Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T10:08:48.641Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Communication in Dogs and Wolves

from Part I - Communication and Language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2021

By
Katalin Oláh ,
József Topál  and
Anna Gergely
Edited by
Allison B. Kaufman ,
Josep Call  and
James C. Kaufman
Allison B. Kaufman
Affiliation:
University of Connecticut
Josep Call
Affiliation:
University of St Andrews, Scotland
James C. Kaufman
Affiliation:
University of Connecticut
Get access

Summary

The ability to engage in some form of communication is essential for any social species. Communication generally relies on species-specific adaptations that provide animals with a cognitive tool to pass on messages from one conspecific to the other. This means that communication between members of different species is relatively rare and potentially requires qualitatively different cognitive abilities. This form of communication is not only challenging due to the fact that different species may rely on distinct sets of codes to convey messages but also because the primary modality used for this purpose may be different. Dogs represent a special case in the animal kingdom as they have been uniquely adapted to be receptive to the communicative signals of a species relatively distant in terms of their genome: humans. In this chapter, we will first focus on those characteristics of canids’ intraspecific communication that are shared between the dog and their phylogenetically closest relative, the wolf. Similarities in these forms of communication are likely the result of the common ancestry of the two species. Next, we turn to describing those attributes of canine communication that selectively pertain to how dogs communicate with their conspecifics. Finally, we discuss the ubiquitous nature of heterospecific communication between dogs and humans.

Keywords

dogwolfdomesticationcommunicationsocial skills
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Animal Cognition , pp. 74 - 99
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agnetta, B., Hare, B., & Tomasello, M. (2000). Cues to food location that domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) of different ages do and do not use. Animal Cognition, 3 (2), 107–112.Google Scholar
Albuquerque, N., Guo, K., Wilkinson, A., Savalli, C., Otta, E., & Mills, D. (2016). Dogs recognize dog and human emotions. Biology Letters, 12(1), 20150883.Google Scholar
Albuquerque, N., Guo, K., Wilkinson, A., Resende, B., & Mills, D. S. (2018). Mouth-licking by dogs as a response to emotional stimuli. Behavioural Processes, 146, 42–45.Google Scholar
Allen, W. F. (1937). Olfactory and trigeminal conditioned reflexes in dogs. American Journal of Physiology, 118, 532–540.Google Scholar
Andics, A., Gábor, A., Gácsi, M., Faragó, T., Szabó, D., & Miklósi, Á. (2016). Neural mechanisms for lexical processing in dogs. Science, 353 (6303), 1030–1032.Google Scholar
Andics, A. & Miklósi, Á. (2018). Neural processes of vocal social perception: Dog-human comparative fMRI studies. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 85, 54–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Asa, C. S., Mech, L. D., & Seal, U. S. (1985). The use of urine, faeces, and anal-gland secretions in scent-marking by a captive wolf (Canis lupus) pack. Animal Behaviour, 33(3), 1034–1036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asa, C. S., Mech, L. D., Seal, U. S., & Plotka, E. D. (1990). The influence of social and endocrine factors on urine-marking by captive wolves (Canis lupus). Hormones and Behavior, 24 (4), 497–509.Google Scholar
Ashmead, D. H., Clifton, R. K., & Reese, E. P. (1986). Development of auditory localization in dogs: Single source and precedence effect sounds. Developmental Psychobiology, 19(2), 91–103.Google Scholar
Barber, A. L. A., Randi, D., Müller, C. A., & Huber, L. (2016). The processing of human emotional faces by pet and lab dogs: Evidence for lateralization and experience effects. PLoS One, 11(4), e0152393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baun, M. M., Bergstrom, N., & Langston, N. F. L. T. (1984). Physiological effects of human/companion animal bonding. Nursing Research, 33(3), 126–129.Google Scholar
Bekoff, M. (1974). Social play in coyotes, wolves and dogs. BioScience, 24(4), 225–230.Google Scholar
Bence, M., Elek, Z., Kis, A., Kubinyi, E., Lakatos, G., Miklósi, Á., … Rónai, Z. (2013). Analysis of oxytocin receptor gene as putative component of social behavior in family dogs. Behavior Genetics, 43(6), 509.Google Scholar
Bleicher, N. (1963). Physical and behavioral analysis of dog vocalizations. American Journal of Veterinary Research, 24, 415–427.Google Scholar
Bognár, Z., Iotchev, I. B., & Kubinyi, E. (2018). Sex, skull length, breed, and age predict how dogs look at faces of humans and conspecifics. Animal Cognition, 21 (4), 447–456.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, J. W. & Nott, H. M. (1995). Social and Communication Behaviour of Companion Dogs. In Serpell, J. A. (Ed.), The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behavior and Interactions with People (pp. 115–130). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, J. W. & Rooney, N. I. C. O. L. A. (2016). Dog Social Behavior and Communication. In Serpell, J. A. (Ed.), The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behavior and Interactions with People. 2nd ed. (pp. 133–159). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bräuer, J., Schönefeld, K., & Call, J. (2013). When do dogs help humans? Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 148 (1), 138–149.Google Scholar
Brisbin, I. L. Jr & Austad, S. N. (1991). Testing the individual odour theory of canine olfaction. Animal Behaviour, 42(1), 63–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, D. S. & Johnston, R. E. (1983). Individual Discrimination on the Basis of Urine in Dogs and Wolves. In Müller-Schwarze, D. (Ed.), Chemical Signals in Vertebrates 3 (pp. 343–346). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Byosiere, S. E., Chouinard, P. A., Howell, T. J., & Bennett, P. C. (2018). What do dogs (Canis familiaris) see? A review of vision in dogs and implications for cognition research. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25 (5), 1798–1813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charnetski, C. J., Riggers, S., & Brennan, F. X. (2004). Effect of petting a dog on immune system function. Psychological Reports, 95, 1087–1091.Google Scholar
Chen, M., Daly, M., Williams, N., Williams, S., Williams, C., & Williams, G. (2000). Non-invasive detection of hypoglycaemia using a novel, fully biocompatible and patient friendly alarm system. BMJ, 321 (7276), 1565–1566.Google Scholar
Clutton-Brock, J. (1997). Origins of the Dog: Domestication and Early History. In Serpell, J. (Ed.), The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behavior and Interactions with People (2–19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. A. & Fox, M. W. (1976). Vocalization in wild canids and possible effects of domestication. Behavioural Processes, 1(1), 77–92.Google Scholar
Coppinger, R.. & Coppinger, L. (2001). Dogs: A Startling New Understanding of Canine Origin, Behavior & Evolution. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Coscia, E. M., Phillips, D. P., & Fentress, J. C. (1991). Spectral analysis of neonatal wolf Canis lupus vocalizations. Bioacoustics, 3 (4), 275–293.Google Scholar
Coscia, M., A. (1995). Ontogeny of Timber Wolf Vocalizations: Acoustic Properties and Behavioural Contexts. Doctoral Dissertation, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada.Google Scholar
Csibra, G. & Gergely, G. (2006). Social Learning and Social Cognition: The Case for Pedagogy. In Munakata, Y. & Johnson, M. H. (Eds.), Processes of Change in Brain and Cognitive Development: Attention and Performance XXI (pp. 249–274). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dale, R., Palma-Jacinto, S., Marshall-Pescini, S., & Range, F. (2019). Wolves, but not dogs, are prosocial in a touch screen task. PLoS One 14 (5), e0215444.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
D’Aniello, B., Scandurra, A., Alterisio, A., Valsecchi, P., & Prato-Previde, E. (2016). The importance of gestural communication: A study of human–dog communication using incongruent information. Animal Cognition, 19 (6), 1231–1235.Google Scholar
D’Aniello, B., Semin, G. R., Alterisio, A., Aria, M., & Scandurra, A. (2018). Interspecies transmission of emotional information via chemosignals: From humans to dogs (Canis lupus familiaris). Animal Cognition, 21 (1), 67–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Derix, R. R. W. M. (1994). The Social Organisation of Wolves and African Wild Dogs: An Empirical and Model-Theoretical Approach. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands.Google Scholar
Faragó, T., Andics, A., Devecseri, V., Kis, A., Gácsi, M., & Miklósi, Á. (2014). Humans rely on the same rules to assess emotional valence and intensity in conspecific and dog vocalizations. Biology Letters, 10 (1), 20130926.Google Scholar
Faragó, T., Takács, N., Miklósi, Á., & Pongrácz, P. (2017). Dog growls express various contextual and affective content for human listeners. Royal Society Open Science, 4(5), 170134.Google Scholar
Feddersen-Petersen, D. U. (2000). Vocalisation of European wolves (Canis lupus lupus L.) and various dog breeds (Canis lupus f. familiaris). Archiv für Tierzucht, 43, 387–397.Google Scholar
Feddersen-Petersen, D. U. (2007). Social Behaviour of Dogs and Related Canids. In: Jensen, P. (Ed.), The Behavioural Biology of Dogs, Wallington, UK: CAB, International.Google Scholar
Fox, M. (1970). A comparative study of the development of facial expressions in canids: Wolf, coyote and foxes. Behaviour, 36 (1–2), 49–73.Google Scholar
Fox, M. (1971). Behaviour of Wolves, Dogs and Related Canids. London: Jonathan Cape.Google Scholar
Gácsi, M., Kara, E., Belényi, B., Topál, J., & Miklósi, Á. (2009). The effect of development and individual differences in pointing comprehension of dogs. Animal Cognition, 12 (3), 471–479.Google Scholar
Gergely, A., Faragó, T., Galambos, Á., & Topál, J. (2017). Differential effects of speech situations on mothers’ and fathers’ infant-directed and dog-directed speech: An acoustic analysis. Scientific Reports, 7 (1), 13739.Google Scholar
Goodwin, D., Bradshaw, J. W., & Wickens, S. M. (1997). Paedomorphosis affects agonistic visual signals of domestic dogs. Animal Behaviour, 53 (2), 297–304.Google Scholar
Halpin, Z. T. (1986). Individual odors among mammals: Origins and functions. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 16, 39-70.Google Scholar
Hardin, D. S., Anderson, W., & Cattet, J. (2015). Dogs can be successfully trained to alert to hypoglycemia samples from patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Therapy, 6 (4), 509–517.Google Scholar
Harrington, F. H. & Mech, L. D. (1979). Wolf howling and its role in territory maintenance. Behaviour, 68 (3), 207-249.Google Scholar
Heffner, H. E. (1983). Hearing in large and small dogs: Absolute thresholds and size of the tympanic membrane. Behavioral Neuroscience, 97 (2), 310–318.Google Scholar
Hepper, P. G. (1994). Long term retention of kinship recognition established during infancy in the domestic dog. Behavioural Processes, 33 (1–2), 3–14.Google Scholar
Hirsh-Pasek, K. & Treiman, R. (1982). Doggerel: Motherese in a new context. Journal of Child Language, 9 (1), 229–237.Google Scholar
Jacobs, G. H. (1993). The distribution and nature of colour vision among the mammals. Biological Reviews, 68 (3), 413–471.Google Scholar
Jensen, P., Persson, M. E., Wright, D., Johnsson, M., Sundman, A. S., & Roth, L. S. V. (2016). The genetics of how dogs became our social allies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(5), 334–338.Google Scholar
Kaminski, J., Call, J., & Fischer, J. (2004). Word learning in a domestic dog: Evidence for” fast mapping.” Science, 304 (5677), 1682–1683.Google Scholar
Kaminski, J., Hynds, J., Morris, P., & Waller, B. M. (2017). Human attention affects facial expressions in domestic dogs. Scientific Reports, 7, 12914.Google Scholar
Kaminski, J., Neumann, M., Bräuer, J., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2011). Dogs, Canis familiaris, communicate with humans to request but not to inform. Animal Behaviour, 82 (4), 651–658.Google Scholar
Kaminski, J. & Nitzschner, M. (2013). Do dogs get the point? A review of dog–human communication ability. Learning and Motivation, 44 (4), 294–302.Google Scholar
Kaminski, J., Schulz, L., & Tomasello, M. (2012). How dogs know when communication is intended for them. Developmental Science, 15 (2), 222–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaminski, J. & Piotti, P. (2016). Current trends in dog-human communication: Do dogs inform? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25 (5), 322–326.Google Scholar
Kis, A., Ciobica, A., & Topál, J. (2017). The effect of oxytocin on human-directed social behaviour in dogs (Canis familiaris). Hormones and Behaviour, 94, 40–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kis, A., Bence, M., Lakatos, G., Pergel, E., Turcsán, B., Pluijmakers, J., … Kubinyi, E. (2014). Oxytocin receptor gene polymorphisms are associated with human directed social behavior in dogs (Canis familiaris). PLoS One, 9(1), e83993.Google Scholar
Kleiman, D. (1966 ). Scent marking in the Canidae. Symposia of the Zoological Society of London, 18, 167–177.Google Scholar
Kostarczyk, E. & Fonberg, E. (1981). Heart rate mechanisms in instrumental conditioning reinforced by petting in dogs. Physiology & Behavior, 28 (1), 27–30.Google Scholar
Kubinyi, E., Virányi, Z., & Miklósi, Á. (2007). Comparative social cognition: From wolf and dog to humans. Comparative Cognition & Behavior Reviews, 2(1), 26–46.Google Scholar
Kuhne, F., Hoessler, J. C., & Struwe, R. (2012). Affective behavioural responses by dogs to tactile human-dog interactions. Berliner und Munchener Tierarztliche Wochenschrift, 125, 371–378.Google Scholar
Leaver, S. D. A. & Reimchen, T. E. (2008). Behavioural responses of Canis familiaris to different tail lengths of a remotely-controlled life-size. Behaviour, 145(3), 377–390.Google Scholar
McGreevy, P., Grassi, T. D., & Harman, A. M. (2004). A strong correlation exists between the distribution of retinal ganglion cells and nose length in the dog. Brain, Behavior and Evolution, 63(1), 13–22.Google Scholar
Mech, L. D. & Boitani, L. (2010). Wolves: Ecology, Behavior and Conservation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mech, L. D. (2001). “Standing over” and “hugging” in wild wolves. Canadian Field-Naturalist, 115, 179–181.Google Scholar
Merola, I., Prato-Previde, E., & Marshall-Pescini, S. (2012). Social referencing in dog-owner dyads? Animal Cognition, 15(2), 175–185.Google Scholar
Miklósi, Á. (2015). Dog Behaviour, Evolution, and Cognition. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Miklósi, Á., Polgárdi, R., Topál, J., & Csányi, V. (2000). Intentional behaviour in dog-human communication: An experimental analysis of “showing” behaviour in the dog. Animal Cognition, 3(3), 159–166.Google Scholar
Miklósi, Á. & Topál, J. (2013). What does it take to become ‘best friends’? Evolutionary changes in canine social competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(6), 287–294.Google Scholar
Miller, P. E. & Murphy, C. J. (1995). Vision in dogs. Journal-American Veterinary Medical Association, 207(12), 1623–1634.Google Scholar
Mills, D. S., Ramos, D., Estellés, M. G., & Hargrave, C. (2006). A triple blind placebo-controlled investigation into the assessment of the effect of dog appeasing pheromone (DAP) on anxiety related behaviour of problem dogs in the veterinary clinic. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 98(1-2), 114–126.Google Scholar
Molnár, C., Pongrácz, P., Faragó, T., Dóka, A., & Miklósi, Á. (2009). Dogs discriminate between barks: The effect of context and identity of the caller. Behavioural Processes, 82(2), 198–201.Google Scholar
Morton, E. S. (1977). On the occurrence and significance of motivation-structural rules in some bird and mammal sounds. The American Naturalist,111(981), 855–869.Google Scholar
Müller, C. A., Schmitt, K., Barber, A. L., & Huber, L. (2015). Dogs can discriminate emotional expressions of human faces. Current Biology, 25(5), 601–605.Google Scholar
Neitz, J., Geist, T., & Jacobs, G. H. (1989). Color vision in the dog. Visual Neuroscience, 3(2), 119–125.Google Scholar
Ostojić, L. & Clayton, N. S. (2014). Behavioural coordination of dogs in a cooperative problem-solving task with a conspecific and a human partner. Animal Cognition, 17(2), 445–459.Google Scholar
Pageat, P. & Gaultier, E. (2003). Current research in canine and feline pheromones. Veterinary Clinics: Small Animal Practice, 33(2), 187–211.Google ScholarPubMed
Petterson, H., Kaminski, J., Herrmann, E., & Tomasello, M. (2011). Understanding of human communicative motives in domestic dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 133(3-4), 235–245.Google Scholar
Pilley, J. W. (2013). Border collie comprehends sentences containing a prepositional object, verb, and direct object. Learning and Motivation, 44(4), 229–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinc, L., Bartoš, L., Reslová, A., & Kotrba, R. (2011). Dogs discriminate identical twins. PLoS One, 6(6), 4–7.Google Scholar
Piotti, P. & Kaminski, J. (2016). Do dogs provide information helpfully? PLoS One, 11(8), e0159797.Google Scholar
Polgár, Z., Kinnunen, M., Újváry, D., Miklósi, Á., & Gácsi, M. (2016). A test of canine olfactory capacity: Comparing various dog breeds and wolves in a natural detection task. PLoS One, 11(5), e0154087.Google Scholar
Pongrácz, P., Molnár, C., Dóka, A., & Miklósi, Á. (2011). Do children understand man’s best friend? Classification of dog barks by pre-adolescents and adults. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 135(1-2), 95–102.Google Scholar
Pongrácz, P., Molnár, C., & Miklósi, Á. (2010). Barking in family dogs: An ethological approach. Veterinary Journal, 183(2), 141–147.Google Scholar
Pongrácz, P., Molnár, C., Miklósi, Á., & Csányi, V. (2005). Human listeners classify dog barks in different situations. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 119(2), 136–144.Google Scholar
Pongrácz, P., Molnár, C., & Miklósi, Á. (2006). Acoustic parameters of dog barks carry emotional information for humans. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 100(3-4), 228-240.Google Scholar
Range, F. & Virányi, Z. (2015). Tracking the evolutionary origins of dog-human cooperation: The “Canine Cooperation Hypothesis.” Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1582.Google Scholar
Raymer, J., Wiesler, D., Novotny, M., Asa, C., Seal, U. S., & Mech, L. D. (1985). Chemical investigations of wolf (Canis lupus) anal-sac secretion in relation to breeding season. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 11(5), 593–608.Google Scholar
Riedel, J., Schumann, K., Kaminski, J., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2008). The early ontogeny of human–dog communication. Animal Behaviour, 75(3), 1003–1014.Google Scholar
Rooney, N. J., Bradshaw, J. W. S., & Robinson, I. H. (2001). Do dogs respond to play signals given by humans? Animal Behaviour, 61(4), 715–722.Google Scholar
Savalli, C., Resende, B., & Gaunet, F. (2016). Eye contact is crucial for referential communication in pet dogs. PLoS One, 11(9), e0162161.Google Scholar
Schassburger, R. M. (1987). Wolf vocalization: An integrated model of structure, motivation and ontogeny. In Frank, H. (Ed.), Man and Wolf, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Dr. W. Junk Publishers.Google Scholar
Schassburger, R. M. (1993). Vocal Communication in the Timber Wolf, Canis Lupus, Linnaeus: Structure, Motivation, and Ontogeny. Advances in Ethology, no. 30. Berlin/Hamburg: Paul Parey Scientific Publishers.Google Scholar
Schenkel, R. (1947). Expression studies of wolves. Behaviour,1(8), 1–129.Google Scholar
Siniscalchi, M., d’Ingeo, S., & Quaranta, A. (2016). The dog nose “KNOWS” fear: Asymmetric nostril use during sniffing at canine and human emotional stimuli. Behavioural Brain Research, 304, 34-41.Google Scholar
Siniscalchi, M., d’Ingeo, S., & Quaranta, A. (2018). Orienting asymmetries and physiological reactivity in dogs’ response to human emotional faces. Learning & Behavior, 46(4), 574–585.Google Scholar
Serpell, J. (2017). The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behavior and Interactions with People. 2nd ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Somppi, S., Törnqvist, H., Hänninen, L., Krause, C., & Vainio, O. (2014). How dogs scan familiar and inverted faces: An eye movement study. Animal Cognition, 17(3), 793–803.Google Scholar
Somppi, S., Törnqvist, H., Topál, J., Koskela, A., Hänninen, L., Krause, C. M., & Vainio, O. (2017). Nasal oxytocin administration alters the gazing behavior and pupil dilatation in domestic dogs. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1854.Google Scholar
Strain, G. M., Tedford, B. L., & Jackson, R. M. (1991). Postnatal development of the brain stem auditory-evoked potential in dogs. American Journal of Veterinary Research, 52(3), 410–415.Google Scholar
Tauzin, T., Csík, A., Kis, A., Kovács, K., & Topál, J. (2015). The order of ostensive and referential signals affects dogs’ responsiveness when interacting with a human. Animal Cognition, 18(4), 975–979.Google Scholar
Téglás, E., Gergely, A., Kupán, K., Miklósi, Á., & Topál, J. (2012). Dogs’ gaze following is tuned to human communicative signals. Current Biology, 22(3), 209–212.Google Scholar
Topál, J., Kis, A., & Oláh, K. (2014). Dogs’ sensitivity to human ostensive cues: A unique adaptation? In Kaminski, J., Marshall-Pescini, S. (Eds.), The Social Dog: Behaviour and Cognition (pp. 319–346). London UK: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Topál, J., Miklósi, Á., Gácsi, M., Dóka, A., Pongrácz, P., Kubinyi, E., … & Csányi, V. (2009). The dog as a model for understanding human social behavior. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 39, 71–116.Google Scholar
Udell, M. A. R., & Wynne, C. D. L. (2010). Ontogeny and phylogeny: Both are essential to human-sensitive behavior in the genus Canis. Animal Behaviour, 79(2), 9–14.Google Scholar
van Hooff, J. A. R. A. M. & Wensing, J. A. B. (1987). Dominance and its Behavioral Measures in a Captive Wolf Pack. In Frank, H. (Ed.), Man and Wolf (pp. 219–252), Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Dr. W. Junk Publishers.Google Scholar
Virányi, Z., Gácsi, M., Kubinyi, E., Topál, J., Belényi, B., Ujfalussy, D., & Miklósi, Á. (2008). Comprehension of human pointing gestures in young human-reared wolves (Canis lupus) and dogs (Canis familiaris). Animal Cognition, 11(3), 373–387.Google Scholar
Virányi, Z., Topál, J., Gácsi, M,, Miklósi, Á., & Csányi, V. (2004). Dogs respond appropriately to cues of humans’ attentional focus. Behavioural Processes, 66(2), 161–172.Google Scholar
Vormbrock, J. K., & Grossberg, J. M. (1988). Cardiovascular effects of human–pet dog interactions. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 11(5), 509–517.Google Scholar
Wang, G. D., Zhai, W., Yang, H. C., Wang, L., Zhong, L., Liu, Y. H., … Zhang, Y. P. (2016). Out of southern East Asia: The natural history of domestic dogs across the world. Cell Research, 26, 21–33.Google Scholar
Worsley, H. K. & O’Hara, S. J. (2018). Cross-species referential signalling events in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris). Animal Cognition, 21(4), 457–465.Google Scholar
Wysocki, C. J. (1979). Neurobehavioral evidence for the involvement of the vomeronasal system in mammalian reproduction. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 3(4), 301–341.Google Scholar
Zimen, E. (1981). The Wolf: His Place in the Natural World. London: Souvenir Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×