Exploring the evolutionary origins of overimitation: a comparison across domesticated and non‐domesticated canids

Johnston, Angie M.; Holden, Paul C.; Santos, Laurie R.

doi:10.1111/desc.12460

Cited by 35 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 80 publications

(114 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although additional work is necessary to fully establish the degree to which dogs show a greater tendency to follow the Knower when she uses communicative cues and goal-directed actions, the current findings clearly establish that dogs do not demonstrate a human-like bias to defer to communicative cues. These findings, along with several other recent findings (e.g., Johnston, Holden, & Santos, 2017;Topál et al, 2009), suggest that the human bias to defer to communicative cues may be unique. Not only do dogs fail to defer to communicative cues when they are able to discover more efficient solutions on their own (e.g., Johnston et al, 2017;Topál et al, 2009), but they may also be more likely to evaluate information provided by communicative cues than non-communicative cues (Experiments 1 and 2).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Dogs do not demonstrate a human-like bias to defer to communicative cues

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human children and domesticated dogs learn from communicative cues, such as pointing, in highly similar ways. In two experiments, we investigate whether dogs are biased to defer to these cues in the same way as human children. We tested dogs on a cueing task similar to one previously conducted in human children. Dogs received conflicting information about the location of a treat from a Guesser and a Knower, who either used communicative cues (i.e., pointing; Experiments 1 and 2), non-communicative physical cues (i.e., a wooden marker; Experiment 1), or goal-directed actions (i.e., grasping; Experiment 2). Although human children tested previously struggled to override inaccurate information provided by the Guesser when she used communicative cues, in contrast to physical cues or goal-directed actions, dogs were more likely to override the Guesser's information when she used communicative cues or goal-directed actions than when she used non-communicative physical cues. Given that dogs did not show the same selective bias towards the Guesser's information in communicative contexts, these findings provide clear evidence that dogs do not demonstrate a human-like bias to defer to communicative cues. Instead, dogs may be more likely to critically evaluate information presented via communicative cues than either physical or non-communicative cues.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Dogs do not demonstrate a human-like bias to defer to communicative cues

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nonhuman animals that may be expected to overimitate (e.g., domesticated dogs and our closest living animal relatives, common chimpanzees, and bonobos) do not do so; instead they omit actions they see modeled that are demonstrably redundant . Given the limited evidence for cumulative culture in other animals, when did this phenomenon emerge in humans?…”

Section: The Beginnings Of Cumulative Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

The Social Glue of Cumulative Culture and Ritual Behavior

Nielsen

2018

Child Dev Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cumulative culture, where innovations are incorporated progressively into a population's stock of skills and knowledge, generating more sophisticated repertoires, is a core aspect of human cognition underpinning the technological advances that characterize our species. Cumulative culture relies on our proclivity for high-fidelity imitation, a characteristic that emerged phylogenetically early in our evolutionary history and emerges ontogenetically early in our development. Commensurate with this proclivity to copy others comes a tradeoff that behaviors that are functionally irrelevant will be easily maintained and transmitted. Rituals are an expression of this. In this article, I argue that the core cognitive architecture responsible for cumulative culture and technological progress also supports the propagation of rituals: our socially motivated propensity for engaging in high-fidelity imitation.

show abstract

“…It originates from domestic dogs but has, since it arrived at least 3,500 years ago, developed into a phenotypically and genetically distinct population of feral dogs. Its appearance is similar to the domesticated dog but there are big differences in its behavior 17,18 . Like the wolf, the dingo is a predominantly meat-eating omnivorous animal, and lacks the duplications of the alpha-amylase locus giving improved starch digestion in domestic dogs 11,19,20 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genomic analysis of dingoes identifies genomic regions under reversible selection during domestication and feralization

Zhang

Wang

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dingoes (Canis dingo) are wild canids living in Australia. They have lived isolated from both the wild and the domestic ancestor and are a unique model for studying feralization, the process in which a domestic species escapes human control, adapts to the wild, and diverges from the domestic ancestor into a genetically distinct population.Here, we sequenced the genomes of 10 dingoes and 2 New Guinea Singing Dogs, to study the origins and feralization process of the dingo. Phylogenetic and demographic analyses show that dingoes originate from domestic dogs in southern East Asia, which migrated via Island Southeast Asia to reach Australia 4300-5000 years ago, and subsequently diverged into a genetically distinct population. Selection analysis identified 99 positively selected genes enriched in starch and fat metabolism pathways, indicating a diet change during feralization of dingoes. Interestingly, we found that 14 genes have shifted allele frequencies compared to dogs but not compared to wolves.This suggests that the selection affecting these genes during domestication of the wolf was reversed in the feralization process. One of these genes, ARHGEF7, may promote the formation of neural spine and synapses in hippocampal neurons. Functional assays showed that an A to G mutation in ARHGEF7, located in a transcription factor-binding site, decreases the endogenous expression. This suggests that ARHGEF7 may have been under selection for behavioral adaptations related to the transitions in environment both from wild to domestic and from domestic back to wild.Our results indicate that adaptation to domestication and feralization primarily affected different genomic regions, but that some genes, related to neurodevelopment, metabolism and reproduction, may have been reversibly affected in the two processes.

show abstract

Exploring the evolutionary origins of overimitation: a comparison across domesticated and non‐domesticated canids

Cited by 35 publications

References 80 publications

Dogs do not demonstrate a human-like bias to defer to communicative cues

Dogs do not demonstrate a human-like bias to defer to communicative cues

The Social Glue of Cumulative Culture and Ritual Behavior

Genomic analysis of dingoes identifies genomic regions under reversible selection during domestication and feralization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About