Emotional contagion is a basic form of empathy that makes individuals able to experience others’ emotions. In human and non-human primates, emotional contagion can be linked to facial mimicry, an automatic and fast response (less than 1 s) in which individuals involuntary mimic others’ expressions. Here, we tested whether body (play bow, PBOW) and facial (relaxed open-mouth, ROM) rapid mimicry is present in domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) during dyadic intraspecific play. During their free playful interactions, dogs showed a stronger and rapid mimicry response (less than 1 s) after perceiving PBOW and ROM (two signals typical of play in dogs) than after perceiving JUMP and BITE (two play patterns resembling PBOW and ROM in motor performance). Playful sessions punctuated by rapid mimicry lasted longer that those sessions punctuated only by signals. Moreover, the distribution of rapid mimicry was strongly affected by the familiarity linking the subjects involved: the stronger the social bonding, the higher the level of rapid mimicry. In conclusion, our results demonstrate the presence of rapid mimicry in dogs, the involvement of mimicry in sharing playful motivation and the social modulation of the phenomenon. All these findings concur in supporting the idea that a possible linkage between rapid mimicry and emotional contagion (a building-block of empathy) exists in dogs.

While dog owners ascribe different emotions to their pets, including jealousy, research on secondary emotions in nonhuman animals is very limited and, so far, only one study has investigated jealousy in dogs (Canis familiaris). This work explores jealousy in dogs one step further. We conducted two studies adapting a procedure devised to assess jealousy in human infants. In each study 36 adult dogs were exposed to a situation in which their owner and a stranger ignored them while directing positive attention towards three different objects: a book, a puppet and a fake dog (Study 1: furry; Study 2: plastic). Overall, the results of both studies do not provide evidence that the behavioral responses of our dogs were triggered by jealousy: we did not find a clear indication that the fake dogs were perceived as real social rivals, neither the furry nor the plastic one. Indeed, dogs exhibited a higher interest (i.e. look at, interact with) towards the fake dogs, but differences in the behavior towards the fake dog and the puppet only emerged in Study 2. In addition, many of the behaviors (protest, stress, attention seeking, aggression) that are considered distinctive features of jealousy were not expressed or were expressed to a limited extent, revealing that dogs did not actively try to regain their owner’s attention or interfere with the interaction between the owner and the faux rival. Finally, a differentiated response towards the attachment figure (the owner) and the unfamiliar person (the stranger) did not emerge. Differently from what reported in human infants, dogs’ behavior towards the attachment figure and the stranger interacting with the potential competitor (in this case, the fake dog) did not significantly differ: in both studies dogs paid attention to the owner and the stranger manipulating the fake dog to the same extent. In conclusion, we do not exclude that dogs could possess a rudimentary form of jealousy, but we suggest that research on this topic should require the use of a real social interloper (conspecific or human) and more naturalistic procedures.

Due to their playful propensity, dogs are a good model to test some hypotheses about play dynamics (length, asymmetry, features of players) and communication (play bow [PBOW]; relaxed open-mouth [ROM] display). We video-recorded 203 play sessions between dogs in an off-leash dog park in Palermo, Italy. Contrary to the expectation, play asymmetry (particularly high in this species) did not differ between stranger and familiar dogs, thus suggesting the limited role of play in forming dominance relationships. Asymmetry negatively affected the duration of the session, whereas the increasing number of players was positively linked to the duration of playful interactions. The number of PBOWs exchanged by players may exert a certain influence on the session length as well. PBOWs were performed independently from the kind of play (locomotor vs. contact) the dogs were engaging in. Conversely, ROMs were preferentially emitted during contact play when "face-to-face" interactions were more likely. Body closeness is also required in case opening the mouth has not a signal function but only preludes a bite. However, in the 82% of cases play bites did not follow a ROM, thus suggesting that dogs place ROMs in the appropriate context to optimize signal detectability. In conclusion, 2 tactics may concur in coping with the asymmetry and unpredictability of play sessions in dogs. First, whenever the asymmetry increases dogs shorten the duration of their sessions thus limiting the risk of possible escalation. Second, dogs make use of a good communicative system based on the reciprocal exchange of playful signals. (PsycINFO Database Record

Jealousy appears to have clear adaptive functions across species: it emerges when an important social relationship with a valued social partner is threatened by third-party that is perceived as a rival. Dyads of dogs living together and their owners were tested adapting a procedure devised to study jealousy in young human siblings. Owners at first ignored both dogs while reading a magazine (Control episode), and then petted and praised one of the dogs while ignoring the other, and vice versa (Experimental episodes). We found several differences in the dogs' behavior between the Experimental episodes and the Control episode, even though only monitoring (gazing at the owner) was exhibited for a significantly greater amount of time in the Experimental episodes. Remarkable individual behavioral differences emerged, suggesting that the dogs' reactions could be influenced by the relationships that they establish with their owner and the companion dog. Overall, current results do not clearly support our prediction that the ignored dogs would exhibit more behaviors aimed at regaining the owner's attention when their owner directed attention and care to a companion dog, compared to the control situation. The great intra- and inter-dyad behavioral variability and the choice to test cohabiting dogs could have prevented the emergence of a clear jealous reaction. These findings do not exclude that dogs may exhibit a primordial form of jealousy in a realistic situation, but an additional research is needed to fully gauge which situations, if any, could trigger jealousy in dogs and to rule out alternative explanations.