scholarly journals Differences in persistence between dogs and wolves in an unsolvable task in the absence of humans

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akshay Rao ◽  
Lara Bernasconi ◽  
Martina Lazzaroni ◽  
Sarah Marshall-Pescini ◽  
Friederike Range
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Task Performance ◽  
Ecological Niches ◽  
Behavioural Flexibility ◽  
Testing Situation ◽  
Hunting Success ◽  
The Social ◽  
Unsolvable Task ◽  
Species Ecology

Despite being closely related, dogs consistently perform worse than wolves in independent problem-solving tasks. These differences in problem-solving performance have been attributed to dogs’ greater reliance on humans, who are usually present when problem-solving tasks are presented. However, more fundamental motivational factors or behavioural traits such as persistence, behavioural variety and neophobia may also be responsible for differences in task performance. Hence, to better understand what drives dogs’ and wolves’ different problem-solving performance, it is essential to test them in the absence of humans. Here, we tested equally raised and kept dogs and wolves with two unsolvable tasks, a commonly used paradigm to study problem-solving behaviour in these species. Differently from previous studies, we ensured no humans were present in the testing situation. We also ensured that the task was unsolvable from the start which eliminated the possibility that specific manipulative behaviours was reinforced. This allowed us to measure both persistence and behavioural flexibility more accurately. In line with previous studies, we found wolves to be more persistent than dogs. We also found behavioural variety to be linked to persistence and persistence to be linked to contact latency. Finally, subjects were consistent in their performance between the two tasks. These results suggest that fundamental differences in motivation to interact with objects drive the performance of wolves and dogs in problem solving tasks. Since correlates of problem-solving success i.e. persistence, neophobia, and behavioural variety are influenced by species’ ecology, our results support the social ecology hypothesis which postulates that the different ecological niches of the two subspecies (dogs have evolved to primarily be scavengers and thrive on and around human refuse, while wolves have evolved to primarily be group hunters and have a low hunting success rate) at least partly shaped their behaviours.

scholarly journals Differences in persistence between dogs and wolves in an unsolvable task in the absence of humans

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akshay Rao ◽  
Lara Bernasconi ◽  
Martina Lazzaroni ◽  
Sarah Marshall-Pescini ◽  
Friederike Range
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Task Performance ◽  
Ecological Niches ◽  
Behavioural Flexibility ◽  
Testing Situation ◽  
Hunting Success ◽  
The Social ◽  
Unsolvable Task ◽  
Species Ecology

Despite being closely related, dogs consistently perform worse than wolves in independent problem-solving tasks. These differences in problem-solving performance have been attributed to dogs’ greater reliance on humans, who are usually present when problem-solving tasks are presented. However, more fundamental motivational factors or behavioural traits such as persistence, behavioural variety and neophobia may also be responsible for differences in task performance. Hence, to better understand what drives dogs’ and wolves’ different problem-solving performance, it is essential to test them in the absence of humans. Here, we tested equally raised and kept dogs and wolves with two unsolvable tasks, a commonly used paradigm to study problem-solving behaviour in these species. Differently from previous studies, we ensured no humans were present in the testing situation. We also ensured that the task was unsolvable from the start which eliminated the possibility that specific manipulative behaviours was reinforced. This allowed us to measure both persistence and behavioural flexibility more accurately. In line with previous studies, we found wolves to be more persistent than dogs. We also found behavioural variety to be linked to persistence and persistence to be linked to contact latency. Finally, subjects were consistent in their performance between the two tasks. These results suggest that fundamental differences in motivation to interact with objects drive the performance of wolves and dogs in problem solving tasks. Since correlates of problem-solving success i.e. persistence, neophobia, and behavioural variety are influenced by species’ ecology, our results support the social ecology hypothesis which postulates that the different ecological niches of the two subspecies (dogs have evolved to primarily be scavengers and thrive on and around human refuse, while wolves have evolved to primarily be group hunters and have a low hunting success rate) at least partly shaped their behaviours.

scholarly journals Differences in persistence between dogs and wolves in an unsolvable task in the absence of humans

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akshay Rao ◽  
Lara Bernasconi ◽  
Martina Lazzaroni ◽  
Sarah Marshall-Pescini ◽  
Friederike Range
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Task Performance ◽  
Ecological Niches ◽  
Behavioural Flexibility ◽  
Testing Situation ◽  
Hunting Success ◽  
The Social ◽  
Unsolvable Task ◽  
Species Ecology

Despite being closely related, dogs consistently perform worse than wolves in independent problem-solving tasks. These differences in problem-solving performance have been attributed to dogs’ greater reliance on humans, who are usually present when problem-solving tasks are presented. However, more fundamental motivational factors or behavioural traits such as persistence, behavioural variety and neophobia may also be responsible for differences in task performance. Hence, to better understand what drives dogs’ and wolves’ different problem-solving performance, it is essential to test them in the absence of humans. Here, we tested equally raised and kept dogs and wolves with two unsolvable tasks, a commonly used paradigm to study problem-solving behaviour in these species. Differently from previous studies, we ensured no humans were present in the testing situation. We also ensured that the task was unsolvable from the start which eliminated the possibility that specific manipulative behaviours was reinforced. This allowed us to measure both persistence and behavioural flexibility more accurately. In line with previous studies, we found wolves to be more persistent than dogs. We also found behavioural variety to be linked to persistence and persistence to be linked to contact latency. Finally, subjects were consistent in their performance between the two tasks. These results suggest that fundamental differences in motivation to interact with objects drive the performance of wolves and dogs in problem solving tasks. Since correlates of problem-solving success i.e. persistence, neophobia, and behavioural variety are influenced by species’ ecology, our results support the social ecology hypothesis which postulates that the different ecological niches of the two subspecies (dogs have evolved to primarily be scavengers and thrive on and around human refuse, while wolves have evolved to primarily be group hunters and have a low hunting success rate) at least partly shaped their behaviours.

scholarly journals Differences in persistence between dogs and wolves in an unsolvable task in the absence of humans

PeerJ ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. e5944 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akshay Rao ◽  
Lara Bernasconi ◽  
Martina Lazzaroni ◽  
Sarah Marshall-Pescini ◽  
Friederike Range
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Task Performance ◽  
Motivational Factors ◽  
Ecological Niches ◽  
Testing Situation ◽  
Hunting Success ◽  
Unsolvable Task ◽  
Species Ecology

Despite being closely related, dogs perform worse than wolves in independent problem-solving tasks. These differences in problem-solving performance have been attributed to dogs’ greater reliance on humans, who are usually present when problem-solving tasks are presented. However, more fundamental motivational factors or behavioural traits such as persistence, motor diversity and neophobia may also be responsible for differences in task performance. Hence, to better understand what drives the differences between dogs’ and wolves’ problem-solving performance, it is essential to test them in the absence of humans. Here, we tested equally raised and kept dogs and wolves with two unsolvable tasks, a commonly used paradigm to study problem-solving behaviour in these species. Differently from previous studies, we ensured no humans were present in the testing situation. We also ensured that the task was unsolvable from the start, which eliminated the possibility that specific manipulative behaviours were reinforced. This allowed us to measure both persistence and motor diversity more accurately. In line with previous studies, we found wolves to be more persistent than dogs. We also found motor diversity to be linked to persistence and persistence to be linked to contact latency. Finally, subjects were consistent in their performance between the two tasks. These results suggest that fundamental differences in motivation to interact with objects drive the differences in the performance of dogs and wolves in problem-solving tasks. Since correlates of problem-solving success, that is persistence, neophobia, and motor diversity are influenced by a species’ ecology, our results support the socioecological hypothesis, which postulates that the different ecological niches of the two species (dogs have evolved to primarily be scavengers and thrive on and around human refuse, while wolves have evolved to primarily be group hunters and have a low hunting success rate) have, at least partly, shaped their behaviours.

scholarly journals Is Distributed Cognition Group Level Cognition?

2015 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirk Ludwig
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Task Performance ◽  
Distributed Cognition ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Group Problem ◽  
Group Problem Solving ◽  
The Social ◽  
Or Task ◽  
And Task

AbstractThis paper shows that recent arguments from group problem solving and task performance to emergent group level cognition that rest on the social parity and related principles are invalid or question begging. The paper shows that standard attributions of problem solving or task performance to groups require only multiple agents of the outcome, not a group agent over and above its members, whether or not any individual member of the group could have accomplished the task independently.

The Social Nature of Private Speech of Preschoolers During Problem Solving

1987 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul P. Goudena
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Task Performance ◽  
Cognitive Task ◽  
Private Speech ◽  
Main Hypothesis ◽  
Dual Nature ◽  
Social Nature ◽  
The Social ◽  
Performance Results

Extending Vygotsky's theory, young children's private speech during problem solving is conceptualised as having a dual nature; as a reaction to the task and as, at the same time, an indirect appeal to a potentially helpful person. The interactional function of private speech is elaborated within a developmental pragmatic frame of explanation. Based on the dual nature conceptualisation of private speech, the hypothesis was tested that children would produce more private speech during problem solving following interaction with a collaborative adult than following interaction with a non-collaborative adult, the adult being non-actively present during the child's execution of the cognitive task. Twenty-two children (ages: 4 years 2 months to 4 years 10 months) participated in the experiment. Support was found for the main hypothesis. No reliable relationship was found between the amount of private speech produced and the quality of task performance. Results are discussed in relation to other studies of private speech, two of which are re-interpreted in accordance with a dual nature conceptualisation of private speech. The role of private speech in the regulation of non-verbal task performance is critically analysed. It is emphasised that private speech should be studied while taking into account the interactional framework in which the child has been functioning.

scholarly journals Nurses in action: An introduction to action research in nursing

Curationis ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
E. C. McKibbin ◽  
P. J. Castle
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Action Research ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Professional Practice ◽  
Health Science ◽  
The Social ◽  
Local Contexts ◽  
Joint Problem ◽  
New Generation ◽  
Joint Problem Solving

Action Research is one of the new generation of qualitative research methods in the social sciences which has special significance for nurses in South Africa. The collaborative, participative and reflective qualities of Action Research appeal to practitioners, and lend themselves to joint problem solving activities in local contexts. This paper sets out a rationale for Action Research, then describes its features, strengths, and limitations. Ways of overcoming the latter are suggested. The paper concludes that Action Research has potential application in the field of nursing, not only for the purposes of practical problem solving, but also for improving the personal and professional practice of nurses, and for emancipating nurses from their subordinate position in the hierarchy of health science.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document