The study of dogs’ responses to an approaching human plays an important role both for the development of a better human-dog relationship and for dog training. The aim of this study was to assess the dog response to different approach modalities. Twenty-five dogs of different breeds or mixed-breed, 17 females and 8 males, 56.4±26.2 months old, underwent a behavioral test where a male stranger (MS) approached the subject using two different modalities. In the indirect approach (IA), the MS approached the dog with a semicircle walk avoiding eye contact and stood at the side of the dog for 10 seconds; in the direct approach (DA) MS walked in a straight line staring at the dog and stood in front of the dog for 10 seconds. The test execution order was randomized. Dogs’ responses were scored 1 to 6 as follows: aggressive (1), active avoidant, passive avoidant, ambivalent, passive, or friendly (6). In addition, the duration of five stress signals (nose licking, paw lifting, yawning, blinking, shaking) was measured and summed. The statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon test (p < 0.05). Dogs responded more friendly to IA than to DA (median: 6.0 versus 6.0, p = 0.021). Dogs showed a tendency to display stress signals more in DA than in IA (median: 1.0 versus 0.0, p = 0.201). A direct approach seem to be more stressful for dogs, likely because it is perceived as more threatening. This study helps understanding the role of human posture in human-dog communication.

Dogs’ responses to different approach modalities performed by a male stranger

E. Ricci
Primo
;
B. Carlone;A. Gazzano
Penultimo
;
C. Mariti
Ultimo
2016-01-01

Abstract

The study of dogs’ responses to an approaching human plays an important role both for the development of a better human-dog relationship and for dog training. The aim of this study was to assess the dog response to different approach modalities. Twenty-five dogs of different breeds or mixed-breed, 17 females and 8 males, 56.4±26.2 months old, underwent a behavioral test where a male stranger (MS) approached the subject using two different modalities. In the indirect approach (IA), the MS approached the dog with a semicircle walk avoiding eye contact and stood at the side of the dog for 10 seconds; in the direct approach (DA) MS walked in a straight line staring at the dog and stood in front of the dog for 10 seconds. The test execution order was randomized. Dogs’ responses were scored 1 to 6 as follows: aggressive (1), active avoidant, passive avoidant, ambivalent, passive, or friendly (6). In addition, the duration of five stress signals (nose licking, paw lifting, yawning, blinking, shaking) was measured and summed. The statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon test (p < 0.05). Dogs responded more friendly to IA than to DA (median: 6.0 versus 6.0, p = 0.021). Dogs showed a tendency to display stress signals more in DA than in IA (median: 1.0 versus 0.0, p = 0.201). A direct approach seem to be more stressful for dogs, likely because it is perceived as more threatening. This study helps understanding the role of human posture in human-dog communication.
2016
https://www.dogbehavior.it/index.php?journal=dogbehavior&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=44&path%5B%5D=34
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11568/955577
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact