Reevaluating canine perspective-taking behavior

Udell, Dorey, and Wynne (2011) demonstrated that both domesticated and nondomesticated canids—specifically, gray wolves—have the capacity to succeed on perspective-taking tasks, suggesting that dogs’ ability to respond to the human attentional state is not a by-product of domestication alone. Furthermore, not all dogs were successful on the task. Instead, the occluder type used was a strong predictor of performance, indicating the important role of environment and experience for tasks of this type. Here, we address several commentaries reflecting on the methods and design of that study, as well as the interpretation of the results. We also discuss the positive shift toward more interactive approaches in the field of canine behavior and cognition. Finally, we question the functionality of describing canine social behavior in terms of theory of mind.     

Can your dog read your mind?: Understanding the causes of canine perspective taking

Prior studies have documented the domestic dog’s (Canis lupus familiaris) sensitivity to human attentional state, including a tendency to preferentially beg for food from attentive individuals and an ability to selectively perform forbidden behaviors when humans are not looking. Due to the success of dogs on perspective-taking tasks, some have hypothesized that domestic dogs may have theory of mind, or the ability to infer what other individuals know. Here we provide the first evidence that nondomesticated canids, grey wolves (Canis lupus), are also sensitive to human attentional state under some conditions. We also demonstrate that dogs do not display an undifferentiated sensitivity to all visual cues of attentional state. Rather, dogs are more sensitive to stimuli encountered in their home environment. Some dogs perform poorly on perspective-taking tasks. These findings have important implications for the interpretation of research designed to understand complex social cognition across species.     

Print Media

James Aronson's The Press and the Cold War (Bobbs-Merrill, $8.00)

Jon G. Udell's Economic Trends in the Daily Newspacer Business: 1946 to 1970 (Wisconsin Project Reports, Vol. IV, No. 6, Bureau of Business Research and Service, Graduate School of Business, University of Hisconsin, Kadison, Hisconsin 53706, free)

William L. Rivers and David H. Rubin's A Region's Press: Anatomy of Newspapers in the San Francisco Bay Area (Institute of Government Studies, University of California, Berkeley, Cal, 94720, $5.75/4.50)

Theodore P. Greene's America's Heroes: The Changing Models of Success in American Magazines (Oxford University Press, $9.50)

Burton's Which Ad Pulled Best? (Decker Communications Inc., 501 Madison Ave., New York 10022, $4.95 paperback)     

The development of argument skills

This work sought to obtain experimental evidence to corroborate cross-sectional patterns of development in argument skills and to evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention designed to foster development of these skills in academically at-risk 13- to 14-year-olds. Students participated in 16 sessions of a collaborative, goal-based activity providing dense exercise of argumentive thinking. One condition included peer dialogues; another did not. The former was the more effective, although both groups progressed. Participants showed increased frequency of usage of powerful argumentive discourse strategies, such as counterargument, and decreased frequency of less effective strategies. Quality of individual arguments (for or against a claim) also improved, supporting the existence of a close relation between these two kinds of argument skills.     

Print Media

Robert Adams' Creativity in Communications (New York Graphic Society, $20.00)

Jon G. Udell's Future Newsprint Demand: 1970-1980 (University of Wisconsin Graduate School of Business, free on request)