Inhibitory control, but not prolonged object-related experience appears to affect physical problem-solving performance of pet dogs

Human infants develop an understanding of their physical environment through playful interactions with objects. Similar processes may influence also the performance of non-human animals in physical problem-solving tasks, but to date there is little empirical data to evaluate this hypothesis. In addition or alternatively to prior experiences, inhibitory control has been suggested as a factor underlying the considerable individual differences in performance reported for many species. Here we report a study in which we manipulated the extent of object-related experience for a cohort of dogs (Canis familiaris) of the breed Border Collie over a period of 18 months, and assessed their level of inhibitory control, prior to testing them in a series of four physical problem-solving tasks. We found no evidence that differences in object-related experience explain variability in performance in these tasks. It thus appears that dogs do not transfer knowledge about physical rules from one physical problem-solving task to another, but rather approach each task as a novel problem. Our results, however, suggest that individual performance in these tasks is influenced in a complex way by the subject’s level of inhibitory control. Depending on the task, inhibitory control had a positive or a negative effect on performance and different aspects of inhibitory control turned out to be the best predictors of individual performance in the different tasks. Therefore, studying the interplay between inhibitory control and problem-solving performance will make an important contribution to our understanding of individual and species differences in physical problem-solving performance

Behavioural responses to unexpected changes in reward quality

Successive negative contrast (SNC) effects are changes in anticipatory or consummatory behaviour when animals unexpectedly receive a lower value reward than they have received previously. SNC effects are often assumed to reflect frustration and appear to be influenced by background affective state. However, alternative explanations of SNC, such as the functional-search hypothesis, do not necessarily imply an aversive affective state. We tested 18 dogs in a SNC paradigm using a patch foraging task. Dogs were tested in two conditions, once with the low value reward in all of five trials (unshifted) and once when reward value was altered between high and low (shifted). Following a reward downshift, subjects showed a SNC effect by switching significantly more often between patches compared to the unshifted condition. However, approach latency, foraging time and quantity consumed did not differ between conditions, suggesting non-affective functional search behaviour rather than frustration. There was no relationship between strength of SNC and anxiety-related behaviours as measured in a novel object test and a personality questionnaire (C-BARQ). However, associations with the C-BARQ scores for Trainability and Stranger directed aggression suggest a possible link with behavioural flexibility and coping style. While reward quality clearly affects incentive motivation, the relationship between SNC, frustration and background affective state requires further exploration

EEG Transients in the Sigma Range During non-REM Sleep Predict Learning in Dogs (vol 7, 12936, 2017)

Contains fulltext : 190341.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)A correction to this article has been published and is linked from the HTML and PDF versions of this paper. The error has not been fixed in the paper.3 p

A reappraisal of successive negative contrast in two populations of domestic dogs

When an anticipated food reward is unexpectedly reduced in quality or quantity, many mammals show a successive negative contrast (SNC) effect, i.e. a reduction in instrumental or consummatory responses below the level shown by control animals that have only ever received the lower-value reward. SNC effects are believed to reflect an aversive emotional state, caused by the discrepancy between the expected and the actual reward. Furthermore, how animals respond to such discrepancy has been suggested to be a sign of animals’ background mood state. However, the occurrence and interpretation of SNC effects are not unequivocal, and there is a relative lack of studies conducted outside of laboratory conditions. Here, we tested two populations of domestic dogs (24 owned pet dogs and 21 dogs from rescue kennels) in a SNC paradigm following the methodology by Bentosela et al. (J Comp Psychol 123:125–130, 2009), using a design that allowed a within-, as well as a between-, subjects analysis. We found no evidence of a SNC effect in either population using a within- or between-subjects design. Indeed, the withinsubjects analysis revealed a reverse SNC effect, with subjects in the shifted condition showing a significantly higher level of response, even after they received an unexpected reduction in reward quality. Using a within-, rather than a between-, subjects design may be beneficial in studies of SNC due to higher sensitivity and statistical power; however, order effects on subject performance need to be considered. These results suggest that this particular SNC paradigm may not be sufficiently robust to replicate easily in a range of environmental contexts and populations