Skip to main content
Log in

Dogs are able to solve a means-end task

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

Abstract

Dogs, although very skilled in social-communicative tasks, have shown limited abilities in the domain of physical cognition. Consequently, several researchers hypothesized that domestication enhanced dogs’ cognitive abilities in the social realm, but relaxed selection on the physical one. For instance, dogs failed to demonstrate means-end understanding, an important form of relying on physical causal connection, when tested in a string-pulling task. Here, we tested dogs in an “on/off” task using a novel approach. Thirty-two dogs were confronted with four different conditions in which they could choose between two boards one with a reward “on” and another one with a reward “off” (reward was placed next to the board). The dogs chose the correct board when (1) both rewards were placed at the same distance from the dog, when (2) the reward placed “on” the board was closer to the dog, and (3) even when the reward placed “off” the board was much closer to the dog and was food. Interestingly, in the latter case, dogs did not perform above chance, if instead of a direct reward, the dogs had to retrieve an object placed on the board to get a food reward. In contrast to previous string-pulling studies, our results show that dogs are able to solve a means-end task even if proximity of the unsupported reward is a confounding factor.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Auersperg AMI, Gajdon GK, Huber L (2009) Kea (Nestor notabilis) consider spatial relationships between objects in the support problem. Biol Lett 5:455–458

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bird CD, Emery NJ (2010) Rooks perceive support relations similar to six-month-old babies. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B-Biol Sci 277:147–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boysen ST, Mukobi KL, Berntson GG (1999) Overcoming response bias using symbolic representations of number by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Anim Learn Behav 27:229–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bratman M (1981) Intention and means-end reasoning. Philos Rev 90:252–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bräuer J, Kaminski J, Riedel J, Call J, Tomasello M (2006) Making inferences about the location of hidden food: social dog, causal ape. J Comp Psych 120:38–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cacchione T, Krist H (2004) Recognizing impossible object relations: intuitions about support in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Comp Psych 118:140–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Call J (2006) Descartes’ two errors: reason and reflection in the great apes. In: Hurley S, Nudds M (eds) Rational animals? Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 219–234

    Google Scholar 

  • Collier-Baker E, Davis JM, Suddendorf T (2004) Do dogs (Canis familiaris) understand invisible displacement? J Comp Psych 118:421–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Mendonca-Furtado O, Ottoni EB (2008) Learning generalization in problem solving by a blue-fronted parrot (Amazona aestiva). Anim Cogn 11:719–725

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deacon TW (1997) The symbolic species: the co-evolution of language and the brain. Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond A (1990) Developmental time course in human infants and infant monkeys, and the neural basis of the inhibitory control of reaching. In: Diamond A (ed) The development and neural bases of higher cognitive functions. New York Academy of Sciences, New York, pp 637–676

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickinson A (1980) Contemporary animal learning theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Erdohegyi A, Topál J, Virányi Zs, Miklósi Á (2007) Dog-logic: inferential reasoning in a two-way choice task and its restricted use. Anim Behav 74:725–737

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiset S, LeBlanc V (2007) Invisible displacement understanding in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris): the role of visual cues in search behavior. Anim Cogn 10:211–224

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fiset S, Gagnon S, Beaulieu C (2000) Spatial encoding of hidden objects in dogs (Canis familiaris). J Comp Psych 114:315–324

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Frank H (1980) Evolution of canine information processing under conditions of natural and artificial selection. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 5:389–399

    Google Scholar 

  • Hare B, Tomasello M (2005) Human-like social skills in dogs? TRENDS Cogn Sci 9:439–444

    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  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hauser MD, Kralik J, Botto-Mahan C (1999) Problem solving and functional design features: experiments on cotton-top tamarins, Saguinus oedipus oedipus. Anim Behav 57:565–582

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich B (1995) An experimental investigation of insight in Common Ravens (Corvus corax). Auk 112:994–1003

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemmer H (1990) Domestication. The decline of environmental appreciation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Herre W, Röhrs M (1973) Haustiere-Zoologisch Gesehen. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrmann E, Wobber V, Call J (2008) Great apes’ (Pan troglodytes, Pan paniscus, Gorilla gorilla, Pongo pygmaeus) understanding of tool functional properties after limited experience. J Comp Psych 122:220–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irie-Sugimoto N, Kobayashi T, Sato T, Hasegawa T (2008) Evidence of means—end behavior in Asian elephants (Elephas maximus). Anim Cogn 11:359–365

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Köhler W (1927) The mentality of apes. Vintage Books, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kralik JD, Hauser MD, Zimlicki R (2002) The relationship between problem solving and inhibitory control: cotton-top tamarin (Saguinus oedipus) performance on a reversed contingency task. J Comp Psych 116:39–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall-Pescini S, Valsecchi P, Petak I, Accorsi PA, Previde EP (2008) Does training make you smarter? The effects of training on dogs’ performance (Canis familiaris) in a problem- solving task. Behav Process 78:449–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCall CA, Burgin SE (2002) Equine utilization of secondary reinforcement during response extinction and acquisition. Appl Anim Behav Sci 78:253–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miklósi Á, Soproni K (2006) A comparative analysis of animals’ understanding of the human pointing gesture. Anim Cogn 9:81–94

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miklósi Á, Polgardi 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 Zs, Csányi V (2003) A simple reason for a big difference: wolves do not look back at humans but dogs do. Curr Biol 13:763–766

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Osthaus B, Lea SEG, Slater AM (2003) Training influences problem-solving abilities in dogs (Canis lupus familiaris). In: Proceedings of Annual BSAS Conference. p 103

  • Osthaus B, Lea SEG, Slater AM (2005) Dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) fail to show understanding of means-end connections in a string-pulling task. Anim Cogn 8:37–47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Piaget J (1952) The origins of intelligence in children. International University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pongrácz P, Miklósi Á, Kubinyi E, Gurobi K, Topál J, Csányi V (2001) Social learning in dogs: the effect of a human demonstrator on the performance of dogs in a detour task. Anim Behav 62:1109–1117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Povinelli DJ (2000) Folk physics for apes. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pryor K (2009) Reaching the animal mind: clicker training and what it teaches us about all animals. Scribner, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core T (2009) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org

  • Range F, Heucke SL, Gruber C, Konz A, Huber L, Zs Virányi (2009) The effect of ostensive cues on dogs’ performance in a manipulative social learning task. Appl Anim Behav Sci 120:170–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santos LR, Rosati A, Sproul C, Spaulding B, Hauser MD (2005) Means-means-end tool choice in cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus): finding the limits on primates’ knowledge of tools. Anim Cogn 8:236–246

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt GF, Cook RG (2006) Mind the gap: means-end discrimination by pigeons. Anim Behav 71:599–608

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thorndike EL (1898) Animal intelligence: an experimental study of the associative processes in animals. Psychol Rev Monogr Suppl 2

  • Tomasello M, Call J (1997) Primate cognition. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    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 

  • Topál J, Kubinyi E, Gácsi M, Miklósi Á (2005) Obeying social rules: a comparative study on dogs and humans. J Cult Evol Psych 3:213–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Udell MAR, Dorey NR, Wynne CDL (2010) What did domestication do to dogs? A new account of dogs’ sensitivity to human actions. Biol Rev 85:327–345

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Virányi Z, Gácsi M, Kubinyi E, Topál J, Belényi B, Ujfalussy D, Miklósi Á (2008) Comprehension of human pointing gestures in young human-reared wolves and dogs. Anim Cogn 11:373–387

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vlamings P, Uher J, Call J (2006) How the great apes (Pan troglodytes, Pongo pygmaeus, Pan paniscus, and Gorilla gorilla) perform on the reversed contingency task: The effects of food quantity and food visibility. J Exp Psych-Anim Behav Process 32:60–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vonk J, Subiaul F (2009) Do chimpanzees know what others can and cannot do? Reasoning about ‘capability’. Anim Cogn 12:267–286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Watson JS, Gergely G, Csanyi V, Topal J, Gacsi M, Sarkozi Z (2001) Distinguishing logic from association in the solution of an invisible displacement task by children (Homo sapiens) and dogs (Canis familiaris): Using negation of disjunction. J Comp Psych 115:219–226

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Werdenich D, Huber L (2006) A case of quick problem solving in birds: string pulling in keas, Nestor notabilis. Anim Behav 71:855–863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitt E, Douglas M, Osthaus B, Hockin I (2009) Domestic cats (Felis catus) do not show causal understanding in a string-pulling task. Anim Cogn 12:739–743

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wobber V, Hare B (2009) Testing the social dog hypothesis: are dogs also more skilled than chimpanzees in non-communicative social tasks? Behav Process 81:423–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wynne CDL, Udell MAR, Lord KA (2008) Ontogeny’s impact on human–dog communication. Anim Behav 76:e1–e4

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The project is financially supported by Austrian Science Fund (FWF) projects P21418 and P21244 (FR). We thank Corsin Müller for helping with the analyses, the dog owners for participating, and Daniel Povinelli and three referees for helpful comments on an earlier version of this manuscript. We further thank a private sponsor and Royal Canin for financial support of the Clever Dog Lab.

Conflict of interest

We declare that all experiments conducted in this study comply with the current laws of Austria where they were performed and that the authors have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Friederike Range.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Range, F., Hentrup, M. & Virányi, Z. Dogs are able to solve a means-end task. Anim Cogn 14, 575–583 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-011-0394-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-011-0394-5

Keywords

Navigation