Domestic pet dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) do not show a preference to contrafreeload, but are willing

被引:0
|
作者
Liza Rothkoff
Lynna Feng
Sarah-Elizabeth Byosiere
机构
[1] Hunter College,Thinking Dog Center, Department of Psychology
[2] City University of New York,undefined
[3] Guide Dogs for the Blind,undefined
来源
Scientific Reports | / 14卷
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Contrafreeloading is the behavior of working for food when also provided with identical food that does not require effort to obtain. This behavior has been observed in humans and non-human animals, including domesticated species. In the current investigation, we assessed whether companion animals, specifically domestic dogs, contrafreeload when presented with two feeders simultaneously, a snuffle mat (a work for food device) and a tray (a freely available food device). Thirty-eight pet dogs participated in the study in which ten feeding trials were presented where food was distributed equally in both feeders. Three overarching research questions were considered: (1) Do dogs prefer to contrafreeload and/or are they willing to contrafreeload, (2) is activity (step count) or body condition score (BCS) related to contrafreeloading behavior and, (3) does previous experience with puzzle feeders impact contrafreeloading behavior? Two general linear models were conducted assessing the effects of sex, experience, age, activity and BCS on the proportion of first choices to the snuffle mat (ICs) and the number of interactions with the snuffle mat while food was still available in the tray (INs). Overall, when assessing the proportion of first choices to each feeder, dogs demonstrated a willingness to contrafreeload but not a preference to contrafreeload. In a reduced model, only one term, owner-reported body condition score, had a significant effect, suggesting that dogs with a higher BCS demonstrated a greater proportion of first choices for the snuffle mat (F (1,36) = 7.72, p = 0.009, η2p = 0.177). In evaluating the number of interactions with the snuffle mat while food was still available in the tray, the model was not significant (F (5,29) = 1.231, p = 0.320, η2p = 0.175). This study represents the first investigation of contrafreeloading in domestic pet dogs and informs recommendations for canine enrichment.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Domestic pet dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) do not show a preference to contrafreeload, but are willing
    Rothkoff, Liza
    Feng, Lynna
    Byosiere, Sarah-Elizabeth
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2024, 14 (01)
  • [2] Do domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) perceive the Delboeuf illusion?
    Petrazzini, Maria Elena Miletto
    Bisazza, Angelo
    Agrillo, Christian
    ANIMAL COGNITION, 2017, 20 (03) : 427 - 434
  • [3] Do domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) perceive the Delboeuf illusion?
    Maria Elena Miletto Petrazzini
    Angelo Bisazza
    Christian Agrillo
    Animal Cognition, 2017, 20 : 427 - 434
  • [4] Do Domestic Dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) Perceive Numerosity Illusions?
    Looke, Miina
    Marinelli, Lieta
    Eatherington, Carla Jade
    Agrillo, Christian
    Mongillo, Paolo
    ANIMALS, 2020, 10 (12): : 1 - 14
  • [5] Domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) and forensic practice
    Byard, Roger W.
    FORENSIC SCIENCE MEDICINE AND PATHOLOGY, 2016, 12 (03) : 241 - 242
  • [6] Domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) and forensic practice
    Beverly J. McEwen
    Sean P. McDonough
    Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology, 2016, 12 : 530 - 531
  • [7] Domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) and forensic practice
    Roger W. Byard
    Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology, 2016, 12 : 241 - 242
  • [8] Domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) and forensic practice
    McEwen, Beverly J.
    McDonough, Sean P.
    FORENSIC SCIENCE MEDICINE AND PATHOLOGY, 2016, 12 (04) : 530 - 531
  • [9] Do dogs (Canis familiaris) show contagious yawning?
    Aimee L. Harr
    Valerie R. Gilbert
    Kimberley A. Phillips
    Animal Cognition, 2009, 12 : 833 - 837
  • [10] Do dogs (Canis familiaris) show contagious yawning?
    Harr, Aimee L.
    Gilbert, Valerie R.
    Phillips, Kimberley A.
    ANIMAL COGNITION, 2009, 12 (06) : 833 - 837