Human facial expression affects a dog’s response to conflicting directional gestural cues

Ford, Gretta; Guo, Kun; Mills, Daniel S.

doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2018.12.022

Cited by 14 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They are keen observers of human reactions through their exceptional ability to read signs of will and emotion from human faces [ 38 ]. In addition, dogs can read the non-verbal language of humans [ 39 , 40 , 41 ], probably deriving from the history of coevolution with human beings, the ethogram, and the breed [ 5 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Presence of Campylobacterjejuni and C. coli in Dogs under Training for Animal-Assisted Therapies

Santaniello

Varriale

Dipineto

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was conducted to evaluate the presence of Campylobacter (C.) jejuni and C. coli in dogs at five dog training centers in Southern Italy. A total of 550 animals were sampled by collecting rectal swabs. The samples were processed to detect thermotolerant Campylobacter spp. by culture and molecular methods. Campylobacter spp. were isolated from 135/550 (24.5–95% confidence interval) dogs. A total of 84 C. jejuni (62.2%) and 51 C. coli (37.8%) isolates were identified using conventional PCR. The dog data (age, sex, breed, and eating habits) were examined by two statistical analyses using the C. jejuni and C. coli status (positive or negative) as dependent variables. Dogs fed home-cooked food showed a higher risk of being positive for C. jejuni than dogs fed dry or canned meat for dogs (50.0%; p < 0.01). Moreover, purebred dogs had a significantly higher risk than crossbred dogs for C. coli positivity (16.4%; p < 0.01). This is the first study on the prevalence of C. jejuni and C. coli in dogs frequenting dog training centers for animal-assisted therapies (AATs). Our findings emphasize the potential zoonotic risk for patients and users involved in AATs settings and highlight the need to carry out ad hoc health checks and to pay attention to the choice of the dog, as well as eating habits, in order to minimize the risk of infection.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Presence of Campylobacterjejuni and C. coli in Dogs under Training for Animal-Assisted Therapies

Santaniello

Varriale

Dipineto

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On one side, owners’ reports of their pets’ psychological QoL may be negatively biased by their own poor mental health. However, dogs are also able to discriminate emotional facial expressions [ 53 ] and tend towards avoidance when humans have negative or neutral facial expressions [ 54 ]. In addition, inconsistency in owner behaviour negatively affects dogs’ welfare [ 17 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of the Milan Pet Quality of Life Instrument (MPQL) to Measure Pets’ Quality of Life during COVID-19

Piotti

Karagiannis

Satchell

et al. 2021

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic caused lifestyle changes, with unknown effect on pets’ quality of life (QoL). Between May and July 2020, we distributed an online survey to investigate the role of several factors on feline and canine QoL, including lockdown-related factors. We used existing scales to measure human and pets’ personalities (Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory Personality Questionnaire, RST-PQ; RST-Dog; RST-Cat) and the human–animal relationship (Lexington Attachment to Pets Scale, LAPS) and the Milan Pet Quality of Life instrument (MPQL). Overall, 235 participants reported about 242 adult pets (Ncats = 78, Ndogs = 164). Factor analysis confirmed the structure and internal reliability of the existing scales (RST-PQ, RST-Dog, RST-Cat, LAPS) and suggested a four-factor structure for the MPQL (physical, psychological, social, environmental). The results indicate that the pets’ psysical QoL was largely explained by pet-related elements (pets’ demographics and life experience, and pets’ personality). Conversely, the pets’ psychological QoL was explained mostly by owner-related elements, such as the owners’ demographics, COVID-19-related changes, and the owners’ personality. Predictably, the pets’ environmental QoL is mostly explained by environmental factors, such as the outdoor access in the home environment and the country. Finally, the pets’ social QoL was explained by the larger combination of models: pets’ characteristics and personality, environment and COVID-19-related changes, and the pet–human relationship. These findings can be explained by two non-mutually exclusive mechanisms. The reported changes may be a by-product of the COVID-19 pandemic’s psychological and lifestyle effects on the owners, which in turn alter the way the owners interact with their pets and look after them. However, the owners’ characteristics and mood may bias their answers regarding their pets.

show abstract

“…Dogs, on the other hand, are one of the main species involved and studied in AAIs [30,31,49] as they have an important competence—the ability to read the non-verbal language of the human being [50,51,52]. Dogs have developed a particular preference for humans, and the ability to recognize conspecifics seems to have played an important role in their genetic changes [53].…”

Section: Suggestions For Research Actionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Human–Animal Relationship as the Focus of Animal-Assisted Interventions: A One Health Approach

Menna

Santaniello

Todisco

et al. 2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Animal-assisted intervention (AAIs) represent an adequate expression of integrated medicine, according to the One Health approach. We argue that AAIs are interventions based on interspecific relationships between humans and animals. Although there are many studies on the effects of AAIs on animal and human health and wellbeing, research is still needed to give us more data. For example, information is still lacking on the aspects characterizing and influencing the interspecific relationships occurring in AAIs. The efficacy of an intervention based on interspecific relationships will be influenced by different factors, such as attachment styles and personalities of both the animal and the handler, an appropriate choice of animal species and their individuality, animal educational training techniques, the relationship between the handler and the animal, and relational reciprocity between animal, the patients, and members of the working team. Method: This article aims to contribute to the study of interspecific relationships in AAIs via theoretical considerations. An interspecific relationship determines the result of safe interventions, which directly influences the welfare of the animal. Results and considerations: AAIs should be evaluated systemically as a network within a process in which every component interacts with and influences other components. Standardized methods using appropriate tests and parameters are needed to better select appropriate animals (i.e., species and individual subjects) using interspecific relational competences as well as appropriate educational training methods and health protocols to assess potential risks.

show abstract

Human facial expression affects a dog’s response to conflicting directional gestural cues

Cited by 14 publications

References 36 publications

Presence of Campylobacterjejuni and C. coli in Dogs under Training for Animal-Assisted Therapies

Presence of Campylobacterjejuni and C. coli in Dogs under Training for Animal-Assisted Therapies

Use of the Milan Pet Quality of Life Instrument (MPQL) to Measure Pets’ Quality of Life during COVID-19

The Human–Animal Relationship as the Focus of Animal-Assisted Interventions: A One Health Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About