FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Animal cognition2021; 25(2); 369-384; doi: 10.1007/s10071-021-01557-6

Cognition and the human-animal relationship: a review of the sociocognitive skills of domestic mammals toward humans.

Abstract: In the past 20 years, research focusing on interspecific sociocognitive abilities of animals toward humans has been growing, allowing a better understanding of the interactions between humans and animals. This review focuses on five sociocognitive abilities of domestic mammals in relation to humans as follows: discriminating and recognizing individual humans; perceiving human emotions; interpreting our attentional states and goals; using referential communication (perceiving human signals or sending signals to humans); and engaging in social learning with humans (e.g., local enhancement, demonstration and social referencing). We focused on different species of domestic mammals for which literature on the subject is available, namely, cats, cattle, dogs, ferrets, goats, horses, pigs, and sheep. The results show that some species have remarkable abilities to recognize us or to detect and interpret the emotions or signals sent by humans. For example, sheep and horses can recognize the face of their keeper in photographs, dogs can react to our smells of fear, and pigs can follow our pointing gestures. Nevertheless, the studies are unequally distributed across species: there are many studies in animals that live closely with humans, such as dogs, but little is known about livestock animals, such as cattle and pigs. However, on the basis of existing data, no obvious links have emerged between the cognitive abilities of animals toward humans and their ecological characteristics or the history and reasons for their domestication. This review encourages continuing and expanding this type of research to more abilities and species.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2021-09-02 PubMed ID: 34476652PubMed Central: 4785927DOI: 10.1007/s10071-021-01557-6Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article
  • Review

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research article discusses the evolution of scientific understanding of domestic mammals’ sociocognitive skills towards humans. The research focuses on five main abilities including recognition of individual humans, perception of human emotions, understanding human attentional states and goals, use of referential communication, and engagement in social learning. The study covers various domestic mammals like cats, dogs, ferrets, goats, horses, pigs, sheep, and cattle.

Understanding Sociocognitive Abilities

  • The research draws attention to the notion that over the past 2 decades, studies on animals’ sociocognitive skills towards humans have offered deeper insights into human-animal interactions.
  • The primary focus of this review is to understand five basic sociocognitive abilities of domestic mammals in context to humans — recognizing and distinguishing between individual humans, apprehending human emotions, comprehending human attention and objectives, using referential communication which implies understanding and conveying human cues, and participating in social learning activities with humans, such as demonstration and social referencing.

Findings Across Various Species

  • The study explicitly covers eight species of domestic mammals— cats, cattle, dogs, ferrets, goats, horses, pigs, and sheep— drawing evidence from available literature.
  • Findings reveal that some species display incredible skills in recognizing humans or decoding and interpreting human emotions or signals. For instance, sheep and horses can identify their keeper through photographs; dogs can sense fear through human scents, and pigs can comprehend human pointing gestures.
  • However, it is noted that research is disproportionate across different species. There are many studies on animals that cohabit closely with humans, like dogs, but there are fewer studies on livestock animals like cattle and pigs.

Correlation Between Cognitive Abilities and Ecological or Domestication History

  • Based on the available data, the study could not fond any substantial connections between the cognitive abilities of animals towards humans and their ecological characteristics or the history and reasons behind their domestication.
  • This surprising finding suggests that the sociocognitive abilities of domestic mammals might instead be shaped by other variables not considered in this study. For example, specific environmental factors, innate intelligence levels within species, or training and exposure to humans could have impact.

Future Research Suggestions

  • The review underscores the need to expand such research to cover more abilities and a wider array of species. Such research could assist in refining our understanding of the cognitive capabilities of different animal species and improving human-animal interactions.

Cite This Article

APA
Jardat P, Lansade L. (2021). Cognition and the human-animal relationship: a review of the sociocognitive skills of domestic mammals toward humans. Anim Cogn, 25(2), 369-384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-021-01557-6

Publication

Animal cognition
ISSN: 1435-9456
NlmUniqueID: 9814573
Country: Germany
Language: English
Volume: 25
Issue: 2
Pages: 369-384

Researcher Affiliations

Jardat, Plotine
  • CNRS, IFCE, INRAE, University of Tours, PRC, 37380, Nouzilly, France.
  • Department of Biology, École Normale Supérieure de Lyon, University of Lyon, Lyon, France.
  • Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire d'Alfort (ENVA), Maisons-Alfort, France.
Lansade, Léa
  • CNRS, IFCE, INRAE, University of Tours, PRC, 37380, Nouzilly, France. lea.lansade@inrae.fr.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Animals, Domestic
  • Cattle
  • Cognition
  • Dogs
  • Emotions
  • Ferrets
  • Gestures
  • Horses
  • Human-Animal Interaction
  • Humans
  • Sheep
  • Swine

References

This article includes 139 references
  1. Adachi I, Kuwahata H, Fujita K. Dogs recall their owner’s face upon hearing the owner’s voice.. Anim Cogn 10:17–21.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-006-0025-8pubmed: 16802145google scholar: lookup
  2. Albuquerque N, Guo K, Wilkinson A. Dogs recognize dog and human emotions.. Biol Lett 12:20150883.
    doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2015.0883pmc: 4785927pubmed: 26763220google scholar: lookup
  3. Albuquerque N, Guo K, Wilkinson A. Mouth-licking by dogs as a response to emotional stimuli.. Behav Processes 146:42–45.
    doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2017.11.006pubmed: 29129727google scholar: lookup
  4. Anderson JR, Bucher B, Chijiiwa H. Third-party social evaluations of humans by monkeys and dogs.. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 82:95–109.
    doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.01.003pubmed: 28077260google scholar: lookup
  5. Baba C, Kawai M, Takimoto-Inose A. Are horses (Equus caballus) sensitive to human emotional cues?. Animals 9:630.
    doi: 10.3390/ani9090630pmc: 6770165google scholar: lookup
  6. Beausoleil NJ, Stafford KJ, Mellor DJ. Does direct human eye contact function as a warning cue for domestic sheep (Ovis aries)?. J Comp Psychol 120:269–279.
    doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.120.3.269pubmed: 16893264google scholar: lookup
  7. Benjamin A, Slocombe K. ‘Who’s a good boy?!’ Dogs prefer naturalistic dog-directed speech.. Anim Cogn 21:353–364.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-018-1172-4pmc: 5908831pubmed: 29500713google scholar: lookup
  8. Bernauer K, Kollross H, Schuetz A. How do horses (Equus caballus) learn from observing human action?. Anim Cogn .
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-019-01310-0pubmed: 31531748google scholar: lookup
  9. Bräuer J, Call J, Tomasello M. Visual perspective taking in dogs (Canis familiaris) in the presence of barriers.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 88:299–317.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2004.03.004google scholar: lookup
  10. Bulloch MJ, Tynes VV. Ferrets.. Behaviour of exotic pets pp 59–68.
  11. Burla JB, Siegwart J, Nawroth C. Human demonstration does not facilitate the performance of horses (Equus caballus) in a spatial problem-solving task.. Animals 8:96.
    doi: 10.3390/ani8060096pmc: 6025305google scholar: lookup
  12. Call J, Bräuer J, Kaminski J, Tomasello M. Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) are sensitive to the attentional state of humans.. J Comp Psychol .
    doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.117.3.257pubmed: 14498801google scholar: lookup
  13. Call J, Hare B, Carpenter M, Tomasello M. “Unwilling” versus “unable”: chimpanzees’ understanding of human intentional action.. Dev Sci 7:488–498.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2004.00368.xpubmed: 15484596google scholar: lookup
  14. Chijiiwa H, Kuroshima H, Hori Y. Dogs avoid people who behave negatively to their owner: third-party affective evaluation.. Anim Behav 106:123–127.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.05.018google scholar: lookup
  15. Chijiiwa H, Takagi S, Arahori M. Cats (Felis catus) show no avoidance of people who behave negatively to their owner.. Anim Behav Cogn 8:23–35.
    doi: 10.26451/abc.08.01.03.2021google scholar: lookup
  16. Correia-Caeiro C, Guo K, Mills D. Bodily emotional expressions are a primary source of information for dogs, but not for humans.. Anim Cogn 3:267–279.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-021-01471-xgoogle scholar: lookup
  17. Coulon M, Deputte BL, Heyman Y, Baudoin C. Individual recognition in domestic cattle (Bos taurus): Evidence from 2D-images of heads from different breeds.. PLoS ONE 4:e4441.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0004441pmc: 2636880pubmed: 19212439google scholar: lookup
  18. Custance D, Mayer J. Empathic-like responding by domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) to distress in humans: an exploratory study.. Anim Cogn 15:851–859.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-012-0510-1pubmed: 22644113google scholar: lookup
  19. D’Aniello B, Scandurra A, Alterisio A. The importance of gestural communication: a study of human–dog communication using incongruent information.. Anim Cogn 19:1231–1235.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-016-1010-5pubmed: 27338818google scholar: lookup
  20. D’Aniello B, Semin GR, Alterisio A. Interspecies transmission of emotional information via chemosignals: from humans to dogs (Canis lupus familiaris).. Anim Cogn 21:67–78.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-017-1139-xpubmed: 28988316google scholar: lookup
  21. D’Ingeo S, Quaranta A, Siniscalchi M. Horses associate individual human voices with the valence of past interactions: a behavioural and electrophysiological study.. Sci Rep 9:11568.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-47960-5pmc: 6689011pubmed: 31399629google scholar: lookup
  22. De Waal FBM. Putting the altruism back into altruism: the evolution of empathy.. Annu Rev Psychol 59:279–300.
    doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093625pubmed: 17550343google scholar: lookup
  23. Destrez A, Costes-Thiré M, Viart AS. Male mice and cows perceive human emotional chemosignals: a preliminary study.. Anim Cogn .
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-021-01511-6pubmed: 33839953google scholar: lookup
  24. Dierendonck MC. The importance of social relationships in horses.. Utrecht University, Utrecht.
  25. Duranton C, Bedossa T, Gaunet F. When facing an unfamiliar person, pet dogs present social referencing based on their owners’ direction of movement alone.. Anim Behav 113:147–156.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2016.01.004google scholar: lookup
  26. Eatherington CJ, Mongillo P, Lõoke M, Marinelli L. Dogs (Canis familiaris) recognise our faces in photographs: implications for existing and future research.. Anim Cogn 23:711–719.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-020-01382-3pubmed: 32270351google scholar: lookup
  27. Evans CS. Referential signals.. Springer, Boston pp 99–143.
  28. Feinman S. Social referencing in infancy.. Merrill Palmer Q 28:445–470.
  29. Fugazza C, Miklósi Á. Deferred imitation and declarative memory in domestic dogs.. Anim Cogn 17:237–247.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-013-0656-5pubmed: 23856708google scholar: lookup
  30. Fugazza C, Sommese A, Pogány Á, Miklósi Á. Did we find a copycat? Do as i do in a domestic cat (Felis catus).. Anim Cogn 1:121–131.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-020-01428-6google scholar: lookup
  31. Gácsi M, Miklód Á, Varga O. Are readers of our face readers of our minds? Dogs (Canis familiaris) show situation-dependent recognition of human’s attention.. Anim Cogn 24:144–153.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-003-0205-8google scholar: lookup
  32. Gainotti G. A historical review of investigations on laterality of emotions in the human brain.. J Hist Neurosci 28:23–41.
    doi: 10.1080/0964704X.2018.1524683pubmed: 30475661google scholar: lookup
  33. Galibert F, Quignon P, Hitte C, André C. Toward understanding dog evolutionary and domestication history.. Comptes Rendus Biol 334:190–196.
    doi: 10.1016/j.crvi.2010.12.011google scholar: lookup
  34. Galvan M, Vonk J. Man’s other best friend: domestic cats (F. silvestris catus) and their discrimination of human emotion cues.. Anim Cogn 19:193–205.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-015-0927-4pubmed: 26400749google scholar: lookup
  35. Gerencsér L, Pérez Fraga P, Lovas M. Comparing interspecific socio-communicative skills of socialized juvenile dogs and miniature pigs.. Anim Cogn 22:917–929.
    doi: 10.1007/S10071-019-01284-Zpmc: 6834752pubmed: 31256339google scholar: lookup
  36. Gieling ET, Musschenga MA, Nordquist RE, van der Staay FJ. Juvenile pigs use simple geometric 2D shapes but not portrait photographs of conspecifics as visual discriminative stimuli.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 142:142–153.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2012.10.018google scholar: lookup
  37. Hare B, Brown M, Williamson C, Tomasello M. The domestication of social cognition in dogs.. Science (80-) 298:1634–1636.
    doi: 10.1126/science.1072702google scholar: lookup
  38. Held S, Mendl M, Devereux C, Byrne RW. Social tactics of pigs in a competitive foraging task: the “informed forager” paradigm.. Anim Behav 59:569–576.
    doi: 10.1006/anbe.1999.1322pubmed: 10715179google scholar: lookup
  39. Hernádi A, Kis A, Turcsán B, Topál J. Man’s underground best friend: domestic ferrets, unlike the wild forms, show evidence of dog-like social-cognitive skills.. PLoS ONE 7:e43267.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0043267pmc: 3419687pubmed: 22905244google scholar: lookup
  40. Heyes CM. Social learning in animals: categories and mechanisms.. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 69:207–231.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185x.1994.tb01506.xpubmed: 8054445google scholar: lookup
  41. Huber L, Racca A, Scaf B. Discrimination of familiar human faces in dogs (Canis familiaris).. Learn Motiv 44:258–269.
    doi: 10.1016/j.lmot.2013.04.005pmc: 3807667pubmed: 24187385google scholar: lookup
  42. Huber A, Barber ALA, Faragó T. Investigating emotional contagion in dogs (Canis familiaris) to emotional sounds of humans and conspecifics.. Anim Cogn 20:703–715.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-017-1092-8pmc: 5486498pubmed: 28432495google scholar: lookup
  43. Humphrey T, Proops L, Forman J. The role of cat eye narrowing movements in cat–human communication.. Sci Rep 10:16503.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-73426-0pmc: 7536207pubmed: 33020542google scholar: lookup
  44. Ittyerah M, Gaunet F. The response of guide dogs and pet dogs (canis familiaris) to cues of human referential communication (pointing and gaze).. Anim Cogn 12:257–265.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-008-0188-6pubmed: 18769948google scholar: lookup
  45. Jeannin S, Gilbert C, Amy M, Leboucher G. Pet-directed speech draws adult dogs’ attention more efficiently than Adult-directed speech.. Sci Rep 7:4980.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-04671-zpmc: 5504008pubmed: 28694512google scholar: lookup
  46. Kaminski J, Call J, Fischer J. Word learning in a domestic dog: evidence for “fast mapping.”. Science 304:1682–1683.
    doi: 10.1126/science.1097859pubmed: 15192233google scholar: lookup
  47. Kaminski J, Tempelmann S, Call J, Tomasello M. Domestic dogs comprehend human communication with iconic signs.. Dev Sci 12:831–837.
    doi: 10.1111/J.1467-7687.2009.00815.Xpubmed: 19840038google scholar: lookup
  48. Kaminski J, Neumann M, Bräuer J. Dogs, Canis familiaris, communicate with humans to request but not to inform.. Anim Behav 82:651–658.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.06.015google scholar: lookup
  49. Kaminski J, Schulz L, Tomasello M. How dogs know when communication is intended for them.. Dev Sci 15:222–232.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2011.01120.xpubmed: 22356178google scholar: lookup
  50. Kaminski J, Hynds J, Morris P, Waller BM. Human attention affects facial expressions in domestic dogs.. Sci Rep 7:12914.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-12781-xpmc: 5648750pubmed: 29051517google scholar: lookup
  51. Kendrick KM, Da Costa AP, Leigh AE. Sheep don’t forget a face.. Nature 414:165–166.
    doi: 10.1038/35102669pubmed: 11700543google scholar: lookup
  52. Kis A, Topál J, Gácsi M. Does the A-not-B error in adult pet dogs indicate sensitivity to human communication?. Anim Cogn 15:737–743.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-012-0481-2pubmed: 22460627google scholar: lookup
  53. Knolle F, Goncalves RP, Jennifer Morton A. Sheep recognize familiar and unfamiliar human faces from two-dimensional images.. R Soc Open Sci 4:171228.
    doi: 10.1098/rsos.171228pmc: 5717684pubmed: 29291109google scholar: lookup
  54. Koba Y, Tanida H. How do miniature pigs discriminate between people? The effect of exchanging cues between a non-handler and their familiar handler on discrimination.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 61:239–252.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(98)00192-0google scholar: lookup
  55. Koba Y, Tanida H. How do miniature pigs discriminate between people? Discrimination between people wearing coveralls of the same colour.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 73:45–58.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(01)00106-Xpubmed: 11356290google scholar: lookup
  56. Krause MA, Udell MAR, Leavens DA, Skopos L. Animal pointing: Changing trends and findings from 30 years of research.. J Comp Psychol 132:326–345.
    doi: 10.1037/com0000125pubmed: 29952588google scholar: lookup
  57. Krueger K, Flauger B, Farmer K, Maros K. Horses (Equus caballus) use human local enhancement cues and adjust to human attention.. Anim Cogn 14:187–201.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-010-0352-7pubmed: 20845052google scholar: lookup
  58. Kubinyi E, Miklósi Á, Topál J, Csányi V. Dogs (Canis familiaris) Learn from their owners via observation in a manipulation task.. J Comp Psychol 117:156–165.
    doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.117.2.156pubmed: 12856786google scholar: lookup
  59. Lakatos G, Soproni K, Dóka A, Miklósi Á. A comparative approach to dogs’ (Canis familiaris) and human infants’ comprehension of various forms of pointing gestures.. Anim Cogn 12:621–631.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0221-4pubmed: 19343382google scholar: lookup
  60. Lampe JF, Andre J. Cross-modal recognition of human individuals in domestic horses (Equus caballus).. Anim Cogn 15:623–630.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-012-0490-1pubmed: 22526687google scholar: lookup
  61. Lansade L, Bouissou MF, Erhard HW. Fearfulness in horses: a temperament trait stable across time and situations.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 115:182–200.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2008.06.011google scholar: lookup
  62. Lansade L, Nowak R, Lainé AL. Facial expression and oxytocin as possible markers of positive emotions in horses.. Sci Rep 8:14680.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-32993-zpmc: 6168541pubmed: 30279565google scholar: lookup
  63. Lansade L, Colson V, Parias C. Female horses spontaneously identify a photograph of their keeper, last seen six months previously.. Sci Rep 10:6302.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-62940-wpmc: 7156667pubmed: 32286345google scholar: lookup
  64. Lansade L, Colson V, Parias C. Human face recognition in horses: data in favor of a holistic process.. Front Psychol 11:2311.
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.575808google scholar: lookup
  65. Lansade L, Trösch M, Parias C. Horses are sensitive to baby talk: pet-directed speech facilitates communication with humans in a pointing task and during grooming.. Anim Cogn .
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-021-01487-3pubmed: 34476652google scholar: lookup
  66. Malavasi R, Huber L. Evidence of heterospecific referential communication from domestic horses (Equus caballus) to humans.. Anim Cogn 19:899–909.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-016-0987-0pubmed: 27098164google scholar: lookup
  67. Maros K, Gácsi M, Miklósi Á. Comprehension of human pointing gestures in horses (Equus caballus).. Anim Cogn 11:457–466.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-008-0136-5pubmed: 18247069google scholar: lookup
  68. McComb K, Taylor AM, Wilson C, Charlton BD. The cry embedded within the purr.. Curr Biol 19:R507–R508.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2009.05.033pubmed: 19602409google scholar: lookup
  69. McKinley J, Sambrook TD. Use of human-given cues by domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) and horses (Equus caballus).. Anim Cogn 3:13–22.
    doi: 10.1007/s100710050046google scholar: lookup
  70. McMillan N, Hahn AH, Spetch ML, Sturdy CB. Avian cognition: examples of sophisticated capabilities in space and song.. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci 6:285–297.
    doi: 10.1002/wcs.1346pubmed: 26263230google scholar: lookup
  71. Mehrkam LR, Wynne CDL. Owner attention facilitates social play in dog–dog dyads (Canis lupus familiaris): evidence for an interspecific audience effect.. Anim Cogn 24:341–352.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-021-01481-9pubmed: 33523316google scholar: lookup
  72. Merola I, Prato-Previde E, Marshall-Pescini S. Social referencing in dog-owner dyads?. Anim Cogn 15:175–185.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-011-0443-0pubmed: 21874515google scholar: lookup
  73. Merola I, Prato-Previde E, Marshall-Pescini S. Dogs’ social referencing towards owners and strangers.. PLoS ONE 7:e47653.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047653pmc: 3469536pubmed: 23071828google scholar: lookup
  74. Merola I, Lazzaroni M, Marshall-Pescini S, Prato-Previde E. Social referencing and cat–human communication.. Anim Cogn 18:639–648.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-014-0832-2pubmed: 25573289google scholar: lookup
  75. Miklósi Á, Soproni K. A comparative analysis of animals’ understanding of the human pointing gesture.. Anim Cogn 9:81–93.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-005-0008-1pubmed: 16235075google scholar: lookup
  76. Miklósi Á, Pongrácz P, Lakatos G. A comparative study of the use of visual communicative signals in interactions between dogs (Canis familiaris) and humans and cats (Felis catus) and humans.. J Comp Psychol 119:179–186.
    doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.119.2.179pubmed: 15982161google scholar: lookup
  77. Mongillo P, Scandurra A, Kramer RSS, Marinelli L. Recognition of human faces by dogs (Canis familiaris) requires visibility of head contour.. Anim Cogn 20:881–890.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-017-1108-4pubmed: 28653115google scholar: lookup
  78. Munksgaard L, De Passillé AM, Rushen J, Ladewig J. Dairy cows use of colour cues to discriminate between people.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 65:1–11.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(99)00055-6google scholar: lookup
  79. Nagasawa M, Murai K, Mogi K, Kikusui T. Dogs can discriminate human smiling faces from blank expressions.. Anim Cogn 14:525–533.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-011-0386-5pubmed: 21359654google scholar: lookup
  80. Nakamura K, Takimoto-Inose A, Hasegawa T. Cross-modal perception of human emotion in domestic horses (Equus caballus).. Sci Rep 8:8660.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-26892-6pmc: 6013457pubmed: 29930289google scholar: lookup
  81. Nawroth C, McElligott AG. Human head orientation and eye visibility as indicators of attention for goats (Capra hircus).. PeerJ 5:e3073.
    doi: 10.7717/peerj.3073pmc: 5346283pubmed: 28289568google scholar: lookup
  82. Nawroth C, Ebersbach M, von Borell E. Are juvenile domestic pigs (Sus scrofa domestica) sensitive to the attentive states of humans? The impact of impulsivity on choice behaviour.. Behav Processes 96:53–58.
    doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2013.03.002pubmed: 23500190google scholar: lookup
  83. Nawroth C, Ebersbach M, von Borell E. Juvenile domestic pigs (Sus scrofa domestica) use human-given cues in an object choice task.. Anim Cogn 17:701–713.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-013-0702-3pubmed: 24197275google scholar: lookup
  84. Nawroth C, Baciadonna L, McElligott AG. Goats learn socially from humans in a spatial problem-solving task.. Anim Behav 121:123–129.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2016.09.004google scholar: lookup
  85. Nawroth C, Brett JM, McElligott AG. Goats display audience-dependent human-directed gazing behaviour in a problem-solving task.. Biol Lett 12:20160283.
    doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2016.0283pmc: 4971169pubmed: 27381884google scholar: lookup
  86. Nawroth C, von Borell E, Langbein J. ‘Goats that stare at men’—revisited: do dwarf goats alter their behaviour in response to eye visibility and head direction of a human?. Anim Cogn 19:667–672.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-016-0957-6pubmed: 26820558google scholar: lookup
  87. Nawroth C, Albuquerque N, Savalli C. Goats prefer positive human emotional facial expressions.. R Soc Open Sci 5:180491.
    doi: 10.1098/rsos.180491pmc: 6124102pubmed: 30225038google scholar: lookup
  88. Nawroth C, Langbein J, Coulon M. Farm animal cognition-linking behavior, welfare and ethics.. Front Vet Sci 6:24.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2019.00024pmc: 6383588pubmed: 30838218google scholar: lookup
  89. Nawroth C, Martin ZM, McElligott AG. Goats follow human pointing gestures in an object choice task.. Front Psychol 11:1–6.
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00915google scholar: lookup
  90. Ohkita M, Nagasawa M, Kazutaka M, Kikusui T. Owners’ direct gazes increase dogs’ attention-getting behaviors.. Behav Processes 125:96–100.
    doi: 10.1016/J.BEPROC.2016.02.013pubmed: 26915425google scholar: lookup
  91. Pelgrim MH, Espinosa J, Tecwyn EC. What’s the point? Domestic dogs’ sensitivity to the accuracy of human informants.. Anim Cogn 24:281–297.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-021-01493-5pmc: 7936605pubmed: 33675439google scholar: lookup
  92. Pérez Fraga P, Gerencsér L, Lovas M. Who turns to the human? Companion pigs’ and dogs’ behaviour in the unsolvable task paradigm.. Anim Cogn 24:33–40.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-020-01410-2pubmed: 32681198google scholar: lookup
  93. Péter A, Topál J, Miklósi Á, Pongrácz P. I saw where you have been—The topography of human demonstration affects dogs’ search patterns and perseverative errors.. Behav Processes 125:51–62.
    doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2016.02.005pubmed: 26869220google scholar: lookup
  94. Pinc L, Bartoš L, Reslová A, Kotrba R. Dogs discriminate identical twins.. PLoS ONE 6:4–7.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0020704google scholar: lookup
  95. Pongrácz P, Onofer DL. Cats show an unexpected pattern of response to human ostensive cues in a series of A-not-B error tests.. Anim Cogn 23:681–689.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-020-01373-4pmc: 7320938pubmed: 32227273google scholar: lookup
  96. Pongrácz P, Miklósi Á, Kubinyi E. Social learning in dogs: the effect of a human demonstrator on the performance of dogs in a detour task.. Anim Behav 62:1109–1117.
    doi: 10.1006/anbe.2001.1866google scholar: lookup
  97. Pongrácz P, Szapu JS, Faragó T. Cats (Felis silvestris catus) read human gaze for referential information.. Intelligence 74:43–52.
    doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2018.11.001google scholar: lookup
  98. Preston SD, de Waal FBM. Empathy: its ultimate and proximate bases.. Behav Brain Sci 25:1–20.
    doi: 10.1017/S0140525X02000018pubmed: 12625087google scholar: lookup
  99. Price EO. Behavioral aspects of animal domestication.. Q Rev Biol 59:1–32.
    doi: 10.1086/413673google scholar: lookup
  100. Proops L, Mccomb K. Cross-modal individual recognition in domestic horses (Equus caballus) extends to familiar humans.. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 279:3131–3138.
    doi: 10.1098/rspb.2012.0626google scholar: lookup
  101. Proops L, Walton M, McComb K. The use of human-given cues by domestic horses, Equus caballus, during an object choice task.. Anim Behav 79:1205–1209.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.02.015google scholar: lookup
  102. Proops L, Grounds K, Smith AV, McComb K. Animals remember previous facial expressions that specific humans have exhibited.. Curr Biol 28:1428-1432.e4.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2018.03.035pubmed: 29706519google scholar: lookup
  103. Quaranta A, D'Ingeo S, Amoruso R, Siniscalchi M. Emotion recognition in cats.. Animals 10:1107.
    doi: 10.3390/ani10071107pmc: 7401521google scholar: lookup
  104. Racca A, Amadei E, Ligout S. Discrimination of human and dog faces and inversion responses in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris).. Anim Cogn 13:525–533.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0303-3pubmed: 20020168google scholar: lookup
  105. Ringhofer M, Yamamoto S. Domestic horses send signals to humans when they face with an unsolvable task.. Anim Cogn 20:397–405.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-016-1056-4pubmed: 27885519google scholar: lookup
  106. Rørvang MV, Christensen JW, Ladewig J, McLean A. Social learning in horses-fact or fiction?. Front Vet Sci 5:212.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2018.00212pmc: 6135911pubmed: 30238009google scholar: lookup
  107. Rørvang MV, Nielsen TB, Christensen JW. Horses failed to learn from humans by observation.. Animals .
    doi: 10.3390/ani10020221pmc: 7070367pubmed: 32013218google scholar: lookup
  108. Rybarczyk P, Koba Y, Rushen J. Can cows discriminate people by their faces?. Appl Anim Behav Sci 74:175–189.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(01)00162-9google scholar: lookup
  109. Sabiniewicz A, Tarnowska K, Świątek R. Olfactory-based interspecific recognition of human emotions: Horses (Equus ferus caballus) can recognize fear and happiness body odour from humans (Homo sapiens).. Appl Anim Behav Sci 230:105072.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2020.105072google scholar: lookup
  110. Saito A, Shinozuka K. Vocal recognition of owners by domestic cats (Felis catus).. Anim Cogn 16:685–690.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-013-0620-4pubmed: 23525707google scholar: lookup
  111. Sankey C, Henry S, André N. Do horses have a concept of person?. PLoS ONE 6:e18331.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0018331pmc: 3068175pubmed: 21479184google scholar: lookup
  112. Schrimpf A, Single MS, Nawroth C. Social referencing in the domestic horse.. Animals 10:164.
    doi: 10.3390/ani10010164pmc: 7022515google scholar: lookup
  113. Schuetz A, Farmer K, Krueger K. Social learning across species: horses (Equus caballus) learn from humans by observation.. Anim Cogn 20:567–573.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-016-1060-8pubmed: 27866286google scholar: lookup
  114. Schwab C, Huber L. Obey or not obey? Dogs (Canis familiaris) behave differently in response to attentional states of their owners.. J Comp Psychol .
    doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.120.3.169pubmed: 16893253google scholar: lookup
  115. Silver ZA, Furlong EE, Johnston AM, Santos LR. Training differences predict dogs’ (Canis lupus familiaris) preferences for prosocial others.. Anim Cogn 24:75–83.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-020-01417-9pubmed: 32757105google scholar: lookup
  116. Siniscalchi M, D’Ingeo S, Quaranta A. The dog nose “KNOWS” fear: asymmetric nostril use during sniffing at canine and human emotional stimuli.. Behav Brain Res 304:34–41.
    doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2016.02.011pubmed: 26876141google scholar: lookup
  117. Siniscalchi M, D’Ingeo S, Fornelli S, Quaranta A. Lateralized behavior and cardiac activity of dogs in response to human emotional vocalizations.. Sci Rep 8:77.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-18417-4pmc: 5758824pubmed: 29311574google scholar: lookup
  118. Siniscalchi M, D’Ingeo S, Minunno M, Quaranta A. Communication in dogs.. Animals 8:131.
    doi: 10.3390/ani8080131pmc: 6116041google scholar: lookup
  119. Siniscalchi M, D’Ingeo S, Quaranta A. Orienting asymmetries and physiological reactivity in dogs’ response to human emotional faces.. Learn Behav 46:574–585.
    doi: 10.3758/s13420-018-0325-2pubmed: 29923158google scholar: lookup
  120. Siniscalchi M, D’Ingeo S, Quaranta A. Lateralized emotional functioning in domestic animals.. Appl Anim Behav Sci .
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2021.105282google scholar: lookup
  121. Smith AV, Proops L, Grounds K. Functionally relevant responses to human facial expressions of emotion in the domestic horse (Equus caballus).. Biol Lett 12:20150907.
    doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2015.0907pmc: 4780548pubmed: 26864784google scholar: lookup
  122. Smith AV, Proops L, Grounds K. Domestic horses (Equus caballus) discriminate between negative and positive human nonverbal vocalisations.. Sci Rep 8:13052.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-30777-zpmc: 6115467pubmed: 30158532google scholar: lookup
  123. Soproni K, Miklósi Á, Topál J, Csányi V. Dogs’ (Canis familiaris) responsiveness to human pointing gestures.. J Comp Psychol 116:27–34.
    doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.116.1.27pubmed: 11926681google scholar: lookup
  124. Stone SM. Human facial discrimination in horses: can they tell us apart?. Anim Cogn 13:51–61.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0244-xpubmed: 19533185google scholar: lookup
  125. Takagi S, Arahori M, Chijiiwa H. Cats match voice and face: cross-modal representation of humans in cats (Felis catus).. Anim Cogn 22:901–906.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-019-01265-2pubmed: 31076940google scholar: lookup
  126. Thorpe WH. Learning and instinct in animals.. Methuen, London .
  127. Tibbetts EA, Dale J. Individual recognition: it is good to be different.. Trends Ecol Evol 22:529–537.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2007.09.001pubmed: 17904686google scholar: lookup
  128. Topál J, Byrne RW, Miklósi Á, Csányi V. Reproducing human actions and action sequences: “Do as I do!” in a dog.. Anim Cogn 9:355–367.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-006-0051-6pubmed: 17024511google scholar: lookup
  129. Townsend SW, Koski SE, Byrne RW. Exorcising Grice’s ghost: an empirical approach to studying intentional communication in animals.. Biol Rev 92:1427–1433.
    doi: 10.1111/brv.12289pubmed: 27480784google scholar: lookup
  130. Trösch M, Cuzol F, Parias C. Horses categorize human emotions cross-modally based on facial expression and non-verbal vocalizations.. Animals 9:862.
    doi: 10.3390/ani9110862pmc: 6912773google scholar: lookup
  131. Trösch M, Ringhofer M, Yamamoto S. Horses prefer to solicit a person who previously observed a food-hiding process to access this food: a possible indication of attentional state attribution.. Behav Processes 166:103906.
    doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2019.103906pubmed: 31301426google scholar: lookup
  132. Trösch M, Bertin E, Calandreau L. Unwilling or willing but unable: can horses interpret human actions as goal directed?. Anim Cogn 23:1035–1040.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-020-01396-xpubmed: 32449047google scholar: lookup
  133. Trösch M, Pellon S, Cuzol F. Horses feel emotions when they watch positive and negative horse–human interactions in a video and transpose what they saw to real life.. Anim Cogn 23:643–653.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-020-01369-0pubmed: 32162112google scholar: lookup
  134. Udell MAR, Giglio RF, Wynne CDL. Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) use human gestures but not nonhuman tokens to find hidden food.. J Comp Psychol 122:84–93.
    doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.122.1.84pubmed: 18298285google scholar: lookup
  135. Udell MAR, Dorey NR, Wynne CDL. What did domestication do to dogs? A new account of dogs’ sensitivity to human actions.. Biol Rev 85:327–345.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2009.00104.xpubmed: 19961472google scholar: lookup
  136. Virányi Z, Topál JÓ, Gácsi MÁ. Dogs respond appropriately to cues of humans’ attentional focus.. Behav Processes 66:161–172.
    doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2004.01.012pubmed: 15110918google scholar: lookup
  137. Vitale Shreve KR, Udell MAR. What’s inside your cat’s head? A review of cat (Felis silvestris catus) cognition research past, present and future.. Anim Cogn 18:1195–1206.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-015-0897-6pubmed: 26154131google scholar: lookup
  138. Vitale KR, Udell MAR. The quality of being sociable: the influence of human attentional state, population, and human familiarity on domestic cat sociability.. Behav Processes 158:11–17.
    doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2018.10.026pubmed: 30391492google scholar: lookup
  139. Worsley HK, O’Hara SJ. Cross-species referential signalling events in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris).. Anim Cogn 21:457–465.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-018-1181-3pmc: 6004278pubmed: 29713846google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 30 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,727 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.