Dogs (Canis familiaris) account for body orientation but not visual barriers when responding to pointing gestures.

Abstract

In a series of 4 experiments we investigated whether dogs use information about a human’s visual perspective when responding to pointing gestures. While there is evidence that dogs may know what humans can and cannot see, and that they flexibly use human communicative gestures, it is unknown if they can integrate these two skills. In Experiment 1 we first determined that dogs were capable of using basic information about a human’s body orientation (indicative of her visual perspective) in a point following context. Subjects were familiarized with experimenters who either faced the dog and accurately indicated the location of hidden food, or faced away from the dog and (falsely) indicated the un-baited container. In test trials these cues were pitted against one another and dogs tended to follow the gesture from the individual who faced them while pointing. In Experiments 2–4 the experimenter pointed ambiguously toward two possible locations where food could be hidden. On test trials a visual barrier occluded the pointer’s view of one container, while dogs could always see both containers. We predicted that if dogs could take the pointer’s visual perspective they should search in the only container visible to the pointer. This hypothesis was supported only in Experiment 2. We conclude that while dogs are skilled both at following human gestures, and exploiting information about others’ visual perspectives, they may not integrate these skills in the manner characteristic of human children.

Citizen Science as a New Tool in Dog Cognition Research

“…Dogs tested by citizen scientists were reported to wait 10–15 seconds longer in each of the three conditions than in Call et al [ 14 ]. Moreover, while dogs’ sensitivity to human eyes and head direction has been observed several times in the published literature, our data did not replicate this seemingly robust finding [ 14 , 16 , 18 , 50 ]. Only by considering the Live dataset in isolation is there any evidence that dogs were sensitive to being watched when retrieving forbidden treats.…”

Theory of mind in animals: Current and future directions

“…Chimpanzees have been shown to provide help based on an understanding of others' goals, even as part of a collaborative task requiring sensitivity to the different roles they and a partner must play to reach a common goal (Melis & Tomasello, ; Warneken et al, ; Warneken & Tomasello, ; Yamamoto et al, ; Yamamoto, Humle, & Tanaka, ). Recent evidence also suggests that apes, rhesus macaques, dogs ( Canis lupus familiaris ), and ravens are sensitive to others' perspectives in cooperative contexts as well as neutral ones (Bugnyar, ; Bugnyar & Heinrich, ; Buttelmann et al, ; Catala, Mang, Wallis, & Huber, ; Drayton & Santos, , ; Grueneisen, Duguid, Saur, & Tomasello, ; Kaminski, Brauer, Call, & Tomasello, ; Karg et al, ; Krupenye et al, ; MacLean & Hare, ; MacLean, Krupenye, & Hare, ; Maginnity & Grace, ; Marticorena et al, ). In the wild, chimpanzees even appear to selectively inform ignorant groupmates of nearby snakes more than knowledgeable ones (Crockford, Wittig, Mundry, & Zuberbuhler, ; Crockford, Wittig, & Zuberbuhler, ).…”

Current Trends in Dog-Human Communication

“…When it comes to dogs’ understanding of humans’ psychological states, results are not unanimous. Dogs seem to understand something about a human’s current perspective, but this does not seem to lead to an understanding of humans’ psychological states (Kaminski, Bräuer, Call, & Tomasello, 2009; MacLean, Krupenye, & Hare, 2014; Virányi, Topál, Miklósi, & Csanyi, 2006). Dogs do, however, seem to attend to humans’ communicative intent.…”

“…Overall, the evidence suggests that dogs may possess some of the skills necessary for the understanding of communication as information. There is, however, not enough evidence suggesting that dogs act with helpful motives when interacting with others, and, in addition, there is not much evidence for dogs’ understanding of humans’ mental state (i.e., human perspective and state of knowledge; Kaminski et al, 2009; MacLean et al, 2014). According to a “mentalistic” approach, this is necessary for declarative communication to be possible (Tomasello et al, 2007).…”

“…The currently available evidence on dog communication suggests that dogs possess some of the cognitive building blocks that need to be in place for an individual to communicate informatively: Dogs seem to have some understanding of humans’ communicative intent (Kaminski et al, 2012; Scheider et al, 2011; Téglás et al, 2012) and, in some situations, seem to show helpful motives and have an expectation for humans to act helpfully (Bräuer et al, 2013; Hare & Tomasello, 1999; Kaminski et al, 2011; Kirchhofer et al, 2012; Miklósi et al, 2003). Findings on dogs’ understanding of humans’ mental states (Kaminski et al, 2009; MacLean et al, 2014; Virányi et al, 2006) and their understanding of referentiality (Tauzin, Csík, Kis, & Topál, 2015; Téglás et al, 2012) are still controversial, however, and as of yet there is no convincing evidence that dogs show the tendency to communicate with a motive to inform (Kaminski et al, 2011).…”