Are dogs self aware?

I think the "they can only see in black and white" deal is from (warning: I'm about to type something icky) dissecting cadaver dogs' eyes. This is because rods and cones in the eye have different functions. Dogs have a lot more rods (black and white vision) but I believe it's been found that they do have cones, although the numbers aren't in the same proportions as in humans, for example.

As for self-awareness, that's hard to test for. Dogs don't really recognize themselves in a mirror (this is a fairly standard test which many chimps pass but many bonobos don't). But the mirror test isn't decisive, as many younger chimps don't pass it. It, of course, doesn't make much sense to say that chimps are only sometimes self-aware. It's possible to become self-aware, but there are chimps that never recognize themselves in a mirror. So does that mean that the species is only sometimes self-aware? It's a puzzle.

One thing with dogs is, they are very trainable (obviously) and so they can be administered all manner of intelligence tests. But are they really engaging in creative thinking, or are they trying anything and everything, hoping that it'll be right, and then repeating that behavior once they get some positive reinforcement.

I was watching a recent episode of "Be the Creature" on Animal Planet; it was about African wild dogs. The Kratt brothers took an old antelope skull and fitted it with a small camera. The dogs - particularly the puppies - investigated, sniffed, chewed and played with the skull. The Kratts reasoned (from this and other observations) that dogs are probably smarter than lions and bears but not as intelligent as chimps and dolphins. Not bad for the animal kingdom.

Given the evidence of "guilty" behavior on the part of dogs, i think they are sufficiently aware to recognize that they have done something for which they will be punished or scolded.

Anyway, why would we--those who love dogs--care? Their loyalty and affection are not to be doubted, and that is the transaction on which they, and we, depend.

dunno about dogs but cats certainly are. They hate to lose their dignity and worrying about loss of dignity shows a self awareness.

I think recognising a reflection is a small part of self-awareness.

They also sit very very prettily and neatly when the are after something (often off my plate ) and know just how to look the most appealing.

Reply to: are dogs self-aware?
It would be very possible to tell. Place three objects that are exactly the same in every way except color and place them at equal distances away from the dog. By placing the objects in different places every time you run the test, and than watching the dog, you will find out whether the dog is attracted to one particular color more than the others. If you have a dog, you should try it.

From: Shadowless-Nightmare

PS : I have a dog and may try it myself sometime.

The three objects would have to have exactly the same value, though. As in, if you took a black and white photograph of them, they would all appear the same shade of gray. Otherwise you have the light gray, the dark gray, etc., which is still difference. (And if I understand your suggestion correctly, which I'm not sure of, you think that the difference would attract the attention of the dog?)

I don't think of the Pacco as self aware. He might be underneath all the other stuff. He is, though, extremely highly other-aware.

Good Q
That a good Q
I have thought that myself befor
I have a staff puppy
What sort of dog do you have?

carrieanne

Re: Reply to: are dogs self-aware?
That is a good idea
I think i might try it myself

carrieanne

Actually, dodgs do see some color but they are not very adept at distinguishing one color from another. They are color blind in the same senmse that humans are. They just don't know which colors are which.

As for dogs being self aware, I had a dog many years ago that was a Bouvier. Bouviers are natrually very hairy. One day we took the dog to be clipped so he would be comfortable for the summer. When he came home he hid behind the couch and would not come out for a long time. Obviously, he felt naked. This would indicate a certain sense of self without a doubt.

As I undestand it, dogs do sorta see color the way a colorblind humans does, as mentioned by NickFun. The physiology of their eyes indicates a fair amount of sensitivity at the opposite ends of the spectrum, IE, Reds and Blues, but lesser sensitivity, or differentiation of, yellows and greens, which lie in the middle of the visible spectrum. Their retinas are more densely packed with "Rods" than are ours, while their macula, or center portion of the eye, is both smaller than ours, proportionately, and less densely packed with "cones", which are responsible for detail and color. We have a "fovea" at the center of our "macula", in which the concentration of cones is the highest, and which is key to our ability to read and recognize fine detail. Dogs lack this anatomical feature. They also see a bit beyond what humans perceive as the visible spectrum, with comparatively enhanced sensitivity slightly into both the infrared and ultraviolet. Due to their relatively higher compliment of rods, their lowlight vision is something on the order of twice that of humans, but not quite as efficient as that of cats. The structure of their eyes, and the musculature which controls them, indicates they are far more sensitive to movement and contrast than to color or detail, and that they are incapable of focusing sharply on close objects, though their mid-to-long-distance depth perception is very highly developed and their peripheral vision is more acute than is ours, all due to their greater number of, and distribution of, rods vs cones. Interestingly, the dog devotes a greater proportion of its brain to its sense of smell alone than humans devote to all five senses, and their hearing is sensitive to both a broader range of frequencies and a lower threshold than is that of humans; they can hear much higher pitched sounds than can we, and much softer sounds.

Now, the self-aware part, well that's harder to pin down. All mine insist they are, but I do have my doubts about a couple of them. Still, they do vigorously argue the point. Seriously, though, there is that whole pack-order thing, which is very real, particularly obvious if you live, as I do, with a large pack of dogs. They all have distinct and different personalities, and I'm convinced they know who they are, who the others are, who we are, and all of our relative positions within the pack. There are challenges within the pack from time to time, but I just about never get involved in their politics, nor they in mine. The ranking pups generally ride herd on their subordinates pretty well. The Boss Dog, big Sam, a 150 + pound Rottweiler mix, rarely gets involved, but if he does, the issue is decided in moments, and the entire pack is rather subdued and deferential around him for a good long while, while the direct recipient of his wrath is generally unseen for hours, then spends a day or two trying to literally kiss up to Sam, who remains aloof a day or two, curling his lip and uttering a low, understated growl which drives the miscreant back to the fringes, then gradually relents, and everybody's tails start to perk up and pretty soon the pack is orderly and all freindly with one another, within their own limits of decorum, once again. Well, as orderly as it gets, anyway. At least untill company shows up, or a deer crosses the yard, or a neighbor dog stops over, or a snowmobile goes by. They go to great lengths to make sure everyone and everything else is aware of them, whether or not they are "self aware". I really think they are.

Yeah, what he said.

Folks who train hunting dogs for competition are very aware of dogs' ability to see color. Often a "duck" will be marked with a bright orange flag or post so that handlers know where the duck is, and some dogs pick up on this. In failing light conditions, though -- dusk or heavily overcast skies -- they lose their ability to see the thing, even when it's easily visible to humans.

Dunno about the self-awareness bit. I've occasionally read lay articles on this stuff, and don't understand the techniques well enough to make any sort of judgement. Certainly my dogs seem to fail the mirror test, but they are extraordinarily adept (from my point of view, anyway) at distinguishing between self and other when it comes to territorial markings. (Scent again, which is the only sense that is monosynaptic -- that is, hardwired -- to the brain. It is the primordial sense.)

(What do we mean by "self-aware," anyway?)

Recognizing themselves in the mirror is one sign of self-awareness - and responding by trying to remove, or at least investigate, a mark placed on their faces which can only be detected by looking in said mirror is a strong indicator. Not sure how dogs score.

In my simple minded way, i simply consider that a dog will come when called--by someone they know, but not necessarily a stranger; they will take note that a stranger has said their "name," but not necesarily come.

In fact, i refer to eBeth's oldest dog as Mr. Bailey. However, if i see him doing something i don't want him to do, or if he doesn't not come when called, i say "Bailey" sharply, and he responds. Perhaps you will say he responds to the tone, and the particular form of address is meaningless--yet he still responds, and responds specifically when the name give him is used.

For those who find this altogether too unscientific, my response is that scientific observation does not allow us to assert that all humans are self-conscious, or even that the brain is a universally present organ.

Our human defintion of self-awareness includes being able to recognize oneself in the mirror because sight is our dominant sense. However, for dogs the dominant sense is smell. In other words, if they can't smell it then it has no relevance. If dogs were the dominant creature on this planet they would say that we were not self-aware because we can't recognize our own scent.

I haven't positioned a mirror next to the floor yet to test Pacco on this. I'm getting very curious. He has barked at a dog on tv...

I don't know about the self awareness business. Setanta makes a good case for it. I do think Pacco is a physical embodiment of selfdom. His name means package in italian, short for "gift package", pacco dono, a phrase I made up. He is virtually always 'at work' in his role as house corgi; I am his job, generally, although if others are in my company they become his job too. If I am not at work and he is left in the office, he remains facing the door I left for at least two hours. Even in sleep he is positioned relative to my protection from wolves. He commands his field.
He exhibits concern. And he smiles, I swear it, sometimes. He is quite free with eye contact.

I once introduced the older dog to the husky statue (okay, it's a giant malamute, but they call it a husky) outside the football stadium at the University of Washington. He wasn't perturbed until he tried to sniff it's butt. Upon sniffing, the hackles went up, the tail down and out, the ears and lips back, and he gave one of the most frightening growls he's ever let out.

Nothing to do with self-awareness -- just reinforcing Nickfun's assertion of smell-as-identifier in the dog world.

(As regards TV, I've seen the whole spectrum, from dogs who are fascinated by it to dogs who are totally disinterested. Sight hound vs. other dogs, perhaps...)

Good point, PD. When my Sweetiepie and I went to Schiller Park in Columbus with Mr. Bailey, he seemed fine at first--then he noticed the statue of Schiller, and began barking ferociously. I'm sure he saw it as a person, and was angered that he hadn't scented that individual. Of course, though, i've always quipped that it is his literary criticism of German poetry.

Gads. Had to read Schiller's "William Tell" once. You know, I would trade the whole of pre-19th century Romantic theater library for just one recovered text by Euripides or Aristophanes. Deadly stuff.