[ad_1]
Dogs are often described as exceptionally intelligent and capable compared to other animals. But is this really the case?
In an attempt to answer this question, British researchers from the University of Exeter and Canterbury Christ Church University reviewed more than 300 scientific studies on the cognitive abilities of dogs and other animals in the context of an article published in the newspaper. Learning and behavior. They found that in many cases the dogs' intelligence had been overestimated.
"In the course of our work, it seemed to us that many studies on canine cognition sought to" prove "how intelligent dogs were," said Stephen Lea, professor of psychology at Exeter, in a statement. "They are often compared to chimpanzees and every time the dogs win," that adds to their outstanding reputation. "
In the last study, the researchers argue that in order to evaluate dogs' knowledge, it is necessary to consider them from three different angles: as carnivores (an order comprising animals such as dogs, wolves, bears, lions and hyenas), social hunters and domestic animals.
They then compared various aspects of the dog's intelligence with other species that fall into these three categories. These others include wild dogs, spotted hyenas and wolves (carnivores and social hunters); cats (carnivores and domestic animals); bottlenose dolphins and chimpanzees (social hunters); and horses and pigeons (domestic animals).
The review focused on characteristics, including associative learning, sensory cognition, physical cognition, spatial cognition, social cognition, and self-awareness.
"Dogs are special because they are the meeting point for pets, social hunters and carnivores," said Britta Osthaus, psychologist at Canterbury. Newsweek. "But their cognition is not fundamentally different from that of comparison species. Dogs show no cognitive ability that could not be expected from any comparison species. Their knowledge is not exceptional. "
In associative learning, a process by which ideas reinforce each other and can be related to each other, the team found no evidence that dogs were particularly special. At the same time, with respect to physical cognition – the ability of an animal to act effectively on the world of things – the dogs do not excel and their performances have been found to be equivalent to those of other members of the three groups. comparison.
In space tasks – those that help to understand the immediate environment of an animal – dogs have shown good performance, but again, the same is true for other species.
With regard to perception abilities or sensory cognition, the situation is more complex. Dogs have an excellent sense of smell, but similar abilities have been observed in other carnivores and domestic animals.
Social cognition – the way an animal learns and interacts with others – is the area in which we have the most information about dogs. Although it is clear that they have an impressive ability to use the behavior of other animals (especially that of humans) as an index – a key indicator of high levels of social cognition – other carnivores are even better to these tasks.
"Some other domestic species can do as well as dogs, although no other social hunter (with the exception of the wolf) has been shown to do so well," the authors wrote in l & # 39; study. "Dogs also have impressive social learning abilities, and they seem to be more successful than any other carnivore except wolves. [Nevertheless]they have demonstrated no abilities that have not been demonstrated in other social hunters. "
The researchers also examined studies on the concept of "theory of mind". It is the idea that some animals have some understanding of the spirit of other animals.
"Can an animal understand what another animal can perceive and predict what it will understand (taking perspective)?" Write the authors. "And if so, can he use this information, either to deceive the other animal (deception), or to enter the same state of mind (empathy)?"
While data is limited on this issue, in the experiments that have been conducted so far, chimpanzees are more likely than dogs to resolve tasks requiring perspective-taking, although dogs may do better than dogs. chimpanzees in cooperative situations. In addition, chimpanzees are more likely than dogs to show signs of deception or empathy.
Finally, we have no solid evidence of self-awareness in dogs: they do not respond to their image in the mirror, for example. The same is true for other carnivores, but two social hunters – chimpanzees and dolphins – have demonstrated this ability.
So, in the light of such evidence, why is the idea that dogs are exceptional so widespread?
"Dogs occupy a prominent place in the lives of many people and they fill a variety of roles, be they service dogs, police dogs, search dogs and dogs." rescue, etc., "said Osthaus. "They have incredible cognitive skills, especially in social interactions with humans. But, as we have seen, these skills match other species, such as goats, pigs and pigeons. We are certain that science will find comparative cognitive achievements in other species in the future. "
"We have to accept that dogs are dogs – special, but not exceptional," she said. "And therefore, we should not expect too much when we train them and share our home with them. We must adjust our interaction with them to do them justice. They are domesticated, carnivorous social hunters and we must provide them with mental stimulation, physical activity and proper nutrition to ensure their well-being. "
[ad_2]
Source link
