In another experiment, where human caregivers feigned being stuck in a box, their dogs showed signs of distress, crying and whining and pawing at the box to help the caregiver escape.Įven when hand-reared, wolves do not seem to attach to their caregivers in the same way as domestic dogs © Getty Images Wolves, predictably, thought only of their stomachs. In one experimental setup where dogs and hand-reared wolves were offered the choice of food or their caregiver, many dogs, as well as investigating the food, also came to their caregivers for cuddles and attention. In uncertain environments, they’ll spend more time near their human companions and, when left alone with strangers, dogs spend more time nearer the door.ĭomestic dogs seem naturally to attach to their human companions in other ways. In tests that involve ‘strangers’ walking into a room that already contains a dog and its human companion, for instance, dogs react in a manner broadly comparable to human children. No, Bunny the talking dog can’t really speak English, but here’s how you can learn to speak dogĭogs really do appear to attach, psychologically, to their human companions in a way we recognise.Dogs' secret superpower: not intelligence, but love.The 5 biggest dog training myths debunked by science.She very, very rapidly makes these strong, powerful connections with people.” But he certainly does not shy away from the L-word when describing his own doting companion, Xephos. Not suitable for scientific papers or articles, but permissible for common use. Wynne thinks of love as an everyday term. “It is particularly talked about in the strong bond between parent and child, and that makes a good model for the relationship between dogs and people.”
“Attachment is a particular, measurable aspect of love specifically to the reassurance that an individual can gain from the presence of a beloved other,” explains Dr Clive Wynne, dog behavioural scientist and author of Dog Is Love. After all, if generations of poets cannot agree on a definition of love, then what hope might science have? This is why many dog researchers prefer the word ‘attachment’ when referring to the bond that dogs have with us. It is clear that many animal scientists in the modern era remain reticent about the use of the term ‘love’ in non-human animals because the concept is too subjective. The medical scientists favoured a rational, objective approach to their craft – one that found sentimental ideas about whether dogs have emotions to be both unprofessional and even unethical, because it threatened to hold back the progress of medical science.ĭog behavioural scientist Dr Clive Wynne gets some puppy snuggle time © Deanna Dent/ASUĪbout objectivity, the medical scientists had a point that is still relevant today.
On the other side were medical scientists who saw dogs as little more than automatons – machine-like subjects acceptable for medical experiments. They argued that dogs were capable of many (or all) of the emotions we feel, differing only by degree.
On the one side were those who drew support from Charles Darwin’s ideas about how mammals (including humans) share common ancestors. They were ready to fight about whether emotions like love were uniquely human or common to many animals, particularly social mammals such as dogs. At one point, hundreds almost fought in the street. It had burning effigies and vandalised statues, angry marches and speeches in packed-out town halls. It involved banners, placards and leaflets. The story of dogs and emotions begins in the Victorian era, when the question sparked one of the first culture wars in history.
0 kommentar(er)
