McGetrick Jim, Fux Leona, Schullern-Schrattenhofen Johannes, Rault Jean-Loup, Range Friederike
Domestication Lab, Konrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria.
Department of Behavioural and Cognitive Biology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Ethology. 2024 Jan 10;130(4). doi: 10.1111/eth.13430. eCollection 2024 Apr.
Reciprocity is one of the most prominent explanations for the evolution of stable cooperation. Although reciprocity has been studied for decades in numerous animal species and behavioural contexts, its underlying proximate mechanisms remain unclear. Domestic dogs provide a useful model species for the study of proximate mechanisms, though there are currently inconsistent findings regarding dogs' propensity to reciprocate. Here, we investigated whether, after minimal training, pet dogs would press a button, which remotely controlled a food dispenser, to deliver food to an enclosure occupied by a helpful conspecific that had provided them with food or an unhelpful conspecific that had not provided them with food. We included an asocial control condition in which the enclosure was unoccupied and a social facilitation control in which the food delivery mechanism was non-functional. Whether subjects were familiar with the helpful and unhelpful conspecifics was also varied. In addition, to investigate potential mechanisms underlying reciprocity, we measured subjects salivary oxytocin concentration before and after they experienced the helpful and unhelpful acts. There was no effect of the previous helpfulness or the familiarity of the partner on the number of times subjects pressed the button. However, there was also no effect of the presence of a partner or the operationality of the food delivery mechanism on the number of button presses, indicating that subjects were not pressing the button to provision the partner. Moreover, the experience of the helpful or unhelpful act did not influence subjects' salivary oxytocin concentration. Variation in findings of reciprocity across studies appears to correspond with differing training protocols. Subjects' understanding of the task in the current study may have been constrained by the limited training received. Additional tests to verify subjects' understanding of such tasks are warranted in future studies.
互惠是稳定合作进化的最突出解释之一。尽管互惠在众多动物物种和行为背景下已被研究了数十年,但其潜在的近因机制仍不清楚。家犬为近因机制的研究提供了一个有用的模型物种,尽管目前关于犬类互惠倾向的研究结果并不一致。在这里,我们调查了宠物犬在经过最少训练后,是否会按下一个远程控制食物分配器的按钮,以便将食物送到一个对其有帮助(给它提供过食物)或无帮助(未给它提供过食物)的同种个体所在的围栏中。我们设置了一个非社交对照条件,即围栏为空,以及一个社会促进对照条件,即食物输送机制不起作用。此外,我们还改变了实验对象是否熟悉有帮助和无帮助的同种个体这一条件。另外,为了研究互惠背后的潜在机制,我们在实验对象经历有帮助和无帮助行为之前和之后测量了他们唾液中的催产素浓度。之前的帮助行为或伙伴的熟悉程度对实验对象按下按钮的次数没有影响。然而,伙伴的存在或食物输送机制的可操作性对按钮按下次数也没有影响,这表明实验对象按下按钮并非是为了给伙伴提供食物。此外,有帮助或无帮助行为的经历并没有影响实验对象唾液中的催产素浓度。不同研究中互惠结果的差异似乎与不同的训练方案相对应。在当前研究中,实验对象对任务的理解可能受到了所接受的有限训练的限制。未来的研究有必要进行额外的测试以验证实验对象对这类任务的理解。