What does it take to become 'best friends'? Evolutionary changes in canine social competence

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Volumn 17, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 287-294

  Miklósi, Ádám ^a,b   Topál, József ^c  

^a EÖTVÖS LORÁND UNIVERSITY   (Hungary)

^b MTA ELTE COMPARATIVE ETHOLOGY RESEARCH GROUP   (Hungary)

^c INSTITUTE OF EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE   (Hungary)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EVOLUTIONARY CHANGES; HUMAN LIKENESS; SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR; SOCIAL COGNITION; SOCIAL COMPETENCES; SOCIAL SKILLS; SOCIO-COGNITIVE; SYSTEM-LEVEL APPROACH;

COGNITIVE SYSTEMS;

BIOLOGY;

ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; CLADISTICS; DOG; EVOLUTION; FRIEND; FRIENDSHIP; HUMAN; HUMAN VERSUS ANIMAL COMPARISON; HUMAN-ANIMAL BOND; NONHUMAN; REVIEW; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL COGNITION; SOCIAL COMPETENCE; ANIMAL; DECISION MAKING; MENTAL CAPACITY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOLOGY;

ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; DECISION MAKING; DOGS; HUMANS; MENTAL COMPETENCY; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

EID: 84891719072     PISSN: 13646613     EISSN: 1879307X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2013.04.005     Document Type: Review

References (93)

1. Heyes C.M. New thinking: the evolution of human cognition. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 2012, 367:2091-2096.
2. Shettleworth S. Cognition, Evolution, and Behavior 2010, Oxford University Press.
3. Menzel N. The honeybee as a model for understanding the basis of cognition. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2012, 13:758-768.
4. Fernald R.D. Social control of the brain. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 2012, 35:133-151.
5. Emery N.J., Clayton N.S. The mentality of crows: convergent evolution of intelligence in corvids and apes. Science 2004, 306:1903-1907.
6. Miklósi Á. Dog Behaviour, Evolution, and Cognition 2007, Oxford University Press.
7. Price E.O. Behavioral aspects of animal domestication. Q. Rev. Biol. 1984, 59:2-32.
8. Hare B., et al. The domestication of cognition in dogs. Science 2002, 298:1634-1636.
9. Miklósi Á., et al. A simple reason for a big difference: wolves do not look back at humans, but dogs do. Curr. Biol. 2003, 13:763-766.
10. Topál J., et al. Differential sensitivity to human communication in dogs, wolves, and human infants. Science 2009, 325:1269-1271.
11. Hare B., Tomasello M. Human-like social skills in dogs?. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2005, 9:439-444.
12. Topál J., et al. The dog as a model for understanding human social behavior. Adv. Stud. Behav. 2009, 39:71-116.
13. Topál J., et al. Attachment behavior in dogs (Canis familiaris): a new application of Ainsworth's (1969) strange situation test. J. Comp. Psychol. 1998, 112:219-229.
14. Palmer R., Custance D. A counterbalanced version of Ainsworth's strange situation procedure reveals secure-base effects in dog-human relationships. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2008, 109:306-319.
15. Ainsworth M.D.S. Object relations, dependency and attachment: a theoretical review of the infant-mother relationship. Child Dev. 1969, 40:969-1025.
16. Rajecki D.W., et al. Toward a general theory of infantile attachment: a comparative review of aspects of the social bond. Behav. Brain Sci. 1978, 3:417-464.
17. Topál J., et al. The effect of domestication and socialization on attachment to human: a comparative study on hand reared wolves and differently socialized dog puppies. Anim. Behav. 2005, 70:1367-1375.
18. Merola I., et al. Dogs' social referencing towards owners and strangers. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e47653.
19. Gácsi M., et al. Human analogue safe haven effect of the owner: behavioural and heart rate response to stressful social stimuli in dogs. PLoS ONE 2013, 8:e58475.
20. Csibra G., Gergely G. Natural pedagogy. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2009, 13:144-153.
21. Senju A., Csibra G. Gaze following in human infants depends on communicative signals. Curr. Biol. 2008, 18:668-671.
22. Miklósi Á., Topál J. The evolution of canine cognition. The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Evolutionary Psychology 2012, 513-568. Oxford University Press. J. Vonk, T. Shackelford (Eds.).
23. Gácsi M., et al. Species-specific differences and similarities in the behavior of hand raised dog and wolf puppies in social situations with humans. Dev. Psychobiol. 2005, 47:111-122.
24. Erdohegyi Á., et al. Dog-logic: inferential reasoning in a two-way choice task and its restricted use. Anim. Behav. 2007, 74:725-737.
25. Kaminski J. Dogs (Canis familiaris) are adapted to receive human communication. Neurobiology of Umwelt: How Living Beings Perceive the World 2009, 103-107. Springer Verlag. A. Berthoz, Y. Christen (Eds.).
26. Kis A., et al. Does the A-not-B error in adult pet dogs indicate sensitivity to human communication?. Anim. Cogn. 2012, 15:737-743.
27. Kaminski J., et al. How dogs know when communication is intended for them. Dev. Sci. 2012, 15:222-232.
28. Virányi Zs., et al. Dogs can recognize the focus of attention in humans. Behav. Proc. 2004, 66:161-172.
29. Téglás E., et al. Dogs' gaze following is tuned to human communicative signals. Curr. Biol. 2012, 22:209-212.
30. Soproni K., et al. Comprehension of human communicative signs in pet dogs. J. Comp. Psychol. 2001, 115:122-126.
31. Lakatos G., et al. A comparative approach to dogs' (Canis familiaris) and human infants' comprehension of various forms of pointing gestures. Anim. Cogn. 2009, 12:621-631.
32. Miklósi Á., Soproni K. A comparative analysis of the animals' understanding of the human pointing gesture. Anim. Cogn. 2006, 9:81-94.
33. Kirchhofer K.C., et al. Dogs (Canis familiaris), but not chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), understand imperative pointing. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e30913.
34. Scheider L., et al. Do domestic dogs interpret pointing as a command?. Anim. Cogn. 2013, 16:361-372.
35. Pettersson H., et al. Understanding of human communicative motives in domestic dogs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2011, 133:235-245.
36. Buttelmann D., Tomasello M. Can domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) use referential emotional expressions to locate hidden food?. Anim. Cogn. 2012, 16:137-145.
37. Topál J., et al. Obeying social rules: a comparative study on dogs and humans. J. Cult. Evol. Psychol. 2005, 3:213-238.
38. Kupán K., et al. Why do dogs (Canis familiaris) select the empty container in an observational learning task?. Anim. Cogn. 2011, 14:259-268.
39. Virányi Z., et al. Comprehension of human pointing gestures in young human-reared wolves and dogs. Anim. Cogn. 2008, 11:373-388.
40. Reid P.J. Adapting to the human world: dogs' responsiveness to our social cues. Behav. Proc. 2009, 80:325-333.
41. Udell M.A.R., et al. Wolves outperform dogs in following human social cues. Anim. Behav. 2008, 76:1767-1773.
42. Udell M.A.R., et al. What did domestication do to dogs? A new account of dogs' sensitivity to human actions. Biol. Rev. 2009, 85:327-345.
43. Coppinger R., Coppinger L. Dogs 2002, Chicago University Press.
44. Miklósi Á., Topál J. Is there a simple recipe of how to make friends?. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2005, 9:463-464.
45. Riedel J., et al. The early ontogeny of human-dog communication. Anim. Behav. 2008, 73:1003-1014.
46. Wynne C.D.L., et al. Ontogeny's impact on human-dog communication. Anim. Behav. 2008, 76:e1-e4.
47. Udell M.A.R., et al. Can your dog read your mind? Understanding the causes of canine perspective taking. Learn. Behav. 2011, 39:289-302.
48. Miklósi Á., Topál J. 'On the hunt for the genetic basis of perspective taking' - pitfalls in methodology. Learn. Behav. 2011, 39:310-313.
49. Frank H. Evolution of canine information processing under conditions of natural and artificial selection. Z. Tierpsychol. 1980, 59:389-399.
50. Trut L.N. Experimental studies in early canid domestication. The Genetics of the Dog 2001, 15-41. CABI Publishing. A. Ruvinsky, J. Sampson (Eds.).
51. Belyaev D.K. Destabilizing selection as a factor in domestication. J. Heredity 1978, 70:301-308.
52. Udell M.A.R., Wynne C.D.L. Ontogeny and phylogeny: both are essential to human-sensitive behavior in the genus Canis. Anim. Behav. 2010, 79:e9-e14.
53. Bitterman M.E. Vertebrate - invertebrate comparisons. NATO ASI Ser. Intell. Evol. Biol. 1988, 17:251-275.
54. Heyes C., Huber L. The Evolution of Cognition 2000, MIT Press.
55. Holdt, von B.M., et al. Genome-wide SNP and haplotype analyses reveal a rich history underlying dog domestication. Nature 2010, 464:898-902.
56. Parker H.G., Ostrander E.A. Canine Genomics and Genetics: Running with the Pack. PLoS Genet. 2005, 1:e58.
57. Larson G., et al. Rethinking dog domestication by integrating genetics, archeology, and biogeography. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2012, 109:8878-8883.
58. Boyko A.R., et al. Complex population structure in African village dogs and its implications for inferring dog domestication history. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2009, 106:13903-13908.
59. Tomasello M., Call J. Primate Cognition 1997, Oxford University Press.
60. Bering J.M. A critical review of the 'enculturation hypothesis': the effects of human rearing on ape social cognition. Anim. Cogn. 2004, 7:201-212.
61. Waters E., et al. Q-Sort definitions of social competence and self-esteem: discriminant validity of related constructs in theory and data. Dev. Psychol. 1985, 21:508-522.
62. Liddle B., Nettle D. Higher-order theory of mind and social competence in school-age children. J. Cult. Evol. Psychol. 2006, 4:231-246.
63. Stump K.N., et al. Theories of social competence from the top-down to the bottom-up: a case for considering foundational human needs. Social Behavior and Skills in Children 2009, 23-37. Springer Science and Business Media, LLC. J.L. Matson (Ed.).
64. Oliveira R.F. Social behavior in context: hormonal modulation of behavioral plasticity and social competence. Int. Comp. Biol. 2009, 49:423-440.
65. Taborsky B., Oliveira R.F. Social competence: an evolutionary approach. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2012, 27:679-688.
66. Pigliucci M. Evolution of phenotypic plasticity: where are we going now?. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2005, 20:481-486.
67. Dingemanse N.J., et al. Behavioural reaction norms: animal personality meets individual plasticity. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2010, 25:81-89.
68. Dunbar R. Grooming, Gossip, and the Evolution of Language 1996, Harvard University Press.
69. Tomasello M., et al. Understanding and sharing intentions: the origins of cultural cognition. Behav. Brain Sci. 2005, 28:675-691.
70. Flack J.C., de Waal F.B.M. Dominance style, social power, and conflict management: a conceptual framework. Macaque Societies: A Model for the Study of Social Organization. 2004, 157-182. Cambridge University Press. B. Thierry (Ed.).
71. Call J. Chimpanzee social cognition. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2001, 5:388-393.
72. Herrmann E., et al. Humans have evolved specialized skills of social cognition: the cultural intelligence hypothesis. Science 2007, 317:1360-1366.
73. Bräuer J., et al. Chimpanzees really know what others can see in a competitive situation. Anim. Cogn. 2007, 10:439-448.
74. Hare B., et al. Do chimpanzees know what conspecifics know?. Anim. Behav. 2001, 61:139-151.
75. Bräuer J., et al. Making inferences about the location of hidden food: Social dog - causal ape. J. Comp. Psychol. 2006, 120:38-47.
76. Gácsi M., et al. Effects of selection for cooperation and attention in dogs. Behav. Brain Funct. 2009, 5:31.
77. Koster J. Hunting with dogs in Nicaragua: an optimal foraging approach. Curr. Anthropol. 2008, 49:935-944.
78. Topál J., Gácsi M. Lessons we should learn from our unique relationship with dogs: an ethological approach. Crossing boundaries 2012, 163-187. Brill Academic Press. L. Birke, J. Hockenhull (Eds.).
79. Topál J., et al. Reproducing human actions and action sequences: 'Do as I Do!' in a dog. Anim. Cogn. 2006, 9:355-367.
80. Range F., et al. Selective imitation in dogs. Curr. Biol. 2007, 17:868-872.
81. Naderi S., et al. Co-operative interactions between blind persons and their dogs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2001, 74:59-80.
82. Helton W.S. Deliberate practice in dogs: a canine model of expertise. J. Gen. Psychol. 2007, 134:247-257.
83. Zimen E. Ontogeny of approach and flight behavior towards humans in wolves, poodles and wolf-poodle hybrids. Man and Wolf 1987, 275-292. W.J. Publishers. H. Frank (Ed.).
84. Gácsi M., et al. Explaining dog wolf differences in utilizing human pointing gestures: selection for synergistic shifts in the development of some social skills. PLoS ONE 2009, 4:e6584.
85. Kubinyi E., et al. Comparative social cognition: from wolf and dog to humans. Comp. Cogn. Behav. Rev. 2007, 2:26-46.
86. Range F., Viranyi Zs. Gaze following abilities in wolves (Canis lupus). PLoS ONE 2011, 6:e16888.
87. Feuerbacher E.N., Wynne C.D. Relative efficacy of human social interaction and food as reinforcers for domestic dogs and hand-reared wolves. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 2012, 98:105-129.
88. McKinley J., Sambrook T.D. Use of human-given cues by domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) and horses (Equus caballus). Anim. Cogn. 2000, 3:13-22.
89. Wobber V., et al. Evidence for two waves of selection on the social skills of dogs. Int. Stud. 2009, 10:206-224.
90. Udell M.A.R., et al. The performance of stray dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) living in a shelter on human guided object-choice tasks. Anim. Behav. 2010, 79:717-725.
91. Hare B., et al. The domestication hypothesis for dogs' skills with human communication: a response to Udell et al. (2008) and Wynne et al. (2008). Anim. Behav. 2010, 79:e1-e6.
92. Berns G.S., et al. Functional MRI in awake unrestrained dogs. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e38027.
93. Kubinyi E., et al. Polymorphism in the tyrosine hydroxylase (TH) gene is associated with activity-impulsivity in German shepherd dogs. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e30271.