Cited by 50Human-Animal Interaction StudiesAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesAnimal Behavior and Reproduction

Dogs, but Not Wolves, Lose Their Sensitivity Toward Novelty With Age

Open access
Hansen Wheat, Christina, van der Bijl, Wouter, Temrin, Hans·2019·Frontiers in Psychology

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Selection of behavioral traits holds a prominent role in the domestication of animals, and domesticated species are generally assumed to express reduced fear and reactivity toward novel stimuli compared to their ancestral species. However, very few studies have explicitly tested this proposed link between domestication and reduced fear responses. Of the limited number of studies experimentally addressing the alterations of fear during domestication, the majority has been done on canids. These studies on foxes, wolves, and dogs suggest that decreased expression of fear in domesticated animals is linked to a domestication-driven delay in the first onset of fearful behavior during early ontogeny. Thus, wolves are expected to express exaggerated fearfulness earlier during ontogeny compared to dogs. However, while adult dogs are less fearful toward novelty than adult wolves and wolf-dog hybrids, consensus is lacking on when differences in fear expression arise in wolves and dogs. Here we present the first extended examination of fear development in hand-raised dogs and European gray wolves, using repeated novel object tests from 6 to 26 weeks of age. Contrary to expectations, we found no evidence in support of an increase in fearfulness in wolves with age or a delayed onset of fear response in dogs compared to wolves. Instead, we found that dogs strongly reduced their fear response in the period between 6 and 26 weeks of age, resulting in a significant species difference in fear expression toward novelty from the age of 18 weeks. Critically, as wolves did not differ in their fear response toward novelty over time, the detected species difference was caused solely by a progressive reduced fear response in dogs. Our results thereby suggest that species differences in fear of novelty between wolves and dogs are not caused by a domestication-driven shift in the first onset of fear response. Instead, we suggest that a loss of sensitivity toward novelty with age in dogs causes the difference in fear expression toward novelty in wolves and dogs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02001

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Even human-socialized wolves are more neophobic than dogs toward objects.

    “Moreover, even human-socialized wolves (both as puppies and as adults) are more neophobic than are dogs toward objects. [41,44,51–53].”

    From Comparing wolves and dogs: current status and implications for human ‘self-domestication’ (2022) · cites this paper as [51]

    The Results (Latency Measures; page not provided) show that hand-raised wolves approached novel objects more slowly than dogs at 18, 22, and 26 weeks, and the Discussion reports greater fear of novelty in adult wolves. But the Discussion says there was no species difference during early development, so the claim is not supported for puppies generally. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 90 · Cited by 50

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Coppinger R. Coppinger L. (2001). Dogs: A Startling New Understanding of Canine Origin, Behavior & Evolution. New York, NY: The University of Chicago Press.
  2. Scott J. P. Fuller J. L. (1965). Genetics and the Social Behavior of the Dog - the Classic Study. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Authors
Hansen Wheat, C., van der Bijl, W., & Temrin, H.
Affiliations
Stockholm University (SE)
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2019-09-04
Volume
10
Pages
2001-2001
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2968303990
Cited by
50
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 22 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1
FWCI
3.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Diva portal (Dalarna University Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Stockholms Universitet
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
Keywords
domestication, dogs, wolf, ontogeny, species differences, novel object test, fear development, Canidae

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