Humans process dog and human facial affect in similar ways.

Humans share aspects of their facial affect with other species such as dogs. Here we asked whether untrained human observers with and without dog experience are sensitive to these aspects and recognize dog affect with better-than-chance accuracy. Additionally, we explored similarities in the way obs...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Annett Schirmer, Cui Shan Seow, Trevor B Penney
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2013-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/24023954/?tool=EBI
id doaj-a2644c27ea9a48dc80a15e22fce559dc
record_format Article
spelling doaj-a2644c27ea9a48dc80a15e22fce559dc2021-03-03T22:55:37ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032013-01-0189e7459110.1371/journal.pone.0074591Humans process dog and human facial affect in similar ways.Annett SchirmerCui Shan SeowTrevor B PenneyHumans share aspects of their facial affect with other species such as dogs. Here we asked whether untrained human observers with and without dog experience are sensitive to these aspects and recognize dog affect with better-than-chance accuracy. Additionally, we explored similarities in the way observers process dog and human expressions. The stimulus material comprised naturalistic facial expressions of pet dogs and human infants obtained through positive (i.e., play) and negative (i.e., social isolation) provocation. Affect recognition was assessed explicitly in a rating task using full face images and images cropped to reveal the eye region only. Additionally, affect recognition was assessed implicitly in a lexical decision task using full faces as primes and emotional words and pseudowords as targets. We found that untrained human observers rated full face dog expressions from the positive and negative condition more accurately than would be expected by chance. Although dog experience was unnecessary for this effect, it significantly facilitated performance. Additionally, we observed a range of similarities between human and dog face processing. First, the facial expressions of both species facilitated lexical decisions to affectively congruous target words suggesting that their processing was equally automatic. Second, both dog and human negative expressions were recognized from both full and cropped faces. Third, female observers were more sensitive to affective information than were male observers and this difference was comparable for dog and human expressions. Together, these results extend existing work on cross-species similarities in facial emotions and provide evidence that these similarities are naturally exploited when humans interact with dogs.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/24023954/?tool=EBI
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Annett Schirmer
Cui Shan Seow
Trevor B Penney
spellingShingle Annett Schirmer
Cui Shan Seow
Trevor B Penney
Humans process dog and human facial affect in similar ways.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Annett Schirmer
Cui Shan Seow
Trevor B Penney
author_sort Annett Schirmer
title Humans process dog and human facial affect in similar ways.
title_short Humans process dog and human facial affect in similar ways.
title_full Humans process dog and human facial affect in similar ways.
title_fullStr Humans process dog and human facial affect in similar ways.
title_full_unstemmed Humans process dog and human facial affect in similar ways.
title_sort humans process dog and human facial affect in similar ways.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2013-01-01
description Humans share aspects of their facial affect with other species such as dogs. Here we asked whether untrained human observers with and without dog experience are sensitive to these aspects and recognize dog affect with better-than-chance accuracy. Additionally, we explored similarities in the way observers process dog and human expressions. The stimulus material comprised naturalistic facial expressions of pet dogs and human infants obtained through positive (i.e., play) and negative (i.e., social isolation) provocation. Affect recognition was assessed explicitly in a rating task using full face images and images cropped to reveal the eye region only. Additionally, affect recognition was assessed implicitly in a lexical decision task using full faces as primes and emotional words and pseudowords as targets. We found that untrained human observers rated full face dog expressions from the positive and negative condition more accurately than would be expected by chance. Although dog experience was unnecessary for this effect, it significantly facilitated performance. Additionally, we observed a range of similarities between human and dog face processing. First, the facial expressions of both species facilitated lexical decisions to affectively congruous target words suggesting that their processing was equally automatic. Second, both dog and human negative expressions were recognized from both full and cropped faces. Third, female observers were more sensitive to affective information than were male observers and this difference was comparable for dog and human expressions. Together, these results extend existing work on cross-species similarities in facial emotions and provide evidence that these similarities are naturally exploited when humans interact with dogs.
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/24023954/?tool=EBI
work_keys_str_mv AT annettschirmer humansprocessdogandhumanfacialaffectinsimilarways
AT cuishanseow humansprocessdogandhumanfacialaffectinsimilarways
AT trevorbpenney humansprocessdogandhumanfacialaffectinsimilarways
_version_ 1714812035494051840