To

1
Sharon To
Lynda Haas
Writing 39C
15 July 2015
Feelers and Thinkers: A Literary Review of Canine Cognition and Emotion
Given the popular status of domesticated dogs as mans best friend, there have been
years of debate over whether or not dogs are capable of feeling and thinking, much less loving a
human being, essentially a question of canine intelligence and consciousness. The study of
canine science is fairly new, as evolutionary anthropologist Brian Hare infers is in part due to the
fact that until the mid- to late- 1900s scientists believed domesticated animals were artificial
products of human breeding (The Genius of Dogs 14) and therefore of less interest than other
animals. In this review, I will be analyzing studies held throughout the past several decades
specifically aimed at discovering what dogs are feeling or thinking, if they are at all, and how
such emotions and thoughts affect or are affected by the human-animal relationship we have
developed with them. I will begin by establishing the initial perception of canines and their
intelligence as determined by early comparative psychologists as well as the effect of these
assertions on the general public and the canine population. I will then discuss scientific studies
held throughout the 20th century focusing on various facets of dogs emotional and intellectual
capabilities and their methods of expression. Many of these studies transformed the way
humans viewed dogs and their mental capacities and redefined the human-animal relationship.
It is then through more recent studies from the late 20th to early 21st century that I will
investigate the growing insight into canine intelligence and learning and its effect on our
consideration of dogs as conscious intelligent creatures.
A common perception of dogs, and all animals, in the past that has dated back to as
early as the seventeenth century involved a denial of animal consciousness as apparent by
philosopher Rene Descartes claim that animals are automata that behave in purely

To 2
mechanistic terms and are therefore not truly conscious or intelligent (Wilson, Internet
Encyclopedia of Philosophy). John Bradshaw, director of the Anthrozoology Institute at the
University of Bristol and research scientist studying domestic cats and dogs for over 25 years,
explains in his book Dog Sense that philosophers of the past also attributed emotions to
consciousness, believing the brain controlled behavior directly, and emotions existed merely as
commentary. By this logic, it was concluded that dogs were incapable of emotions because they
lacked the degree of consciousness that humans have (152).
This notion of dogs as simple beings was further supported by studies on dog
intelligence. Brian Hare, evolutionary anthropologist at Duke University and founder of the Duke
Canine Cognition Center, utilizes a definition of intelligence in his book The Genius of Dogs that
has two criteria:
1. A mental skill that is strong compared with others, either within your own species or in
closely related species.
2. The ability to spontaneously make inferences (7).
Though there are many definitions of intelligence by which to follow, I will be using Hares
definition as well as a consideration for learning and communicative abilities throughout my
analysis. One of the first formal studies of canine intelligence, which follows the same definition
as Hares, was held in 1898 by comparative psychologist and pioneer investigator in human and
animal learning Edward Thorndike. By placing dogs into puzzle-boxes and re-placing them after
their successful escape, Thorndike observed how dogs figured out how to escape the box and
whether or not they could remember how it was done when the experiment was repeated. With
each succeeding session, the dogs were able to escape more quickly, but as Thorndike
reasoned, if they were capable of inference, they would be able to escape immediately after
their first success. Through this experiment, Thorndike concluded that dogs learned through
trial-and-error learning, which required no insight and implied that dogs had limited intelligence

To 3
and were inferior to other species like chimpanzees and humans (Chance, Thorndikes Puzzle
Boxes 437-439).
However, researchers like Adam Miklosi, head of the Ethology department at Eotvos
Lorand University, leading expert on dog cognition and behavior, and founder of the Family Dog
Research Project, one of the largest dog research groups in the world, and Brian Hare have in
recent studies revealed dogs abilities to interpret human gestures, signifying the possession of
communicative skills (The Genius of Dogs 53). Through various experiments, dogs are directed
to specific areas with a simple pointing gesture from the experimenter. Despite enacting
different situations, such as the accompaniment of other forms of visual gesturing (eye
movement, gazing, etc.) and different styles of pointing, such as proximal pointing, cross
pointing, and asymmetric pointing (see Figure 1), dogs have responded accordingly, following
the pointing gesture regardless of where the experimenter stood, or how he/she pointed to the
desired location. Among the various species that were tested for pointing comprehension,
Miklosi indicates that dogs were of those that were more efficient while also noting that dogs
were also one of the species that had the most exposure to human gestures. Their enhanced
sociocognitive abilities, developed from extensive socialization with humans, provide them with
communicative skills that support higher learning capabilities (Miklosi 81-93).
A famous study in the field
of canine science known as the
Rico studies was held by leading
expert on dog cognition and
founder of the Max Planck
Institutes Dog Cognition Study
Center, Juliane Kaminski. Through
the Rico studies, Kaminski proved that dogs were able to learn words similarly to human infants.
A border collie named Rico was instructed to fetch toys for the instructor, with the amount of

To 4
toys and the varying labels for said toys increasing with each session. Rico had shown an ability
to learn by exclusion, being able decipher between known and unknown terms and draw
connections between new words and new items. His retention ability was also tested four weeks
after exposure to the items, and he was able to successfully retrieve the items in 3 out of 6
sessions (Kaminski 1682-1683). Ricos ability to associate human words with physical items is
another indication of dogs communicative skills and their understanding of humans as well as
their comprehensive and cognitive abilities.
It stands to reason that perhaps dogs are capable of different kinds of reasoning that
does not parallel that of human beings. One such way could be in their reliance and heavy
usage of olfaction, a sense humans are not as responsive to. In 1994, Peter Hepper,
psychology professor and director of research in behavioral development and welfare at
Queens University Belfast, published his study of the practice of imprinting among puppies and
their mothers using olfaction. After separating a litter of puppies from their mother for several
weeks, researchers provided the mother with cloths containing the scent of her puppies as well
as cloths with scents of other puppies. The mother reacted with more interest in the scent of her
own offspring, and vice versa for the puppies when given cloths with scents from different
mothers. Having done the same experiment among littermates, scientists were able to conclude
that dogs shared a family odor that allowed for recognition of their kin. Their ability to
recognize each other based purely off scent indicates that dogs are able to convey information
through odors that humans are oblivious to, which suggests that dogs could possess a level of
cognition that is unknown to humans (Hepper 13).
Heppers experiments have also found that dogs imprint on other animals as well,
particularly humans. The bond they are able to share with humans can be understood on a
scientific and hormonal level, and also leads to insight on their emotional and cognitive facilities.
To test the degree of attachments dogs feel with humans as compared to their attachment with
their own species on a hormonal level, scientists David Tuber (Ohio State University,

To 5
Mansfield), Suzanne Sanders (Ohio State University, Columbus), Michael Hennessy (Wright
State University), and Julia Miller (Ohio State University, Mansfield) conducted an experiment
with eight mongrels raised as littermate pairs with full socialization with humans from eight
weeks to seven years of age. They observed the behavior of one of the dogs while their
littermate pair was taken away and a human caretaker was present. The level of stress
hormone cortisol in their blood did not change and neither did their behavior as long as they
were in their familiar kennel. However, when the dogs were taken to an unfamiliar kennel as a
pair, they showed agitation and their levels of stress hormone went up by over 50 percent
(Tuber et al. 105). With a caretaker present, their stress was alleviated and their cortisol levels
returned to normal.
Researchers have realized the powerful human attachment in domestic dogs and have
been able to attribute such an emotion to biology, namely the hormone oxytocin. Johannes
Odendaal, a pioneer of research on human-animal interaction, and Roy Meintjes, professor of
vet science at the University of Pretoria in South Africa, performed a study on friendly
interactions between dogs and humans. After taking initial blood samples and establishing the
baseline value for blood pressure and hormone levels, humans and dogs were able to interact
with friendly social gestures for a maximum of 30 minutes. As a result, blood pressure
decreased in both humans and dogs, and hormones such as endorphin, oxytocin, dopamine,
and prolactin increased in both species. Because oxytocin has been identified as the hormone
that promotes intimate bonding, its increase in both humans and dogs through interaction
indicates that, just like humans, dogs are capable of developing strong bonds, and are therefore
capable of emotion (Odendaal & Meintjes 298-300).

To 6
Other emotions that dogs
may feel, such as anger or fear
along with other possible
emotions for which there is no
human parallel, are often
conveyed through body
language, another form of
communication dogs possess
that often goes unnoticed by
humans. Zoologists and animal
behaviorists Zana Bahlig-Pieren
and Dennis Turner investigated
the anthropomorphic
interpretations that humans have
of animal behavior. Dog owners
and non-owners were shown
clips of dog behavior and were asked to associate their expressions with emotions. The owners
descriptions were more anthropomorphic than the non-owners because of their judgment was
affected by their relationship with dogs and their tendency to project their own feelings onto
dogs, disregarding the dogs body language, which should have been a clearer indication of
how they were actually feeling (Bahlig-Pieren & Turner 205-210). In Figure 2, I have created an
infographic that displays the body language of three typical emotions dogs convey through their
body language as well as additional information on each emotion.
Through studies and discoveries such as those I have just mentioned, it is now
understood that because dogs have similar mammalian brain structure as well as hormonal
makeup, they also are similarly cognitive and emotional. This idea that emotions play a part in

To 7
our behavior counters past assumptions that human-level consciousness was necessary to feel
emotion. According to Bradshaw, emotions are survival mechanisms and exist to indicate to us
where we are in relation to where we ought to be (153). By that logic, dogs are also capable of
emotions, having needed them to survive. However, their needs for survival differed from our
own, meaning evolution is what created the difference between human emotion and canine
emotion. Similarly, canine intelligence, and all animal intelligence for that matter, does not
parallel human intelligence, not necessarily because they are inferior, but because their
evolutionary needs different from our own.
To conclude, the current state of canine science and research into canine cognition and
emotion is nascent, but the amount of knowledge in this field continues to accumulate. It is
important to understand a dogs perspective to improve and enhance the human-animal
relationship we have developed with them. With a better understanding of dogs and their
emotional and mental capacity comes responsibility and obligation to treat these creatures
accordingly. Our relationship with dogs has changed over the decades with the research that
has been done to shed light on their capabilities, and it may continue to evolve as we discover
more about them.
Works Cited
Bahlig-Pieren, Zana, and Dennis C. Turner. "Anthropomorphic Interpretations and Ethological
Descriptions of Dog and Cat Behavior by Lay People." Anthrozoos 12 (1999): 205-10.
Research Gate. Web. 15 July 2015.
Bradshaw, John. Dog Sense: How the New Science of Dog Behavior Can Make You a Better
Friend to Your Pet. New York: Basic, 2011. Print.
Chance, Paul. "Thorndike's Puzzle Boxes and the Origins of the Experimental Analysis of
Behavior."Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 3.72 (1999): 433-40. Print.
Hare, Brian, and Vanessa Woods. The Genius of Dogs: How Dogs Are Smarter than You Think.

To 8
New York: Dutton, 2013. Print.
Hepper, Peter G. "Long-term Retention of Kinship Recognition Established during Infancy in the
Domestic Dog." Behavioural Processes 33.1-2 (1994): 3-14. Science Direct. Web. 12
July 2015.
Kaminski, Juliane, Josep Call, and Julia Fischer. "Word Learning in a Domestic Dog: Evidence
for "Fast Mapping"" Science 304 (2004): 1682-683. Web. 14 July 2015.
Miklosi, Adam, and Krisztina Soproni. "A Comparative Analysis of Animals' Understanding of the
Human Pointing Gesture." Animal Cognition 9.2 (2006): 81-93. Springer Link. Web. 10
July 2015.
Odendaal, Johannes, and Roy Meintjes. "Neurophysiological Correlates of Affiliative Behavior
Between Humans and Dogs." The Veterinary Journal 165.3 (2003): 296-301. Science
Direct. Web. 14 July 2015.
Tuber, David, Suzanne Sanders, Michael Hennessy, and Julia MIller. "Behavioral and
Glucocorticoid Responses of Adult Domestic Dogs (Canis Familiaris) to Companionship
and Social Separation."Journal of Comparative Psychology 110 (1996): 103-08.
Research Gate. Web. 12 July 2015.
Wilson, Scott D. "Animals and Ethics." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. N.p., n.d. Web. 15
July 2015.