ArticleAnimal cognition2025
Do dogs know what humans know? A study into pet dogs' (Canis familiaris) ability to attribute knowledge to an unfamiliar person.
Article in Animal cognition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Domestic dogs demonstrate sensitivity to human gaze and attentiveness, but evidence is mixed for their understanding of human knowledge, in the sense of understanding what a person has or has not seen. Here we tested whether pet dogs take a human competitor's past visual access into account in a 3-choice food competition task. The dogs (N = 22) observed food being hidden under 2 of 3 cups, and witnessed how their human competitor saw only one baiting. When the human chose first, dogs were expected to avoid the cup she had seen baited; when dogs chose first, they were expected to choose randomly between baited cups, or favour the cup both had seen baited. However, the dogs chose randomly between the baited cups, regardless of who had first choice. The dogs did choose the cup only they had seen baited above chance only when the competitor chose first, suggesting a potential preference for this cup only in this situation, but they did not choose this cup more than the cup both had seen. Therefore, the current study provides no clear evidence that pet dogs infer others' knowledge from past visual access. The combination of cognitive steps required to be successful in this task might have been too demanding for the dogs. Alternatively, the competitive setting used may not be as suitable for domestic dogs as it is for other species. Further research in ecologically relevant settings may clarify the extent and limits of dogs' understanding of others' knowledge.
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.