Search

Simple Summary: Dogs can learn how to solve problems by watching humans. However, whether this is also true for cats, which are also companion animals, is unknown. In this study, three experiments were used to investigate whether cats could change their behaviour and gain rewards efficiently by observing a human demonstrating how to obtain food. We found no evidence that observing human behaviour enabled more efficient problem-solving by cats or caused them to change their behaviours. Other than their learning ability, the biological characteristics of cats and the experimental context may have contributed towards the present negative results. Humans learn by observing the behaviour of others, which can lead to more efficient problem-solving than by trial-and-error learning. Numerous studies have shown that animals, other than humans, are also capable of social learning. Dogs, as humans' closest companion animals, can learn to obtain rewards following behavioural demonstrations by humans. However, it is not known whether cats, who also live with humans, can learn how to solve problems by observing human behaviours. Three experiments were used to investigate whether cats could change their behaviour and gain rewards efficiently by observing a human demonstrating how to obtain food. In Experiment 1, a human demonstrated how to open a transparent drawer and take out the reward inside, but cats did not significantly follow the same method as the human. In Experiment 2a, a transparent tube device was used to make the operation easier for cats. However, cats were not influenced by the human behaviour. As the devices used in these experiments were transparent, meaning that the cats could see the food inside directly, they might have required strong inhibitory control. Therefore, in Experiment 2b the tube device was made opaque, and cats again observed the human demonstration. Nevertheless, the cats were not influenced by the human's behaviour. The results of these experiments indicate a lack of social learning, including imitation, from human behaviours in cats, at least in these experimental settings with food rewards. Other than their inherent ability, cats' biological characteristics and the experimental context may have contributed towards the negative results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dogs and cats are sensitive to human social signals such as pointing, gazing and facial expressions. Previous studies have demonstrated that dogs show over-reliance on human actions in the presence of conflicting physical cues. However, it is still unclear whether this tendency is specific to dogs, or shared with other domesticated animals. Here, we compared the behavior of dogs and cats in a two-choice task after they saw a person taking and pretending to eat food from a baited container. After one experimenter showed the dogs (Experiment 1) or cats (Experiment 2) two opaque containers, each containing a piece of the food, another (the demonstrator) removed food from one container and ate it (Eating condition), or simply picked up the food and returned it to the container (Showing condition). We recorded which container the subjects approached first after the demonstration. Both dogs and cats were less likely to choose the container associated with the human in the Eating than the Showing condition, although choice for this container was above chance in both conditions. In Experiment 3, we confirmed that dogs and cats naturally chose a baited over an empty container. These results suggest that both species' reasoning abilities might be influenced by a bias for prioritizing specific human actions. Although dogs and cats have different domestication histories, their social awareness of humans appears similar, possibly because they both share their environment with humans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dogs are highly sensitive to human behavior, and they evaluate us using both their direct experiences and from a third-party perspective. Dogs pay attention to various aspects of our actions and make judgments about, for example, social vs. selfish acts. However, it is unclear if dogs judge human competence. To investigate this issue, we showed dogs two experimenters manipulating a transparent container: one was good at removing the lid to take an object out of the container (Competent person), whereas the other was unsuccessful at this task (Incompetent person). After demonstrating their actions twice with different containers, both experimenters simultaneously tried to open a third container which contained food (Food condition; 30 dogs) or was empty (Empty condition; 30 dogs). Dogs in the Food condition looked at the Competent person longer than the Incompetent one, and female dogs in particular were more likely to approach the Competent person. In contrast, dogs in the Empty condition showed no preferences. This result suggests that dogs can recognize different competence levels in humans, and that this ability influences their behavior according to the first situation. Our data also indicate that more attention should be given to potential sex differences in dogs' social evaluation abilities. • We tested whether dogs judge different competence levels of humans. • Competence was operationalized as ability (good vs. poor) at opening a container. • Female dogs preferred the competent person when the container had food. • Sex differences might characterize dogs' social evaluation processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]