A case for methodological overhaul and increased study of executive function in the domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris)
Executive function (EF) allows for self-regulation of behavior including maintaining focus in the face of distraction, inhibiting behavior that is suboptimal or inappropriate in a given context, and updating the contents of working memory. While EF has been studied extensively in humans, it has only recently become a topic of research in the domestic dog. In this paper, I argue for increased study of dog EF by explaining how it might influence the owner–dog bond, human safety, and dog welfare, as well as reviewing the current literature dedicated to EF in dogs. In “EF and its Application to “Man’s Best Friend” section, I briefly describe EF and how it is relevant to dog behavior. In “Previous investigations into EF in dogs” section, I provide a review of the literature pertaining to EF in dogs, specifically tasks used to assess abilities like inhibitory control, cognitive flexibility, and working memory capacity. In “Insights and limitations of previous studies” section, I consider limitations of existing studies that must be addressed in future research. Finally, in “Future directions” section, I propose future directions for meaningful research on EF in dogs.
KeywordsDogs Canine Cognition Executive function Attention
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The author declares that she has no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by the author.
- American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (n.d.). Pet statistics. Retrieved from https://www.aspca.org/animal-homelessness/shelter-intake-and-surrender/pet-statistics
- Baumeister RF, Bratslavsky E, Muraven M, Tice DM (1998) Ego depletion: is the active self a limited resource? Personal Process Individ Differ 74(5):1252–1265Google Scholar
- Braver TS, Gray JR, Burgess GC (2007) Explaining the many varieties of working memory variation: Dual mechanisms of cognitive control. In: Conway A, Jarrold C, Kane MJ, Miyake A, Towse JN (eds) Variation in working memory. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 76–106Google Scholar
- Cook PF, Prichard A, Spivak M, Berns GS (2016a) Awake canine fMRI predicts dogs’ preference for praise vs food. Soc Cognit Affect Neurosci 11(12):1853–1862Google Scholar
- Dunbar RI (1998) The social brain hypothesis. Brain 9(10):178–190Google Scholar
- Gazzaniga MS (2009) Neuroanatomy and development. In: Gazzaniga MS, Ivry RB, Mangun GR (eds) Cognitive Neuroscience: The Biology of the Mind. W. W. Norton & Company, New York, pp 59–109Google Scholar
- Landsberg GM, Hunthausen W, Ackerman L (2003) The effects of aging on the behavior of senior pets. Handbook of Behavior Problems of the Dog and Cat, 2nd edn. WB Saunders, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
- Mech DL (2000) Leadership in wolf, Canis lupus, packs. Can Field Nat 114(2):259–263Google Scholar
- Müller CA, Riemer S, Virányi Z, Huber L, Range F (2016) Inhibitory control, but not prolonged object- related experience appears to affect physical problem-solving performance of pet dogs. PLoS ONE 11(2):e0147753. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0147753 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Norman DA, Shallice T (1986) Attention to action: willed and automatic control of behavior. In: Davidson R, Schwartz RG, Shapiro D (eds) Consciousness and self-regulation: advances in research and theory. Plenum Press, New York, pp 1–18Google Scholar
- Ruehl WW, Bruyette DS, DePaoli A, Cotman CW, Head E, Milgram NW, Cummings BJ (1995) Canine cognitive dysfunction as a model for human age-related cognitive decline, dementia and Alzheimer’s disease: clinical presentation, cognitive testing, pathology and response to 1-deprenyl therapy. Prog Brain Res 106:217–225PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Schleidt WM, Shalter MD (2003) Co-evolution of humans and canids: an alternative view of dog domestication: homo homini lupus? Evol Cognit 9(1):57–72Google Scholar
- Somppi S, Tӧrnqvist H, Topál J, Koskela A, Hänninen L, Krause CM, Vainio O (2017) Nasal oxytocin treatment biases dogs’ visual attention and emotional response toward positive human facial expressions. Front Psychol 8:1854. https://doi.org/10.3380/fpsyg.2017.01854 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Topál J, Kis A, Oláh K (2014) Dogs’ sensitivity to human ostensive cues: a unique adaptation. The social dog: behavior and cognition 319–346Google Scholar
- Uzgiris IC, Hunt JM (1975) Assessment in infancy: Ordinal scales of psychological development. University of Illinois Press, ChampaignGoogle Scholar
- Wallis LJ, Range F, Müller CA, Serisier S, Huber L, Virányi Z (2014) Lifespan development of attentiveness in domestic dogs: drawing parallels with humans. Frontiers in Psychology 5(71):1–13Google Scholar
- Wright HF, Mills DS, Pollux PMJ (2011) Development and validation of a psychometric tool for assessing impulsivity in the domestic dog Canis familiaris. Int J Comp Psychol 24:210–225Google Scholar