Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41368502›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2025

Paw-spective shift: how our mood alters the way we read dog emotions.

Holly G Molinaro, Clive D L Wynne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Holly G MolinaroPsychology Department, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States of America.
Clive D L WynnePsychology Department, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study explored the influence of people's mood on their perception of dog emotions in order to expand our understanding of how mood biases may shape emotional interpretation. Across two experiments, participants were primed into positive, neutral, or negative moods using validated visual stimuli before they evaluated video clips of dogs displaying positive, neutral, or negative emotional states. Participants were asked to rate valence and arousal of the dogs in the videos. Experiment 1 utilized visual primes unrelated to animals, while Experiment 2 employed dog-specific primes. Although mood priming significantly influenced participants' self-reported emotions in Experiment 1, it did not affect their interpretation of the dogs' emotional states. Dog-specific primes influenced participants' interpretation of dog emotions in Experiment 2; however, the effect was a contrasting one, in that participants in the positively induced group rated dogs as sadder and those in the negative group rated dogs as happier. These findings challenge previous assumptions about mood-congruence effects in cross-species emotional perception, suggesting a more complex interplay of factors than anticipated. The study underscores the need for further research to disentangle the mechanisms governing how humans perceive and respond to animals' emotional cues, with implications for improving animal welfare and human-animal interactions.

Indexed as

AffectEmotionsAdultAnimalsDogsFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultContrast effectDogsEmotional primingHuman animal interactionsMood

Identifiers

PMID41368502
PMCPMC12684405

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.