Cues to food location that domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) of different ages do and do not use

  title={Cues to food location that domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) of different ages do and do not use},
  author={Bryan Agnetta and Brian A. Hare and Michael Tomasello},
  journal={Animal Cognition},
Abstract The results of three experiments are reported. In the main study, a human experimenter presented domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) with a variety of social cues intended to indicate the location of hidden food. The novel findings of this study were: (1) dogs were able to use successfully several totally novel cues in which they watched a human place a marker in front of the target location; (2) dogs were unable to use the marker by itself with no behavioral cues (suggesting that some… 
Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) use a physical marker to locate hidden food
The results of three studies aimed at pinning down the relative contributions of the human’s hand and the marker suggest that dogs use the marker as a genuine communicative cue quite independently from the experimenter's actions.
Effect of training and familiarity on responsiveness to human cues in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris)
Support is provided for the presence of an evolved adaptation to exploit social cues provided by humans that can be augmented by familiarity with the cue giver, however, additional joint activity as experienced in an intensive training regime does not seem to increase accuracy in following human-given cues.
Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) are sensitive to the attentional state of humans.
Dogs behaved in clearly different ways in most of the conditions in which the human did not watch them compared with the control condition, in which she did.
Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) use human gestures but not nonhuman tokens to find hidden food.
The results indicate that dogs are more sensitive to human cues than equivalent nonhuman cues, and that the size of the cue is a critical element in determining dogs' success in following it.
Do dogs follow human social cues? A replication with family dogs in Japan.
Whether family dogs in Japan can use social cues to locate food hidden in one of two small containers (pots) is investigated and the data seem to challenge the domestication hypothesis and support the claim that social skill learning plays a critical role in this task.
Domesticated Dogs’ (Canis familiaris) Response to Dishonest Human Points
The role of pointing in dogs’ choice behavior and whether dogs, like human children, have difficulty interpreting the gesture novelly are explored and results indicated dogs learned to inhibit their approach to a deceptive static point when the reward was visible during choice.
Domestic dogs’ (Canis familiaris) choices in reference to information provided by human and artificial hands
Investigation of dogs’ use of information from human informants using a stationary pointing gesture, as well as the conditions under which dogs would utilize a stationary point, indicates that dogs chose in accordance with the number of points exhibited toward a particular location.


Communication of Food Location Between Human and Dog ( Canis Familiaris )
Two domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) participated in a series of studies in which they communicated with a human about the location of hidden food. In the first study both dogs were able to follow
Domestic Dogs (Canis familiaris) Use Human and Conspecific Social Cues to Locate Hidden Food
Ten domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) of different breeds and ages were exposed to 2 different social cues indicating the location of hidden food, each provided by both a human informant and a
Use of experimenter-given cues in dogs
It is suggested that the phenomenon of dogs responding to cues given by humans is better analysed as a case of interspecific communication than in terms of discrimination learning.
Chimpanzee Use of Human and Conspecific Social Cues to Locate Hidden Food
Two studies are reported in which chimpanzees attempted to use social cues to locate hidden food in one of two possible hiding places. In the first study four chimpanzees were exposed to a local
Search behavior in various breeds of adult dogs (Canis familiaris): object permanence and olfactory cues.
Human analog tests of object permanence were administered to various breeds of adult dogs and confirmed that success was lower in invisible than in visible displacement tests and that these problems were solved on the basis of representation of visual information rather than on the based of olfactory cues or of local rule learning.
Search behavior of dogs (Canis familiaris) in invisible displacement problems
Gagnon and Doré (1992) showed that domestic dogs are able to solve a Piagetian object permanence task called the invisible displacement problem. A toy is hidden in a container which is moved behind a
Chimpanzee gaze following in an object-choice task
These findings allowed us to discard both simple orientation and understanding seeing-knowing in others as the explanations for gaze following in chimpanzees, but they did not allow us to conclusively choose between orientation combined with foraging tendencies and understandingSeeing in others.
Five primate species follow the visual gaze of conspecifics
Individuals from five primate species were tested experimentally for their ability to follow the visual gaze of conspecifics to an outside object, and individuals from all species reliably followed the gaze of ConspecificS.
Factors influencing young chimpanzees' (Pan troglodytes) recognition of attention.
The results indicate that young chimpanzees may be selectively attached to other organisms making direct eye contact with them or engaged in postures or movements that indicate attention, even though they may not appreciate the underlying mentalistic significance of these behaviors.
Comprehension of novel communicative signs by apes and human children.
It is shown that young children understand the communicative intentions of other persons--although they may have more difficulty comprehending the exact nature of those intentions in some cases--whereas apes treat the behavioral signs of others as predictive cues only (signals).