19Research using the two-object choice paradigm showed that dogs prefer the object 20 associated with the happy human emotion. However, they provided rather ambiguous results 21regarding the negative emotions. We assumed that differences between the dogs' and owners' 22 interest towards the 'negative' object might be responsible for this. In our experiment, dogs 23 observed their owner expressing different emotions towards two uniform plastic bottles. Five 24 dog groups were tested based on the condition they received: (1) happy versus neutral, (2) happy 25 versus disgust, (3) neutral versus disgust and (4-5) neutral versus neutral, as control groups. 26Contrary to previous studies using free choice paradigm, we used a task-driven approach. After 27 the demonstration, the dogs had to retrieve one object to the owner. The dogs' performance in 28 the two neutral-neutral groups did not differ from the chance level. In contrast, subjects were 29 able to distinguish between the happy and neutral expression of the owner: they both 30 approached and fetched the 'happy' object. In the happy-disgusted and neutral-disgusted 31 groups, the dogs approached the bottles randomly, suggesting that they found the 'disgusting' 32 and 'neutral' objects equally attractive. Nevertheless, the dogs preferentially retrieved the 33 object marked with the relatively more positive emotion (happy or neutral) to the owner in both 34 conditions. Our results demonstrate that dogs are able to recognize which is the more positive

Dogs' seemingly empathic behaviour attracts general and scientific attention alike. Behaviour tests are usually not sufficiently realistic to evoke empathic-like behaviour; therefore we decided to ask owners about their experiences with their dogs in emotionally loaded situations. Owners from Hungary (N = 591) and from Germany (N = 2283) were asked to rate their level of agreement on a 1–5 Likert scale with statements about the reactivity of their dogs to their emotions and to other dogs’ behaviour. We created two scales with satisfactory internal reliability: reactivity to the owner’s emotion and reactivity to other dogs’ behaviour. Based on an owner-dog personality matching theory, we hypothesised that the owner’s empathy, as measured by the subscale on the cooperativeness character factor of the human personality, will correlate with their dog’s emotional reactivity in emotionally loaded situations. In addition we also examined how anthropomorphism, contagious yawning, attitude toward the dog are related to emotional reactivity in dogs as perceived by the owner. In addition we examined how owners rate dog pictures. We found that the scale scores were largely independent from demographic and environmental variables like breed, sex, age, age at acquiring, keeping practices, training experiences and owner's age. However, anthropomorphic and emotional attitude of the owners probably biased the responses. In the German sample more empathic owners reported to have more emotionally reactive dog, as expected by the personality matching theory. More empathic owners reported to have fewer problems with their dogs and they rated a puppy picture as more cute in both countries. 62% of owners from Hungary and 36% of owner from Germany agreed with the statement “My dog is more important for me than any human being”. In Germany, more empathic owners agreed less with this statement and indicated that their dogs have a tendency for contagious yawning. Owners whose attitudes toward their dogs were anthropomorphic (agreed more with the statement that “My dog thinks like a child”), perceived their dogs as more reactive to their emotions. This findings highlights the importance of testing the attitudes of the respondents when they assess the personality and the emotions of animals. The criterion validity of the Dog Emotional Reactivity Survey should be confirmed by objective behavioural tests.

This study investigates whether dogs are able to differentiate between people according to whether or not they show similarities to their owners. We hypothesized that dogs would show a preference for the "similar" partner when interacting with unfamiliar humans. After having familiarized with two experimenters displaying different degrees of similarity to their owners, dogs (N = 36) participated in a situation where the desired toy object was made inaccessible in order to find out whether they initiate interaction with the two partners differently. Two different types of "similarity cues" were used (either alone or combined with each other): (1) persistent behavioral characteristics (i.e., familiar vs. strange motion pattern and language usage) and (2) an unfamiliar arbitrary group marker (i.e., one of the potential helpers was wearing clothing similar to that worn by the owner). Results show that although dogs payed equal attention to the human partners displaying various types of similarity to their owners during familiarization, they exhibited a visual attention preference for the human whose motion pattern and language usage were similar to their owner's in the inaccessible-toy task. However, there was weak evidence of discrimination based on the arbitrary group marker (clothing). Although dogs' different tendencies to interact with the potential helpers do not necessarily imply an underlying ability to create social categories based on the degree of similarity between the owner and unfamiliar people, these results suggest that functionally human infant-analogue forms of social categorization may have emerged in dogs.

No abstract

No abstract