Search

Using the comparative approach, researchers draw inferences about the evolution of cognition. Psychologists have postulated several hypotheses to explain why certain species are cognitively more flexible than others, and these hypotheses assume that certain cognitive skills are linked together to create a generally "smart" species. However, empirical findings suggest that several animal species are highly specialized, showing exceptional skills in single cognitive domains while performing poorly in others. Although some cognitive skills may indeed overlap, we cannot a priori assume that they do across species. We argue that the term "cognition" has often been used by applying an anthropocentric viewpoint rather than a biocentric one. As a result, researchers tend to overrate cognitive skills that are human-like and assume that certain skills cluster together in other animals as they do in our own species. In this paper, we emphasize that specific physical and social environments create selection pressures that lead to the evolution of certain cognitive adaptations. Skills such as following the pointing gesture, tool-use, perspective-taking, or the ability to cooperate evolve "independently" from each other as a concrete result of specific selection pressures, and thus have appeared in distantly related species. Thus, there is not "one cognition". Our argument is founded upon traditional Darwinian thinking, which--although always at the forefront of biology--has sometimes been neglected in animal cognition research. In accordance with the biocentric approach, we advocate a broader empirical perspective as we are convinced that to better understand animal minds, comparative researchers should focus much more on questions and experiments that are ecologically valid. We should investigate nonhuman cognition for its own sake, not only in comparison to the human model.

Simple Summary: This qualitative study explores human–dog relationships with a focus on communication dynamics. Twelve human–dog dyads were analyzed using narrative interviews and cooperative tasks. The results suggest that human expectations shape interactions, transforming dog ownership into a family-like role. Effective communication relies on both verbal and non-verbal cues. Empathy is critical for deeper emotional connections. This study highlights that compatibility between humans and dogs has a significant impact on relationship satisfaction. This exploratory study examines the complex dynamics of human–dog relationships and their impact on interspecies communication. Twelve human–dog dyads were studied using narrative interviews to explore how people perceive their relationships with their dogs. In addition, the dyads engaged in a cooperative task to observe interaction dynamics during everyday activities. This study shows that individual expectations frame interactions and that traditional notions of dog ownership are evolving into more family-like relationships. Effective communication relies on a nuanced mix of verbal and non-verbal cues, with empathy emerging as a fundamental element guiding these interactions. Our findings underline the profound influence of human expectations, knowledge and empathy on communication with dogs. They also highlight the critical role of compatibility between human and dog dyads, and emphasize that such compatibility is a key determinant of satisfaction in interspecies relationships. These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of how human factors modulate communication and satisfaction in human–animal interactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]