Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Learn Behav. 2011 Dec;39(4):314-7. doi: 10.3758/s13420-011-0041-7.

Theory of mind in dogs?: examining method and concept.

Author information

1
Department of Psychology, Barnard College, NY 10027, USA. ahorowit@barnard.edu

Abstract

In line with other research, Udell, Dorey, and Wynne's (in press) finding that dogs and wolves pass on some trials of a putative theory-of-mind test and fail on others is as informative about the methods and concepts of the research as about the subjects. This commentary expands on these points. The intertrial differences in the target article demonstrate how critical the choice of cues is in experimental design; the intersubject-group differences demonstrate how life histories can interact with experimental design. Even the best-designed theory-of-mind tests have intractable logical problems. Finally, these and previous research results call for the introduction of an intermediate stage of ability, a rudimentary theory of mind, to describe subjects' performance.

PMID:
21789555
DOI:
10.3758/s13420-011-0041-7
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Springer
    Loading ...
    Support Center