizer, Szymon Burzynski and Angela Fieldsend for providing dog pictures. We also thank three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions on the manuscript. Ethical approval had been granted for the University of Lincoln (UK), and all procedures complied with the ethical guidance of the International Society for Applied Ethology.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biological Sciences, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, UK

    Anaïs Racca, Eleonora Amadei, Séverine Ligout & Daniel Mills

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, UK

    Anaïs Racca, Kun Guo & Kerstin Meints

  3. Dipartimento di Morfofisiologia Veterinaria e Produzioni Animali, Università degli Studi di Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Eleonora Amadei

Authors
  1. Anaïs Racca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eleonora Amadei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Séverine Ligout
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kun Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kerstin Meints
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Daniel Mills
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anaïs Racca.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Racca, A., Amadei, E., Ligout, S. et al. Discrimination of human and dog faces and inversion responses in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) . Anim Cogn 13, 525–533 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-009-0303-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-009-0303-3

Keywords

search

Navigation