Effect of shared information and owner behavior on showing in dogs (Canis familiaris)

Dogs’ production of referential communicative signals, i.e., showing, has gained increasing scientific interest over the last years. In this paper, we investigate whether shared information about the present and the past affects success and form of dog–human interactions. Second, in the context of showing, owners have always been treated as passive receivers of the dog’s signals. Therefore, we examined whether the owner’s behavior can influence the success and form of their dog’s showing behavior. To address these questions, we employed a hidden-object task with knowledgeable dogs and naïve owners. Shared information about the present was varied via the spatial set-up, i.e., position of hiding places, within dog–owner pairs, with two conditions requiring either high or low precision in indicating the target location. Order of conditions varied between pairs, representing differences in shared knowledge about the past (communication history). Results do not support an effect of communication history on either success or showing effort. In contrast, the spatial set-up was found to affect success and choice of showing strategies. However, dogs did not adjust their showing effort according to different spatial set-ups. Our results suggest that the latter could be due to the owner’s influence. Owner behavior generally increased the effort of their dog’s showing behavior which was stronger in the set-up requiring low showing precision. Moreover, our results suggest that owners could influence their dog’s showing accuracy (and thereby success) which, however, tended to be obstructive.Introduction Showing Shared information and the principle of least effort The present study Materials and methods subjects materials and set-up prodedure; pretest test design behavioral coding statistical analysis) Results overall success distribution of showing types effect of correct showing, condition and time on success effect of condition and time on showing effort correlation between showing accuracy and seconds effect of owner behavior on correct showing effect of owner behavior on showing effort) Discussion Communication about the hidden object’s location Sensitivity to spatial set‑up and communication history The principle of least effort and the owner’s influence on it Limitations and implications for future researc

Dogs distinguish human intentional and unintentional action

When dogs interact with humans, they often show appropriate reactions to human intentional action. But it is unclear from these everyday observations whether the dogs simply respond to the action outcomes or whether they are able to discriminate between different categories of actions. Are dogs able to distinguish intentional human actions from unintentional ones, even when the action outcomes are the same? We tested dogs’ ability to discriminate these action categories by adapting the so-called “Unwilling vs. Unable” paradigm. This paradigm compares subjects’ reactions to intentional and unintentional human behaviour. All dogs received three conditions: In the unwilling-condition, an experimenter intentionally withheld a reward from them. In the two unable-conditions, she unintentionally withheld the reward, either because she was clumsy or because she was physically prevented from giving the reward to the dog. Dogs clearly distinguished in their spontaneous behaviour between unwilling- and unable-conditions. This indicates that dogs indeed distinguish intentional actions from unintentional behaviour. We critically discuss our findings with regard to dogs’ understanding of human intentional action.Results - Analysis of waiting - Other behavioural reactions Discussion Methods - Ethical statement - Subjects - Experimental set‑up - Procedure - Codin

Context and prediction matter for the interpretation of social interactions across species

Predictions about others’ future actions are crucial during social interactions, in order to react optimally. Another way to assess such interactions is to define the social context of the situations explicitly and categorize them according to their affective content. Here we investigate how humans assess aggressive, playful and neutral interactions between members of three species: human children, dogs and macaques. We presented human participants with short video clips of real-life interactions of dyads of the three species and asked them either to categorize the context of the situation or to predict the outcome of the observed interaction. Participants performed above chance level in assessing social situations in humans, in dogs and in monkeys. How accurately participants predicted and categorized the situations depended both on the species and on the context. Contrary to our hypothesis, participants were not better at assessing aggressive situations than playful or neutral situations. Importantly, participants performed particularly poorly when assessing aggressive behaviour for dogs. Also, participants were not better at assessing social interactions of humans compared to those of other species. We discuss what mechanism humans use to assess social situations and to what extent this skill can also be found in other social species.Introduction Methods - Subjects - Stimuli - Procedure - Design and coding - Statistical analyses Results - Context decisions - Outcome decisions - Comparison between context and outcome decisions Discussio

A quark model analysis of the charge symmetry breaking in nuclear force

In order to investigate the charge symmetry breaking (CSB) in the short range part of the nuclear force, we calculate the difference of the masses of the neutron and the proton, $\Delta {\rm M}$, the difference of the scattering lengths of the p-p and n-n scatterings, $\Delta a$, and the difference of the analyzing power of the proton and the neutron in the n-p scattering, $\Delta A(\theta)$, by a quark model. In the present model the sources of CSB are the mass difference of the up and down quarks and the electromagnetic interaction. We investigate how much each of them contributes to $\Delta {\rm M}$, $\Delta a$ and $\Delta A(\theta)$. It is found that the contribution of CSB of the short range part in the nuclear force is large enough to explain the observed $\Delta A(\theta)$, while $\Delta a$ is rather underestimated.Comment: 26 pages,6 figure

A new gas attenuator system for the ID17 biomedical beamline at the ESRF

Volume: 425Non peer reviewe

Dogs (Canis familiaris), but Not Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), Understand Imperative Pointing

Chimpanzees routinely follow the gaze of humans to outside targets. However, in most studies using object choice they fail to use communicative gestures (e.g. pointing) to find hidden food. Chimpanzees' failure to do this may be due to several difficulties with this paradigm. They may, for example, misinterpret the gesture as referring to the opaque cup instead of the hidden food. Or perhaps they do not understand informative communicative intentions. In contrast, dogs seem to be skilful in using human communicative cues in the context of finding food, but as of yet there is not much data showing whether they also use pointing in the context of finding non-food objects. Here we directly compare chimpanzees' (N = 20) and dogs' (N = 32) skills in using a communicative gesture directed at a visible object out of reach of the human but within reach of the subject. Pairs of objects were placed in view of and behind the subjects. The task was to retrieve the object the experimenter wanted. To indicate which one she desired, the experimenter pointed imperatively to it and directly rewarded the subject for handing over the correct one. While dogs performed well on this task, chimpanzees failed to identify the referent. Implications for great apes' and dogs' understanding of human communicative intentions are discussed