Content area
Full Text
Abstract Udell, Dorey, andWynne (2011) demonstrated that both domesticated and nondomesticated canids-specifically, gray wolves-have the capacity to succeed on perspective-taking tasks, suggesting that dogs' ability to respond to the human attentional state is not a by-product of domestication alone. Furthermore, not all dogs were successful on the task. Instead, the occluder type used was a strong predictor of performance, indicating the important role of environment and experience for tasks of this type. Here, we address several commentaries reflecting on the methods and design of that study, as well as the interpretation of the results. We also discuss the positive shift toward more interactive approaches in the field of canine behavior and cognition. Finally, we question the functionality of describing canine social behavior in terms of theory of mind.
Keywords Wolves . Dogs . Canis lupus familiaris . Canis lupus . Perspective taking . Social cognition . Theory of mind . Domestication . Learning . Two-stage hypothesis
We are most grateful to all the authors for their stimulating commentaries. At times, it may seem like any one experiment is a lens through which different observers may see very different things. We hope in this response to be able to clarify our study and to move forward the discussion as to what might constitute canine theory of mind.
Movement toward an interactive approach
We agree wholeheartedly with Miklósi and Topál (2011) that "there is evidence to suggest that domestication is a genetic process," one that has led to a number of morphological, behavioral, and possibly even social changes in the domestic dog (see Udell, Dorey, & Wynne, 2010b, for more on canine domestication and socialization). To argue, as we do, that domestication is neither necessary nor sufficient to explain domestic dogs' sensitivity to attentional state or responsiveness to human gestures is not to say that genetic domestication has had no effect on the behavior of domestic dogs (see also Udell et al., 2010b). Instead, we suggest that the results in Udell, Dorey and Wynne (2011), like prior pointing studies (e.g., Udell, Dorey and Wynne 2008), demonstrate that domestication is not necessary to account for dogs' responsiveness to human stimuli, because a number of nondomesticated species demonstrate the capacity to succeed on such tasks. These include not...