A comparison of dog–dog and dog–human play behaviour

Dog-Dog vs Human-Dog Playing

Nicola J Rooney, John W.S Bradshaw, Ian H Robinson

A comparison of dog–dog and dog–human play behaviour

Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Volume 66, Issue 3, 29 February 2000, Pages 235–248

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.

Training methods and owner–dog interactions: Links with dog behaviour and learning ability

Training methods and owner-dog interactions

Nicola Jane Rooney, Sarah Cowan

Training methods and owner–dog interactions: Links with dog behaviour and learning ability

Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Volume 132, Issues 3–4, July 2011, Pages 169–177

Abstract

The methods by which owners train their pet dogs range widely, with some exclusively using rewards, and others using a combination, or only punishment-based methods. This paper examines links between the way in which owners reported to have trained their dogs and observations of the dogs’ subsequent behaviour. It also explores associations between behaviour of owner and dog when tested in their own home. A total of 53 owners were surveyed about their preferred methods for training each of seven common tasks, and were each filmed interacting with their dog in a series of standardised scenarios. Dogs owned by subjects who reported using a higher proportion of punishment were less likely to interact with a stranger, and those dogs whose owners favoured physical punishment tended to be less playful. However, dogs whose owners reported using more rewards tended to perform better in a novel training task. Ability at this novel task was also higher in dogs belonging to owners who were seen to be more playful and who employed a patient approach to training. This study shows clear links between a dog's current behaviour and its owner's reported training history as well as the owner's present behaviour. High levels of punishment may thus have adverse effects upon a dog's behaviour whilst reward based training may improve a dog's subsequent ability to learn.

Third-party interventions in dyadic play between littermates of domestic dogs, Canis lupus familiaris

Camille Ward, Rebecca Trisko, Barbara B. Smuts

Third-party interventions in dyadic play between littermates of domestic dogs, Canis lupus familiaris

Animal Behaviour, Volume 78, Issue 5, November 2009, Pages 1153–1160

ABTRACT

Interventions occur when animals interfere in competitive interactions between two or more individuals. Interveners can alter the nature of the ongoing interaction by targeting one party (attacking, biting) and supporting the other. Three theories have been proposed to account for intervention behaviour: kin selection, reciprocity and direct benefits. The kin selection hypothesis predicts that interveners will selectively support relatives over nonrelatives; the reciprocity hypothesis predicts that when intervener ‘A’ supports individual ‘B’, later ‘B’ will intervene and support ‘A’; and the direct benefits hypothesis predicts that target/support patterns should serve the immediate interests of the intervener. We tested the reciprocity and direct benefits hypotheses by exploring third-party interventions in play fighting among littermates of domestic dogs. Interveners in dyadic play did not preferentially target or support preferred playmates of the intervener. Interveners targeted the dog in the losing role at the time of the intervention, and they did not show reciprocity in support. Taken together, these last two findings suggest that littermates benefit directly and use interventions opportunistically to practise offence behaviours directed at littermates already behaving subordinately. Opportunities to practise targeting in a playful setting may help structure dominance relationships among littermates. Additionally, the tendency for puppies to do what the other is doing (target the dog in the losing role) may pave the way for synchronizing cooperative behaviours during group hunting and territorial defence. The types of behaviours used to intervene changed over development, but the outcome following an intervention remained stable.

Domestic Dogs

B. Smuts

Domestic Dogs

Encyclopedia of Animal Behavior, Editors-in-Chief:  Michael D. Breed and Janice Moore, Oxford, 2010, Pages 562–567

ABSTRACT

Dogs, the first domestic animals, evolved from East Asian wolves approximately 40 000–20 000 years ago. Dogs understand human body language, many spoken words, and even abstract symbols. Dogs pay attention to human face and eyes, and they often turn to humans to help solve problems. Dogs and humans form a mutual emotional bond that reduces stress in both species. Being around dogs improve human physical and mental well-being. Most dogs are very social and play with other dogs if they can. Stray and feral dogs are common on the edges of human society. They form social groups, and sometimes cooperate in territorial defense, much as wolves do.

Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) use visual attention cues when play signaling

Alexandra Horowitz

Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) use visual attention cues when play signaling

Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, Volume 4, Issue 2, March–April 2009, Pages 53–54

ABSTRACT

Recent research has shown that dogs are able to recognize varying attentional states of humans ( [Call et al., 2003] and [Schwab and Huber, 2006]) and to use visual attention cues as an indication of a human's perceptual access (Virányi et al., 2006). The present research examines dogs’ use of visual attention cues when communicating with conspecifics in play.

Given dogs’ success at producing and interpreting communicative and attention cues of humans, a logical next step is to examine dogs’ abilities to use attention cues when communicating to conspecifics. The present research looks at 39 bouts of dyadic play in a natural setting. Sequential behaviors and head direction of both dogs were noted throughout the bouts. After coding, analysis considered the use of those behaviors identified as “play signals” (invitations to play) or “attention-getting behaviors” (acts which disrupt the partner's sensory [visual, auditory, tactile] experience) with respect to the visual attention cues of the recipient.

Of the 397 observed play signals, 376 were to a forward-facing audience (z = 5.25, n = 37 bouts, P < 0.001). When play signals were used in combination with attention getters, the actor preceded the play signal with the attention getter more often than the inverse (χ² = 9.52, df = 1, P < 0.01).

Dogs used attention getters more often when their partners were looking away than throughout the bouts (P[away] = 0.82, P[bout] = 0.34; z = 4.93, n = 33 bouts, P < 0.001). Further, dogs used more visual attention getters when their partner had their side to them (z = 1.93, n = 19 bouts, P = 0.0536), and dogs directed more tactile attention getters to dogs who were looking away or distracted (z = 2.37, n = 33 bouts, P = 0.0178). When a partner was socially distracted, tactile attention getters were used more often than visual attention getters (z = 2.22, n = 12 bouts, P = 0.0264).

Play behaviors were differentially used according to the partner's posture. Play signals were sent nearly exclusively to forward-facing conspecifics; attention-getting behaviors were used most often when a playmate was facing away, and before signaling an interest to play. In addition, the mode of attention getter matched the degree of inattentiveness of the playmate; stronger attention getters were used when a playmate was looking away or distracted, and less forceful ones when the partner was facing forward or laterally. The current evidence provides support for the claim that dogs can use behavioral indications of elements of attention in others to guide their own behavior.(Horowitz et al. 2009)

An experimental study of the effects of play upon the dog–human relationship

Nicola J Rooney, John W.S Bradshaw

An experimental study of the effects of play upon the dog–human relationship

Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Volume 75, Issue 2, 3 January 2002, Pages 161–176

Abstract

It has often been suggested that intraspecific dominance relationships are established through play. By analogy, it is also claimed that the outcome of competitive games can affect dog–human relationships. This paper experimentally tests the latter idea. Fourteen Golden Retrievers were each subjected to two treatments; 20 sessions of a tug-of-war game with the experimenter which they were allowed to win, and 20 sessions which they lost. Their relationship with the experimenter was assessed, via a composite behavioural test, once at the outset and once after each treatment. Principal components analysis allowed the 52 behavioural measures to be combined into nine underlying factors. Confidence (the factor most closely corresponding to conventional dominance) was unaffected by the treatments. Dogs scored higher for obedient attentiveness after play treatments, irrespective of whether they won or lost, and demandingness scores increased with familiarity of the test person. The 10 most playful dogs scored significantly higher for playful attention seeking after winning than after losing. We conclude that, in this population, dominance dimensions of the dog–human relationship are unaffected by the outcome of repetitive tug-of-war games. However, we suggest that the effects of games may be modified by the presence of play signals, and when these signals are absent or misinterpreted the outcome of games may have more serious consequences. Games may also assume greater significance for a minority of “potentially dominant” dogs.

Development of play behavior between potential guide dogs for the blind and human raisers

N. Koda

Development of play behavior between potential guide dogs for the blind and human raisers

Behavioural Processes, Volume 53, Issues 1–2, 13 March 2001, Pages 41–46

Abstract

This study shows longitudinal development of human-dog interactions in a guide dog raising program. Social play interactions between potential guide dogs for the blind (puppies) and their adult female raisers (PWs) were videotaped at home during the period from two months to 11 or 12 months of the puppies’ age. The puppies and PWs established close proximity relationships by two to three months of age. The older the puppies became, the shorter time the puppies and PWs spent in intensive fighting and chasing play. The older the puppies became, the longer the puppies and PWs spent in waiting, seeking and possessing together play which needed the puppies’ self-control, concentration and ability to cooperate with the PWs. Whether or not these behavioral tendencies which the puppies showed were appropriate for guide dog candidates is also discussed.