Proximate mechanisms underlying problem solving abilities

Problemlösungsfähigkeiten ermöglicht es Tieren auf artenspezifische Herausforderungen ihrer Umwelt zu reagieren. Nicht überraschend, scheinen sich Hunde und Wölfe, die sehr nahe miteinander verwandt sind, aber in unterschiedlichen ökologischen Nischen leben, in dieser Hinsicht zu unterscheiden. Allerdings ist nicht klar, ob diese Unterschiede durch unterschiedliche kognitive Fähigkeiten (z.B. kausales Verständnis), Motivation (z.B. Beharrlichkeit und Angst vor Neuem) oder allgemeinere Merkmale (z.B. Aufmerksamkeit, Arbeitsgedächtnis) zustande kommen. In diesem Projekt werden wir Wölfe und Hunde, die die gleichen Erfahrungen haben (Wolf Science Center), aber auch Haushunde und freilaufende Hunde, in einer Reihe von Experimenten untersuchen. Die gleichaufgezogenen Wölfe und Hunde geben uns die Möglichkeit zu untersuchen, ob es durch die Domestikation zu wirklichen Unterschieden in den Fähigkeiten zwischen den Tieren gekommen ist; der Vergleich zwischen den verschiedenen Hundepopulationen erlaubt uns zu beurteilen, in wieweit Erfahrung diese Fähigkeiten beeinflusst. In den Experimenten werden wir zum einen die Motivation der Tiere testen, verschiedenen Aufgaben zu bewältigen, aber auch ihr kausales Verständnis und ihre Aufmerksamkeit gegenüber Details bzw. ihr Arbeitsgedächtnis. Mit der Ergebnissen können wir die Hypothese evaluieren, ob der unterschiedliche Lebensraum vom Wolf (ein kooperativer Jäger der in engen Familiengruppen lebt) und Hund (durch die Domestikation angepasst an den Lebensraum des Menschen) die Problemlösefähigkeiten beeinflusst hat, oder ob, durch die relativ kurze Zeitspanne seit der Domestizierung, Hunde prinzipiell noch dieselben Fähigkeiten haben, wie die Wölfe. Das Kernteam bilden Associate Univ.-Prof. Dr. Friederike Range, Gründerin und Leiterin des Wolf Science Centers und Priv. Doz. Dr. Sarah Marshall-Pescini, eine hochrangige Wissenschaftlerin, die eng mit Range in Bezug zu Hundekognition und Domestizierungsprozesse zusammenarbeitet, sowie Priv. Doz. Dr. Sabine Tebbich, Postdoktorandin an der Universität Wien, deren Expertise in der physischen Wahrnehmung verschiedener Tierarten liegt.

This project examined the problem-solving abilities of wolves and dogs to understand how their social and ecological environments, as well as domestication, may have shaped these skills. Tasks were designed to measure cognitive abilities (learning and reasoning), motivation (neophilia), and general-purpose mechanisms (inhibition and behavioral flexibility). To assess inhibition, a task was created to minimize human influence and training. Wolves outperformed dogs in their ability to inhibit responses, contradicting earlier findings. For behavioral flexibility, pet dogs outperformed both wolves and pack-living dogs, particularly in tasks requiring interaction with novel apparatuses, suggesting that socialization with humans enhances dogs' motivation and flexibility. Regarding neophilia, all groups-wolves, pack-living dogs, and pet dogs-interacted more with novel objects than familiar ones. However, there were no significant differences in how quickly they approached the novel object or which object they interacted with first. Wolves spent more time with the familiar object, possibly reflecting differences in exploratory behavior. In a "learning set" task, both wolves and dogs improved their performance over time, demonstrating the ability to "learn to learn," with no differences in learning speed between species. In a reversal learning phase, where previously learned associations were reversed, dogs performed better than wolves during the first session of each reversal, indicating greater behavioral flexibility. However, in inferential reasoning tasks, such as the noisy cup task and the L-shaped tube test, both wolves and dogs failed to understand the task contingencies. This was surprising, as previous studies suggested better performance in such tasks by wolves. Follow-up testing with starlings indicated that success in the noisy cup task might rely on associative learning rather than true inference, which could explain the failure of wolves and dogs, who had limited exposure to the task and no opportunity to learn its contingencies. Dogs were also tested on their ability to assess their body size and shape, as well as their understanding of material solidity. Dogs could accurately assess their size but were less consistent in recognizing shapes. They also demonstrated some understanding of material solidity. Agility-trained dogs performed better in shape perception tasks but were slower in tasks involving material solidity, suggesting that life experience influences body-awareness. Overall, the results showed few significant differences between wolves and dogs, suggesting that domestication has not greatly influenced these abilities. Inferential reasoning, a key aspect of problem-solving, appears to be weakly developed in both species. Wolves' superior problem-solving abilities may stem more from their persistence and motivation than advanced cognitive skills. Further research is needed to clarify the roles of cognition, motivation, and life experience in shaping problem-solving abilities in wolves and dogs.