Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41897854›Full record

ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026

Popperian Dogs-Practical Rationality and Inferential Reasoning in Dogs.

Ludwig Huber

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2026. 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

1 author.

Ludwig HuberCognition and Applied Ethology, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-0217-136X

Funding

FWF Austrian Science Fund 10.55776/W1262FWF Austrian Science Fund P36853
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The last few decades have provided mounting evidence that dogs are not only able to behave in intelligent ways but also that they have the capacity to make inferences by associating visible and imagined events. In particular, the kinds of inferences shown by dogs elevate them to 'Popperian animals', which are rational in the sense of being able to conduct trials and errors in the head. Here, I review a selection of studies with dogs that fulfil this attribution. Dogs have been found capable of (a) making inferences by exclusion, with both computer images and word-object associations, (b) drawing inferences about the efficiency of the observed methods, the situational constraints of the situation, and the goals of the model in the course of selective ('rational') imitation, and (c) going beyond directly observable cues when inferring the intention, the knowledge, or even the beliefs of humans in perspective-taking tasks. Despite the contamination with ambiguous data, open questions, and current debates about the possession of (non-linguistic) mechanisms for creating mental representations of the mental states of others (called mind reading), we may safely assume that domesticated dogs have become Popperian animals equipped with the cognitive tool set of inferential thinking and perspective taking.

Indexed as

dogsinference by exclusionPopperian animalpractical rationalityselective imitationtheory of mind

Identifiers

PMID41897854
PMCPMC13023329

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.