Abstract
In this review, we have analyzed the studies on the “mismatch paradigm” or “contrasting paradigm”, in which the word indicates an intent that is opposite to the gesture in dogs and children. The studies on children highlighted the importance of the type of gestural messages that, when delivered in a non-ostensive manner, assume less value than the verbal indication; whereas, when more emphasis is given to the gestures, it produces opposite results. Word-trained dogs appear to rely more on words, but in the absence of such specific training, dogs rely more on gestures either in transitive or intransitive actions. Moreover, gestural communication appears easier to generalize, since dogs respond equally well to the gestural messages of familiar persons and strangers, whereas their performance lowers when a stranger provides a vocal message. Visual signals trigger faster responses than auditory signals, whereas verbal indications can at most equal the gestural latencies, but never overcome them. Female dogs appeared to be more proficient in the interpretation of gestural commands, while males performed better in the case of verbal commands. Based on a PRISMA analyses from the Web of Science database, three papers on children and four on dogs were retrieved. Our analyses revealed that gestures are more reliable reference points than words for dogs and children. Future studies should focus on choices related to objects of different values for the subjects. Moreover, the choices of dogs should be compared using known and unknown objects, which might help clarify how familiarity with the objects could differently influence their responses.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Albuquerque N, Guo K, Wilkinson A, Savalli C, Otta E, Mills D (2016) Dogs recognize dog and human emotions. Biol Lett 12:20150883. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2015.08834
Alibali MW, Nathan M (2007) Teachers’ gestures as a means of scaffolding students’ understanding: Evidence from an early algebra lesson. In: Goldman R, Pea R, Barron B, Derry SJ (eds) Video research in the learning sciences, Mahwah, Erlbaum, pp 349–365. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2016.02.011
Andics A, Gábor A, Gácsi M, Faragó T, Szabó D, Miklósi Á (2016) Neural mechanisms for lexical processing in dogs. Science 353(6303):1030–1032. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan3276
Andics A, Gácsi M, Faragó T, Kis A, Miklósi A (2014) Voice-sensitive regions in the dog and human brain are revealed by comparative fMRI. Curr Biol 24:574–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2014.01.058
Beaver BV (1999) Canine social behaviour. Canine behaviour: a guide for veterinarians. WB Saunders Company, Philadelphia, pp 137–199
Bell AH, Meredith MA, Van Opstal AJ, Munoz DP (2005) Crossmodal integration in the primate superior colliculus underlying the preparation and initiation of saccadic eye movements. J Neurophysiol 93:3659–3673. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.01214.2004
Behne T, Carpenter M, Tomasello M (2005) One-year-olds comprehend the communicative intentions behind gestures in a hiding game. Dev Sci 8(6):492–499. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2005.00440.x
Bensky MK, Gosling SD, Sinn DL (2013) The world from a dog’s point of view: a review and synthesis of dog cognition research. Adv Study Behav 45:209–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407186-5.00005-7
Bloom P (2000) How children learn the meanings of words. MIT Press, Cambridge
Calvert G, Spence C, Stein BE (2004) The handbook of multisensory processes. MIT Press, Cambridge
Church RB, Goldin-Meadow RS (1986) The mismatch between gesture and speech as an index of transitional knowledge. Cognition 23(1):43–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(86)90053-3
Colbert-White EN, Tullis A, Andresen DR, Parker KM, Patterso KE (2018) Can dogs use vocal intonation as a social referencing cue in an object choice task? Anim Cogn 21:253–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-018-1163-5
Csibra G (2003) Teleological and referential understanding of action in infancy. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 358:447–458. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2002.1235
D’Aniello B, Alterisio A, Scandurra A, Petremolo E, Iommelli MR, Aria M (2017) What’s the point? Golden and Labrador retrievers living in kennels do not understand human pointing gestures. Anim Cogn 20(4):777–787. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-017-1098-2
D’Aniello B, Scandurra A (2016) Ontogenetic effects on gazing behaviour: a case study of kennel dogs (Labrador Retrievers) in the impossible task paradigm. Anim Cogn 19(3):565–570. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-016-0958-5
D’Aniello B, Scandurra A, Alterisio A, Valsecchi P, Prato-Previde E (2016) The importance of gestural communication: a study of human–dog communication using incongruent information. Anim Cogn 19(6):1231–1235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-016-1010-5
D’Aniello B, Scandurra A, Prato-Previde E, Valsecchi P (2015) Gazing toward humans: a study on water rescue dogs using the impossible task paradigm. Behav Process 110:68–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2014.09.022
D’Aniello B, Semin GR, Alterisio A, Aria M, Scandurra A (2018) Interspecies transmission of emotional information via chemosignals: from humans to dogs (Canis lupus familiaris). Anim Cogn 21(1):67–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-017-1139-x
Fantz RL (1964) Visual experience in infants: decreased attention to familiar patterns relative to novel ones. Science 146:668–670
Faragó T, Pongrácz P, Range F, Virányi Z, Miklósi A (2010) ‘The bone is mine’: affective and referential aspects of dog growls. Anim Behav 79:917–925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.01.005
Fukuzawa M, Mills DS, Cooper JJ (2005) More than just a word: non-semantic command variables affect obedience in the domestic dog (Canis familiaris). Appl Anim Behav Sci 91:129–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2004.08.025
Gácsi M, Kara E, Belényi B, Topál J, Miklósi A (2009) The effect of development and individual differences in pointing comprehension of dogs. Anim Cogn 12(3):471–479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-008-0208-6
Gaunet F (2009) How do guide dogs and pet dogs (Canis familiaris) ask their owners for their toy and for play? Anim Cogn 13(2):311–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-009-0279-z
Gergely A, Petró E, Oláh K, Topál J (2019) Auditory-visual matching of conspecifics and non-conspecifics by dogs and human infants. Animals 9:17. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9010017
Grassmann S, Tomasello M (2010) Young children follow pointing over words in interpreting acts of reference. Dev Sci 13:251–263. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00871.x
Grassmann S, Kaminski J, Tomasello M (2012) How two word-trained dogs integrate pointing and naming. Anim Cogn 15(4):657–665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-012-0494-x
Hare B, Tomasello M (2005) Human-like social skills in dogs? Trends Cogn Sci 9(9):439–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.07.003
Hare B, Brown M, Williamson C, Tomasello M (2002) The domestication of social cognition in dogs. Science 298:1634. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1072702
Hostetter AB (2011) When Do Gestures Communicate? A Meta-Analysis Psych Bull 137(2):297–315. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022128
Jaswal VK, Hansen MB (2006) Learning words: children disregard some pragmatic information that conflicts with mutual exclusivity. Develop Sci 9:158–165. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2006.00475.x
Kaminski J, Call J, Fischer J (2004) Word learning in a domestic dog: evidence for “fast mapping”. Science 304:1682. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097859
Kaminski J, Nitzschner M (2013) Do dogs get the point? A review of dog–human communication ability. Learn Motiv 44:294–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2013.05.001
Kaminski J, Schulz L, Tomasello M (2012) How dogs know when communication is intended for them. Develop Sci 15:222–232. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2011.01120.x
Kendon A (2004) Gesture: visible action as utterance. Cambridge University Press, New York
Knapp ML, Hall JA, Horgan TG (2013) Nonverbal communication in human interaction. Cengage Learning, Boston
Kuhl PK (1983) Perception of auditory equivalence classes for speech in early infancy. Infant Behav Dev 6:263–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0163-6383(83)80036-8
Loveless NE, Brebner J, Hamilton P (1970) Bisensory presentation of information. Psych Bulletin 73(3):161–199. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0028681
Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLOS Med 6:e10001000. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100
Marler P (1965) Communication in monkeys and apes. In: De Vore I (ed) Primate behavior: field studies of monkeys and apes, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York, pp 544–584.
Marshall-Pescini S, Passalacqua C, Barnard S, Valsecchi P, Prato-Previde E (2009) Agility and search and rescue training differently affects pet dogs’ behaviour in socio-cognitive tasks. Behav Process 81:416–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2009.03.015
Miklósi Á (2007) Dog behaviour, evolution, and cognition. Oxford Biology, Oxford
Miklósi Á (2009) Evolutionary approach to communication between humans and dogs. Vet Res Commun 33(1):S53–S59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11259-009-9248-x
Miklósi Á, Soproni K (2006) A comparative analysis of animals’ understanding of the human pointing gesture. Anim Cogn 9:81–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-005-0008-1
Miklósi Á, Topál J (2013) What does it take to become ‘best friends’? Evolutionary changes in canine social competence. Trends Cogn Sci 17(6):287–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2013.04.005
Mills DS (2005) What’s in a word? A review of the attributes of a command affecting the performance of pet dogs. Anthrozoös 18(3):208–221. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279305785594108
Müller CS, Mayer C, Dörrenberg S, Huber L, Range F (2011) Female but not male dogs respond to a size constancy violation. Biol Lett 7:689–691. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2011.0287
Partan S, Marler P (1999) Communication Goes Multimodal. Science 283(5406):1272–1273. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.283.5406.1272
Patzwald C, Elsner B (2019) Do as I say-or as I do?! How 18-and 24-month-olds integrate words and actions to infer intentions in situations of match or mismatch. Infant Behav Dev 55:46–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2019.03.004
Pilley JW, Reid AK (2011) Border collie comprehends object names as verbal referents. Behav Process 86:184–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2010.11.007
Ping RM, Goldin-Meadow S (2008) Hands in the air: using ungrounded iconic gestures to teach children conservation of quantity. Develop Psych 44:1277–1287. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.44.5.1277
Ratcliffe VF, Reby D (2014) Orienting asymmetries in dogs' responses to different communicatory components of human speech. Curr Biol 24(24):2908–2912. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2014.10.030
Root-Gutteridge H, Ratcliffe VF, Korzeniowska AT, Reby D (2019) Dogs perceive and spontaneously normalize formant-related speaker and vowel differences in human speech sounds. Biol Lett 15:20190555. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2019.0555
Rossano F, Nitzschner M, Tomasello M (2014) Domestic dogs and puppies can use human voice direction referentially. Proc R Soc B 281:20133201. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.3201
Rowe C (1999) Receiver psychology and the evolution of multicomponent signals. Anim Behav 58:921–931. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1999.1242
Scandurra A, Alterisio A, Aria M, Vernese R, D’Aniello B (2018a) Should I fetch one or the other? A study on dogs on the object choice in the bimodal contrasting paradigm. Anim Cogn 21:119–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-017-1145-z
Scandurra A, Alterisio A, Di Cosmo A, D’Aniello B (2018b) Behavioral and perceptual differences between sexes in dogs: an overview. Animals 8:151. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8090151
Scandurra A, Alterisio A, Marinelli L, Mongillo P, Semin GR, D’Aniello B (2017) Effectiveness of verbal and gestural signals and familiarity with signal-senders on the performance of working dogs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 191:78–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2017.02.003
Scandurra A, Prato-Previde E, Valsecchi P, Aria M, D’Aniello B (2015) Guide dogs as a model for investigating the effect of life experience and training on gazing behaviour. Anim Cogn 18(4):937–944. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-015-0864-2
Scheider L, Grassmann S, Kaminski J, Tomasello M (2011) Domestic dogs use contextual information and tone of voice when following a human pointing gesture. PLoS ONE 6(7):e21676. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021676
Semin GR, Scandurra A, Baragli P, Lanatà A, D’Aniello B (2019) Inter- and intra-species communication of emotion: chemosignals as the neglected medium. Animals 9:887. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9110887
Siniscalchi M, d’Ingeo S, Quaranta A (2016) The dog nose “KNOWS” fear: asymmetric nostril use during sniffing at canine and human emotional stimuli. Behav Brain Res 304:34–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2016.02.011
Siniscalchi M, d'Ingeo S, Quaranta A (2018a) Orienting asymmetries and physiological reactivity in dogs' response to human emotional faces. Learn Behav 46(4):574–585. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-018-0325-2
Siniscalchi M, d'Ingeo S, Fornelli S, Quaranta A (2018b) Lateralized behavior and cardiac activity of dogs in response to human emotional vocalizations. Sci rep 8(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-18417
Siniscalchi M, d'Ingeo S, Minunno M, Quaranta A (2018c) Communication in dogs. Animals 8(8):131. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8080131
Spelke ES (1976) Infants’ intermodal perception of events. Cogn Psychol 8:553–560
Stroop JR (1935) Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. J Exp Psychol 18:643–662. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054651
Taylor AM, Reby D, McComb K (2011) Cross modal perception of body size in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris). PLoS ONE 6(2):e17069
Thesen A, Steen JB, Doving KB (1993) Behaviour of dogs during olfactory tracking. J Exp Biol 180:247–251
Topál J, Gergely G, Erdöhegyi A, Csibra G, Miklósi A (2009) Differential sensitivity to human communication in dogs, wolves, and human infants. Science 325:1269. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1176960
Topál J, Kis A, Oláh K (2014) Dogs’ sensitivity to human ostensive cues: a unique adaptation? In: Kaminski J, Marshall-Pescini SM (eds) The social dog: behaviour and cognition. Elsevier, London, pp 319–346
Turcsán B, Szánthó F, Miklósi Á, Kubinyi E (2015) Fetching what the owner prefers? Dogs recognize disgust and happiness in human behaviour. Anim Cogn 18(1):83–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-014-0779-3
Udell MAR, Wynne CD (2010) Ontogeny and phylogeny: both are essential to human-sensitive behaviour in the genus Canis. Anim Behav 79(2):e9–e14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.11.033
Udell MAR, Wynne CDL (2008) A review of domestic dogs’ (Canis familiaris) human-like behaviors: or why behavior analysts should stop worrying and love their dogs. J Exp Anal Behav 89:247–261. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2008.89-247
Uetz GW, Roberts AJ (2002) Multisensory cues and multimodal communication in spiders: insights from video/audio playback studies. Brain Behav Evol 59:222–230. https://doi.org/10.1159/000064909
Welch R, Warren DH (1986) Intersensory interactions. In: Boff KR, Kaufman L, Thomas JP (eds) Handbook of Perception and Human Performance I. Sensory Processes and Perception. New York, J Wiley, pp 25-36.
Wynne CD, Udell MA, Lord KA (2008) Ontogeny's impacts on human–dog communication. Anim Behav 76(4):e1–e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.03.010
Xu T, Yu X, Perlik AJ, Tobin WF, Zweig JA, Tennant K, Jones T, Zuo Y (2009) Rapid formation and selective stabilization of synapses for enduring motor memories. Nature 462(7275):915–919. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08389
Yuval-Greenberg S, Deouell LY (2009) The dog’s meow: asymmetrical interaction in cross-modal object. Recognition Exp Brain Res 193:603–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-008-1664-6
Zhan L (2012) Nonverbal communication in pride and prejudice. Theory Pract Lang Stud 2(8):1621–1626. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.8.1621-1626
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
BD, AS and ADC conceived and designed the review; AS, BF, and CP sourced the publications; BD’ wrote the draft and all authors contributed in improving the text. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Scandurra, A., Pinelli, C., Fierro, B. et al. Multimodal signaling in the visuo-acoustic mismatch paradigm: similarities between dogs and children in the communicative approach. Anim Cogn 23, 833–841 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-020-01398-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-020-01398-9