Impulsivity as a trait in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris): A systematic review and meta-analysis

Impulsivity is a critical component of dog (Canis familiaris) behavior that owners often want to curtail. Though studies of dog impulsivity have examined their inability to wait and to inhibit inappropriate behaviors, it is not clear whether impulsivity is a behavioral trait with consistent characteristics across contexts. For this project, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate whether impulsivity exists as a behavioral trait in domestic dogs. Under a pre-registered protocol, we processed over 10,000 bibliographic database records to uncover 13 articles with multiple impulsivity tasks assessed in the same subjects. Across 31 pairs of impulsivity tasks, 28 failed to detect a correlation in performance between tasks and 3 detected a correlation. For 15 correlations of impulsivity tasks with the owner's perception of their dog's impulsivity, 10 were not correlated, while 5 were correlated. A formal meta-analysis on one pair of tasks (A-not-B task and Cylinder task) tested across seven different studies showed no overall correlation between the tasks. Our systematic review and meta-analysis found little indication of consistent relationships between impulsivity levels across tasks for dogs. Therefore, at the moment, we do not have good evidence of impulsivity as a behavioral trait that transfers across contexts, suggesting that perhaps we should focus on the context-specific nature of impulsivity in dogs

ManyDogs 1: A multi-lab replication study of dogs' pointing comprehension

To promote collaboration across canine science, address replicability issues, and advance open science practices within animal cognition, we have launched the ManyDogs consortium, modeled on similar ManyX projects in other fields. We aimed to create a collaborative network that (a) uses large, diverse samples to investigate and replicate findings, (b) promotes open science practices of pre-registering hypotheses, methods, and analysis plans, (c) investigates the influence of differences across populations and breeds, and (d) examines how different research methods and testing environments influence the robustness of results. Our first study combines a phenomenon that appears to be highly reliable—dogs’ ability to follow human pointing—with a question that remains controversial: do dogs interpret pointing as a social communicative gesture or as a simple associative cue? We collected data (N = 455) from 20 research sites on two conditions of a 2-alternative object choice task: (1) Ostensive (pointing to a baited cup after making eye-contact and saying the dog’s name); (2) Non-ostensive (pointing without eye-contact, after a throat-clearing auditory control cue). Comparing performance between conditions, while both were significantly above chance, there was no significant difference in dogs’ responses. This result was consistent across sites. Further, we found that dogs followed contralateral, momentary pointing at lower rates than has been reported in prior research, suggesting that there are limits to the robustness of point-following behavior: not all pointing styles are equally likely to elicit a response. Together, these findings underscore the important role of procedural details in study design and the broader need for replication studies in canine science

ManyDogs 1: A Multi-Lab Replication Study of Dogs’ Pointing Comprehension

To promote collaboration across canine science, address replicability issues, and advance open science practices within animal cognition, we have launched the ManyDogs consortium, modeled on similar ManyX projects in other fields. We aimed to create a collaborative network that (a) uses large, diverse samples to investigate and replicate findings, (b) promotes open science practices of pre-registering hypotheses, methods, and analysis plans, (c) investigates the influence of differences across populations and breeds, and (d) examines how different research methods and testing environments influence the robustness of results. Our first study combines a phenomenon that appears to be highly reliable—dogs’ ability to follow human pointing—with a question that remains controversial: do dogs interpret pointing as a social communicative gesture or as a simple associative cue? We collected data (N = 455) from 20 research sites on two conditions of a 2-alternative object choice task: (1) Ostensive (pointing to a baited cup after making eye-contact and saying the dog’s name); (2) Non-ostensive (pointing without eye-contact, after a throat-clearing auditory control cue). Comparing performance between conditions, while both were significantly above chance, there was no significant difference in dogs’ responses. This result was consistent across sites. Further, we found that dogs followed contralateral, momentary pointing at lower rates than has been reported in prior research, suggesting that there are limits to the robustness of point-following behavior: not all pointing styles are equally likely to elicit a response. Together, these findings underscore the important role of procedural details in study design and the broader need for replication studies in canine science