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 cognition. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cognition. Show all posts

30 May 2018

Free canine science event, June 1-3: Live streaming world wide! #SPARCS18

Free canine science event, June 1-3: Live streaming world wide! #SPARCS18




It’s Baaack! 

You may remember us talking about the SPARCS conference in 2013, 2014, and 2015. After a 2-year hiatus, it’s baaack! And people who care about dogs all around the world are pretty much losing it with excitement (like on the SPARCS Facebook page!).

SPARCS, which stands for the Society for the Promotion of Applied Research in Canine Science, has been at the forefront of connecting dog lovers to canine science via a free, live streaming conference that actively brings dog people into the conversation #SPARCS18! 

SPARCS returns for 2018, this Friday, Saturday and Sunday, June 1 - 3. This time, it’s all about what’s underneath: canine behavioral genetics. Six canine researchers, behavioral veterinarians, and geneticists bring us ‘The Real Dog: What We Know & What We Don’t (Yet).’

#SPARCS18 speakers and science hosts!
We’re incredibly excited to join SPARCS for the third year as science hosts. The conferences is live streaming from New York's Hudson Valley (EDT), and is now presented by The National Canine Research Council. As we prepare for the conference, here’s what you should know about watching and engaging live, and even how to watch later.


June 1 - 3, 2018
9:30am - 5:15pm (EDT)
Each day features two speakers, post-talk Q&A, and an end-of-day group panel discussion 4:30pm - 5:15pm

Friday, June 1
Ádám Miklósi and Kristopher Irizarry kick us off with the evolution of dogs’ close relationship with humans.


Saturday, June 2
Claire Wade and Elinor Karlsson introduce the amazingly complex relationship between genomics and behavior, which in recent years has been clarified with the help of citizen science.


Sunday, June 3
Kelly Ballantyne and Jessica Hekman wrap it up and get really real about the impact of behavioral genetics on dog relationships with humans and the important recognition that genetics don’t necessarily mean predestination.


Get social: Pose questions and comments for speaker Q&As and daily panel discussions. This live streaming conference is anything but passive — unless that’s what you want, in which case sit back in your pajamas and relax! After each talk, we (Mia and Julie of Do You Believe in Dog?) will hold speaker Q&A sessions, and our questions (we hope!) will be your questions! 

Share questions or comments over Twitter DYBID using #SPARCS18, and feel free to post on the Do You Believe in Dog Facebook page too. Remember, SPARCS is also on Facebook and Twitter. 

Watch later: All presentations and panel discussions will be recorded and posted to the SPARCS website following the conference. 

Watch the past: As mentioned, this is the 4th SPARCS conference, and past presentations, speaker interviews, and panel discussions are available, right now, for free, on the SPARCS website. Hear from Marc Bekoff, Michael Fox, Clive Wynne, Ádám Miklósi, Ray Coppinger, James Serpell, Simon Gadbois, Monique Udell, Alexandra Horowitz, Kathryn Lord, Patricia McConnell, Stephen Zawistowski, Michael Hennessey, Bonne Beerda, James Ha, Hal Herzog, Márta Gácsi and others anytime you like. 
Continue Reading »
DoYouBelieveInDog
0 Comments

You Might Also Like

23 February 2016

Dog Researchers Head to the City by the Bay: The Canine Science Symposium in San Francisco, CA

Dog Researchers Head to the City by the Bay: The Canine Science Symposium in San Francisco, CA


Hi Julie & Mia,

I wanted to write to the two of you about the Canine Science Symposium. It's happening this April 16 & 17 in San Francisco, and I thought you might be interested to hear all about it. I bet Julie remembers speaking about anthropomorphism at the very first CSS. Hopefully, we’ll be able to get her back to San Francisco for the next one!

This year's Symposium promises to be bigger and better with an extra half day of presentations, more speakers and new breakout sessions to dig deeper into the research. Three years later since that inaugural Symposium at Pawsitive Tails, we're now at the San Francisco SPCA where we’ve partnered with the organization’s Behavior & Training Department, brought on sponsors (such as the Karen Pyror Academy) and in all, expect well over 100 shelter staff and volunteers, trainers and dog enthusiasts to join us for this day and a half of canine science. We love coming to San Francisco in part because of the vibrant dog community there!

While many Symposium speakers continue to return each year to share their research, we ensure that the topics are new – and we’re real sticklers on the “applied” part of the research. We want those that come out to learn with us to be able to walk away with new techniques and approaches to try in their interactions with shelter dogs, dogs that they train and the dogs they live with. 

This year’s addition of breakout sessions will provide more advanced content (something we think the Symposium crowd is eager for) and live opportunities to discuss research and training ideas (and in some cases, as they’re happening!). We like sharing our enthusiasm for dogs, and the Symposium is our opportunity to make our research accessible.
Xephos running the maze at ASU.
Our CSS speakers for 2016 include Drs. Clive Wynne (Arizona State University), Erica Feuerbacher (Carroll College), Lindsay Mehrkam (Oregon State University), Sasha Protopopova  (Texas Tech University) and myself. This year, we have new additions to our speaking roster including Dr. Monique Udell from Oregon State University and post-doctoral scholar Dr. Nathan Hall from Arizona State University. Dr. Jeannine Berger, who heads up the SF/SPCA’s Behavior Resources, will be speaking too (in the past, she’s led our roundtable, but now she’s joining us at the podium).

While many of us are former or current students of Clive’s, our research interests are diverse as evidenced by this year’s topics. Our presentations include decoding dominance in dogs; canine sociability and attachment; using advanced behavioral principles in dog training; applying cognitive, behavioral and physiological measures to improve shelter dog welfare; using play as training and enrichment; understanding visitor behavior in shelters to increase adoptions; exploring canine olfaction and interpreting canine body language.

We’re excited to return to San Francisco this April and hope to see many in the dog training and behavior community at the Symposium! 

For those folks that are interested in attending, head on over to https://www.sfspca.org/get-involved/events/CSS2016 for all the details including speaker bios and presentation descriptions, and online registration (registration is at the waaaay bottom of the page).

Our early-bird registration ends March 2nd, so those that want to attend should sign up soon!  

Lisa Gunter 
MA, CBCC-KA, CPDT-KA

Continue Reading »
DoYouBelieveInDog
0 Comments

You Might Also Like

9 March 2015

How dogs get the point: what enables canines to interpret human gestures?

How dogs get the point: what enables canines to interpret human gestures?


Guest post by: Lucia Lazarowski, PhD candidate. Her research is available via free promotional access in the journal Behavioural Processes until February, 2016.

Hi Mia and Julie,

As a long-time fan of the blog, it is an honor to be a guest contributor! I am especially excited to tell DYBID readers about this research because it was somewhat of a pet project (pun intended). I am now a PhD student at Auburn University, but this study was done while I was working at North Carolina State University’s College of Veterinary Medicine. At NCSU, I worked with a team of veterinarians and animal behaviorists on a several projects aimed at improving selection and training of military working dogs, and I was primarily involved with studies related to explosives detection. 

Meanwhile in the canine cognition world, a hot topic was that of dogs’ ability to follow human gestures. Several studies have demonstrated that dogs are able to use human gestures, like pointing, to find hidden treats. An interesting finding that fueled a lot of the research in this area is that dogs perform better on these tasks than chimpanzees, our closest relatives, and wolves, dogs’ closest relatives. Is it possible that dogs are able to read and use human gestures because they co-evolved with humans, endowing them with a specialized human-like type of social cognition that their ancestors missed out on? Or, is it that dogs are such an integrated part of our lives that through our daily interactions they learn that paying attention to our body language pays off?

These two viewpoints have sparked a heated debate among canine scientists. In order to tease apart the roles of domestication and experience (or the nature/nurture debate, as your high school psychology teacher would call it), researchers have tested canines of different species (domesticated and wild-type) and different life histories (human-reared and feral). The domestication hypothesis, which suggests that point-following is an innate skill that dogs have acquired in a case of convergent evolution with humans, predicts that domestication alone is sufficient for point-following. The learning hypothesis, on the other hand, contends that dogs must learn through experience to follow human gestures, regardless of domestication status. 

The fact that chimps and wolves do not appear to utilize human pointing as dogs do seems to support domestication as an explanation. But, (plot twist!) if wolves are raised with humans from an early age and are tested in appropriate conditions, they can perform as well or even better than dogs.  To recap, groups that have succeeded at human pointing tasks include canines that are domesticated and socialized (pet dogs), non-domesticated and un-socialized (wolves), and non-domesticated and socialized (hand-reared wolves).  Hopefully at this point the missing piece of the puzzle is obvious: what about domestic dogs that have not been heavily exposed to humans? This vital yet untested sub-group of canines would help tip the scales in the domestication vs. experience debate.

At NCSU, we were gearing up to begin a new study investigating factors related to olfactory learning in canine explosives detection. The dogs acquired for this study were mixed-breed males around 1 year old, and unlike our previous studies which used trained military working dogs, these were laboratory-reared dogs. It occurred to me that this would be the perfect opportunity to test a group of dogs that met all of the proposed criteria for the “missing link”: laboratory dogs lack the same experiences that pet dogs living in human homes have (including the possibly critical opportunity to learn about human gestures), but they are socialized to humans at an early age and thus not fearful like feral dogs may be. Another bonus is that their life histories are known and documented, unlike dogs found in a shelter that at some point may have lived with people. If the opportunity to learn about human gestures is critical for point-following behavior to develop and not just domestication alone, these dogs would be expected to perform worse than pet dogs on point-following tasks. 





We tested 11 laboratory dogs and 9 pet dogs using methods established in previous studies in which dogs watched as humans performed two types of point (“easy” and “hard”, for simplicity’s sake).  What we found was that while pet dogs followed the harder point to the correct container significantly higher than chance, the laboratory dogs did not. Both groups of dogs were able to locate the correct container using the easier point, demonstrating that any failures were not due methodological flaws or to an inability to perform the demands of the task (note that success on these easier point trials can be explained by simpler mechanisms like physical proximity to the container).
 
Our results seem to suggest that exposure to humans and the opportunity to learn about the meanings of gestures plays an important role in dogs’ ability to follow pointing. 


Interestingly, a few dogs in the pet group performed just as poorly as the laboratory dogs, which would lend further support to the idea that individual experiences shape these abilities. Further, failures by the laboratory dogs are not likely caused by cognitive deficits due to an impoverished environment; the dogs received environmental enrichment including daily interactions with kennel and research staff, play-time with conspecifics, outdoor exercise, and a variety of toys (and after completing this experiment, participated in daily socialization and reward-based training sessions to facilitate future adoptions). Though domestication may likely contribute to dogs’ gesture-reading skills, specific life experiences may also be critical for their manifestation. 

P.S.: A happily-ever-after to this story: one of the subjects from this cohort, ‘Captain’, was adopted upon completion of the studies... by me! 

Lucia and Captain - all smiles!

Author
Lucia Lazarowski is a PhD student at Auburn University in the Comparative Cognition Laboratory. They collaborate with the Canine Performance Sciences program at Auburn University (Facebook).

If you found this interesting, you may also enjoy our guest post by Dr Bradley Smith: Take a walk on the wild side: Dingo science, or see all of our guest contributors.

Images: Copyright Lucia Lazarowski. 

References:
Lazarowski L. (2015). A comparison of pet and purpose-bred research dog (Canis familiaris) performance on human-guided object-choice tasks, Behavioural Processes, 110 60-67. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2014.09.021 [OPEN ACCESS until Feb 2016]

Kaminski, J., Nitzschner, M., 2013. Do dogs get the point? A review of dog-human communication ability. Learn Motiv. 44 (4), 294–302.

Udell, M.A.R., Dorey, N.R., Wynne, C.D.L., 2010. What did domestication do to dogs? A new account of dogs’ sensitivity to human actions. Biol Rev. 85 (2), 327–345.

Reid, P., 2009. Adapting to the human world: Dogs’ responsiveness to our social cues. Behav Process. 80 (3), 325–333. 

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

You Might Also Like

27 March 2014

Do As I Do: Copy Cat Social Imitation in Dog Training

Do As I Do: Copy Cat Social Imitation in Dog Training


Join us for another guest post, this time from Claudia Fugazza of the Family Dog Project in Budapest. Claudia's here to discuss her recent publication in Applied Animal Behaviour Science on the efficiency of new methods in dog training.

Hi Mia and Julie,

Formal training methods used until now rely mainly on the well-known rules of individual associative learning. These methods work perfectly well for a very wide range of animals — pigeons, rats, dogs and even crabs — and human and non-human animals can learn by ‘click and treat,’ as noted in the popular training book by Karen Pryor.




However, recent research has found substantial evidence that dogs could be predisposed to acquire information socially via the ‘Do as I do’ method. Do as I Do is a relatively new training method for people to use, based on dogs’ social cognitive skills, particularly on their imitative ability. 



With this training technique, dogs learn new behaviors by observing and copying their handler. The dog is a copycat. This method relies on social learning, and it was recently introduced in the applied field of dog training. 




As this method has started spreading in the dog training world, we felt that its efficiency and efficacy needed scientific testing. We were also wanting to know whether this method would be more or less efficient than other current training methods in training for particular behaviors.

We expected that dogs would more easily copy object-related actions from a human demonstrator so we tested dogs’ efficiency in this kind of tasks. To do this, I travelled across Italy and the UK with my video-cameras as well as a heavy Ikea cabinet filled with objects (you can imagine the weird looks I got from security personal at checkpoints!). I used these objects to test dogs learning to open or close drawers and lockers, pick up items from it etc. Since training methods can be affected by the skills of the trainer, only experienced dog-owners pairs who achieved a certificate either for the ‘Do as I do’ method or for shaping / clicker training were included in the study. Each pair was tested using ‘his’ method for teaching three different object-related actions in three testing sessions.


We expected that the ‘Do as I do’ method would prove more efficient for teaching complex tasks, compared to the shaping method that relies on individual learning. This expectation comes from what we know in humans: we tend to rely more on social learning when required to learn something difficult.

Our research found that the ‘Do as I do’ method proved more efficient for teaching dogs complex tasks, like close a drawer, open a locker and pick up an item that was inside (i.e., the time needed by the owner to obtain the first correct performance of the predetermined action was shorter with the ‘Do as I do’ method compared to shaping). We did not find a significant difference in the efficiency of the methods for teaching dogs simple tasks like knocking over a bottle or ringing a bell.

Now that we know a bit more on how to efficiently teach complex object-related actions, we are curious to know what happens when we want to teach different kind of complex actions, like body movements. We also want to know whether introducing social learning in dog training could have an effect on learning cues for trained action. 

We are aware that learning rates can be influenced by many factors, and we acknowledge that this study is just a very first step towards a more scientific approach to training paradigms. However we believe that this kind of information can be very important for the practitioners working in the applied field of dog training. We hope that the readers will not misinterpret the results and will not extend them to different actions and situations that were not tested.

Furthermore we would like to emphasize that, despite being efficient for training some kinds of actions, the ‘Do as I do’ method does not replace the methods based on individual learning (for example think of how many actions are not imitable at all if the demonstrator is a human and the learner is a dog!). Instead ‘Do as I do’ is a useful (and fun!) addition to existing training paradigms. Experienced dog trainers may find effective ways to mix the different training techniques in order to obtain the best results with each dog. 

Claudia Fugazza
Do as I Do Book and DVD
http://www.apprendimentosociale.it/en/claudia-fugazza/
Family Dog Project 

Reference 
Fugazza C. & Miklósi Á. (2014). Should old dog trainers learn new tricks? The efficiency of the Do as I do method and shaping/clicker training method to train dogs, Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 153 53-61. DOI:


© Do You Believe in Dog? 2014
p.s. Check out this dog's excellent jump!





Continue Reading »
DoYouBelieveInDog
2 Comments

You Might Also Like

3 October 2013

Take a walk on the wild side: Dingo science

Take a walk on the wild side: Dingo science


Image: Bradley Smith
Hi Mia and Julie,

As one of the few in the world exploring the ‘mind’ of the dingo, the highly controversial wild dog of Australia, I consider myself quite a rare ‘breed’ of scientist. So I thought I would let you know about some of the recent work I have done with dingoes, including a few world first discoveries. It seems dingoes are becoming just as famous for solving problems as they are for causing them!

I find the differences between the way wild and domestic dogs think and behave fascinating. 

The dingo just happens to be a great model for investigating the influence that domestication has on the canine mind because they are considered by many to be a ‘proto dog’. That is, they are thought to be one of the earliest forms of the domestic dog. Not a domestic dog as we know today, but one representing an early transition from the more-wolf-like common ancestor, to dog. What makes dingoes really interesting and unique is that they are wild living and genetically, behaviourally and physically more wolf-like than dog-like, yet are able to communicate with humans (see my paper on their ability to follow human social cues) and in the right environments, can be successful pets - whereas wolves cannot.
Dr Bradley Smith
(and dingo pup friend!)

Domestic dogs are what we call ‘socially’ intelligent , which means they are highly adept at communicating with people. For example, they can read our behaviours, and express to us what they want. This has a lot to do with why we love them so much, why we can create such a close bond, and why they are such successful companions. But this social intelligence may have come at a cost. When faced with a problem that they cannot solve, dogs will often ‘look’ towards their owners for help instead of trying to solve it on their own. The dog’s wild counterparts - wolves and dingoes - however, have to solve problems on their own. 

In problem solving situations where a human is present, wild canids rarely look back to a human for assistance, and choose to keep trying to solve the task or simply give up (for more information see my experiment on looking back behaviour).  

It seems to me that humans have become tools in the dog’s problem solving ‘bag of tricks’, and the selection pressure for independent problem solving has been relaxed. It's not that dogs are lazy or dumb - they know exactly what they want, and how to get it!

Image: Bradley Smith
When talking about 'intelligence' in animals it is important to distinguish between different kinds of behaviour and the thinking that goes on behind them. Dogs performing fancy tricks, although impressive and fun to show your guests at parties, are learnt through operant or classical conditioning and therefore not really abilities we would consider higher-order. Perhaps the best example is tool use, which has only been reported in a select group of species. Tool-using animals are those that establish the effective orientation of an object to alter some condition and attain an incentive. This has not been reported in any canid (wild or domestic), although there are many anecdotal accounts floating around the You Tube.

So to my surprise, when I began working with dingoes at the Dingo Discovery Centre in Melbourne, Australia, and I came across a dingo that had learned to use tools! Sterling, a sub-adult male had discovered that by manipulating things in his environment, he could get up to all sorts of mischief. In one instance Sterling dragged a plastic table from one end of his enclosure to the other. By jumping on the repositioned table he was able to reach a parcel of food that was placed high on the mesh of his enclosure. Take a look:


On another occasion, I captured Sterling moving around his portable plastic kennel. He would use the kennel as a lookout to see his neighbours over the 1m high opaque wall of his enclosure. His manipulation of objects instantly remind me of Wolfgang Kohlers observations of chimpanzees stacking crates in order to reach bananas that were hanging out of reach.

Another relatively recent phenomena, considered unique to higher order creatures, are the reactions of animals to the death of conspecifics. Originally thought to only be evident in primates, it has now been documented in a variety of species such as elephants and dolphins. Similar behaviour had yet to be reported in any domestic or wild canid until an ecologist friend of mine Rob Appleby (a PhD candidate from Griffith University) spotted a dingo mother and four littermates respond rather remarkably to the death of a pup on Fraser Island (Queensland, Australia). Over multiple days, the mother transported the pup on at least four instances around the island (one of which he was able to capture on video). She did this by picking up the pup (approximately 3 months old) with her mouth and carrying it away. 
Image: Bradley Smith

To me, such behaviour is no real shock. Given that they are highly social species, have high-order cognitive ability, and live in complex societies (e.g., prolonged periods of parental care, strong mother-infant bond). Instead of making any real assertions that dingoes mourn the dead, we chose to interpret the behaviour in more evolutionary or adaptive terms. That is, that the mother was adopting a ‘wait and see’ approach to her deceased pup which still appeared physically healthy and intact. I will let you decide what you make of this behaviour!

I hope you have enjoyed reading about some of the amazing antics that dingoes have been up to recently, and also learned a few more ways why canines are so amazing! I think we have only reached the tip of the iceberg in terms of our understanding of the canine brain, and I look forward to exploring it further with you.
Image: Bradley Smith


Bradley Smith
Senior Post-doctoral Research Fellow
Appleton Institute
Central Queensland University
@howlingdingo 


Further reading:

Smith B.P. & Litchfield C.A. (2010). Dingoes (Canis dingo) can use human social cues to locate hidden food, 
Animal Cognition, 13 (2) 367-376. DOI: 

Smith B.P., Appleby R.G. & Litchfield C.A. (2012). Spontaneous tool-use: An observation of a dingo (Canis dingo) using a table to access an out-of-reach food reward, Behavioural Processes, 89 (3) 219-224. DOI:

Appleby R., Smith B. & Jones D. (2013). Observations of a free-ranging adult female dingo (Canis dingo) and littermates’ responses to the death of a pup, Behavioural Processes, 96 42-46. DOI:


Smith B.P. & Litchfield C.A. Looking back at ‘looking back’: operationalising referential gaze for dingoes in an unsolvable task, Animal Cognition, DOI:

© 2013 Bradley Smith | Do You Believe in Dog?
Continue Reading »
DoYouBelieveInDog
0 Comments

You Might Also Like

9 September 2013

Robo-WOOF! What's happening in dog-human communication technology?

Robo-WOOF! What's happening in dog-human communication technology?


(Source)
Hey Julie,
Thank you for the gorgeous congratulations for winning I'm a Scientist, get me out of here! - what an amazing experience! So many students engaged in science and asking questions that made my head spin - fabulous, fabulous stuff! I learned so much!

One of the questions that came up a few times during the live chat sessions with student classes was about communication between dogs and people. I was asked "Do you think dogs will ever be able to talk to humans?" and "Why don't dogs talk? Why do they only bark?", as well as "Do dogs understand us? How?" and "Could we use technology to communicate with dogs?" - you see? They kept me on my toes!

My initial reactions were to say, "Dogs DO talk to us! They use their body language and their vocalisations extremely well, it's just that people aren't always fluent in listening to what they're telling us!" I also told them all about Chaser and her 1,200+ words, about the fact dogs' senses are different to ours (a much less visual, much more sniffy kind of a world).

Then one student said, "But what about this?":

 
Now Julie, I don't know about YOU, but somehow, I missed out on this 'BowLingual' device when it was launched in the early noughties. It's a: 
"computer-based dog-to-human language translation device developed by Japanese toy company Takara and first sold in Japan in 2002. Versions for South Korea and the United States were launched in 2003. The device was named by Time Magazine as a "Best Invention of 2002." The inventors of BowLingual, Keita Satoh, Dr. Matsumi Suzuki and Dr. Norio Kogure were awarded the Ig Nobel Prize for "promoting peace and harmony between the species.
The device is presented as a "translator" but has been called an "emotion analyzer". It is said to use technology to categorize dog barks into one of six standardized emotional categories. BowLingual also provides a phrase which is representative of that emotion. The product instructions clearly state that these phrases "are for entertainment purposes only" and are not meant to be accurate translations of each bark."
I totally endorse all those disclaimers, especially after reading this review by Dr Sophia Yin, but also can't help thinking if this 'toy' device can register a dog's bark and then categorize the dog's mood as happy, sad, on guard, assertive, frustrated or needy - couldn't we just listen and do the same ourselves? I mean, you know that, right? You recently covered the latest scientific findings regarding what dogs' barks are telling us, over at Scientific American and The Bark (ha!).  

So why can't we just listen? Learn? I certainly know the difference between my dogs' barks as to whether there's someone strange approaching our front door versus a family member or if they're just playing when I'm down the other end of our house. I'm teaching my daughter to tell the difference too. She's learning and she's just turned three.  

So is it really that hard? Or are people just lazy?



On the definitely-not-a-toy side of things, a Google Glass researcher has teamed up with a Georgia Institute of Technology professor to create FIDO (Facilitating Interactions for Dogs with Occupations) as wearable technology for working dogs to enable better communication with handlers. 


FIDO works by giving a service or detection dog a special sensor that can attach to its collar of a vest. The dog can interact with the sensor by biting, tugging or touching it with their nose and the handler will receive a corresponding signal ("bomb ahead", "hurricane alarm sounding" or "you have pancreatic cancer" are all examples given for different working dog contexts) as an audio or display cue. You can read more about FIDO in an interview with the professor from Georgia Tech here. 

Then there's the ICPooch, that's currently seeking funding via Kickstarter. The brain child of an entrepreneurial 13 year old (yep, you read that correctly) from the UK, the ICPooch promises to let you video talk with your dog (and deliver a treat cookie!) from anywhere in the world. 

Like this:





What do you think? Gimmick or something that has the potential to actually reduce separation anxiety in dog when their owners are away? Think dogs could potentially be remote trained by professional dog trainers? I wonder how well the dogs can actually SEE the display and whether they would respond differently to different people who 'dial in'. 

Very interested to hear your thoughts on this - hope you're well!

Mia

Further reading:

Tan D., Fitzpatrick G., Gutwin C., Begole B., Kellogg W.A., Paldanius M., Kärkkäinen T., Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila K., Juhlin O. & Häkkilä J. (2011) Communication technology for human-dog interaction: exploration of dog owners' experiences and expectations, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2641. DOI:

Kerepesi A., Jonsson G.K., Miklósi Á., Topál J., Csányi V. & Magnusson M.S. (2005). Detection of temporal patterns in dog–human interaction, Behavioural Processes, 70 (1) 69-79. DOI:

© 2013 Mia Cobb | Do You Believe in Dog?
Continue Reading »
DoYouBelieveInDog
0 Comments

You Might Also Like

18 July 2013

Dog-eared books

Dog-eared books


Hi Julie,

I loved hearing from Clare Browne about her research into timing of reinforcement in our first guest post last week, and it certainly stimulated lots of great comments and questions on Facebook and Google+. 


I know you've been busy Chaser-ing around (lucky ducks, both!) and there's also all those amazing conferences happening this week, what with the ISAZ, IAHAIO and AVSAB events on in Chicago, so just a very quick post from me this week! 

You know how we recently put together out list of top ten books for the Science Book a Day team?

Well, Chaser's upcoming book release reminded me that we should put them all in one place here, so that we (or anyone else looking for a canine science book or fourteen) could find them easily if needed. 



Science Book A Day

In no particular order, here they are:


McGreevy (2009) A Modern Dog’s Life. 

A fabulous book, written with humour and insight, that offers a modern take on what challenges and motivates our dogs and how we can best meet their needs.

http://doyoubelieveindog.blogspot.com/2012/09/todays-favorites-paul-mcgreevys-books.html
Search to purchase: http://booko.com.au/9781742231051/A-Modern-Dog-s-Life


Horowitz (2009) Inside of a Dog.

What’s it like to be a dog? This book covers the science of how dogs think and perceive the world and is accompanied by personal reflections on Horowitz’s own dog’s behaviour. Get to know the umwelt of the dog. http://insideofadog.com/

http://doyoubelieveindog.blogspot.com.au/2012/12/tis-season-to-be-doggy-fa-la-la-la-laaaa.html
Search to purchase: http://booko.com.au/9781451672756/Inside-of-a-Dog

Bradshaw (2012) Dog Sense: How the New Science of Dog Behavior Can Make You a Better Friend to Your Pet.

This recent publication answers the very important question: “What’s good for dogs?” Explore recent research into dog behaviour and cognition and take away ways to make your dog psychologically healthy.

http://www.bris.ac.uk/vetscience/people/88445/index.html
 

Search to purchase: http://booko.com.au/9780465030033/Dog-Sense

Lindsay (2000 / 2001 / 2005) Handbooks of Applied Dog Behavior and Training Triptych

Three enormous books containing so much canine science that even the heartiest of appetites will be satiated.

  1. Handbook of Applied Dog Behavior and Training, Vol. 1: Adaptation and Learning
  2. Handbook of Applied Dog Behavior and Training, Vol. 2: Etiology and Assessment of Behavior Problems
  3. Handbook of Applied Dog Behavior and Training, Vol. 3: Procedures and Protocols
Search to purchase:
http://booko.com.au/9780813807546/Handbook-of-Applied-Dog-Behaviour-and-Training-Principles-of-Behavioural-Adaption-and-Learning-v-1

http://booko.com.au/9780813828688/Handbook-of-Applied-Dog-Behavior-and-Training-Volume-II

http://booko.com.au/9780813807386/Handbook-of-Applied-Dog-Behavior-and-Training-Procedures-and-Protocols-v-3



Miklósi (2009) Dog Behaviour, Evolution, and Cognition.One of the first books to collate and synthesise the growing primary research on dog evolution, behaviour and cognition. Often used in the classroom, it offers an in depth overview of canine science research methods as well as study findings. Keep a lookout for the second edition!

http://familydogproject.elte.hu/index.html

Search to purchase: http://booko.com.au/9780199545667/Dog-Behaviour-Evolution-and-Cognition

 
Csányi (2005) If Dogs Could Talk: Exploring the Canine Mind.

What does careful observation and documentation of dog behaviour tell us about the canine mind? And how did people and dogs come to share these strong emotional bonds? Readers join Csányi, and his dogs Flip and Jerry, in this scientific exploration of the high degree of mutual understanding between humans and their four-legged best friends.

http://familydogproject.elte.hu/staff.html
Search to purchase: http://booko.com.au/9780865477292/If-Dogs-Could-Talk

Coppinger & Coppinger (2002) Dogs: A New Understanding of Canine Origin, Behavior and Evolution.How did dogs come to be dogs, and where does their diversity come from? From village dogs to dogs in our beds, the Coppingers investigate how physical appearances and behaviours develop from both genes and the environment in which they are raised.

http://www.hampshire.edu/faculty/rcoppinger.htm
Search to purchase: http://booko.com.au/9780226115634/Dogs


 
McConnell (2003) The Other End of the Leash.

Dogs and humans are two entirely different species with distinct evolutionary heritages, yet can walk down the street together, move in synch and seemingly share mutual understanding. But are we always on the same page? Learn how dogs might interpret our human behaviour, and learn how to interact with dogs in ways they best understand. A must-read for anyone interested in enhancing their relationship and communication with canine companions.

http://www.patriciamcconnell.com/
Search to purchase: http://booko.com.au/9780345446787/Other-End-of-the-Leash

Jensen (2007) The Behavioural Biology of Dogs.
With separate sections by various experts, this book offers a nice overview of canine behavioural biology. Sections focus on dog evolution and development, basic behaviour and assessment, prevention and treatment of common companion dog behaviour 
problems. 

https://www.ifm.liu.se/biology/zoology/applied_ethology/group_members/per-jensen/

Search to purchase: http://booko.com.au/9781845931872/The-Behavioural-Biology-of-Dogs




Serpell (1995) The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behaviour and Interactions with People.

An early publication pulling together research into dog behaviour, cognition and evolution. The book dispels many myths and stereotypes about our canine friends and includes sections on dog origins, behaviour and behaviour problems as well as human-dog interactions. A comprehensive overview, rooted in scientific evidence. Keep a lookout for the second edition! 

Scott & Fuller (1965) Genetics and the Social Behavior of the Dog: The classic study.

Often referenced, but probably not so often read, this classic study, spanning twenty years, covers research into the role of genetics and socialisation on dog behaviour.

http://www.bgsu.edu/departments/nmb/page28619.html
Search to purchase: http://booko.com.au/9780226743387/Dog-Behaviour

Now, we were asked to put together a list of 10 canine science books and managed to squish in 13 there, but if anyone has others they'd have liked to see on this list, PLEASE list them into the comments section and we have have the best list of 15, or 20 or 500 canine science books going round!

In other news, Julie, I've joined a cartel. A while ago, my clever friend, Carolyn, had the idea of creating a positive space for working mums that offers support and smart ideas on how to get through the day. And now, it exists. Somehow, I'm part of it?! 

We're called Champagne Cartel and we have a lot to say. Champagne Cartel is a bunch of six working mums who are all doing the best we can with what we've got. Between us we have 11 kids - ranging in age from 21 years to teeny-tiny - and loads of wisdom and experience to offer. We believe in sometimes putting yourself first, which may or may not include the odd sneaky glass of champagne. And we think guilt is for suckers. 

So if you're ever feeling like a break from canine science, and think you'd like to dip a toe in the champagne, so to speak, you'd be very welcome!

I've just received some more SUPER EXCITING NEWS, but it will just need to wait until next time!


Most importantly Julie, what (and how??) does Chaser think?

Mia

Further reading:
  • The books above!
  • Ramos D., Ades C. & Dornhaus A. (2012). Two-Item Sentence Comprehension by a Dog (Canis familiaris), PLoS ONE, 7 (2) e29689. DOI:
  • van der Zee E., Zulch H., Mills D. & Dornhaus A. (2012). Word Generalization by a Dog (Canis familiaris): Is Shape Important?, PLoS ONE, 7 (11) e49382. DOI:
© 2013 Mia Cobb
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