A task-experienced partner does not help dogs be as successful as wolves in a cooperative string-pulling task

Beware of Strangers: Dogs' Empathetic Response to Unknown Humans

Empathy is a complex cognitive ability that has been studied in many social animals, including dogs. Previous studies have found that dogs would rescue their distressed owner more quickly than a calm owner and that dogs respond physiologically and behaviorally to the sound of crying strangers. However, no studies have explored the empathetic and emotional contagion capabilities of dogs towards strangers in rescue paradigms. In the present study, a stranger was placed behind a clear door and was told to cry (distress) or hum (neutral). The dogs' door opening, stress behaviors, tone of approach, and physiological responses were measured. Dogs did not open more frequently or more quickly for the stranger in the distressed condition compared to the neutral condition. Additionally, there was no significant difference between the behavioral or physiological indicators of stress across conditions. It was also found that non-openers were reported by owners to have more fear and, in the empathy test, were more aggressive and fearful in their tone of approach. These results suggest that dogs may be less likely to exhibit empathy-like behaviors to unknown humans in an unfamiliar environment and that owners may be necessary to moderate a dog's stress to show empathetic behaviors.

Some dogs can find the payoff-dominant outcome in the Assurance game

Studies on coordination often present animals with the choice of either cooperating or remaining inactive; however, in nature, animals may also choose to act alone. This can be modeled with the Assurance game, an economic game that has recently been used to explore decision-making in primates. We investigated whether dyads of pet dogs coordinate in the Assurance game. Pairs were presented with two alternatives: they could individually solve an apparatus baited with a low-value reward (Hare) or they could coordinate to solve a cooperative apparatus baited with a high-value reward for each dog (Stag). All individuals matched their partner's choices, but after controlling for side bias, only four out of eleven dyads consistently coordinated on the payoff-dominant strategy (Stag-Stag). Thus, some dogs are capable of finding coordinated outcomes, as do primates, at least when their partner's actions are visible and coordination results in the biggest payoff for both individuals.

Are domesticated animals dumber than their wild relatives? A comprehensive review on the domestication effects on animal cognitive performance

Animal domestication leads to diverse behavioral, physiological, and neurocognitive changes in domesticated species compared to their wild relatives. However, the widely held belief that domesticated species are inherently less "intelligent" (i.e., have lower cognitive performance) than their wild counterparts requires further investigation. To investigate potential cognitive disparities, we undertook a thorough review of 88 studies comparing the cognitive performance of domesticated and wild animals. Approximately 30% of these studies showed superior cognitive abilities in wild animals, while another 30% highlighted superior cognitive abilities in domesticated animals. The remaining 40% of studies found similar cognitive performance between the two groups. Therefore, the question regarding the presumed intelligence of wild animals and the diminished cognitive ability of domesticated animals remains unresolved. We discuss important factors/limitations for interpreting past and future research, including environmental influences, diverse objectives of domestication (such as breed development), developmental windows, and methodological issues impacting cognitive comparisons. Rather than perceiving these limitations as constraints, future researchers should embrace them as opportunities to expand our understanding of the complex relationship between domestication and animal cognition.

Observational spatial memory in wolves and dogs

Social learning is highly adaptive in transmitting essential information between individuals in many species. While several mechanisms have been observed, less is known about how much animals can remember. However, results on observational spatial memory among caching species, i.e. a form of social learning allowing individuals to remember and pilfer food caches made by others, suggest that this ability correlates with their social organization. Both wolves and their domesticated form, dogs, are social species known to make food caches, and previous studies have shown that they both can use observational spatial memory abilities to find hidden food. In order to test how much socially transmitted information wolves and dogs can remember, we tested both species in a task requiring them to find 4, 6 or 8 caches after they observed a human hiding food items, or after a control condition where they could not observe the hiding. We found that both wolves and dogs retrieved more caches and were more efficient for the first few caches if they observed the hiding than in the control condition, suggesting that they did not simply rely on scent to find the rewards. Interestingly, wolves outperformed dogs irrespective of whether the caching could be observed or not. We suggest that this result is due to a difference in motivation/persistence between wolves and dogs rather than observational spatial memory.

Cooperation increases bottlenose dolphins' (Tursiops truncatus) social affiliation

Dolphins live in a fission-fusion society, where strong social bonds and alliances can last for decades. However, the mechanism that allows dolphins to form such strong social bonds is still unclear. Here, we hypothesized the existence of a positive feedback mechanism in which social affiliation promotes dolphins' cooperation, which in turn promotes their social affiliation. To test it, we stimulated the cooperation of the 11 dolphins studied by providing a cooperative enrichment tool based on a rope-pulling task to access a resource. Then we measured the social affiliation [simple ratio index (SRI)] of each possible pair of dolphins and evaluated whether it increased after cooperation. We also evaluated whether, before cooperation, pairs that cooperated had a higher SRI than those that did not cooperate. Our findings showed that the 11 cooperating pairs had significantly stronger social affiliation before cooperation than the 15 non-cooperating pairs. Furthermore, cooperating pairs significantly increased their social affiliation after cooperation, while non-cooperating pairs did not. As a result, our findings provide support to our hypothesis, and suggest that the previous social affiliation between dolphins facilitates cooperation, which in turn promotes their social affiliation.

Dogs take into account the actions of a human partner in a cooperative task

Humans stand out for their capacity to flexibly cooperate, possibly because they understand their partners' role. Researchers have explored if such understanding is unique to humans by assessing whether non-human species wait to manipulate a cooperative apparatus until a delayed partner arrives. If animals do wait, then it is assumed that they recognize the need for a partner. However, success in these tasks may be the result of social facilitation, while failure may be due to poor inhibitory control. Moreover, this approach does not test if animals take their partners' actions into account. Here we trained dogs to press a button simultaneously with their human partner. Afterwards, we tested them in several conditions to disentangle which elements of their partner's behaviour they take into account. Dogs waited to press the button until the delayed partner arrived, the button was available to the partner and the partner acted (pressed the button). We found no relationship between inhibitory control and success. We conclude that dogs are not merely reacting to the presence of their human partners, but are also taking their actions into account when coordinating with them.

The evolution of coordination: a phylogenetic meta-analysis and systematic review

To solve many cooperative problems, humans must have evolved the ability to solve physical problems in their environment by coordinating their actions. There have been many studies conducted across multiple different species regarding coordinating abilities. These studies aim to provide data which will help illuminate the evolutionary origins of cooperative problem solving and coordination. However, it is impossible to make firm conclusions about the evolutionary origins of coordinating abilities without a thorough comparative analysis of the existing data. Furthermore, there may be certain aspects of the literature that make it very difficult to confidently address evolutionary and meta-analytic questions. This study aimed to rectify this by using meta-analysis, phylogenetic analysis and systematic review to analyse the data already obtained across multiple studies, and to assess the reliability of this data. We found that many studies did not provide the information necessary for meta-analysis, or were not comparable enough to other studies to be included in analyses, meaning meta-analyses were underpowered or could not be conducted due to low samples of both studies and different species. Overall, we found that many studies reported small positive effects across studies, but the standard errors of these effects frequently traversed zero.

Paw preference in wolves (Canis lupus): A preliminary study using manipulative tasks

Behavioural and brain lateralization is widespread among non-human vertebrates. Motor lateralization has been investigated in the domestic dog, revealing that "pawedness" in this species seems to be sex and task related; however, few if any studies considered this asymmetry in wolves (Canis lupus). The aim of this study was to investigate the paw preference of seven wolves housed at Parco Natura Viva - Italy, during the interaction with food-related (FD) and olfactory (OLF) environmental enrichment devices. Eleven sessions were done (22 session in total) per condition (FD and OLF), and data about enrichment manipulation were collected. Most of the wolves manipulated the enrichment devices using one paw rather than both paws. At the individual level, all subjects were lateralized in paw use, six were right pawed, one was left pawed (the alpha male) regardless of the enrichment condition. The fact that one paw rather than both was frequently involved in manipulation could indicate a practical advantage for each individual in being lateralized in paw use. Despite the small sample size, our results provide interesting insights about lateralization in wolves, deserving further investigations. More studies are needed considering factors such as temperament, social rank and task complexity on canid motor lateralization.

Wolves and dogs recruit human partners in the cooperative string-pulling task

In comparison to non-human animals, humans are highly flexible in cooperative tasks, which may be a result of their ability to understand a partner’s role in such interactions. Here, we tested if wolves and dogs could flexibly adjust their behaviour according to whether they needed a partner to solve a cooperative loose string-pulling paradigm. First, we presented animals with a delay condition where a human partner was released after the subject so that the animal had to delay pulling the string to enable coordinated pulling with the human partner. Subsequently, we investigated whether subjects would recruit a partner depending on whether they could operate the apparatus alone, or help from a partner was required. Both wolves and dogs successfully waited in the delay condition in 88% of the trials. Experimental subjects were also successful in recruiting a partner, which occurred significantly more often in the cooperation trials than in the solo pulling condition. No species differences were found in either experiment. These results suggest that both wolves and dogs have some understanding of whether a social partner is needed to accomplish a task, which enables behavioural coordination and cooperation.

Endocrine Regulations in Human-Dog Coexistence through Domestication

Endocrine system regulation is important for the maintenance of homeostasis; it controls hormonal functions in complex physiology and behavior and adaptations to social environments. Evidence indicates that for more than 35 000 years, dogs (Canis familiaris) have been domesticated through living with humans. For example, they have acquired human-like social skills, such as eye gazing and pointing gestures. These unique behaviors are, at least partially, regulated by hormones and are thought to have been genetically altered throughout domestication. Glucocorticoids affect social tolerance, while oxytocin facilitates social coordination and familiarity between individuals. We review historical and recent literature to facilitate an understanding of the roles of glucocorticoid and oxytocin functions in the human-canine coexistence dynamic established during domestication.

Wolves lead and dogs follow, but they both cooperate with humans

Due to their convergent evolution, dogs have been suggested as a good model for the evolution of human social skills, such as tolerance and cooperativeness. However, recent studies have revealed that wolves (dogs’ closest undomesticated relatives) are more tolerant and cooperative with conspecifics than dogs. It is still possible, though, that selection during domestication enhanced cooperative inclinations specifically towards humans, predicting better cooperation with humans in dogs than in wolves. We tested this hypothesis by comparing similarly human-raised wolves and dogs when cooperating with a familiar human partner in a string-pulling task. Both dogs and wolves were highly successful with the human partner, highlighting that dog-human cooperation could have evolved based on wolves’ social skills. However, wolves and dogs differed in how they cooperated with their human partners with wolves being more likely to initiate movement leading the interaction with humans, whereas dogs were more likely to wait for the human to initiate action and then follow. Accordingly, we propose that during the course of domestication, after an initial reduction in fear of humans, dogs were selected for increased submissive inclinations (Deferential Behaviour Hypothesis) in order to minimize conflicts over resources, to ensure safe co-habitation and co-working in a way that humans lead and dogs follow.