| Literature DB >> 19686949 |
Mark Petter1, Evanya Musolino, William A Roberts, Mark Cole.
Abstract
In a series of experiments, dogs were allowed to choose between two containers, one of which contained a food reward. In Experiments 1 and 2, a cooperative human tester pointed to the baited container on half the trials, and a deceptive human tester pointed to the empty container on the other half of the trials. Dogs learned to approach the cooperator more often than the deceiver. Inanimate cues (black and white boxes) were used as the "cooperator" and "deceiver" in Experiment 3. As was the case in Experiments 1 and 2, the dogs learned to approach the "cooperator" box more often than the "deceiver" box. Thus, the experiments indicate that dogs are sensitive to the correlation between cues and their outcomes but offer no support for the idea that dogs understand human intentionality.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19686949 DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2009.07.002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Behav Processes ISSN: 0376-6357 Impact factor: 1.777