Cited by 262

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Is the dog-human relationship an attachment bond? An observational study using Ainsworth's strange situation

Prato-Previde, Emanuela, Custance, Deborah Mary, Spiezio, Caterina, Sabatini, Francesca·2003·Behaviour

Abstract

Ainsworth's 'strange situation' procedure was used to investigate the dog ( Canis familiaris ) - human relationship. 38 adult dog-owner pairs were observed in an unfamiliar room, introduced to a human stranger and subjected to four short episodes of separation. The procedure and behavioural analyses were as similar as possible to those used in studying human infants, except for the inclusion of an extra separation period in which the dogs were left alone in the room with articles of clothing belonging to the owner and stranger. A secure base effect was suggested by the fact that the dogs accepted to play with the stranger more in the presence of their owner than during his or her absence. They also explored more in the presence of their owner, but this appeared to be due to diminishing curiosity over time rather than a secure base effect. The dogs also exhibited a range of attachment behaviours, i.e. search and proximity seeking behaviours when separated from their owner, including following, scratching and jumping up on the door, remaining oriented to the door or the owner's empty chair and vocalising. They also greeted their owner more enthusiastically and for longer durations compared to the stranger. Finally, they contacted the owner's clothing more often and for longer durations compared to the stranger's clothing and spent more time next to the owner's chair when the owner's objects were present. Hence, the dogs' behaviour in the strange situation was very similar to th…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1163/156853903321671514

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Prato-Previde, E., Custance, D. M., Spiezio, C., & Sabatini, F.
Venue
Behaviour
Published
2003
Volume
140
Issue
2
Pages
225-254
ISSN
  • 0005-7959
  • 1568-539X
Cited by
262
References
3

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