|
|
Merola, I., Lazzaroni, M., Marshall-Pescini, S., & Prato-Previde, E. (2015). Social referencing and cat–human communication. Anim. Cogn., 18(3), 639–648.
Abstract: Cats’ (Felis catus) communicative behaviour towards humans was explored using a social referencing paradigm in the presence of a potentially frightening object. One group of cats observed their owner delivering a positive emotional message, whereas another group received a negative emotional message. The aim was to evaluate whether cats use the emotional information provided by their owners about a novel/unfamiliar object to guide their own behaviour towards it. We assessed the presence of social referencing, in terms of referential looking towards the owner (defined as looking to the owner immediately before or after looking at the object), the behavioural regulation based on the owner’s emotional (positive vs negative) message (vocal and facial), and the observational conditioning following the owner’s actions towards the object. Most cats (79 %) exhibited referential looking between the owner and the object, and also to some extent changed their behaviour in line with the emotional message given by the owner. Results are discussed in relation to social referencing in other species (dogs in particular) and cats’ social organization and domestication history.
|
|
|
|
Schmidt, J., Scheid, C., Kotrschal, K., Bugnyar, T., & Schloegl, C. (2011). Gaze direction – A cue for hidden food in rooks (Corvus frugilegus)? Behavioural Processes, 88(2), 88–93.
Abstract: Other individual's head- and eye-directions can be used as social cues indicating the presence of important events. Among birds, ravens and rooks have been shown to co-orient with conspecifics and with humans by following their gaze direction into distant space and behind visual screens. Both species use screens to cache food in private; also, it had been suggested that they may rely on gaze cues to detect hidden food. However, in an object-choice task, ravens failed to do so, and their competitive lifestyle may have prevented them from relying on these cues. Here we tested closely related and cooperative rooks. Food was hidden in one of two cups and the experimenter gazed at the baited cup. In a second experiment, we aimed to increase the birds’ motivation to choose correctly by increasing the investment needed to obtain the reward. To do so, the birds had to pull on a string to obtain the cup. Here, the birds as a group tended to rely on gaze cues. In addition, individual birds quickly learned to use the cue in both experiments. Although rooks may not use gaze cues to find hidden food spontaneously, they may quickly learn to do so.
|
|
|
|
Giret, N., Miklósi, Á., Kreutzer, M., & Bovet, D. (2009). Use of experimenter-given cues by African gray parrots ( Psittacus erithacus ). Anim. Cogn., 12(1), 1–10.
Abstract: Abstract: One advantage of living in a social group is the opportunity to use information provided by other individuals. Social information can be based on cues provided by a conspecific or even by a heterospecific individual (e.g., gaze direction, vocalizations, pointing gestures). Although the use of human gaze and gestures has been extensively studied in primates, and is increasingly studied in other mammals, there is no documentation of birds using these cues in a cooperative context. In this study, we tested the ability of three African gray parrots to use different human cues (pointing and/or gazing) in an object-choice task. We found that one subject spontaneously used the most salient pointing gesture (looking and steady pointing with hand at about 20 cm from the baited box). The two others were also able to use this cue after 15 trials. None of the parrots spontaneously used the steady gaze cues (combined head and eye orientation), but one learned to do so effectively after only 15 trials when the distance between the head and the baited box was about 1 m. However, none of the parrots were able to use the momentary pointing nor the distal pointing and gazing cues. These results are discussed in terms of sensitivity to joint attention as a prerequisite to understand pointing gestures as it is to the referential use of labels.
|
|
|
|
Schloegl, C., Kotrschal, K., & Bugnyar, T. (2008). Modifying the object-choice task: Is the way you look important for ravens? Behav. Process., 77(1), 61–65.
Abstract: Most animals seem to have difficulties in using gaze cues to find hidden food in object-choice tasks. For instance, chimpanzees usually fail in these tests, even though they are capable of following other's gaze geometrically behind barriers. Similar to chimpanzees, common ravens are skilled in tracking other's gaze but fail in object-choice tasks. We here explored whether procedural modifications, which had been used successfully in chimpanzees, would also yield positive results in ravens. In our modifications (a) the experimenter approached the cup while gazing at it, (b) the gaze cue was accompanied by a sound and (c) the experimenter could actually see the food while giving the gaze cue. Two out of seven birds performed above chance level in some of these conditions. However, we ascribe this improvement to the individuals' learning ability rather than to an understanding of the communicative nature of the task. This interpretation is further supported by results of a follow-up experiment suggesting that ravens may not rely on conspecifics' gaze cues for finding food caches in a natural foraging context. In sum, our results suggest that ravens may not transfer their gaze follow abilities to foraging situations involving hidden food.
|
|
|
|
Hattori, Y., Kuroshima, H., & Fujita, K. (2007). I know you are not looking at me: capuchin monkeys` ? (Cebus apella) sensitivity to human attentional states. Anim. Cogn., 10(2), 141–148.
Abstract: Abstract The present study asked whether capuchin monkeys recognize human attentional states. The monkeys requested food from the experimenter by extending an arm (pointing) toward the baited one of two transparent cups. On regular trials the experimenter gave the food immediately to the monkeys upon pointing but on randomly inserted test trials she ignored the pointing for 5 s during which she displayed different attentional states. The monkeys looked at the experimenter's face longer when she looked at the monkeys than when she looked at the ceiling in Experiment 1, and longer when she oriented her head midway between the two cups with eyes open than when she did so with eyes closed in Experiment 2. However, the monkeys showed no differential pointing in these conditions. These results suggest that capuchins are sensitive to eye direction but this sensitivity does not lead to differential pointing trained in laboratory experiments. Furthermore, to our knowledge, this is the first firm behavioral evidence that non-human primates attend to the subtle states of eyes in a food requesting task.
|
|
|
|
Schloegl, C., Kotrschal, K., & Bugnyar, T. (2007). Gaze following in common ravens, Corvus corax: ontogeny and habituation. Anim. Behav., 74(4), 769–778.
Abstract: Co-orientation with others by using their gaze direction is considered to be adaptive for detecting food or predators or monitoring social interactions. Like the great apes, common ravens are capable of following human experimenters' gaze direction not only into distant space but also behind visual barriers. We investigated the ontogenetic development of these abilities by confronting birds with a human foster parent looking up (experiment 1) and behind visual barriers (experiment 3) and their modification by habituation (experiments 2 and 4). We tested a group of 12 hand-reared ravens during their first 10 months of life. Ravens responded to others' look-ups soon after fledging but could track their gaze behind a visual barrier only 4 months later, at the age they usually become independent from their parents. Furthermore, ravens quickly ceased responding to repeated look-ups by the model, but did not habituate to repeated gaze cues directed behind a barrier. Our findings support the idea that the two modes of gaze following reflect different cognitive levels in ravens and, possibly, have different functions.
|
|
|
|
B. Agnetta,, B. Hare,, & M. Tomasello,. (2000). Cues to food location that domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) of different ages do and do not use. Anim. Cogn., 3(2), 107–112.
Abstract: Autoren
B. Agnetta, B. Hare, M. Tomasello
Zusammenfassung
The results of three experiments are reported. In the main study, a human experimenter presented domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) with a variety of social cues intended to indicate the location of hidden food. The novel findings of this study were: (1) dogs were able to use successfully several totally novel cues in which they watched a human place a marker in front of the target location; (2) dogs were unable to use the marker by itself with no behavioral cues (suggesting that some form of human behavior directed to the target location was a necessary part of the cue); and (3) there were no significant developments in dogs' skills in these tasks across the age range 4 months to 4 years (arguing against the necessity of extensive learning experiences with humans). In a follow-up study, dogs did not follow human gaze into “empty space” outside of the simulated foraging context. Finally, in a small pilot study, two arctic wolves (Canis lupus) were unable to use human cues to locate hidden food. These results suggest the possibility that domestic dogs have evolved an adaptive specialization for using human-produced directional cues in a goal-directed (especially foraging) context. Exactly how they understand these cues is still an open question.
Schlüsselwörter
Key words Dogs – Arctic wolves – Social cognition – Gaze following – Communication
|
|
|
|
Itakura, S. (2004). Gaze Following and Joint Visual Attention in Nonhuman Animals. Jpn. Psychol. Res., 3. Retrieved May 30, 2024, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5584.2004.00253.x
Abstract: n this paper, studies of gaze-following and joint visual attention in nonhuman animals are reviewed from the theoretical perspective of Emery (2000). There are many studies of gaze-following and joint visual attention in nonhuman primates. The reports concern not only adult individuals but also the development of these abilities. Studies to date suggest that monkeys and apes are able to follow the gaze of others, but only apes can understand the seeing-knowing relationship with regards to conspecifics in competitive situations. Also, there have recently been some reports of ability to follow the gaze of humans in domestic animals, such as dogs or horses, interacting with humans. These domestic animals are considered to have acquired this ability during their long history of selective breeding by humans. However, we need to clarify social gaze parameters in various species to improve our knowledge of the evolution of how we process others gazing, attention, and mental states.
|
|
