conceptualizing the domestic dog – should we start again?

2
References Quaranta, A., Siniscalchi, M., Vallortigara, G., 2007. Asymmetric tail-wagging responses by dogs to different emotive stimuli.. Curr. Biol. 17, R199–R201. Whitfield, J., 2007. ‘Here boy’ makes dogs wag to the right. Nature News 070319. http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070319/full/news070319-6. html. DOI: 10.1038/news070319-6. SPONTANEOUS BLINK RATES OF DOMESTIC DOGS: A PRELIMINARY REPORT Sadahiko Nakajima 1, *, Yasuko Takamatsu 1 , Tomomi Fukuoka 1 , Yasuko Omori 2 1 Department of Psychological Science, Kwansei Gakuin University, Hyogo, Japan 2 Department of Psychology, Jin-ai University, Fukui, Japan *Corresponding author: [email protected] Mammals and birds have species-specific rates of spontaneous blinking (Blount, 1927; Stevens and Livermore, 1978; Kirsten and Kirsten, 1984; Carrington et al., 1987; Tada et al., 2008). The average blink rate of domestic dogs is around 2 per min according to Blount (1927) and Stevens and Livermore (1978). Carrington et al. (1987) reported that dogs spontane- ously blinked 14.5 times per min, on average. To resolve this discrepancy, we analyzed video-recorded blinks of 15 household dogs of varied breeds (8 males and 7 females, 2.5–11 years old) in their normal state: the dogs were not awaiting commands or engaging in tasks when recorded. They were relaxed with their owners but not drowsy. Slow- motion playback and frame-by-frame analysis of the movie shots on a 42-inch screen revealed three explicit types of blinks: fully-closed blinks, half-closed blinks, and one-eye blinks. Average blink (6SE) rates, respectively, were 12.99 (61.96), 10.90 (61.16), and 1.41 (60.31) per min with a high inter-rater agreement (r 5 0.96). The fully-closed blink rate was similar to the score reported by Carrington et al. (1987) rather than Blount (1927) and Stevens and Livermore (1978). We also analyzed duration of closing and reopening in the fully-closed blinks, and the averages (6SE) were 157 (614) and 192 (615) ms, respectively. Sex, age and body size factors had no statistically significant effect on any of these blink measures. In humans, blink rate is associated with levels of arousal (Stern et al., 1994), fatigue (Stern et al., 1984), and pleasant/unpleas- ant feelings (Tecce et al., 1978). As spontaneous blinking may reflect central dopamine activity (Karson, 1983), it also corre- lates with some personality traits in humans (Colzato et al., 2009). We asked the dog owners to rate their dogs’ personality on a 7-point scale for the 20 trait items representing the five factors of dog personality (Aggressiveness, Timidity, Ex- troversion, Intelligence, and Carefreeness; 4 items per factor) created by Hirayoshi and Nakajima (2009). The correlations between blink measures and the factor scores were not signif- icant except for the negative correlation between reopening duration and Intelligence (r 5 -0.57, t 5 2.51, df 513, p 5 0.026). Intelligent dogs might reopen eyes quickly because of some underlying mental property (e.g., general alertness). Otherwise, quickly reopening dogs might make dogs appear ‘intellectual.’ Key words: domestic dog; eyeblink; eye behavior; personality; intelligence References Blount, W.P., 1927. Studies of the movement of the eyelids of animals: Blinking. Q.J. Exp. Physiol. 18, 111–125. Carrington, S.D., Bedford, P.G.C., Guillon, J.-P., Woodard, E.G., 1987. Polarized light biomicroscopic observations on the pre-corneal tear film. 1. The normal tear film of the dog. J. Small Anim. Pract. 28, 605–622. Colzato, L.S., Slagter, H.A., van den Wildenberg, W., Hommel, B., 2009. Clos- ing one’s eyes to reality: Evidence for a dopaminergic basis of psychoti- cism from spontaneous eye blink rates. Pers. Indiv. Differ. 46, 377–380. Hirayoshi, S., Nakajima, S., 2009. Analysis of personality-trait structure of dogs with personality-trait descriptors [in Japanese with English abstract]. Jpn. J. Anim. Psychol. 59, 57–75. Karson, C.N., 1983. Spontaneous eye-blink rates and dopaminergic systems. Brain 106, 643–653. Kirsten, S.J., Kirsten, E.B., 1984. Spontaneous blink rates of birds. Condor 85, 92–93. Stern, J.A., Boyer, D., Schroeder, D., 1994. Blink rate: A possible measure of fatigue. Hum. Factors 36, 285–297. Stern, J., Walrath, L.C., Goldstein, R., 1984. The endogenous eyeblink. Psychophysiol. 21, 22–33. Stevens, J.R., Livermore, Jr, A., 1978. Eye blinking and rapid eye movement: Pulsed photic stimulation of the brain. Exp. Neurol. 60, 541–556. Tada, H., Omori, Y., Sugiyama, T., Hirokawa, K., Ohira, H., Tomonaga, M., 2008. Age and species related differences in blink rate. Int. J. Psycho- physiol. 69, 191–192. Tecce, J.J., Savignano-Bowman, J., Cole, J.O., 1978. Drug effects on contin- gent negative variation and eyeblinks: The distraction-arousal hypothesis. In: Lipton, M.A., DiMascio, A., Killam, K.F. (Eds.), Psychopharmacol- ogy: A Generation of Progress. Raven Press, New York, pp. 745–758. CONCEPTUALIZING THE DOMESTIC DOG – SHOULD WE START AGAIN? J.W.S. Bradshaw* Anthrozoology Institute, DCVS, University of Bristol, Langford, BS40 5DU UK *Corresponding author: [email protected] Traditional interpretations of the behavior of the domestic dog are derived from the hierarchical pack system, based on agonistic encounters, that was once thought to typify the social behavior of the wolf. Over the past decade, this framework has been largely dismantled, based on several lines of reasoning: (1) that social conflict (‘‘dominance’’) within wolf-packs is largely an artifact of captive packs, and does not reflect the much more harmonious behavior of natural, family-based groups; (2) that feral dogs do not construct wolf-type social groups; (3) that much of the behavior of domestic dogs can be interpreted as originating from patterns of behavior common to many species within the Canidae, thus pre-dating the Abstracts 95

Upload: jws-bradshaw

Post on 09-Sep-2016

215 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Conceptualizing the domestic dog – should we start again?

Abstracts 95

References

Quaranta,A., Siniscalchi,M.,Vallortigara,G., 2007.Asymmetric tail-wagging

responses by dogs to different emotive stimuli.. Curr. Biol. 17,

R199–R201.

Whitfield, J., 2007. ‘Here boy’ makes dogs wag to the right. Nature News

070319. http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070319/full/news070319-6.

html. DOI: 10.1038/news070319-6.

SPONTANEOUS BLINK RATES OF DOMESTIC DOGS:A PRELIMINARY REPORTSadahiko Nakajima1,*, Yasuko Takamatsu1,Tomomi Fukuoka1, Yasuko Omori21Department of Psychological Science, Kwansei GakuinUniversity, Hyogo, Japan2Department of Psychology, Jin-ai University, Fukui, Japan*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Mammals and birds have species-specific rates of spontaneousblinking (Blount, 1927; Stevens and Livermore, 1978; Kirstenand Kirsten, 1984; Carrington et al., 1987; Tada et al., 2008).The average blink rate of domestic dogs is around 2 per minaccording to Blount (1927) and Stevens and Livermore(1978). Carrington et al. (1987) reported that dogs spontane-ously blinked 14.5 times per min, on average. To resolvethis discrepancy, we analyzed video-recorded blinks of 15household dogs of varied breeds (8 males and 7 females,2.5–11 years old) in their normal state: the dogs were notawaiting commands or engaging in tasks when recorded.They were relaxed with their owners but not drowsy. Slow-motion playback and frame-by-frame analysis of the movieshots on a 42-inch screen revealed three explicit types ofblinks: fully-closed blinks, half-closed blinks, and one-eyeblinks. Average blink (6SE) rates, respectively, were 12.99(61.96), 10.90 (61.16), and 1.41 (60.31) per min with ahigh inter-rater agreement (r 5 0.96). The fully-closed blinkrate was similar to the score reported by Carrington et al.(1987) rather than Blount (1927) and Stevens and Livermore(1978). We also analyzed duration of closing and reopeningin the fully-closed blinks, and the averages (6SE) were 157(614) and 192 (615) ms, respectively. Sex, age and bodysize factors had no statistically significant effect on any ofthese blink measures.In humans, blink rate is associatedwith levels of arousal (Sternet al., 1994), fatigue (Stern et al., 1984), and pleasant/unpleas-ant feelings (Tecce et al., 1978). As spontaneous blinkingmayreflect central dopamine activity (Karson, 1983), it also corre-lates with some personality traits in humans (Colzato et al.,2009).We asked the dog owners to rate their dogs’ personalityon a 7-point scale for the 20 trait items representing thefive factors of dog personality (Aggressiveness, Timidity, Ex-troversion, Intelligence, and Carefreeness; 4 items per factor)created by Hirayoshi and Nakajima (2009). The correlationsbetween blink measures and the factor scores were not signif-icant except for the negative correlation between reopening

duration and Intelligence (r 5 -0.57, t 5 2.51, df 513, p 50.026). Intelligent dogs might reopen eyes quickly becauseof some underlying mental property (e.g., general alertness).Otherwise, quickly reopening dogs might make dogs appear‘intellectual.’

Key words: domestic dog; eyeblink; eye behavior;personality; intelligence

References

Blount, W.P., 1927. Studies of the movement of the eyelids of animals:

Blinking. Q.J. Exp. Physiol. 18, 111–125.

Carrington, S.D., Bedford, P.G.C., Guillon, J.-P., Woodard, E.G., 1987.

Polarized light biomicroscopic observations on the pre-corneal tear

film.1.The normal tearfilmof the dog. J. SmallAnim.Pract. 28, 605–622.

Colzato,L.S., Slagter,H.A., vandenWildenberg,W.,Hommel,B., 2009.Clos-

ing one’s eyes to reality: Evidence for a dopaminergic basis of psychoti-

cism from spontaneous eye blink rates. Pers. Indiv. Differ. 46, 377–380.

Hirayoshi, S., Nakajima, S., 2009. Analysis of personality-trait structure of

dogs with personality-trait descriptors [in Japanese with English

abstract]. Jpn. J. Anim. Psychol. 59, 57–75.

Karson, C.N., 1983. Spontaneous eye-blink rates and dopaminergic

systems. Brain 106, 643–653.

Kirsten, S.J., Kirsten, E.B., 1984. Spontaneous blink rates of birds. Condor

85, 92–93.

Stern, J.A., Boyer, D., Schroeder, D., 1994. Blink rate: A possible measure

of fatigue. Hum. Factors 36, 285–297.

Stern, J., Walrath, L.C., Goldstein, R., 1984. The endogenous eyeblink.

Psychophysiol. 21, 22–33.

Stevens, J.R., Livermore, Jr, A., 1978. Eye blinking and rapid eyemovement:

Pulsed photic stimulation of the brain. Exp. Neurol. 60, 541–556.

Tada, H., Omori, Y., Sugiyama, T., Hirokawa, K., Ohira, H., Tomonaga, M.,

2008. Age and species related differences in blink rate. Int. J. Psycho-

physiol. 69, 191–192.

Tecce, J.J., Savignano-Bowman, J., Cole, J.O., 1978. Drug effects on contin-

gent negative variation and eyeblinks: The distraction-arousal hypothesis.

In: Lipton, M.A., DiMascio, A., Killam, K.F. (Eds.), Psychopharmacol-

ogy: A Generation of Progress. Raven Press, New York, pp. 745–758.

CONCEPTUALIZING THE DOMESTIC DOG – SHOULD WESTART AGAIN?J.W.S. Bradshaw*Anthrozoology Institute, DCVS, University of Bristol,Langford, BS40 5DU UK*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Traditional interpretations of the behavior of the domestic dogare derived from the hierarchical pack system, based onagonistic encounters, thatwas once thought to typify the socialbehavior of thewolf. Over the past decade, this framework hasbeen largely dismantled, based on several lines of reasoning:(1) that social conflict (‘‘dominance’’) within wolf-packs islargely an artifact of captive packs, and does not reflect themuch more harmonious behavior of natural, family-basedgroups; (2) that feral dogs do not construct wolf-type socialgroups; (3) that much of the behavior of domestic dogs can beinterpreted as originating from patterns of behavior commonto many species within the Canidae, thus pre-dating the

Page 2: Conceptualizing the domestic dog – should we start again?

96 Journal of Veterinary Behavior, Vol 6, No 1, January/February 2011

evolution of the wolf; (4) from an animal welfare perspective,that the conflict-based wolf-pack model encourages an over-emphasis on punishment-based training techniques, aimed atachieving a presumed ‘‘status reduction’’. In companion dogs,aggression is usually motivated by fear, and may be moreparsimoniously explained as arising fromstrategies learned byindividual dogs, based on their past experiences of the successor otherwise of different levels of agonistic behavior(Bradshaw et al., 2009). Rather than being based on a hierar-chy, the dog-human bond may be more realistically formu-lated as a pseudo-parental relationship, in which puppiesbecome socialised to humans and dogs alike during the secondand third months of life, domestication having apparently ex-panded both the scope and time-window of the mechanismswhereby wolf cubs learn the characteristics of pack memberssoon after they first emerge from the den. Proponents ofpunishment-based training techniques often refer to thedog’s supposedly inherent pack nature, and the need to controlany sign of presumed dominance to prevent the dog from be-comingaggressive.Thosewhopromote reward-based systemsof trainingusually de-emphasise such ‘‘naturalistic’’ concepts,and instead base their approach on principles derived fromlearning theory. The former approach is currently widely pro-moted in the media, particularly television, and is still widelyused, despite the concept of wolf society to which it refershaving been largely abandoned by the scientific community.

Key words: dominance; domestic dog; wolf; training;socialization

Reference

Bradshaw, J.W.S., Blackwell, E.J., Casey, R.A., 2009. Dominance in

domestic dogs: useful construct or bad habit? J. Vet. Behav.: Clin.

Appl. Res. 4, 135–144.

EXAMINING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOMESTICDOG BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN ATTACHMENT –DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PURE AND MIXED BREED DOGSJudith M. Thorn*, Jordan A. StouneKnox College, Department of Biology, 2 East South Street,Galesburg, IL, USA*Corresponding author: [email protected];Phone: 1 309 341 7896

In the past, attachment studies have focused on relationshipsbetween children and caregivers. Although pets are notreplacements for human relationships, they too can serve asattachment figures. In the present study the relationshipbetween pet behavior and owner attachment was examined.Participants completed surveys about themselves and theirdogs (N 5 50). Of those participants, the majority (34%)were between the ages of 40 and 49 and 74% were women.Human attachment to pets was classified in four ways:secure, dismissing, preoccupied, and fearful. Owners wereasked to choose the attachment type that best described them

and subsequently score each of the four types of attachmentrelated to themselves. The C-BARQ, completed by theowner, was used to evaluate dog behavior. As expected,there was a negative correlation found between dogsexhibiting aggression towards humans and owners with asecure attachment type. Surprisingly, there were many dif-ferences found between pure and mixed breed dogs. In purebreed dogs (n 5 24), analyzed alone, there were significantcorrelations between dog behavior and attachment type forall four attachment types including stranger-directed aggres-sion, owner-directed aggression, and trainability. No signif-icant correlations were observed between owner attachmenttype and behavior for mixed breed dogs. The differencebetween pure and mixed breed dogs was not expected andleads to interesting questions regarding owners’ perceptionsof and expectations for pure breed dogs.

Key words: attachment; C-BARQ; pure breed; dogbehavior; perception

BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS AND PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGYDaniel S. Mills*Animal Behaviour, Cognition & Welfare Group, Dept ofBiological Sciences, University of Lincoln, RiseholmePark Lincoln LN2 2LG UK*Corresponding author: [email protected];Phone: 144 (0)1522 895356

Behavior problems consist of clusters of behaviors andemotional states of varying intensity associated with arange of cognitive processes, none of which may be uniquefor a given problem. Although there may be specific factorswhich an owner finds unacceptable, the processes thatresult in a problem often have their origins in normality andare spectral in their form. Consequently, there may be nosingle qualitative factor which defines a problem from anobjective biological perspective. This poses challenges forthe scientific classification of behavior problems, andreflects the issues faced in human psychiatry. Manyattempts have been made to define animal behavior prob-lems based on contextual factors, e.g., intermale aggres-sion; putative function, e.g., possessive aggression;significant aetiological factors, e.g., learned aggression, orperhaps a combination of these. Unfortunately any systemwhich does not have a solid biological basis is likely tohave serious limitations and be of limited value when tryingto relate diagnosis to potential pharmacological interven-tion. Recent developments in neuroscience have identified arange of emotional circuits and associated neuromodulatorysystems that are likely to contribute to problem behavior inmammals and by recognising how these are expressed in agiven individual it is possible to define an animal’s problemin multidimensional emotional space. Thus an animal is notfearful or frustrated at any given time, but has a degree offear AND a degree of frustration at a given time. The emo-tional states and their intensity together with cognitive