1
|
Abdai J. Perception of animate motion in dogs. Front Psychol 2025; 15:1522489. [PMID: 39830849 PMCID: PMC11739167 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1522489] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/04/2024] [Accepted: 12/10/2024] [Indexed: 01/22/2025] Open
Abstract
Various motion cues can lead to the perception of animacy, including (1) simple motion characteristics such as starting to move from rest, (2) motion patterns of interactions like chasing, or (3) the motion of point-lights representing the joints of a moving biological agent. Due to the relevance of dogs in comparative research and considering the large variability within the species, studying animacy perception in dogs can provide unique information about how selection for specific traits and individual-level (social) differences may shape social perception. Despite these advantages, only a few studies have investigated the phenomenon in dogs. In this mini-review, we discuss the current findings about how specific motion dynamics associated with animacy drive dogs' visual attention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Judit Abdai
- Center for Mind/Brain Sciences, University of Trento, Rovereto, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Truong S, Schmitt O, Rault JL. On your terms or mine: pigs' response to imposed gentle tactile contact vs. free form interaction with a familiar human. Sci Rep 2024; 14:25249. [PMID: 39448780 PMCID: PMC11502703 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-76451-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2024] [Accepted: 10/14/2024] [Indexed: 10/26/2024] Open
Abstract
Positive human-animal interactions (HAIs) can be intrinsically rewarding and facilitate positive human-animal relationships. However, HAI paradigms vary across studies, and the influence of different interaction paradigms on the animal's response has been overlooked. We compared the behavioural responses of pigs (n = 28) individually tested with two types of gentle tactile interactions with a familiar human: 'free form (FF)' where the pig could voluntarily approach and interact as they normally would, and 'imposed contact (IC)' where the human imposed tactile contact on the pig according to a standardised protocol. Pigs did not differ in their level of engagement with the human between the two types of interactions. However, they differed in their behaviour as they explored the pen more during the FF test, while they emitted more low-pitched vocalisations (grunts) during the IC test. These differences can likely be imputed to the IC test differing to the pigs' habituation to human contact, which could have evoked greater attention to the human or triggered frustration due to violation of expectation. These findings highlight the influence of the predictability of the interaction or level of agency provided to the animal in HAI tests and relation to their previous experience of interacting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Suzanne Truong
- Centre for Animal Nutrition and Welfare, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Veterinaerplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria
| | - Oceane Schmitt
- Centre for Animal Nutrition and Welfare, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Veterinaerplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria
- Institute of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Nutritional Sciences, and Environmental Management, University of Giessen, Giessen, Germany
| | - Jean-Loup Rault
- Centre for Animal Nutrition and Welfare, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Veterinaerplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Lonardo L, Völter CJ, Hepach R, Lamm C, Huber L. Do dogs preferentially encode the identity of the target object or the location of others' actions? Anim Cogn 2024; 27:28. [PMID: 38553650 PMCID: PMC10980658 DOI: 10.1007/s10071-024-01870-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2023] [Revised: 03/22/2024] [Accepted: 03/24/2024] [Indexed: 04/02/2024]
Abstract
The ability to make sense of and predict others' actions is foundational for many socio-cognitive abilities. Dogs (Canis familiaris) constitute interesting comparative models for the study of action perception due to their marked sensitivity to human actions. We tested companion dogs (N = 21) in two screen-based eye-tracking experiments, adopting a task previously used with human infants and apes, to assess which aspects of an agent's action dogs consider relevant to the agent's underlying intentions. An agent was shown repeatedly acting upon the same one of two objects, positioned in the same location. We then presented the objects in swapped locations and the agent approached the objects centrally (Experiment 1) or the old object in the new location or the new object in the old location (Experiment 2). Dogs' anticipatory fixations and looking times did not reflect an expectation that agents should have continued approaching the same object nor the same location as witnessed during the brief familiarization phase; this contrasts with some findings with infants and apes, but aligns with findings in younger infants before they have sufficient motor experience with the observed action. However, dogs' pupil dilation and latency to make an anticipatory fixation suggested that, if anything, dogs expected the agents to keep approaching the same location rather than the same object, and their looking times showed sensitivity to the animacy of the agents. We conclude that dogs, lacking motor experience with the observed actions of grasping or kicking performed by a human or inanimate agent, might interpret such actions as directed toward a specific location rather than a specific object. Future research will need to further probe the suitability of anticipatory looking as measure of dogs' socio-cognitive abilities given differences between the visual systems of dogs and primates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucrezia Lonardo
- Comparative Cognition, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine of Vienna, Medical University of Vienna and University of Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, Vienna, 1210, Austria.
| | - Christoph J Völter
- Comparative Cognition, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine of Vienna, Medical University of Vienna and University of Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, Vienna, 1210, Austria
- Department of Comparative Cultural Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, 04103, Germany
| | - Robert Hepach
- Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK
| | - Claus Lamm
- Social, Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience Unit, Department of Cognition, Emotion and Methods in Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Vienna, 1010, Austria
| | - Ludwig Huber
- Comparative Cognition, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine of Vienna, Medical University of Vienna and University of Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, Vienna, 1210, Austria
| |
Collapse
|