» Articles » PMID: 38553650

Do Dogs Preferentially Encode the Identity of the Target Object or the Location of Others' Actions?

Overview
Journal Anim Cogn
Publisher Springer
Date 2024 Mar 30
PMID 38553650
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
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.

References
1.
Luo Y, Baillargeon R . Can a self-propelled box have a goal? Psychological reasoning in 5-month-old infants. Psychol Sci. 2005; 16(8):601-8. PMC: 3351378. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01582.x. View

2.
Cannon E, Woodward A . Infants generate goal-based action predictions. Dev Sci. 2012; 15(2):292-8. PMC: 3612028. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2011.01127.x. View

2.
Rakita A, Nikolic N, Mildner M, Matiasek J, Elbe-Burger A . Re-epithelialization and immune cell behaviour in an ex vivo human skin model. Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):1. PMC: 6959339. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-56847-4. View

3.
Kano F, Call J . Great apes generate goal-based action predictions: an eye-tracking study. Psychol Sci. 2014; 25(9):1691-8. DOI: 10.1177/0956797614536402. View

4.
Kanakogi Y, Itakura S . Developmental correspondence between action prediction and motor ability in early infancy. Nat Commun. 2011; 2:341. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1342. View