ResearchReciprocal attention of dogs and owners in urban contexts
Introduction
Paying attention to other group members is an essential feature in the social life of a species. Dogs are distinctive in this regard as living in human societies may require them to direct attention toward heterospecific companions. Indeed, dogs' propensity to look at humans seems so embedded in the species that it was proposed as a distinguishing feature between dogs and wolves (Miklósi et al., 2003). Dogs' ability to exploit visual information from humans takes many forms: dogs are predisposed to follow overt human communicative gestures to locate resources (Hare and Tomasello, 2005, Virányi et al., 2008) and to refine this ability through experience (Udell et al., 2010). Witnessing human demonstrators influences dogs' performance in detour (Pongrácz et al., 2001) and manipulative tasks (Miller et al., 2009) and, with appropriate training, dogs can learn to imitate some human motor patterns (Topál et al., 2006, Fugazza and Miklósi, 2014). Dogs can also determine humans' attentional states by looking at them and can modify their behavior accordingly: they prefer to obey and beg from attentive rather than nonattentive humans (Gácsi et al., 2004, Virányi et al., 2004) and can take advantage of inattention, for instance by eating forbidden pieces of food when the forbidding human appears not to be looking at them (Call et al., 2003, Schwab and Huber, 2006).
The mentioned studies offer substantial evidence that dogs resort to looking at humans in a variety of situations. Nonetheless, dogs will not pay the same level of attention to any person in a given context. A few studies have been focusing on the role of the identity of the human partner on the distribution of gazes, showing, for instance that the dogs' owner involved in a manipulation task will receive higher attention than an unfamiliar person performing the same activity (Range et al., 2009). Another manipulation situation used by Horn et al. (2013) indicated that such increase in attention levels requires a close relationship, rather than mere familiarity. The owner's capacity to elicit particularly high levels of attention by dogs becomes especially evident if the animal is presented simultaneously with 2 human “targets,” a condition in which dogs will look at their owner with much longer gazes than at a stranger (Mongillo et al., 2010).
The studies cited so far have all been conducted in strictly controlled experimental conditions. However, a possible limitation of these laboratory-based studies is that they may not adequately model how attention is deployed between dogs and owners in more natural circumstances, for a laboratory can hardly incorporate the quantity and types of stimuli to which dogs are likely to be exposed in real life. Although there are a few studies that focused on dogs' social interactions in natural contexts (Bekoff and Meaney, 1997, Westgarth et al., 2010, Řezáč et al., 2011), there are no data on dog–human attention in such contexts.
This study aimed at providing a characterization of attention between dogs and owners in non-laboratory conditions; to this aim, we chose to run the study in urban areas, which allowed us to observe a great number of dogs and owners engaging in spontaneous behavior, which would have been harder to obtain otherwise, for example, by recording in owners' private properties. The urban environment also provides well-characterizable contexts, varying in the type and density of stimuli, which gave us the opportunity to assess, as a further aim of the study, how dogs' and owners' attention is deployed in the presence of a great number and type of stimuli as opposed to a relatively less rich context.
Section snippets
Subjects and procedure
The present study was carried out in the city of Padova (Italy). Short videos were taken of 176 dog–owner couples walking in various areas of the city. In detail, 2 types of contexts were chosen: (1) the streets and squares of the old city center (CC), characterized by a relatively high density of people and of objects in motion (e.g., bicycles, baby carriages, wheelchairs; Figure 1) (median N of stimuli/video frame = 11; minimum = 5, maximum = 22), as well as by sounds and noises, and (2) the
Sample characteristics
The overall sample included 86 small dogs (height at shoulder below 30 cm; CC: 48; GAs: 38), 44 medium-sized dogs (height between 30 and 60 cm; CC: 22; GAs: 22), and 46 large dogs (height above 60 cm; CC: 18; GAs: 28). With regard the breeds, the relative majority of dogs were of mixed breed (N = 65), followed by English cocker spaniel (N = 10) and Labrador retriever (N = 10). The frequency of breeds represented in the sample is listed in Table 1. There were 75 females (CC: 37; GAs: 38) and 101
Discussion
The first aim of this study was to characterize dogs' and owners' reciprocal attention in the course of a usual activity in a nonlaboratory context and, to this aim, we observed dog–owner couples walking in different urban environments. With regard to dogs, almost half of them were never oriented to their owners and when they did, both the frequency and duration of their gazes were generally very low. Consequently, low values were also found for the total duration of dogs' orientation to
Conclusions
In summary, this study provides the first characterization of dogs' and owners' reciprocal attention in a non-laboratory condition. Although it would be improper to compare directly our data with those obtained in laboratory-based studies, the gaze patterns that we observed by dogs and owners in urban contexts seem to be mainly functional to monitoring each other's presence/position, while they hardly allow extensive communication between dogs and owners. On the basis of our data, it is
Acknowledgments
We thank the owners who participated in the study, and Mrs. Gabriel Walton for her help in revising the English language. We are very grateful to the students Emmanuele Baro, Romina Brunetta, Francesca Pinali and Cecilia Filippi for helping with the experiments.
None of the authors of this article has any financial or personal relationship with other people or organizations that might inappropriately influence or bias its content. The idea for the article was conceived by Lieta Marinelli. The
References (27)
- et al.
Human-like social skills in dogs?
Trends Cogn. Sci.
(2005) - et al.
A simple reason for a big difference: wolves do not look back at humans but dogs do
Curr. Biol.
(2003) - et al.
Imitation and emulation by dogs using a bidirectional control procedure
Behav. Processes
(2009) - et al.
Selective attention to humans in companion dogs, Canis familiaris
Anim. Behav.
(2010) - et al.
Social learning in dogs: the effect of a human demonstrator on the performance of dogs in a detour task
Anim. Behav.
(2001) - et al.
Factors affecting dog–dog interactions on walks with their owners
Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci.
(2011) - et al.
What controls attention in natural environments?
Vision Res.
(2001) - et al.
Dogs respond appropriately to cues of humans' attentional focus
Behav. Processes
(2004) - et al.
Dog behaviour on walks and the effect of use of the leash
Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci.
(2010) - et al.
Interactions among dogs, people, and the environment in Boulder, Colorado: a case study
Anthrozoös
(1997)
Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) are sensitive to the attentional state of humans
J. Comp. Psychol.
Deferred imitation and declarative memory in domestic dogs
Anim. Cogn.
Are readers of our face readers of our minds? Dogs (Canis familiaris) show situation-dependent recognition of human's attention
Anim. Cogn.
Cited by (11)
Sustained attention to the owner is enhanced in dogs trained for animal assisted interventions
2017, Behavioural ProcessesCitation Excerpt :However, a close relationship is not sufficient to guarantee high levels of attention in any situation. In fact, contextual circumstances have a profound impact on attention patterns, and when the setting is complex and rich in stimuli, attention paid by dogs towards their owners may drop to trivial levels (Mongillo et al., 2014). Among the factors that may impact on dogs’ patterns of attention to their owners across different contexts, one highly relevant is the dog’s training history.
Can attention be taught? Interspecific attention by dogs (Canis familiaris) performing obedience tasks
2016, Applied Animal Behaviour ScienceCitation Excerpt :However, when not forced to select whom to observe, dogs pay similar amounts of attention to their owner and an unfamiliar person (Range et al., 2009). Even more strikingly, in a natural setting, rich in environmental stimuli, dogs pay very low levels of attention towards their owners (Mongillo et al., 2014), and the latter also vary in relation to the dogs’ needs/motivations (Mongillo et al., 2015). It is therefore clear that differences in the patterns of interspecific attention do not just depend on the relevance of the human target, but also on a number contextual factors, including the quantity of surrounding stimuli and their quality, i.e. their salience and their biological relevance, the animal’s motivation as well as its cognitive ability to pay and maintain attention.
Assessing companion dog behavior in a social setting
2015, Journal of Veterinary BehaviorAttention of dogs and owners in urban contexts: Public perception and problematic behaviors
2015, Journal of Veterinary BehaviorCitation Excerpt :Non-owners were also asked whether they currently possessed a dog or had owned one in the past. Video recordings were imported into Observer XT software (Noldus Information Technology, Wageningen, the Netherlands) and data were collected from all videos by continuous sampling on focal subjects as described in Mongillo et al. (2014). Data were collected from the usable part of the video (i.e., when dogs' and owners' head orientations were clearly visible).
Heterospecific relationships and the riddle of measurement
2014, Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research