‘Bolder’ together — response to human social cues in groups of free-ranging dogs
In: BehaviourSearch for other papers by Debottam Bhattacharjee in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Shubhra Sau in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Anindita Bhadra in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
In urban environments, humans are a part of an interaction network of several species, impacting them directly or indirectly. The positive, negative and neutral components of such impact can be assessed by studying human-animal interactions in various habitats. While studies have shown animals’ reactions to specific human social cues, information is lacking on how animals respond to such cues in the presence and absence of conspecifics. We investigated the behavioural responses of free-ranging dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) towards various human social cues (neutral, friendly, low- and high-impact threatening) when presented to groups. We used previously published data on dogs’ reactions to identical cues when presented solitarily, and compared them with the group-level responses. Our results strengthen the idea of situation-relevant responsiveness in free-ranging dogs. Dogs in groups exhibited higher approach and less avoidance towards the unfamiliar human experimenter, especially towards the threatening cues, compared to dogs tested alone.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Berman, M. & Dunbar, I. (1983). The social behaviour of free-ranging suburban dogs. — Appl. Anim. Ethol. 10: 5-17.
-
Bhattacharjee, D., Nikhil Dev, N., Gupta, S., Sau, S., Sarkar, R., Biswas, A., Banerjee, A., Babu, D., Mehta, D. & Bhadra, A. (2017a). Free-ranging dogs show age related plasticity in their ability to follow human pointing. — PLoS ONE 12: e0180643.
-
Bhattacharjee, D., Sau, S., Das, J. & Bhadra, A. (2017b). Free-ranging dogs prefer petting over food in repeated interactions with unfamiliar humans. — J. Exp. Biol. 220: 4654-4660.
-
Bhattacharjee, D., Sau, S. & Bhadra, A. (2018). Free-ranging dogs understand human intentions and adjust their behavioral responses accordingly. — Front. Ecol. Evol. 6: 232.
-
Bonanni, R. & Cafazzo, S. (2014). The social organisation of a population of free-ranging dogs in a suburban area of Rome. — In: The social dog (Kaminski, J. & Marshall-Pescini, S., eds). Academic Press, San Diego, CA, p. 65-104.
-
Bonanni, R., Natoli, E., Cafazzo, S. & Valsecchi, P. (2011). Free-ranging dogs assess the quantity of opponents in intergroup conflicts. — Anim. Cogn. 14: 103-115.
-
Call, J., Hare, B., Carpenter, M. & Tomasello, M. (2004). “Unwilling” versus “unable”: chimpanzees’ understanding of human intentional action. — Dev. Sci. 7: 488-498.
-
Dale, R., Range, F., Stott, L., Kotrschal, K. & Marshall-Pescini, S. (2017). The influence of social relationship on food tolerance in wolves and dogs. — Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 71: 107.
-
Debroy, B. (2008). Sarama and her children: the dog in Indian myth. — Penguin Books India, New Delhi.
-
Dowding, C.V., Harris, S., Poulton, S. & Baker, P.J. (2010). Nocturnal ranging behaviour of urban hedgehogs, Erinaceus europaeus, in relation to risk and reward. — Anim. Behav. 80: 13-21.
-
Goddard, M.E. & Beilharz, R.G. (1985). Individual variation in agonistic behaviour in dogs. — Anim. Behav. 33: 1338-1342.
-
Heyes, C.M. (1998). Theory of mind in nonhuman primates. — Behav. Brain Sci. 21: 101-114.
-
Hughes, J. & MacDonald, D.W. (2013). A review of the interactions between free-roaming domestic dogs and wildlife. — Biol. Conserv. 157: 341-351.
-
Krueger, K., Flauger, B., Farmer, K. & Maros, K. (2011). Horses (Equus caballus) use human local enhancement cues and adjust to human attention. — Anim. Cogn. 14: 187-201.
-
Lima, S.L. (1995). Back to the basics of anti-predatory vigilance: the group-size effect. — Anim. Behav. 49: 11-20.
-
Lord, K., Feinstein, M., Smith, B. & Coppinger, R. (2013). Variation in reproductive traits of members of the genus Canis with special attention to the domestic dog (Canis familiaris). — Behav. Proc. 92: 131-142.
-
MacDonald, D.W. & Carr, G.M. (2016). Variation in dog society: between resource dispersion and social flux. — In: The domestic dog (Serpell, J., ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 319-341.
-
MacDonald, D.W. & Johnson, D.D.P. (2015). Patchwork planet: the resource dispersion hypothesis, society, and the ecology of life. — J. Zool. 295: 75-107.
-
Pal, S.K. (2015). Factors influencing intergroup agonistic behaviour in free-ranging domestic dogs (Canis familiaris). — Acta Ethol. 18: 209-220.
-
Paul, M. & Bhadra, A. (2017). Selfish pups: weaning conflict and milk theft in free-ranging dogs. — PLoS ONE 12: e0170590.
-
Paul, M., Sen Majumder, S., Nandi, A.K. & Bhadra, A. (2015). Selfish mothers indeed! Resource-dependent conflict over extended parental care in free-ranging dogs. — Roy. Soc. Open Sci. 2: 150580.
-
Paul, M., Sen Majumder, S., Sau, S., Nandi, A.K. & Bhadra, A. (2016). High early life mortality in free-ranging dogs is largely influenced by humans. — Sci. Rep. 6: 19641.
-
Pyke, G.H. (1984). Optimal foraging theory: a critical review. — Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 15: 523-575.
-
R Development Core Team (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. — R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
-
Range, F., Ritter, C. & Virányi, Z. (2015). Testing the myth: tolerant dogs and aggressive wolves. — Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 282: 20150220.
-
Sen Majumder, S., Bhadra, A., Ghosh, A., Mitra, S., Bhattacharjee, D., Chatterjee, J., Nandi, A.K. & Bhadra, A. (2014). To be or not to be social: foraging associations of free-ranging dogs in an urban ecosystem. — Acta Ethol. 17: 1-8.
-
Sen Majumder, S., Paul, M., Sau, S. & Bhadra, A. (2016). Denning habits of free-ranging dogs reveal preference for human proximity. — Sci. Rep. 6: 32014.
-
Shannon, L.M., Boyko, R.H., Castelhano, M., Corey, E., Hayward, J.J., McLean, C., White, M.E., Abi Said, M., Anita, B.A., Bondjengo, N.I., Calero, J., Galov, A., Hedimbi, M., Imam, B., Khalap, R., Lally, D., Masta, A., Oliveira, K.C., Pérez, L., Randall, J., Tam, N.M., Trujillo-Cornejo, F.J., Valeriano, C., Sutter, N.B., Todhunter, R.J., Bustamante, C.D. & Boyko, A.R. (2015). Genetic structure in village dogs reveals a Central Asian domestication origin. — Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112: 13639-13644.
-
Slabbekoorn, H. & Peet, M. (2003). Birds sing at a higher pitch in urban noise. — Nature 424: 6946.
-
Stankowich, T. & Blumstein, D.T. (2005). Fear in animals: a meta-analysis and review of risk assessment. — Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 272: 2627-2634.
-
Svartberg, K. (2002). Shyness-boldness predicts performance in working dogs. — Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 79: 157-174.
-
Svartberg, K. & Forkman, B. (2002). Personality traits in the domestic dog (Canis familiaris). — Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 79: 133-155.
-
Zollinger, S.A., Slater, P.J.B., Nemeth, E. & Brumm, H. (2017). Higher songs of city birds may not be an individual response to noise. — Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 284: 20170602.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1150 | 221 | 38 |
| Full Text Views | 124 | 18 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 169 | 33 | 1 |
‘Bolder’ together — response to human social cues in groups of free-ranging dogs
In: BehaviourSearch for other papers by Debottam Bhattacharjee in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Shubhra Sau in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Anindita Bhadra in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
In urban environments, humans are a part of an interaction network of several species, impacting them directly or indirectly. The positive, negative and neutral components of such impact can be assessed by studying human-animal interactions in various habitats. While studies have shown animals’ reactions to specific human social cues, information is lacking on how animals respond to such cues in the presence and absence of conspecifics. We investigated the behavioural responses of free-ranging dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) towards various human social cues (neutral, friendly, low- and high-impact threatening) when presented to groups. We used previously published data on dogs’ reactions to identical cues when presented solitarily, and compared them with the group-level responses. Our results strengthen the idea of situation-relevant responsiveness in free-ranging dogs. Dogs in groups exhibited higher approach and less avoidance towards the unfamiliar human experimenter, especially towards the threatening cues, compared to dogs tested alone.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1150 | 221 | 38 |
| Full Text Views | 124 | 18 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 169 | 33 | 1 |
