To promote collaboration across canine science, address reproducibility issues, and advance open science practices within animal cognition, we have launched the ManyDogs consortium, modeled on similar ManyX projects in other fields. We aimed to create a collaborative network that (a) uses large, diverse samples to investigate and replicate findings, (b) promotes open science practices of preregistering hypotheses, methods, and analysis plans, (c) investigates the influence of differences across populations and breeds, and (d) examines how different research methods and testing environments influence the robustness of results. Our first study combines a phenomenon that appears to be highly robust, dogs’ ability to follow human pointing, with a question that remains controversial: do dogs interpret pointing as an informative gesture, as an imperative command, or as a simple associative cue? We collected preliminary data (N = 61) from a single laboratory on two conditions of a 2-alternative object choice task: (1) Ostensive (experimenter pointed to a baited cup after making eye-contact and saying the dog’s name); (2) Non-ostensive (experimenter pointed to a baited cup without making eye-contact or saying the dog’s name). Dogs followed the ostensive point, but not the non-ostensive point, significantly more often than expected by chance. Preliminary results also provided suggestive evidence for variability in point-following across dog breeds. The next phase is the global participation stage of the project. We propose to replicate this protocol in a large and diverse sample of research sites, simultaneously assessing replicability between labs and further investigating the question of dogs’ point-following comprehension.
Although dogs have a special place in human history as the first domesticated species and play important roles in many cultures around the world, their role in scientific studies has been relatively recent. With a few notable exceptions (e.g., Darwin, Pavlov, Scott & Fuller), domestic dogs were not commonly the subject of rigorous scientific investigation of behavior until the late 1990s. While the number of canine science studies has increased dramatically over the last 20 years, most research groups are limited in the inferences they can draw due to the relatively small sample sizes used along with the exceptional diversity observed in dogs (e.g., breed, geographic location, experience). To this end, we introduce the ManyDogs Project, an international consortium of researchers interested in taking a big team science approach to understanding canine behavioral science. We begin by discussing why studying dogs provides valuable insights into behavior and cognition, evolutionary processes, human health, and applications for animal welfare. We then highlight other big team science projects that have previously been conducted in canine science and emphasize the benefits of our approach. Finally, we introduce the ManyDogs Project and our mission: 1) replicating important findings, 2) investigating moderators that need a large sample size such as breed differences, 3) reaching methodological consensus, 4) investigating cross-cultural differences, and finally 5) setting a standard for replication studies in general. In doing so, we hope to address previous limitations in individual lab studies and previous big team science frameworks to deepen our understanding of canine behavior and cognition.
To promote collaboration across canine science, address replicability issues, and advance open science practices within animal cognition, we have launched the ManyDogs consortium, modeled on similar ManyX projects in other fields. We aimed to create a collaborative network that (a) uses large, diverse samples to investigate and replicate findings, (b) promotes open science practices of pre-registering hypotheses, methods, and analysis plans, (c) investigates the influence of differences across populations and breeds, and (d) examines how different research methods and testing environments influence the robustness of results. Our first study combines a phenomenon that appears to be highly reliable—dogs’ ability to follow human pointing—with a question that remains controversial: do dogs interpret pointing as a social communicative gesture or as a simple associative cue? We collected data (N = 455) from 20 research sites on two conditions of a 2-alternative object choice task: (1) Ostensive (pointing to a baited cup after making eye-contact and saying the dog’s name); (2) Non-ostensive (pointing without eye-contact, after a throat-clearing auditory control cue). Comparing performance between conditions, while both were significantly above chance, there was no significant difference in dogs’ responses. This result was consistent across sites. Further, we found that dogs followed contralateral, momentary pointing at lower rates than has been reported in prior research, suggesting that there are limits to the robustness of point-following behavior: not all pointing styles are equally likely to elicit a response. Together, these findings underscore the important role of procedural details in study design and the broader need for replication studies in canine science.
Finding ways to investigate false belief understanding nonverbally is not just important for research in preverbal children, but it is the only way to assess theory of mind-like (ToM) abilities in nonhuman animals. In this preregistered study, we adapted the design from a previous study on dogs (Lonardo et al., 2021) to investigate false belief understanding in children and compare them to dogs. Thirty-two preschool-children (aged 5-6 years) saw the displacement of a reward and also obtained nonverbal cueing information from an adult communicator holding either a true or false belief. In the false belief condition, when the communicator did not know the location of the reward, children picked the baited, but not cued, container more often than the empty one. In the true belief condition, when the communicator witnessed the displacement yet still cued the wrong container, children performed randomly. This behavior pattern is at odds with the one of dogs who followed the cues more often when the human communicator held a false belief. Since our task does not require verbal responses or relational sentence understanding it can also be used in preverbal children as well as to compare ToM-related competences between human and non-human animals, if appropriately adapted. In our study, children behaved in line with existing ToM literature whereas most dogs, but not all, while sensitive to differences between the belief conditions, deviated from children. This difference suggests the need for a more extensive exploration of the evolution of false belief processing and ToM across animals.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.