My owner, right or wrong: the effect of familiarity on the domestic dog’s behavior in a food-choice task

Abstract

Dogs are strongly influenced by human behavior, and they readily form bonds with specific humans. Yet these lines of inquiry are not often combined. The goal of this study was to investigate whether such bonds would play a role in how dogs behave in response to human signals. Using various types of signals, we compared dogs’ use of information from a familiar human (their owner) versus an unfamiliar human when choosing between two food containers. In some conditions, the owner indicated a container that gave food and a stranger indicated a container that did not; in other conditions, this was reversed. Dogs more often chose the container indicated by or nearest to their owner, even when this container never yielded a food reward. In two conditions, dogs chose at chance: a control condition in which both pointers were strangers and a condition in which the owner and stranger sat reading books and provided no social signal. This is the first study to directly compare owners to strangers in a single food-choice situation. Our results suggest that dogs make decisions by attending preferentially to social signals from humans with whom they have become familiar.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. 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 Psychol 120(1):38–47

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Call J, Bräuer J, Kaminski J, Tomasello M (2003) Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) are sensitive to the attentional state of humans. J Comp Psychol 117(3):257–263

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Clutton-Brock J (1995) Origins of the dog: domestication and early history. In: Serpell J (ed) The domestic dog: its evolution, behavior and interactions with people. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  4. 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 Psy 81(3):229–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Coppinger R, Coppinger L (2001) Dogs: A startling new understanding of canine origin, behavior and evolution. NY, New York

    Google Scholar 

  6. Elgier A, Jakovcevic A, Barrera G, Mustaca A (2009) Communication between domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) and humans: dogs are good learners. Behav Proc 81:402–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Erdohegyi Á, Topál J, Virányi Z, 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 

  8. Gácsi M, Kara E, Belényi B, Topál J, Miklósi Á (2009) The effect of development and individual differences in pointing comprehension of dogs. Anim Cogn 12:471–479

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gácsi M, Topál J, Miklósi A, Doka A, Csányi V (2001) Attachment behavior of adult dogs (Canis familiaris) living at rescue centers: forming new bonds. J Comp Psychol 114(4):423–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gácsi M, Győri B, Miklósi Á, Virányi Z, Kubinyi E, Topál J, Csányi V (2005) Species-specific differences and similarities in the behavior of hand-raised dog and wolf pups in social situations with humans. Dev Psychobiol 47:111–122

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gray MM, Sutter NB, Ostrander EA, Wayne RK (2010) The IGF1 small dog haplotype is derived from Middle Eastern grey wolves. Biology 8(16). doi:10.1186/1741-7007-8-16

  12. Hare B, Tomasello M (2005) Human-like social skills in dogs? Trend Cog Sci 9:463–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kubinyi E, Topál J, Miklósi A, Csányi V (2003) Dogs (Canis familiaris) learn from their owners via observation in a manipulation task. J Comp Psychol 117(2):156–165

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kundey S, De Los Reyes A, Arbuthnot J, Allen R (2010) Domesticated dogs’(Canis familiaris) response to dishonest human points. Inter J Comp Psychol 23:201–215

    Google Scholar 

  15. Marshall-Pescini S, Passalacqua C, Barnard S, Valsecchi P, Prato-Previde E (2009) Agility and search and rescue training differently affects pet dogs’ behaviour in socio-cognitive tasks. Behav Proc 81:416–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Marshall-Pescini S, Prato-Previde E, Valsecchi P (2011) Are dogs (Canis familiaris) misled more by their owners than by strangers in a food task? Anim Cog 14(1):137–142

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Marshall-Pescini S, Passalacqua C, Miletto Petrazzini ME, Valsecchi P, Prato-Previde E (2012) Do Dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) make counterproductive choices because they are sensitive to human ostensive cues? PLoS ONE 7(4):e35437. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0035437

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. McKinley J, Sambrook T (2000) Use of human-given cues by domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) and horses (Equus caballus). Anim Cogn 3:13–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. McMahon S, Macpherson K, Roberts W (2010) Dogs choose a human informant: metacognition in canines. Behav Proc 85:293–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Merola I, Prato-Previde E, Marshall-Pescini S (2012) Social referencing in dog-owner dyads? Anim Cogn 15:175–185

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Miklósi Á, Soproni K (2006) A comparative analysis of animals’ understanding of the human pointing gesture. Anim Cogn 9:81–93

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

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

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 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(9):763–766

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Miklósi Á, Pongrácz P, Lakatos G, Topál J, Csányi V (2005) A comparative study of the use of visual communicative signals in interactions between dogs (Canis familiaris) and human and cats (Felis catus) and humans. J Comp Psychol 119(2):179–186

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Palestrini C, Prato-Previde E, Spiezio C, Verga M (2005) Heart rate and behavioral responses of dogs in the Ainsworth’s Strange Situation: a pilot study. Appl Anim Behav Sci 94:75–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Pettersson H, Kaminski J, Herrmann E, Tomasello M (2011) Understanding of human communicative motives in domestic dogs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 133(3):235–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Pongrácz P, Miklósi Á, Timar-Geng K, Csányi V (2003) Preference for copying unambiguous demonstrations in dogs (Canis familiaris). J Comp Psychol 117(3):337–343

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Pongrácz P, Vida V, Bánhegyi P, Miklósi Á (2008) How does dominance rank status affect individual and social learning performance in the dog (Canis familiaris)? Anim Cogn 11(1):75–82. doi:10.1007/s10071-007-0090-7

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Prato-Previde E, Marshall-Pescini S, Valsecchi P (2007) Is your choice my choice? The owners’ effect on pet dogs’ (Canis lupus familiaris) performance in a food choice task. Anim Cogn 11(1):167–174. doi:10.1007/s10071-007-0102-7

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Reid PJ (2009) Adapting to the human world: dogs’ responsiveness to our social cues. Behav Proc 80(3):325–333. doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2008.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Riedel J, Schumann K, Kaminski J, Call J, Tomasello M (2008) The early ontogeny of human-dog communication. Anim Beh 75:1003–1014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Soproni K, Miklósi Á, Topál J, Csányi V (2002) Dogs’ (Canis familiaris) responsiveness to human pointing gestures. J Comp Psychol 116(1):27–34

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Szetei V, Miklósi Á, Topál J, Csányi V (2003) When dogs seem to lose their nose: an investigation on the use of visual and olfactory cues in communicative context between dog and owner. Appl Anim Behav Sci 83:141–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Topal J, Miklósi Á, Csányi V, Dóka A (1998) A new application of Ainsworth’s (1969) Strange Situation Test. J Comp Psychol 112(3):219–229

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Topál J, Miklósi Á, Csányi V (1997) Dog-human relationship affects problem solving behavior in the dog. Anthrozoos 10(4):214–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Topál J, Kubinyi E, Gácsi M, Miklósi Á (2006) Obeying social rules: a comparative study on dogs and humans. J Cult Evol Psychol 3(3–4):223–243

    Google Scholar 

  37. Topál J, Gergely G, Erdohegyi A, Csibra G, Miklósi Á (2009) Differential sensitivity to human communication in dogs, wolves and human infants. Science 325:1269–1272

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Tuber D, Hennessy M, Sanders S, Miller J (1996) Behavioral and glucocorticoid responses of adult domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) to companionship and social separation. J Comp Psychol 110(1):103–108

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Udell M, Dorey N, Wynne C (2010) The performance of stray dogs (Canis familiaris) living in a shelter on human-guided object-choice tasks. Anim Behav 79:717–725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Udell M, Dorey N, Wynne C (2011) Can your dog read your mind? Understanding the causes of canine perspective taking. Learn and Behav 39(4):289–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 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(5319):1687–1689

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Wayne RK, vonHoldt BM (2012) Evolutionary genomics of dog domestication. Mamm Genome 23:3–18

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Kelly Dunbar, Sierra Eisen, Desiree Rogers, Susan Iyican, Anna Waismeyer, Mikel Delgado, and Aryn Hervel. We also thank the Committee on Research at the University of California, Berkeley; our dog participants and their people; and the University of California Chancellor’s Fellowship awarded to AC.

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amy Cook.

Appendix

Appendix

List of breeds.

French Bulldog.

Golden Retriever.

Labrador Retriever mix.

Beauceron.

Australian Cattle Dog mix.

Whippet mix.

German Shepherd.

Boston Terrier.

Rhodesian Ridgeback.

Australian Cattle Dog.

Australian Shepherd Labrador Retriever.

Mexican Hairless.

Rhodesian Ridgeback mix.

Rottweiler mix.

American Pit Bull Terrier mix.

Jack Russell Terrier mix.

Belgian Malinois.

Bearded Collie.

Cavalier King Charles Spaniel.

Cardigan Welsh Corgi.

Unidentifiable mixed breed.

We declare that these experiments comply with the current laws of the USA.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cook, A., Arter, J. & Jacobs, L.F. My owner, right or wrong: the effect of familiarity on the domestic dog’s behavior in a food-choice task. Anim Cogn 17, 461–470 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-013-0677-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Domestic dog
  • Pointing
  • Canis familiaris
  • Social cognition
  • Attachment