Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36978568›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2023

How Do Dogs Behave When Presented with Situations of Different Emotional Valences?

Paulo Souza, Kun Guo, Daniel S Mills, Briseida Resende, Natalia Albuquerque

Open access · goldFull text read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Paulo SouzaInstitute of Biosciences, University of São Paulo, São Paulo 05508-090, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-7615-4810
Kun GuoSchool of Psychology, University of Lincoln, Lincoln LN6 7TS, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6765-1957
Daniel S MillsDepartment of Life Sciences, University of Lincoln, Lincoln LN6 7TS, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4765-9625
Briseida ResendeInstitute of Psychology, University of São Paulo, São Paulo 05508-030, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-5932-0189
Natalia AlbuquerqueInstitute of Psychology, University of São Paulo, São Paulo 05508-030, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-0925-0650
Universidade de São Paulo · BRUniversity of Lincoln · GB

Funding

National Council for Scientific and Technological Development 141446/2015-3São Paulo Research Foundation 2018/25595-0
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dogs are good models for studying behaviour and cognition as they have complex social capabilities. In the current study, we observed how human emotional valences (positive, neutral and negative) affected aspects of dogs' behaviour. We expected that dogs would exhibit more approaching behaviours in the positive condition and more signs of avoidance in the negative one. We analysed videos of 70 adult pet dogs of various breeds taken from an experiment in which one of two actors expressed an emotion and dogs could freely explore the environment for 30 s. Our results show that dogs exhibit differential behaviour when presented with different emotional valences. Two behaviours arose that might be linked to a reciprocal positive emotional state in dogs: tail raised between 90° and 180° and physical contact during sniffing. These behaviours are associated with an active search for information. In the positive conditions, dogs were more willing to explore the social environment and gather information from the actors.

Indexed as

behaviourCanis familiariscognitionemotionsocial cognitionvalence

Identifiers

PMID36978568
PMCPMC10044040
OpenAlexW4324091195

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
reference markers read1
measurements read3
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.