Dogs (Canis familiaris) stick to what they have learned rather than conform to their conspecifics' behavior.
In recent years, an increasing number of studies has investigated majority influence in nonhuman animals. However, due to both terminological and methodological issues, evidence for conformity in nonhuman animals is scarce and controversial. Preliminary evidence suggests that wild birds, wild monkey...
Main Authors: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2018-01-01
|
Series: | PLoS ONE |
Online Access: | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5865722?pdf=render |
id |
doaj-e62881729a174738903340c75588b85a |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-e62881729a174738903340c75588b85a2020-11-25T02:23:09ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032018-01-01133e019480810.1371/journal.pone.0194808Dogs (Canis familiaris) stick to what they have learned rather than conform to their conspecifics' behavior.Markus GermarAmira SultanJuliane KaminskiAndreas MojzischIn recent years, an increasing number of studies has investigated majority influence in nonhuman animals. However, due to both terminological and methodological issues, evidence for conformity in nonhuman animals is scarce and controversial. Preliminary evidence suggests that wild birds, wild monkeys, and fish show conformity, that is, forgoing personal information in order to copy the majority. By contrast, chimpanzees seem to lack this tendency. The present study is the first to examine whether dogs (Canis familiaris) show conformity. Specifically, we tested whether dogs conform to a majority of conspecifics rather than stick to what they have previously learned. After dogs had acquired a behavioral preference via training (i.e., shaping), they were confronted with counter-preferential behavior of either no, one or three conspecifics. Traditional frequentist analyses show that the dogs' behavior did not differ significantly between the three conditions. Complementary Bayesian analyses suggest that our data provide moderate evidence for the null hypothesis. In conclusion, our results suggest that dogs stick to what they have learned rather than conform to the counter-preferential behavior of others. We discuss the possible statistical and methodological limitations of this finding. Furthermore, we take a functional perspective on conformity and discuss under which circumstances dogs might show conformity after all.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5865722?pdf=render |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Markus Germar Amira Sultan Juliane Kaminski Andreas Mojzisch |
spellingShingle |
Markus Germar Amira Sultan Juliane Kaminski Andreas Mojzisch Dogs (Canis familiaris) stick to what they have learned rather than conform to their conspecifics' behavior. PLoS ONE |
author_facet |
Markus Germar Amira Sultan Juliane Kaminski Andreas Mojzisch |
author_sort |
Markus Germar |
title |
Dogs (Canis familiaris) stick to what they have learned rather than conform to their conspecifics' behavior. |
title_short |
Dogs (Canis familiaris) stick to what they have learned rather than conform to their conspecifics' behavior. |
title_full |
Dogs (Canis familiaris) stick to what they have learned rather than conform to their conspecifics' behavior. |
title_fullStr |
Dogs (Canis familiaris) stick to what they have learned rather than conform to their conspecifics' behavior. |
title_full_unstemmed |
Dogs (Canis familiaris) stick to what they have learned rather than conform to their conspecifics' behavior. |
title_sort |
dogs (canis familiaris) stick to what they have learned rather than conform to their conspecifics' behavior. |
publisher |
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
series |
PLoS ONE |
issn |
1932-6203 |
publishDate |
2018-01-01 |
description |
In recent years, an increasing number of studies has investigated majority influence in nonhuman animals. However, due to both terminological and methodological issues, evidence for conformity in nonhuman animals is scarce and controversial. Preliminary evidence suggests that wild birds, wild monkeys, and fish show conformity, that is, forgoing personal information in order to copy the majority. By contrast, chimpanzees seem to lack this tendency. The present study is the first to examine whether dogs (Canis familiaris) show conformity. Specifically, we tested whether dogs conform to a majority of conspecifics rather than stick to what they have previously learned. After dogs had acquired a behavioral preference via training (i.e., shaping), they were confronted with counter-preferential behavior of either no, one or three conspecifics. Traditional frequentist analyses show that the dogs' behavior did not differ significantly between the three conditions. Complementary Bayesian analyses suggest that our data provide moderate evidence for the null hypothesis. In conclusion, our results suggest that dogs stick to what they have learned rather than conform to the counter-preferential behavior of others. We discuss the possible statistical and methodological limitations of this finding. Furthermore, we take a functional perspective on conformity and discuss under which circumstances dogs might show conformity after all. |
url |
http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5865722?pdf=render |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT markusgermar dogscanisfamiliarissticktowhattheyhavelearnedratherthanconformtotheirconspecificsbehavior AT amirasultan dogscanisfamiliarissticktowhattheyhavelearnedratherthanconformtotheirconspecificsbehavior AT julianekaminski dogscanisfamiliarissticktowhattheyhavelearnedratherthanconformtotheirconspecificsbehavior AT andreasmojzisch dogscanisfamiliarissticktowhattheyhavelearnedratherthanconformtotheirconspecificsbehavior |
_version_ |
1724859415022010368 |