Skip to main content
Log in

Pointing following in dogs: are simple or complex cognitive mechanisms involved?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Animal Cognition Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Domestic dogs have proved to be extremely successful in finding hidden food following a series of human social cues such as pointing (an extended hand and index finger indicating the location of the reward), or body position, among many other variants. There is controversy about the mechanisms responsible for these communicative skills in dogs. On the one hand, a hypothesis states that dogs have complex cognitive processes such as a theory of mind, which allow them to attribute intent to the human pointing gesture. A second, more parsimonious, hypothesis proposes that these skills depend on associative learning processes. The purpose of this paper is to provide data that may shed some light on the discussion by looking into two learning processes by using an object choice task: the effect of interference between stimuli on the preference for human social cues and the effect of generalization of the response to novel human social stimuli. The first study revealed that previous training using a physical cue (container location) may hamper the learning of a novel human social cue (distal cross-pointing). The results of the second study indicated stimulus generalization. Dogs learnt a novel cue (distal cross-pointing) faster due to previous experience with a similar cue (proximal pointing), as compared to dogs confronted by a less similar cue (body position) or dogs with no previous experience. In sum, these findings support the hypothesis about the important role of associative learning in interspecific communication mechanisms of domestic dogs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bräuer J, Call J, Tomasello M (2004) Visual perspective taking in dogs (Canis familiaris) in the presence of barriers. Appl Anim Behav Sci 88:299–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bräuer J, Kaminski J, Riedel J, Call J, Tomasello M (2006) Making inferences about the location of hidden food: social dog, causal ape. J Comp Psych 120:38–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper JJ, Ashton C, Bishop S, West R, Mills DS, Young RJ (2003) Clever hounds: social cognition in the domestic dog (Canis familiaris). Appl Anim Behav Sci 81:229–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elgier AM, Jakovcevic A, Barrera G, Mustaca AE, Bentosela M (2009) Communication between domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) and humans: dogs are good learners. Behav Process 81:402–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdöhegyi A, Topál J, Virányi Z, Miklósi A (2007) Dog-logic: inferential reasoning in a two-way choice task and its restricted use. Anim Behav 74:725–737

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guttman N, Kalish HI (1956) Discriminability and stimulus generalization. J Exp Psych 51:79–88

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hare B, Tomasello M (2005) Human-like social skills in dogs? Trends Cogn Sci 9:439–444

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hare B, Call J, Tomasello M (1998) Communication of food location between human and dog (Canis familiaris). Evol Comm 2:137–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hare B, Rosati A, Kaminski J, Bräuer J, Call J, Tomasello M (2010) The domestication hypothesis for dogs’ skills with human communication: a response to Udell et al. (2008) and Wynne et al. (2008). Anim Behav 79:e1–e6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heyes CM (1998) Theory of mind in nonhuman primates. Behav Brain Sci 21:101–148

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz A (2011) Theory of mind in dogs? Examining method and concept. Learn Behav. doi:10.3758/s13420-011-0041-7

  • Kamin LJ (1968) “Atention-like” processes in classical conditioning. In: Jones MR (ed) Miami symposium on the prediction of behavior: aversive stimulation. University of Miami Press, Florida, pp 9–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakatos G, Soproni K, Doka A, Miklosi A (2009) A comparative approach to dogs’ and human infants’ comprehension of various forms of pointing gestures. Anim Cogn 12:621–631

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leavens DA (2004) Review of pointing: where language, culture and cognition meet. Cogn Sys Res 5:157–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leavens DA, Russell JL, Hopkins WD (2005) Intentionality as measured in the persistence and elaboration of communication by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Child Dev 76:291–306

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miklósi A (2009) Evolutionary approach to communication between humans and dogs. Vet Res Comm 33:53–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miklósi A, Polgárdi R, Topál J, Csányi V (1998) Use of experimenter given cues in dogs. Anim Cogn 1:113–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller RR, Escobar M (2002) Associative interference between cues and between outcomes presented together and presented apart: an integration. Behav Process 57:163–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavlov IP (1927) Conditioned reflexes. Oxford University Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Petter M, Musolino E, Roberts W, Cole M (2009) Can dogs (Canis familiaris) detect human deception? Behav Process 82:109–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pettersson H, Kaminski J, Herrmann E, Tomasello M (2011) Understanding of human communicative motives in domestic dogs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 133:235–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pineño O, Matute H (2005) Outcome similarity modulates retroactive interference between cues trained apart. Psicológica 26:281–292

    Google Scholar 

  • Prato-Previde E, Marshall-Pescini S, Valsecchi P (2008) Is your choice my choice? The owners’ effect on pet dogs’ (Canis lupus familiaris) performance in a food choice task. Anim Cogn 11:167–174

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Premack D (1995) Cause/induced motion: Intention/spontaneous motion. In: Changeux JP (ed) Origins of the human brain. Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press, New York, pp 286–309

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel S, Hearst E, George N, O’Neal E (1968) Generalization gradients obtained from individual subjects following classical conditioning. J Exp Psych 78:171–174

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Soproni K, Miklósi A, Topál J, Csányi V (2001) Comprehension of human communicative signs in pet dogs (Canis familiaris). J Comp Psych 115:122–126

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Soproni K, Miklósi A, Topál J, Csányi V (2002) Dogs’ (Canis familiaris) responsiveness to human pointing gestures. J Comp Psych 116:27–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szetei V, Miklósi A, Topál J, Csányi V (2003) When dogs seem to lose their nose: an investigation on the use of visual and olfactory cues in communicative context between dog and owner. Appl Anim Behav Sci 83:141–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorpe WH (1964) Learning and instinct in animals. Methuen, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Udell MAR, Wynne CDL (2010) Ontogeny and phylogeny: both are essential to human-sensitive behaviour in the genus Canis. Anim Behav 79:e9–e14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Udell MAR, Wynne CDL (2011) Reevaluating canine perspective-taking behavior. Learn Behav. doi:10.3758/s13420-011-0043-5

  • Wisniewski MG, Church BA, Mercado E (2009) Learning-related shifts in generalization gradients for complex sounds. Learn Behav 37:325–335

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our gratitude to Lic. Gustavo Bianco for his cooperation and to all the owners who kindly participated in these studies. Special thanks to Dr. Claudio Pereira who kindly collaborated with the figures design and to the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments. Also we appreciate the collaboration of Rosa María Torlaschi for the manuscript translation. This work was supported under the Projects PICT 2005 N° 38020 and PICT 2010 N° 0350, National Agency of Science and Technology (ANPCyT).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mariana Bentosela.

Additional information

Angel M. Elgier, Adriana Jakovcevic contributed equally to this work.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Elgier, A.M., Jakovcevic, A., Mustaca, A.E. et al. Pointing following in dogs: are simple or complex cognitive mechanisms involved?. Anim Cogn 15, 1111–1119 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-012-0534-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-012-0534-6

Keywords

Navigation