Dogs Assess Reputations

We all know someone who has a bad reputation. Backstabber. Malicious gossip. Liar. Cheater. Gets unpredictably angry. And we try to keep that reputation in mind when we deal with the person. If you are like me, you might give the person the benefit of the doubt, but then when it happens to you, you back off and are no longer willing to trust the person. As the saying goes, once bitten, twice shy.

But can dogs assess who has a bad reputation? On the surface, the answer seems to be easy – Of course not. Dogs are supposed to be friendly toward everyone, and are supposed to lack the thinking skills that would allow them to form a judgment about reputations.

Not so fast, however, with the easy answers.

A new study appearing in the journal Animal Cognition shows that dogs can make some pretty good judgments about people’s reputations (Kundey et al. 2011. Reputation-like inference in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris). Animal Cognition 14: 291-302).

The experimenters used a very clever trick. While a dog was watching, they had two people kneeling side-by-side in front of another person who was kneeling facing the other two. The two kneeling people each gave the  person facing them a treat by placing the treat in front of the person. But one of the two givers consistently took the treat back, while the other giver allowed the person in front of them to take the treat. Then each of the givers offered the dog a treat by placing the treat in front of them, just like they did when they were offering the treat to the person. The dog was allowed to choose whose treat to take.

All ten dogs in this experiment chose to take the treat from the giver who didn’t take back the treat.

To control for unintentional cues, the experimenters tried a variety of modifications of this experimental design, each with about ten new dogs. In one modification, the givers were kneeling facing away from the recipient person, and had to reach backward to offer the treat. In another modification, the givers were not people, but large cardboard boxes with people inside reaching out to put down the treats. In a third modification, the recipient was a cardboard box.

In each case, at least nine of the ten dogs chose to take the treat from the giver who didn’t initially take the treat back.

The experimenters concluded that the dogs formed a concept of the reputation of each of the givers: one giver was reliable in offering the treat, while the other one was unreliable.

Let’s extend these results to our dogs. How many times have you yelled at your dog, hit your dog, yanked your dog by the collar or leash, or otherwise acted in an unpleasant manner toward your dog (my hope is that your answer is “zero”)? For those who do that, these experiments imply that dogs are forming a concept of the reputation of their people.

Just as we don’t do well in an environment of working with a boss who has a reputation for being unpleasant, maybe dogs don’t do well living with people who have a reputation of being unpredictable.

And maybe dogs act out when they get a concept that the person that they are living with has a bad reputation.

The moral of the story is, be nice to your dogs.

--Con Slobodchikoff

Comments

[Jay from The Depp Effect]

Dogs definitely don't do well around unpredictable people. There are some who manage to adapt and live peaceably with such people, but then there are the poor souls who snap, both figuratively and literally, and whose punishment is often death - ironically, because the unpredictable people who have made the dog snappy then label him as unpredictable and therefore dangerous. *Sigh*

[kblover]

This is pretty interesting. I do think dogs can definitely form a "profile" about you. They are keen observers and they can come to learn what makes you react a certain way. All part of the way they try to fit in with a social group, be it humans or dogs or both or other creatures.

I think they are able to know which is more likely to occur. For example, someone who gives a ton of treats, but once in a while uses physical corrections, the dog won't be fearful of this person necessarily, since there's a real chance of getting rewarded while only certain things bring out the figurative beat stick.

With the treat take-backs, perhaps the dog is uncertain about the person's reaction if he goes for the treat. It wouldn't surprise me that the dog would go for the non-take-back treat, since getting it is a "safe" option. Plus, it could be that the dog is waiting to hear what to do to earn the treat. Almost an exercise in "leave it".

[rick smith]

1. re: "Dogs are supposed to be friendly toward everyone, and are supposed to lack the thinking skills that would allow them to form a judgment about reputations."
>>do not agree - i do not feel dogs are supposed to be friendly toward everyone - that type of statement is just something we humans wish for :-) whatever thinking skills they possess are only canine capabilities so lets not get too advanced here :-)
2. the experiment as i read it did not link a "treat giver's" reputation to any canine cognitive ability....the situations were visible exchanges observed by canines....even more apparent since some of the treat givers were inanimate boxes with a hand extended thru them.
3. it has always been assumed that dogs have some ability to "remember" things that have happened in their past that may illicit negative reactions in their present, and often the case of abused dogs is brought up....rarely do positive reactions in the past that elicit friendly responses ever get mentioned....why i don't know, but i have yet to see a study that proves in any way how much a dog can "remember" traumatic events that elicit LONG term negative responses throughout their life.

Nevertheless these issues interest me a LOT since i work with many rescue dogs and i'm glad studies are being constructed to try and get a better grasp of canine cognitive abilities in these situations.