Cited by 722Human-Animal Interaction StudiesPrimate Behavior and EcologyChild and Animal Learning Development

A Simple Reason for a Big Difference

Open access
Miklósi, Ádám, Kubinyi, Enikö, Topál, József, Gácsi, Márta, Virányi, Zsófia, Csányi, Vilmos·2003·Current Biology

Abstract

The present investigations were undertaken to compare interspecific communicative abilities of dogs and wolves, which were socialized to humans at comparable levels. The first study demonstrated that socialized wolves were able to locate the place of hidden food indicated by the touching and, to some extent, pointing cues provided by the familiar human experimenter, but their performance remained inferior to that of dogs. In the second study, we have found that, after undergoing training to solve a simple manipulation task, dogs that are faced with an insoluble version of the same problem look/gaze at the human, while socialized wolves do not. Based on these observations, we suggest that the key difference between dog and wolf behavior is the dogs' ability to look at the human's face. Since looking behavior has an important function in initializing and maintaining communicative interaction in human communication systems, we suppose that by positive feedback processes (both evolutionary and ontogenetically) the readiness of dogs to look at the human face has lead to complex forms of dog-human communication that cannot be achieved in wolves even after extended socialization.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0960-9822(03)00263-x

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Miklósi, Á., Kubinyi, E., Topál, J., Gácsi, M., Virányi, Z., & Csányi, V.
Affiliations
Eötvös Loránd University (HU)
Corresponding author
Miklósi, Ádám
Venue
Current Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-04
Volume
13
Issue
9
Pages
763-766
ISSN
0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1975455171
Cited by
718
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 49 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 41 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 46 · 2013: 41 · 2012: 24
FWCI
7.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • WBI Studies Repository (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Hungarian Scientific Research Fund (T029705)
  • Magyar Tudományos Akadémia (F226/98)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
interspecific communication, human-animal communication, socialization, pointing cues, hidden food location, positive feedback, evolution of communication, dogs
MeSH terms
Animals, Animal Communication, Dogs, Humans, Species Specificity, Wolves, Recognition, Psychology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review