ArticleScientific reports2022
Selection for specific behavioural traits does not influence preference of chasing motion and visual strategy in dogs.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- An experimental study focusing on mindfulness to capture how our contacts with dogs can promote human well-being.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Perception of animate motion in dogs.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Review
- Screen interaction behavior in companion dogs: results from a dog owner survey.Applied animal behaviour science · 2024Article
- Eye Tracking in Dogs: Achievements and Challenges.Comparative cognition & behavior reviews · 2023Article
- Life is in motion (through a chick's eye).Animal cognition · 2023Review
- Chasing perception in domestic cats and dogs.Animal cognition · 2022Article
- Spontaneous preference for unpredictability in the temporal contingencies between agents' motion in naive domestic chicks.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Perception of inanimate objects as animate based on motion cues alone seems to be present in phylogenetically distant species, from birth (humans and chicks). However, we do not know whether the species' social and ecological environment has an influence on this phenomenon. Dogs serve as a unique species to investigate whether selection for specific behavioural traits influences animacy perception. We tested purebred companion dogs, and assigned them into two groups based on the type of work they were originally selected for: (1) Chasers, tracking and chasing prey; (2) Retrievers, mark and remember downed game. We displayed isosceles triangles presenting a chasing pattern vs moving independently, in parallel on a screen. We hypothesised that Chasers prefer to look at chasing and Retrievers eventually focus their visual attention on the independent motion. Overall, we did not find a significant difference between groups regarding the looking duration of dogs or the frequency of their gaze alternation between the chasing and independent motions. Thus it seems that selection for specific traits does not influence the perception of animate entities within the species.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.