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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Markus Germar, Amira Sultan, Juliane Kaminski, Andreas Mojzisch
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