Cognitive bias theories concern the influence of emotional states on cognitive functions (such as attention, memory and judgment). In particular, judgment biases pertain to the optimistic/pessimistic interpretation of ambiguous stimuli which is typically linked to the individual’s mood. Judgment bias test (JBT) represents a widespread tool to assess the optimistic/pessimistic attitude and to indirectly evaluate animals emotional state and welfare. JBT has been applied several times on dogs, mainly using a spatial test with a bowl placed in ambiguous positions located between a trained certain positive (P) location which contained a baited bowl and a trained certain negative (N) location which contained an empty bowl; the latency to approach the bowl placed in ambiguous positions is a cue of the dog expectation of a positive or a negative outcome. However, results are anything but conclusive and the link between emotions and judgment biases has not been clearly established yet in dogs. In the present research, the performance of 51 shelter dogs and 40 pet dogs was thoroughly analysed using the classical spatial JBT paradigm. As expected, a pattern emerged with shelter dogs behaving in a more pessimistic-like way than pet dogs. However, several methodological caveats were found. First of all, a non-negligible percentage of dogs did not pass the training phase; Second, results showed that the dogs’ responses towards the trained certain locations were not consistent throughout the test, suggesting that animals may not have fully learned the association between locations and their outcomes during the training; Third, dogs did not always behave differently towards adjacent locations, raising doubts about the animals’ ability to discriminate between locations; Finally, a potential influence of the researcher’s presence on dogs’ performance emerged from analyses. In the second phase of the present research, the aim was to solve these methodological issues using a novel spatial JBT protocol. The focus was to ensure a stable discrimination between certain stimuli (P and N), i.e. two doors located at opposite sides of a test area: behind P a hallway led dogs (N=49 pets) to their owner offering a food treat; behind N, at the end of another hallway, a black cloth was blown by a fan toward dogs (the end of each hallway was not visible from the door). P and N doors were opened one at a time until dogs always entered P and always avoided N. Then 3 ambiguous doors located between P and N were opened, one at a time, to assess the dog’s pessimistic/optimistic attitude (these doors led to 3 new empty hallways). A strong discrimination between P and N has been achieved: in 95% of certain trials dogs responded properly (passed P door, avoided N door). Furthermore, dogs discriminated all the 5 doors. Dogs reaction during trials were video-recorded and the analysis suggested that dogs understood the values of P and N: the more the opened door was close to N the more the dogs chose to rest at the starting position. The final phase of this research project was aimed to validate this novel JBT protocol. The hypothesis to be tested was that anxious dogs, as anxious people, were more pessimistic that non-anxious dogs. Taking into account the literature regarding the anxiety trait in the domestic dog, a specific questionnaire was created to select a sample of dogs which presented high levels of anxiety in everyday situations. Data from more than 400 dogs were collected. A control sample was chosen from the questionnaire responses in order to compare the JBT performance in anxious and non-anxious dogs.

Il fenomeno dei bias cognitivi riguarda l’influenza degli stati emotivi sulle funzioni cognitive. In particolare, il bias di giudizio è relativo all’ interpretazione in senso ottimistico o pessimistico di uno stimolo ambiguo, la quale è correlata allo stato emotivo del soggetto. Lo strumento che viene comunemente utilizzato per valutare ottimismo/pessimismo e, indirettamente, lo stato emotivo, è il judgment bias test (JBT). Questo test è stato utilizzato in molti studi sul cane: nel protocollo classico, una ciotola viene posta in posizioni intermedie rispetto a due posizioni certe, una positiva (P) nella quale la ciotola viene sempre riempita con un boccone di cibo, una negativa (N) nella quale la ciotola è vuota; la latenza a raggiungere la ciotola nelle posizioni intermedie è un indice dell’aspettativa ottimistica/pessimistica del soggetto. I risultati di questi studi non sono però del tutto coerenti tra loro e la relazione tra stato emotivo e bias di giudizio nel cane non è stata al momento del tutto verificata. La prima fase del presente studio è quindi stata finalizzata a valutare nel dettaglio il classico paradigma del JBT (N=51 cani di canile e 40 cani di proprietà). Come previsto, i cani di canile sembrano essere più pessimisti dei cani di proprietà, ma i risultati hanno evidenziato diverse problematiche metodologiche. In primo luogo, una percentuale non trascurabile di cani non è riuscita a superare il training iniziale. In secondo luogo, le risposte dei cani nei confronti delle posizioni certe non sono rimaste invariate nel corso del test, suggerendo che l’associazione tra stimoli certi e presenza/assenza di cibo non sia stata appresa in modo solido. Inoltre, i cani non sono stati in grado di distinguere totalmente tra le posizioni adiacenti. Infine, le analisi suggeriscono che la presenza di un ricercatore nei pressi di una delle posizioni possa aver influenzato i risultati. La fase successiva dello studio è stata orientata a risolvere i problemi metodologici emersi e ad elaborare un nuovo protocollo sperimentale. Il focus principale è stato assicurare che i soggetti (N=49) avessero appreso in modo sicuro il valore dei due stimoli certi (P e N), cioè due porte posizionate alle due estremità dell’arena sperimentale: superata la porta P, un corridoio conduceva il cane al suo proprietario pronto ad offrirgli un boccone di cibo, superata la porta N, un analogo corridoio portava il cane a trovarsi di fronte ad un telo nero mosso da un ventilatore. Le due porte sono state aperte ripetutamente, una alla volta, fino a che i soggetti non hanno deciso di entrare solo in P. Quindi, è stata registrata la risposta all’apertura di 3 porte situate tra P ed N, collegate a 3 corridoi vuoti. I cani sono riuscita a hanno acquisito una forte capacità di discriminare tra P ed N, rispondendo nel modo corretto (entrare solo in P) nel 95% dei casi. Inoltre, sono stati in grado di discriminare completamente tra le porte adiacenti. Validare questo nuovo protocollo per l’esecuzione del JBT nel cane rappresenta l’ultima fase dello studio. L’ipotesi da confermare è che i cani che presentano alti livelli d’ansia siano più pessimisti dei cani non ansiosi, similmente a quanto si registra nella specie umana. È stato quindi redatto uno specifico questionario per selezionare cani ansiosi, prendendo a modello questionari presenti in letteratura. Al momento, sono state raccolte risposte riguardanti più di 400 cani, dalle quali è stato selezionato un campione di controllo di cani non ansiosi per comparare la loro performance nel nuovo JBT con quella dei cani ansiosi.

Analisi del bias di giudizio nel cane (Canis familiaris): elaborazione, sviluppo e validazione di un nuovo paradigma sperimentale per la valutazione dell'ottimismo e del pessimismo / Carlotta Burani , 2021 Oct 06. 33. ciclo, Anno Accademico 2019/2020.

Analisi del bias di giudizio nel cane (Canis familiaris): elaborazione, sviluppo e validazione di un nuovo paradigma sperimentale per la valutazione dell'ottimismo e del pessimismo

BURANI, CARLOTTA
2021

Abstract

Cognitive bias theories concern the influence of emotional states on cognitive functions (such as attention, memory and judgment). In particular, judgment biases pertain to the optimistic/pessimistic interpretation of ambiguous stimuli which is typically linked to the individual’s mood. Judgment bias test (JBT) represents a widespread tool to assess the optimistic/pessimistic attitude and to indirectly evaluate animals emotional state and welfare. JBT has been applied several times on dogs, mainly using a spatial test with a bowl placed in ambiguous positions located between a trained certain positive (P) location which contained a baited bowl and a trained certain negative (N) location which contained an empty bowl; the latency to approach the bowl placed in ambiguous positions is a cue of the dog expectation of a positive or a negative outcome. However, results are anything but conclusive and the link between emotions and judgment biases has not been clearly established yet in dogs. In the present research, the performance of 51 shelter dogs and 40 pet dogs was thoroughly analysed using the classical spatial JBT paradigm. As expected, a pattern emerged with shelter dogs behaving in a more pessimistic-like way than pet dogs. However, several methodological caveats were found. First of all, a non-negligible percentage of dogs did not pass the training phase; Second, results showed that the dogs’ responses towards the trained certain locations were not consistent throughout the test, suggesting that animals may not have fully learned the association between locations and their outcomes during the training; Third, dogs did not always behave differently towards adjacent locations, raising doubts about the animals’ ability to discriminate between locations; Finally, a potential influence of the researcher’s presence on dogs’ performance emerged from analyses. In the second phase of the present research, the aim was to solve these methodological issues using a novel spatial JBT protocol. The focus was to ensure a stable discrimination between certain stimuli (P and N), i.e. two doors located at opposite sides of a test area: behind P a hallway led dogs (N=49 pets) to their owner offering a food treat; behind N, at the end of another hallway, a black cloth was blown by a fan toward dogs (the end of each hallway was not visible from the door). P and N doors were opened one at a time until dogs always entered P and always avoided N. Then 3 ambiguous doors located between P and N were opened, one at a time, to assess the dog’s pessimistic/optimistic attitude (these doors led to 3 new empty hallways). A strong discrimination between P and N has been achieved: in 95% of certain trials dogs responded properly (passed P door, avoided N door). Furthermore, dogs discriminated all the 5 doors. Dogs reaction during trials were video-recorded and the analysis suggested that dogs understood the values of P and N: the more the opened door was close to N the more the dogs chose to rest at the starting position. The final phase of this research project was aimed to validate this novel JBT protocol. The hypothesis to be tested was that anxious dogs, as anxious people, were more pessimistic that non-anxious dogs. Taking into account the literature regarding the anxiety trait in the domestic dog, a specific questionnaire was created to select a sample of dogs which presented high levels of anxiety in everyday situations. Data from more than 400 dogs were collected. A control sample was chosen from the questionnaire responses in order to compare the JBT performance in anxious and non-anxious dogs.
Analysis of judgment bias in the domestic dog (Canis familiaris): conceptual design, development and validation of a novel experimental paradigm for optimism and pessimism assessment
6-ott-2021
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
PhD Thesis Burani.pdf

embargo fino al 05/10/2024

Descrizione: Tesi
Tipologia: Tesi di dottorato
Dimensione 2.31 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
2.31 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Licenza Creative Commons
I metadati presenti in IRIS UNIMORE sono rilasciati con licenza Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal, mentre i file delle pubblicazioni sono rilasciati con licenza Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale (CC BY 4.0), salvo diversa indicazione.
In caso di violazione di copyright, contattare Supporto Iris

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11380/1254195
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact