Acta Biologica Hungarica

, Volume 66, Issue 1, pp 27–40 | Cite as

A Comparison of Rating and Coding Behavioural Traits in Dogs

  • Enikő KubinyiEmail author
  • Samuel D. Gosling
  • Ádám Miklósi


The aim of the present study was to examine the links between independent rating and coding approaches to assessing activity-impulsivity and inattention in dogs. Fifty-six adult Belgian shepherd dogs were videotaped performing in behavioural tests. Seventeen behavioural variables were measured by coders (video coding). Raters watched the same videotapes and then rated the activity-impulsivity and inattention of each dog (video rating). Owners filled out the Dog ADHS-RS questionnaire measuring activity-impulsivity and inattention. Video rating of activity-impulsivity correlated with the scale scores of the owner, but video codings did not. The results suggest that the owner ratings and video ratings are tapping the same constructs, but behavioural variables assessed in the present study were not appropriate for mirroring the owners’ assessments. The findings suggest that if consistent individual differences in broad behavioural traits are the primary focus of analyses, then ratings seem to capture information not easily captured in coding approaches designed to assess the same constructs.


Dog behavioural trait activity coding rating 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Cronbach, L. J., Meehl, P. E. (1955) Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychol. Bull. 52, 281–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    DuPaul, G. J. (1998) ADHD Rating Scale-IV: Checklist, Norms and Clinical Interpretations. Guilford Press, New York.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Feaver, J., Mendl, M., Bateson, P. (1986) A method for rating the individual distinctiveness of domestic cats. Anim. Behav. 34, 1016–1025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fratkin, J. L., Sinn, D. L., Patall, E. A., Gosling, S. D. (2013) Personality consistency in dogs: a metaanalysis. PloS One 8, e54907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Freeman, H. D., Gosling, S. D. (2010) Personality in nonhuman primates: A review and evaluation of past research. Amer. J. of Primatol. 71, 1–19.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gosling, S. D. (2001) From mice to men: What can we learn about personality from animal research? Psychol. Bull. 127, 45–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gosling, S. D., Bonnenburg, A. V. (1998) An integrative approach to personality research in anthrozoology: Ratings of six species of pets ant their owners. Anthrozoös, 11, 148–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gosling, S. D., Kwan, V. S. Y., John, O. P. (2003) A dog’s got personality: A cross-species comparative approach to evaluating personality judgments. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 85, 1161–1169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hejjas, K., Kubinyi, E., Ronai, Zs., Szekely, A., Vas, J., Miklósi, Á., Sasvari-Szekely, M., Kereszturi, E. (2009) Molecular and behavioural analysis of the intron 2 repeat polymorphism in canine dopamine D4 receptor gene. Genes Brain Behav. 8, 330–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Horback, K. M., Miller, L. J., Kuczaj II, S. A. (2013) Personality assessment in African elephants (Loxodonta africana): Comparing the temporal stability of ethological coding versus trait rating. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 149, 55–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jones, A. C., Gosling, S. D. (2005) Temperament and personality in dogs (Canis familiaris): A review and evaluation of past research. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 95, 1–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ijichi, C., Collins, L. M., Creighton, E., Elwood, R. W. (2013). Harnessing the power of personality assessment: subjective assessment predicts behaviour in horses. Behav. Proc. 96, 47–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kwan, V. S. Y., Gosling, S. D., John, O. P. (2008) Anthropomorphism as a special case of social perception: A cross-species comparative approach and a new empirical paradigm. Soc. Cogn. 26, 129–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kubinyi, E., Miklósi, A., Kaplan, F., Gácsi, M., Topál, J., Csányi, V. (2004) Social behaviour of dogs encountering AIBO, an animal-like robot in a neutral and in a feeding situation. Behav. Proc. 65, 231–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kubinyi, E., Vas, J., Héjjas, K., Ronai, Zs., Brúder, I., Turcsán, B., Sasvári-Székely, M., Miklósi, Á. (2012) Polymorphism in the tyrosine hydroxylase (TH) gene is associated with activity-impulsivity in German shepherd dogs. PLoS One, 7, e30271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lehner, P. N. (1996) Handbook of Ethological Methods. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lit, L., Schweitzer, J. B., Iosif, A. M., Oberbauer, A. M. (2010) Owner reports of attention, activity, and impulsivity in dogs: a replication study. Behav. Brain Functions 6, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Martin, P., Bateson, P. (1993) Measuring Behaviour: An Introductory Guide. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Miklósi, Á. (2007) Dog Behaviour, Evolution, and Cognition. Oxford University Press, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mirkó, E., Dóka, A., Miklósi, Á. (2013) Association between subjective rating and behaviour coding and the role of experience in making video assessments on the personality of the domestic dog (Canis familiaris). Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 149, 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pongrácz, P., Miklósi, Á., Molnár, Cs., Csányi, V. (2005) Human listeners are able to classify dog barks recorded in different situations. J. Comp. Psychol. 119, 136–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rooney, N. J., Gaines, S. A., Bradshaw, J. W. S., Penman, S. (2007) Validation of a method for assessing the ability of trainee specialist search dogs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 103, 90–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schönbrodt, F. D., Perugini, M. (2013) At what sample size do correlations stabilize? J. Res. Pers. 47, 609–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stevenson-Hinde, J., Zunz, M. (1978) Subjective assessment of individual rhesus monkeys. Primates 19, 473–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tami, G., Gallagher A. (2009) Description of the behaviour of domestic dog (Canis familiaris) by experienced and inexperienced people. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 120, 159–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tóth L., Gácsi, M., Topál, J., Miklósi, Á. (2008) Playing styles and possible causative factors in dogs’ behaviour when playing with humans. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 114, 473–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Uher, J., Asendorpf, J. B. (2008) Personality assessment in the Great Apes: Comparing ecologically valid behaviour measures, behaviour ratings, and adjective ratings. J. Res. Pers. 42, 821–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vas, J., Topál, J., Gácsi, M., Miklósi, Á., Csányi, V. (2005) A friend or an enemy? Dogs’ reaction to an unfamiliar person showing behavioural cues of threat and friendliness at different times. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 94, 99–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vas, J., Topál, J., Péch, É., Miklósi, Á. (2007) Measuring attention deficit and activity in dogs: A new application and validation of a human ADHD questionnaire. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 103, 105–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vazire, S., Gosling, S. D., Dickey, A. S., Schaprio, S. J. (2007) Measuring personality in nonhuman animals. In: Robins, R. W., Fraley, R. C., Krueger, R. (eds), Handbook of Research Methods in Personality Psychology. Guilford, New York, pp. 190–206.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Weinstein, T. A. R., Capitanio, J. P., Gosling, S. D. (2008) Personality in Animals. In: John, O. P., Robins, R. W., Pervin, L. A. (eds), Handbook of Personality Theory and Research. Guilford, New York, pp. 328–348.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wemelsfelder, F., Hunter, E. A., Mendl, M. T., Lawrence, A. B. (2001) Assessing the ‘whole animal’: a Free-Choice-Profiling approach. Anim. Behav. 62, 209–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wilsson, E., Sundgren, P.-E. (1998) Behaviour test for eight-week old puppies-heritabilities of tested behaviour traits and its correspondence to later behaviour. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 58, 151–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wilsson, E., Sinn, D. L. (2012) Are there differences between behavioral measurement methods? A comparison of the predictive validity of two ratings methods in a working dog program. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 141, 158–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2015

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Enikő Kubinyi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Samuel D. Gosling
    • 2
    • 3
  • Ádám Miklósi
    • 4
  1. 1.MTA-ELTE Comparative Ethology Research GroupBudapestHungary
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of TexasAustinUSA
  3. 3.School of Psychologial SciencesUniversity of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia
  4. 4.Department of EthologyEötvös UniversityBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations