Abstract
The presence of pictures of eyes reduces antisocial behaviour in humans. It has been suggested that this 'watching-eye' effect is the result of a uniquely human sensitivity to reputation-management cues. However, an alternative explanation is that humans are less likely to carry out risky behaviour in general when they feel like they are being watched. This risk-aversion hypothesis predicts that other animals should also show the watching-eye effect because many animals behave more cautiously when being observed. Dogs are an ideal species to test between these hypotheses because they behave in a risk-averse manner when being watched and attend specifically to eyes when assessing humans' attentional states. Here, we examined if dogs were slower to steal food in the presence of pictures of eyes compared to flowers. Dogs showed no difference in the latency to steal food between the two conditions. This finding shows that dogs are not sensitive to watching-eyes and is not consistent with a risk-aversion hypothesis for the watching-eye effect.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1153 |
| Journal | Scientific Reports |
| Volume | 10 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 24 Jan 2020 |
Keywords
- Animals
- Appetitive Behavior
- Behavior Observation Techniques
- Dogs/physiology
- Eye
- Feeding Behavior
- Female
- Flowers
- Food
- Male
- Risk Reduction Behavior
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Watching eyes do not stop dogs stealing food: evidence against a general risk-aversion hypothesis for the watching-eye effect'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver