Dog-Dog vs Human-Dog Playing |
Abstract
In
the popular literature, it is often assumed that a single conceptual
framework can be applied to both dog–dog and dog–human interactions,
including play. We have, through three studies, tested the hypothesis
that dog–dog and dog–human play are motivationally distinct. In an
observational study of dogs being walked by their owners (N=402),
dogs which were walked together, and had opportunities to play with one
another, played with their owners with the same frequency as dogs being
walked alone. This finding was supported by a questionnaire survey of
2585 dog owners in which dogs in multi-dog households played slightly
more often with their owners than dogs in single-dog households. The
performance of dog–dog play does not, therefore, seem to suppress the
dogs' motivation to play with their owners as would be predicted if they
were motivationally interchangeable. In an experimental comparison of
dog–dog and dog–human toy-centred play, the dogs were more likely to
give up on a competition, to show and present the toy to their play
partner, if that partner was human. When two toys were available, dogs
playing with other dogs spent less time showing interest in both toys
and possessed one of the toys for longer, than dogs playing with people.
Overall, the dogs were more interactive and less likely to possess the
object when playing with a person. We conclude that dog–dog and
dog–human play are structurally different, supporting the idea that they
are motivationally distinct. We therefore suggest there is no reason to
assume that the consequences of dog–dog play can be extrapolated to
play with humans.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.