ArticleScientific reports2025
Sound quality impacts dogs' ability to recognize and respond to playback words.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Let's talk about "talking" dogs! Reviewing the science behind a bold idea.Biologia futura · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humans show a remarkable ability to recognize degraded speech, but they struggle as degradation becomes more severe. Research on dogs, a species naturally exposed to human language, has suggested that also in this species, the level of degradation may negatively correlate with familiar speech recognition. The quality of sound playback equipment is crucial in canine research to ensure accurate reproduction, directly impacting dogs' receptivity. In citizen science, availability, operability, and affordability are also key. However, the varying level of sound degradation of commercially available devices may impact dogs' recognition of the played-back sounds. This study evaluates how different audio devices affect the response to human speech in dogs. Study 1 tested dogs' responses to trained verbal action cues delivered via Augmentative Interspecies Communication (AIC) buttons, loudspeakers, and direct human speech. Study 2 tested Gifted Word Learner (GWL) dogs' accuracy in retrieving named toys using the same devices. Study 3 investigated whether GWL dogs could learn new toy names through recorded voice played via loudspeakers and generalize these to direct human speech. Results consistently showed that dogs' responses to verbal cues were significantly affected by the device type, with the best performance observed for direct human speech and the lowest performance for AIC buttons. Our findings show that the level of sound degradation significantly affects dogs' recognition of recorded speech and suggest that current commercially available AIC devices are not recommended for testing effective recognition of the recorded words.
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.