↓ Skip to main content

Do dogs follow behavioral cues from an unreliable human?

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
22 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
40 X users
facebook
9 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 Mendeley
Title
Do dogs follow behavioral cues from an unreliable human?
Published in
Animal Cognition, October 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10071-014-0816-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Akiko Takaoka, Tomomi Maeda, Yusuke Hori, Kazuo Fujita

Abstract

Dogs are known to consistently follow human pointing gestures. In this study, we asked whether dogs "automatically" do this or whether they flexibly adjust their behavior depending upon the reliability of the pointer, demonstrated in an immediately preceding event. We tested pet dogs in a version of the object choice task in which a piece of food was hidden in one of the two containers. In Experiment 1, Phase 1, an experimenter pointed at the baited container; the second container was empty. In Phase 2, after showing the contents of both containers to the dogs, the experimenter pointed at the empty container. In Phase 3, the procedure was exactly as in Phase 1. We compared the dogs' responses to the experimenter's pointing gestures in Phases 1 and 3. Most dogs followed pointing in Phase 1, but many fewer did so in Phase 3. In Experiment 2, dogs followed a new experimenter's pointing in Phase 3 following replication of procedures of Phases 1 and 2 in Experiment 1. This ruled out the possibility that dogs simply lost motivation to participate in the task in later phases. These results suggest that not only dogs are highly skilled at understanding human pointing gestures, but also they make inferences about the reliability of a human who presents cues and consequently modify their behavior flexibly depending on the inference.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 40 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Austria 2 2%
United States 2 2%
Italy 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Hungary 1 <1%
Unknown 104 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 15%
Student > Master 15 14%
Researcher 14 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 20 18%
Unknown 18 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 39 35%
Psychology 26 23%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 6 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 5%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 23 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 213. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 December 2023.
All research outputs
#179,031
of 25,163,238 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#60
of 1,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,638
of 267,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#2
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,163,238 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,552 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,139 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.