Limits...
The effect of domestication on inhibitory control: wolves and dogs compared.

Marshall-Pescini S, Virányi Z, Range F - PLoS ONE (2015)

Bottom Line: Inhibitory control i.e. blocking an impulsive or prepotent response in favour of a more appropriate alternative, has been suggested to play an important role in cooperative behaviour.On the other hand, through the domestication process, dogs may have been selected for cooperative tendencies towards humans and/or a less reactive temperament, which may in turn have affected their inhibitory control abilities.Results are discussed in relation to previous studies using these paradigms and in terms of the validity of these two methods in assessing inhibitory control.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Comparative Cognition, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Medical University of Vienna, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Wolf Science Centre, Ernstbrunn, Austria.

ABSTRACT
Inhibitory control i.e. blocking an impulsive or prepotent response in favour of a more appropriate alternative, has been suggested to play an important role in cooperative behaviour. Interestingly, while dogs and wolves show a similar social organization, they differ in their intraspecific cooperation tendencies in that wolves rely more heavily on group coordination in regard to hunting and pup-rearing compared to dogs. Hence, based on the 'canine cooperation' hypothesis wolves should show better inhibitory control than dogs. On the other hand, through the domestication process, dogs may have been selected for cooperative tendencies towards humans and/or a less reactive temperament, which may in turn have affected their inhibitory control abilities. Hence, based on the latter hypothesis, we would expect dogs to show a higher performance in tasks requiring inhibitory control. To test the predictive value of these alternative hypotheses, in the current study two tasks; the 'cylinder task' and the 'detour task', which are designed to assess inhibitory control, were used to evaluate the performance of identically raised pack dogs and wolves. Results from the cylinder task showed a significantly poorer performance in wolves than identically-raised pack dogs (and showed that pack-dogs performed similarly to pet dogs with different training experiences), however contrary results emerged in the detour task, with wolves showing a shorter latency to success and less perseverative behaviour at the fence. Results are discussed in relation to previous studies using these paradigms and in terms of the validity of these two methods in assessing inhibitory control.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Pet- and pack- dog’s performance in the cylinder task.Mean number (and 95% confidence interval) of trials to criterion in the training phase, and of correct trials in the test phase, for trained and untrained pet dogs and dogs tested with no prior familiarization with the opaque cylinder.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4340790&req=5

pone.0118469.g004: Pet- and pack- dog’s performance in the cylinder task.Mean number (and 95% confidence interval) of trials to criterion in the training phase, and of correct trials in the test phase, for trained and untrained pet dogs and dogs tested with no prior familiarization with the opaque cylinder.

Mentions: WSC pack-living dogs, trained and untrained pet dogs, and dogs tested with no prior familiarization phase were also compared. No difference emerged between pack-dogs and trained and untrained pet dogs in the number of training trials required to reach criterion (mean±SE: pack-living dogs: 1.7±0.8, trained pet dogs: 0.5±0.3, untrained pet dogs: 0.3±0.2; T+ = 1.3, p = 0.5). Furthermore, no differences emerged between all four groups in the number of correct test trials (mean±SE pack-living dogs: 9.5±0.6, trained pet dogs: 9.8±0.1, untrained pet dogs: 9.4±0.3dogs, no training phase dogs: 8.6±0.6; T+ = 4.8, p = 0.19) (Fig. 4). On average trained dogs made correct choices on 98%, untrained dogs on 94% and dogs tested with no prior training trials on 86% of test trials.


The effect of domestication on inhibitory control: wolves and dogs compared.

Marshall-Pescini S, Virányi Z, Range F - PLoS ONE (2015)

Pet- and pack- dog’s performance in the cylinder task.Mean number (and 95% confidence interval) of trials to criterion in the training phase, and of correct trials in the test phase, for trained and untrained pet dogs and dogs tested with no prior familiarization with the opaque cylinder.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4340790&req=5

pone.0118469.g004: Pet- and pack- dog’s performance in the cylinder task.Mean number (and 95% confidence interval) of trials to criterion in the training phase, and of correct trials in the test phase, for trained and untrained pet dogs and dogs tested with no prior familiarization with the opaque cylinder.
Mentions: WSC pack-living dogs, trained and untrained pet dogs, and dogs tested with no prior familiarization phase were also compared. No difference emerged between pack-dogs and trained and untrained pet dogs in the number of training trials required to reach criterion (mean±SE: pack-living dogs: 1.7±0.8, trained pet dogs: 0.5±0.3, untrained pet dogs: 0.3±0.2; T+ = 1.3, p = 0.5). Furthermore, no differences emerged between all four groups in the number of correct test trials (mean±SE pack-living dogs: 9.5±0.6, trained pet dogs: 9.8±0.1, untrained pet dogs: 9.4±0.3dogs, no training phase dogs: 8.6±0.6; T+ = 4.8, p = 0.19) (Fig. 4). On average trained dogs made correct choices on 98%, untrained dogs on 94% and dogs tested with no prior training trials on 86% of test trials.

Bottom Line: Inhibitory control i.e. blocking an impulsive or prepotent response in favour of a more appropriate alternative, has been suggested to play an important role in cooperative behaviour.On the other hand, through the domestication process, dogs may have been selected for cooperative tendencies towards humans and/or a less reactive temperament, which may in turn have affected their inhibitory control abilities.Results are discussed in relation to previous studies using these paradigms and in terms of the validity of these two methods in assessing inhibitory control.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Comparative Cognition, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Medical University of Vienna, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Wolf Science Centre, Ernstbrunn, Austria.

ABSTRACT
Inhibitory control i.e. blocking an impulsive or prepotent response in favour of a more appropriate alternative, has been suggested to play an important role in cooperative behaviour. Interestingly, while dogs and wolves show a similar social organization, they differ in their intraspecific cooperation tendencies in that wolves rely more heavily on group coordination in regard to hunting and pup-rearing compared to dogs. Hence, based on the 'canine cooperation' hypothesis wolves should show better inhibitory control than dogs. On the other hand, through the domestication process, dogs may have been selected for cooperative tendencies towards humans and/or a less reactive temperament, which may in turn have affected their inhibitory control abilities. Hence, based on the latter hypothesis, we would expect dogs to show a higher performance in tasks requiring inhibitory control. To test the predictive value of these alternative hypotheses, in the current study two tasks; the 'cylinder task' and the 'detour task', which are designed to assess inhibitory control, were used to evaluate the performance of identically raised pack dogs and wolves. Results from the cylinder task showed a significantly poorer performance in wolves than identically-raised pack dogs (and showed that pack-dogs performed similarly to pet dogs with different training experiences), however contrary results emerged in the detour task, with wolves showing a shorter latency to success and less perseverative behaviour at the fence. Results are discussed in relation to previous studies using these paradigms and in terms of the validity of these two methods in assessing inhibitory control.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus