Theme Layout

Rightsidebar

Boxed or Wide or Framed

Theme Translation

Display Featured Slider

Yes

Featured Slider Styles

Display Grid Slider

No

Grid Slider Styles

Display Trending Posts

No

Display Author Bio

Display Instagram Footer

Dark or Light Style

Search This Blog

Do you Believe in Dog? (2018). Powered by Blogger.

Copyright Do You Believe in Dog (2018)

The content on Do You Believe in Dog? is copyrighted. If you are interested in using any content produced on Do You Believe in Dog? please email a request.

Strap line

It started when two canine scientists decide to become pen pals in an era of digital media...

Translate

Showing posts with label New Zealand. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New Zealand. Show all posts

9 February 2015

How do dogs and people respond to a crying baby?

How do dogs and people respond to a crying baby?


Guest post by: Min Hooi Yong, PhD


“Does your dog know when you are sad?” Puzzling question, perhaps? 

We get a range of answers from dog owners, from the confident “Yes!” to “Maaaaybe?”, and the hopeful “I like to think so...”. Many dogs are considered to be part of the family, and we expect our family members to empathize with us when we are sad.

A recent study found that dogs showed submissive behavior (licking and nuzzling) when an adult person pretended to cry but not when she is humming1. Does the licking and nuzzling behavior mean that the dog understand that we are feeling sad? (I hear YES-es). Or can it be that because we are crying, we ignore everyone including our dog, and so, our dog will nuzzle us seeking attention and/or comfort?
(source)

There have been many studies showing that animals (e.g. rodents, birds, chimps) experience distress or concern (empathic response) when observing either kin or non-kin in distress. For example, giving electric shocks to rats and pigeons. The observer experienced a change both behaviourally and physiologically, and these responses are often considered as an experience of emotional contagion, an elementary form of empathy. Emotional contagion is essentially the spreading of all forms of emotion from one person (or animal) to another (like the spreading of joy or distress through a crowd - think of a flash mob dance effect filtering through a crowd)2.

Hearing a baby cry can be quite distressing. What happens to us when we, the observers, hear the cry? We respond by getting up and checking on the crying baby, “increased attention”. Our body also releases the stress hormone cortisol when we hear the cry, regardless of age or parenting experience3,4. Also, we can tell if the crying is urgent or not. We do, sometimes find crying aversive (imagine a baby crying non-stop throughout your long-distance flight).
Flickr/thedalogs
In our study, we wanted to know if dogs and humans show a similar physiological response to a baby crying. We had three questions: 
  1. We know that dogs are attached to humans, so would dogs show increased attention to a baby crying and babbling? 
  2. Exposure to uncontrollable white noise is considered aversive and elicits submissive behavior. If dogs find crying aversive, would dogs show submissive behavior towards crying as well as white noise? 
  3. Do dogs show an increased stress response (measured in their salivary cortisol levels) to a baby crying compared to white noise and a baby babbling, similar to humans?
We had 75 dogs and 74 humans listen to one of three sounds. A human baby crying:

A human baby babbling: 

Or white noise:

Each sound was played at an average volume of 82 decibels – similar to chamber music in a small auditorium (not loud enough to cause hearing damage, but it is loud). We collected saliva before and after listening to one sound from both dogs and humans for their cortisol levels. We also analyzed dogs’ behavior while the sound was played, and collected sound ratings about how aversive people found the sounds.

What did our three questions reveal? First, we found that both dogs and humans showed an increase in cortisol levels only after listening to crying, but no changes to baby babbling and white noise. Second, dogs showed increased attention to both the crying and babbling sounds, but not to white noise. Third, dogs displayed increased submissive behavior (e.g. the dog’s body and head were lowered, the ears were held flat and back, the tail was lowered and sometimes slightly between their legs or wagging rapidly side-to-side, the tongue pro-truded slightly, or the dog raised one leg in a hesitant or placating manner) to the crying and white noise, but not to babbling. Additionally, human participants rated the white noise as more aversive than crying (see table below for a summary). We also analyzed other possible aspects that might have influenced the dogs’ responses such as time of testing, demographic data e.g. neutered status and sex, acoustic features in the sounds (pitch and melody), and even dog owners’ unintentional cuing. We found that the responses shown were a result of distress, evident from crying.


You might ask why submissive behavior was shown during crying and white noise. Let’s start with white noise. Our human participants perceived white noise as more unpleasant compared to crying. Humans tend to cover their ears and animals also show similar avoidance, and what better way than to lower your head? On the other hand, with crying sounds, one is generally more subdued (sympathetic concern) especially when you can hear the distress meaning in the sound. The combined behavioral indicators during these sounds (e.g. lowered posture, shaking, stimulus avoidance) points toward submissive behavior.

In humans, an increase in cortisol and attention is interpreted as a demonstration of
emotional contagion3,4. This unique pattern of physiological and behavioral responding to crying in our study is most consistent with (a) emotional contagion in dogs, providing first evidence that dogs, like humans, experience a physiological response to human infant crying, and (b) suggests the first clear evidence of cross-species empathy (i.e. canine emotional contagion to human distress). 

Author
Min Hooi Yong has recently completed her PhD under the supervision of Professor Ted Ruffman in the Department of Psychology, University of Otago, New Zealand. You can follow her research, or Prof Ted Ruffman. This study has been published in the journal “Behavioural Processes”:

Min Hooi Yong
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank all the dog owners and their dogs who participated in our study, and to Stephanie McConnon, Mary Saxton, and Barbara Lowen for allowing us to use their dog videos. Mia is a female English Setter aged 3, Annie is a female Border Collie aged 9, and Flack is a male mixed breed (Collie/Husky/Heading) aged 4.

References
1. Custance, D. & Mayer, J. Empathic-like responding by domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) to distress in humans: An exploratory study. Anim. Cogn. 15, 851–859 (2012).
2. De Waal, F. B. M. Putting the altruism back into altruism: The evolution of empathy. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 59, 279–300 (2008).
3. Fleming, A. S., Corter, C., Stallings, J. & Steiner, M. Testosterone and prolactin are associated with emotional responses to infant cries in new fathers. Horm. Behav. 42, 399–413 (2002).
4. Giardino, J., Gonzalez, A., Steiner, M. & Fleming, A. S. Effects of motherhood on physiological and subjective responses to infant cries in teenage mothers: A comparison with non-mothers and adult mothers. Horm. Behav. 53, 149–158 (2008).

Thank you, Min, for discussing your research on Do You Believe in Dog? View other guest contributors here ~ Julie & Mia 

©  Do You Believe in Dog? 2015 
Continue Reading »
DoYouBelieveInDog
0 Comments

You Might Also Like

11 July 2013

Dog training: Do you get the timing right?

Dog training: Do you get the timing right?



Do You Believe in Dog? is approaching our one-year anniversary (Wow! Yay!!!), and in the coming months, we will be opening up the blog to guest posts from other researchers exploring canine behaviour, cognition and welfare. 


Give a warm welcome to our first guest, 
Clare Browne from the University of Waikato in New Zealand.


Hi Mia and Julie,

As you both know from the last Canine Science Forum, my PhD investigates dog-human communication and how this communication affects dog training.
(source)
I would like to claim that everyone is New Zealand is a fantastic dog trainer and we all communicate brilliantly with our dogs, but alas, we’re just like everyone else. It turns out that when people give feedback to dogs during training, we’re often a bit slow. Let me explain...

You’re no doubt aware that if we want to increase the likelihood that a behaviour occurs again, positive reinforcement (AKA “rewarding” -- adding something to keep the behaviour going) will achieve this. The types of positive reinforcement that are most commonly used in everyday dog training are verbal praise, food, and patting/petting. My PhD studies investigated two things: a) how fast are dog owners delivering positive reinforcement to dogs; and b) does it matter if owners are slow in providing dogs with reinforcement?

Not really Clare's gumboots
To answer the first of these questions, I put on my gumboots and spent many evenings at my friendly local dog clubs, filming owners training their dogs in beginner classes. I collected 1,810 instances where commands were given to dogs. I then went slightly mad and spent months watching videos of people training their dogs. Figure 1 shows how all the dogs responded to their owners, and 44% of the time, dogs did not respond to their owners at all. This one result made me feel like I wasn’t wasting all these years of my PhD – there clearly is a need for research into the efficacy of dog training!

I used some fancy computer software and measured very precisely (down to 25 frames per second) the time between when the owners said the command and when the dogs performed the behavior, like laying down or sitting. I found that owners varied a lot in the time it took them to deliver positive reinforcement to their dogs. Some owners were almost instantaneous with their praise and then the treat followed quickly, whereas others took ages – the longest time was over 6 s! (That might not sound long to you, but try imagining that you’re a Labrador and having to wait 6 s for a treat, all of a sudden it’s a much more serious situation.) 


But does this even matter? Had I gone mad watching videos in my darkened office for no good reason?

To answer this second question, I had to run an experiment. 

I had each dog work inside a large pen, and I sat in the neighbouring pen. A screen in between us prevented the dogs from seeing my body language. I held a pre-training session where the dogs learned that a “beep” sound came just before a feeding device delivered a food treat into their pen. (This “beep” is analogous to us saying, “Good dog”). Once the dogs were comfortable with this, they were taken out of the pen while I set up the equipment. I put two boxes into the pen. These boxes had held dog treats (but were emptied just prior to the experiment) so that they smelled alluring to the dogs. Each box had an open top, and infrared (IR) beams criss-crossed the top surface of both boxes. These IR beams were connected to a computer, so that whenever they were broken (i.e. when a dog sniffed inside a box), the computer delivered a “beep” and then a food treat came from the feeding device. 
Click to enlarge image
There was a catch: when the dogs sniffed inside the ‘non-target’ box, nothing happened. But when they sniffed inside the ‘target’ box, the positive reinforcement food reward was delivered. The dogs, essentially, were being trained to stick their heads inside one of the two boxes (perhaps not necessarily something every owner wants their dog to do, but a good example of a simple behaviour!). 

Twenty dogs received positive reinforcement immediately, as soon as they sniffed inside the target box – there was no delay. However, for another 20 dogs, as soon as they broke the IR beams, the computer started a timer and positive reinforcement (“beep” + treat) was delayed by 1 second.

The results were really interesting! Of the 0 second delay dogs, 60% learned the task; but of the 1 second delay dogs, only 25% learned the task – less than half as many with no delay.  

Check out this video of a dog learning the task with a 0 s delay:


This suggests that timing of reinforcement is important when training dogs to do something new – so be fast with your praise and treats!!

A question that always gets asked about this research is “Isn’t 1 second a really short time?” Yes, it is a very short time. But if you really watch a dog (I recommend filming them) – see how much, how fast, how far they can move – a lot can happen in 1 second. In real-world, dog training, in 1 second a dog could be across the room, it could have moved out of position, or we could have reached into our pocket. 

Finally, I suspect as trainers, we often get away with having sloppy timing because dogs are just so good at attending to our body language. I hypothesise that we are continually giving unintended feedback to dogs – that this feedback may be acting as conditioned reinforcers (much like a body-language-version of the “good dog”). That’s what I suspect anyway ... 

Overall, the take home message is be fast with your feedback!

Sending warm regards from Wintry New Zealand,

Clare

Clare with her dogs, Flint & Apple

Further reading:

Browne C.M., Starkey N.J., Foster T.M. & McEwan J.S. (2013). What dog owners read: A review of best-selling books, Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 8 (4) e38. DOI:

Browne C.M., Starkey N.J., Foster T.M. & McEwan J.S. (2013). Delayed reinforcement – does it affect learning?, Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 8 (4) e37-e38. DOI:

Browne C.M., Starkey N.J., Foster M.T. & McEwan J.S. (2011). Timing of reinforcement during dog training, Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 6 (1) 58-59. DOI:

More about Clare


© 2013 Do You Believe in Dog?
Continue Reading »
DoYouBelieveInDog
1 Comments

You Might Also Like

31 January 2013

Dogs & Cats, Cats & Working Dogs, Working Dogs & Emotions

Dogs & Cats, Cats & Working Dogs, Working Dogs & Emotions


Hi Julie!

What a busy week I’ve found myself having! 

Very productive indeed, with a lot of this:

and some more of that:

 Fuelled by a ton of this:

But I did take time to notice that your cat Josh broke something new.  Oh Josh! 

Thanks for telling me about your ISHAR presentation about dogs and cats in the home.  I can definitely relate to the importance of early socialisation = best chance at harmony. Take my dog Elke, for example.

As a pup, she met and spent time around mature cat Bobby (who opted to ignore her for the most part).
Elke grew up around cats and kittens.
Then she helped me raise a bunch of Shelter foster kittens until they were old enough to be adopted.

By the time Tonto came to live with us as permanent family member, she was an old hand in living around cats. And when Caleb later joined us as a young adult dog, Tonto was pretty relaxed around dogs. He tended to be confident in interactions; not running away (importantly, not triggering any chase responses from our new dog).
Elke ably demonstrating in top image that a cat is not worth waking up for.
Gidget and some enthusiastic GDs
This was also true when we brought a new kennel cat into the Training Kennel and Vet Clinic facility I managed at Guide Dogs Victoria (GDV). We selected a kitten from the Shelter who was outgoing and confident around people and dogs. We then set her up in the main foyer of our facility to have a slow and positive introduction to the visiting puppies and dogs that we could control to maximise the positives for all the animals. 

Gidget now plays an important role at GDV helping to desensitise the dogs to cats by reducing their level of interest and distraction. If their key learning experiences about cats with Gidget are 'boring', they associate future cats with 'boring' and will be less likely to want to chase them. 


Important when you are a working Guide Dog. Or a Police Dog. Or any number of other types of working dogs. Working Dog kennel cats are really common!
(source)

GDV Puppy Class (source)
Gidget also attends the puppy socialisation classes, wearing her harness and lead so puppies can be encouraged at an early age to stay calm around cats. A resident kennel cat also means that a friendly cat is readily available to assess a dog’s level of cat distraction or participate in training sessions to improve Guide Dog-appropriate responses to the presence of a cat.  


Or help out with photo shoots around Valentine's Day. You know how it goes!

(source) Gidget loves photo shoots. Even if they aren't (supposed to be) about her!
Gidget would spend her downtime in my office, asleep next to my computer monitor. We were good workmates and I miss her jaunty greetings and blissed out purrs! 
My regular desktop view when working at GDV
One thing about not sharing an office with Gidget any more is that it’s giving me more time to analyse all my PhD data about working dogs in kennel facilities. 

I’ve been busy number-crunching this week ahead of the RSPCA Australia Scientific Seminar later this month. My presentation is titled ‘Working Like a Dog – Affectively’. I’ll be talking about how affective states (a.k.a emotions) relate to working dogs, their welfare and performance. What is the affective experience for a working dog?  How can we tell? What things should we be considering to give working dogs a ‘life worth living’ (or better!) while they are working to help us humans?
RSPCA Scientific Seminar 2013
Professor David Mellor will be chairing the seminar and giving a presentation titled ‘Coping, cognition and quality of life improvement’ which I’m looking forward to hearing. Mellor’s based in New Zealand and I’ve enjoyed listening to him at other conferences. I am very interested in the work he’s been involved with in translating animal welfare science into practical animal welfare standards and outcomes in collaboration with the NZ government. It’s going to be a fun day!

Speaking of fun – aren’t you at Science Online’s 2013 event this week? I’m following #scio13 on Twitter and pretending I’m there too!

Mia

Further reading:

Mellor D.J. & Bayvel A.C.D. (2008). New Zealand's inclusive science-based system for setting animal welfare standards, Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 113 (4) 313-329. DOI:

Mellor D. (2012). Animal emotions, behaviour and the promotion of positive welfare states, New Zealand Veterinary Journal, 60 (1) 1-8. DOI:

© Mia Cobb 2012
Continue Reading »
DoYouBelieveInDog
0 Comments

You Might Also Like

[name=Do You Believe in Dog?] [img=https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEih0oTdT87wf4V9ic3qh3r4nwYEQ2IsqFtweaU5RXbfIGujIMEg7n7jBmLq88mM9ZWZZ74jemUA2tK0UDNV-mLf4Mx7UzOEv6FISOcaffwhjDIU-9DgKhUj1VILdKBCInozoneqSXX6_kPP/s100/DYBID3+SPARCS2013.jpg] [description=Do You Believe in Dog? is a popular canine science platform presented by Mia Cobb and Julie Hecht. We think it's important that everyone be able to access and understand the latest canine research.] (facebook=https://www.facebook.com/DoYouBelieveInDog/) (twitter=https://www.twitter.com/doubelieveindog/) (instagram=https://www.instagram.com/mlcobb77/) (instagram=https://www.instagram.com/dogspies/)

Follow @SunriseSunsetBlog