Ever noticed your dog slink away after you’ve discovered she’s decimated a shoe?...left you a present on the Oriental rug?...stolen another dog’s biscuit? “I’m such a bad, bad dog and I deserve to go to my crate.”
How about when you feed one of your cats a larger amount than another and notice the despondency in the eyes of one who’s looking all hangdog over the inequity? “Hey, why’d she get all that wet stuff? How about me?”
In the past, we sort of assumed these behaviors were learned pack or pride “tricks” to get us to go easy on punishment or to feed them more, respectively. The interpretation of these behaviors as “embarrassment,” “sadness” and “regret” were deemed by many learned behaviorists to be the result of our tendency to anthropomorphize (inappropriately ascribe human feelings to animals).
But now there’s some proof that we silly pet owners were right all along. Animals do appear to experience regret. In particular, when one animal gets a better treat than another, the one who finds himself lacking may truly feel wronged. So say Duke University neurobiologists in the last issue of Science.
According to a pitch-perfect New York Times piece from last week,
“The latest data comes from brain scans of monkeys trying to win a large prize of juice by guessing where it was hidden. When the monkeys picked wrongly and were shown the location of the prize, the neurons in their brain clearly registered what might have been...
...This is the first evidence that monkeys, like people, have ‘would-have, could-have, should-have’ thoughts,” said Ben Hayden, one of the researchers. Another of the authors, Michael Platt, noted that the monkeys reacted to their losses by shifting their subsequent guesses, just like humans who respond to a missed opportunity by shifting strategy.”
It sort of makes sense, right? In a pack or pride, one must abide by the rules, but it doesn’t mean one has to like it or handle an inequitable interaction the same way twice. If feeling regret gives you a leg up on getting the better bit of meat or the better mate next time then it makes sense that animal brains would adapt in a way that tattoos unpleasant events with indelible emotions rather than fleeting reactions.
Dr. Platt goes on to offer an explanation:
“I can well imagine that regret would be highly advantageous evolutionarily, so long as one doesn’t obsess over it, as in depression...A monkey lacking in regret might act like a psychopath or a simian Don Quixote.”
Tilting at windmills with base reactivity is what Dr. Platt seems to reject in his argument. True emotion is what solidifies an experience, therefore it makes sense to assume that animals may feel a wide array of emotions similar to ours––as long as they confer some sort of evolutionary advantage.
So you know, this notion is somewhat contrary to the body of behavioral research that considers individual behavioral adaptation, as in basic behavioral conditioning, to be the primary way animals learn. Sort of like a behavioral Lamarckism built from a collection of automatic reactions rather than the Darwinistic evolution this new research proposes.
Again, thanks to the New York Times piece, here’s a blurb from a psychologist at the University of Texas in Austin who explains,
“It’s possible that this kind of social signal in animals could have evolved without the conscious experience of regret...But it seems more plausible that there is some kind of conscious experience even if it’s not the same kind of thing that you or I feel.”
Clearly, there’s still lots of hedging in play when it comes to animal emotions. That they’re really not like ours. That animal emotions are wishful thinking on the part of pet owners and other animal lovers.
Indeed, animal feelings on par with humans’ are still largely discounted as anthropomorphism by the scientific community––likely because of our inability to measure them, but also because we humans have been loath to ascribe human-style feelings to animals. This, born of religious beliefs that assume human supremacy and/or potential guilt over our subjugation of animals (as in agriculture settings), in my estimation.
Yet many of us who live with animals find it difficult to reconcile what we can know, scientifically, with what we experience on a regular basis. We believe animals feel. And we don’t take it on faith as we must when we question whether there’s a God, for example. No, we believe it because we can see the evidence before us in our animal companions.
Is it wishful thinking? To my mind, it’s as much so as when humans assumed animals experienced pain differently than we did. And we all know where that led us.
Add Comment25 Comments
It's hard to deny that animals experience "secondary emotions" such as regret, pride, and jealousy when you see the look of dismay on your dog's face as he watches his brother get a treat, or when he gets one himself and lords it over little bro. But is that just us projecting our own emotions onto our pets? Imagining that they would feel as we would?
If they are experiencing these emotions, what does that mean about the way they understand the world? To me, it indicates a broader and deeper understanding than they are normally credited with. To feel embarrassment, an animal would have to grasp the concept of what is expected of them and others' perceptions of them. Can they reason that way?
I file regret under a different catagory and I think it's undeniable that animals can feel it. When training dogs using "negative punishment", I rely on the fact that they can make the connection between their behavior (say, breaking a Stay before I release them) with the whisking away of their reward. If they couldn't feel regret over losing that reward, they wouldn't work harder for it the next time. Or am I confusing regret with greed? Such an interesting topic...
Smaki June 6th, 2009 08:47:24 AM
Animals do have emotions but the problem is that people misinterpret them or assign human oriented interpretations.
Most people cannot read their animals correctly--never mind animals that they are not familiar with.
Anecdotally, I can share that I've seen displays of emotion from animals but in many cases such as the behavioral issue you bring up--housetraining--there is a learned association with the act and the owner's presence.
There is some research being done which might help undo the long standing "animals do not have emotions" theory.
What it means is that humans will have to fess up to the treatment of livestock, zoo animals, etc., if it is proven and the "animals do not feel pain" issue falls in the same category.
That said, just because the scientific studies don't say it is or isn't so doesn't mean that it can be dismissed. There are a lot of things that later get proven but are initially dismissed because of a study or lack of one.
And on that note, most studies focus on a particular aspect--not the whole picture.
Find me blogging at Ark Animals...
Ark Lady June 6th, 2009 10:49:10 AM
I recall a study in which "unfair" treats were given: two animals asked to perform a trick, then one given a treat. Ah, here's an article on one of these studies:
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/39187/title/Dogs_will_go_on_strike_over_unfair_treats
Dogs have a sense of fairness, an "aversion to inequity." Animals do have a much larger range of emotions than most people give them credit for.
Galadriel June 6th, 2009 12:42:31 PM
My little dog knows when she's been bad, I find her belly up looking sheepish, the cats just don't care and will be bad right in front of you.
LorriM June 6th, 2009 02:50:37 PM
As a furMommy to a pack of three Westies, I am hopeful that by your example other doctors, (researchers and/or scientists) that treat both four & two legged loved ones will understand that just because our science cannot currently confirm or disprove a theory it doesn't mean the world's flat. I admire your balance between scientist and animal lover. My regret is that you are a couple of miles too far away to commute to bring our pack in to you as care as their Vet. We live in Texas.
So next best choice, I nominate a suspension of the democracy and vote you Queen of the World! Is there a second?
JoAnn Livanos June 6th, 2009 02:52:12 PM
I think it is often a case of misinterpretation - take for example the "guilty" dog. If he often has accidents in the house or chews inappropriate objects (either because of separation anxiety, or a medical problem, or just poor management) and his owners get angry at him when they come home, the dog will learn to anticipate the owner's angry reaction. He may or may not link that to the soiled rug or chewed up shoe. Slinking away, rolling over on his back, ears laid flat are all appeasement signals the dog is using to try to calm the owner down. Those same owners often will say the dog destroys things out of "spite" when the truth is that the dog is usually very anxious about something.
I am NOT saying that dogs and cats don't have emotions - of course they do. But since we humans are often so quick to label animals with the more "negative" emotions (spite, vengefulness, guilt, jealousy, etc) I think we have to be careful to advise the general public that the emotions that the animals experience are not quite the same as the ones we do - and even more important is how OFTEN we misinterpret their emotions.
Barb June 6th, 2009 03:11:29 PM
Barb and Ark Lady: Too true. I think part of our unwillingness to ascribe human-like emotions to animals has to do with the ease with which we misinterpret some of them. The 'peeing on the rug' is one example in which true regret may me mingled with generalized anxiety and/or the anticipation of routine punishment. After all, none of us would be capable of remaining calm knowing we'd be inevitably punished at the end of the day when 'parent A' came home. Most of us here, however, are unlikely to attempt to extinguish a behavior by punishing them after the fact. We know better and, thus, are better able to discern emotions from base reactions. Not always, to be sure, but more often than most.
JoAnn: Aw, shucks. Thanks. Hope I can live up to your high standards. Just remember to call me out when I don't.
Dr. Patty Khuly June 6th, 2009 04:02:15 PM
My problem lies with all the animals(monkeys,dogs etc) that have to endure these expirements to prove something of only minimal value.
Robert Garnett June 6th, 2009 04:08:29 PM
Robert: You think so? Though you have a valid point, the same was said of infant and animal studies into pain way back in the day. Demonstrating that infant and animal mortality was higher after surgery when pain relief was not applied is what it took to get pain medications more widely employed. It's unfortunate to think the human animal needs such incontrovertible evidence before it'll adopt a change in protocols, but history seems to back the, 'if you can't prove it, it doesn't matter' approach to issues like this. My two pennies.
Dr. Patty Khuly June 6th, 2009 04:14:31 PM
Consciousness can't be confined to a test tube or clinical setting. It's pure zen and if it isn't obvious by now that pets do in fact have feelings and emotions well . . we humans are a lost cause.
Evet June 6th, 2009 06:40:09 PM
I think it's sad when people say, "My dog feels bad when she's done something wrong" and point to the submissive behaviors (lowered body, tail tuck, looking away, rolling over, etc.) but cannot say "My dog feels happy when I get her leash" but say "My dog just goes crazy and gets hyper when I get the leash." It so often is that their feelings are assigned negative connotations in relation to how the person feels about what led up to the behavior.
Not to be a shrink (people or dog), but to try to clarify that: You come home from working longer than normal and you're in a bad mood and your dog has had an accident. Instead of saying "Oh, my fault, Buddy, let's go outside" and cleaning it up silently while the dog's outside, you let the anger about your day rise up, the dog picks up on that, and acts submissive, and you say, "See, they know they did wrong." And say you're tired and are putting off walking the dog, but when you get the leash and the dog gets happy, you contrast that with your state of mind, and get irked at the dog's joy. (Your subconscious is jealous...?)
And I think sometimes the problem is in the words that are used and what definition we put with each word. Not all of us have the same idea about what regret means, for example. To me, and many people, I'd guess, regret means, first and foremost, "I'm sorry that xyz happened to you" because of something I did to the other person. It's also said after some introspection and we apply the word to ourselves, as in "I regret that I didn't buckle down more in high school, blah,blah,blah" The "Hey, that's not fair" reaction (whether spoken by a human or thought by a non-human) can, technically, be termed 'regret' but it has a bit more of the "I'm jealous" emotion, I think. It translates to the "Dang, how come he got two treats, and I only got one" implying that you, as the treat giver, cheated. Then, because we actually are conditioned to feel guilt, we regret our actions, and give the dog another treat 'to be fair.'
KateH June 6th, 2009 07:35:50 PM
Excellent points and great post, Dr Khuly. Humans can generally only read the emotions of the individuals they are closest to, and that includes both animals and other humans. If you took away reading, speaking and writing, humans would interpret emotion in very different ways, and not be so quick to discount "human" emotion and thought in all animals.
brebis noire June 6th, 2009 08:55:02 PM
Dr. K: Your analogy is right on. I am from the era that was told that animals and INFANTS (as in human) don't perceive pain as a grown child or adult. Did not matter that when certain procedures were done that babies cried out & screamed.
When I think about that (60's & as late 70's), how stupid was that to believe? Yet, common in the medical community.
Do animals have emotions? I believe they do, along with damn good memories---but cannot form complex thoughts. And not just negative emotions but positive ones: bliss, contentment, happy. When observing multiple dogs, I think it shows more with their interactions amongst each other and their approaches to the same situations and humans.
Doesn't emotions contibute to personality too?
Barbara A. Albright/NH June 6th, 2009 09:01:48 PM
<<It's pure zen and if it isn't obvious by now that pets do in fact have feelings and emotions well . . we humans are a lost cause.>>
and maybe we should be. After all we are responsible for the worst atrocities committed both on animals and humans alike, many in the name of "religion"
Dr. Khuly,
many of those studies did result in helpful results like the pain management, but so many more did not, and were barely even "medical" I find it hard to justify those that did. After all, Just look at the damage Dr. Spock managed in his short time on this planet... I don't know...
LorriM June 6th, 2009 09:27:45 PM
Lorri, I have no idea what you have against Dr Spock. You are probably just unfamiliar with the history of childhood to make such an assertion.
I read Spock when I had my first kid 11 years ago, and found it perfectly harmless though rather dated. The main message I gathered was to trust my instinct and not squash my child's emotions and behaviours in favour of what other grown-ups said or believed to be appropriate. And to trust myself as a mother.
And yet this fits in exactly with what Dr Khuly is saying here: trust the people who are closest to their own animals, the ones who love them and observe them carefully.
brebis noire June 7th, 2009 08:22:50 AM
Barbara, it's interesting that you say that dogs have "damned good memories", as that is contrary to what many trainers think. The literature out there teaches us that dogs live in the moment, hence the old rule that you have 3 seconds to reward/punish your dog, otherwise they won't understand what the reward/punishment was for. I wonder if they remember the act they're being punished for (say, peeing on the rug), but don't connect it to the punishment because it was insignificant to them.
I'm not necessarily disagreeing, just rambling off some thoughts that your post sparked =)
Smaki June 7th, 2009 08:48:05 AM
<<Lorri, I have no idea what you have against Dr Spock. You are probably just unfamiliar with the history of childhood to make such an assertion.>>
Really? interesting assertion you make yourself. My main objection with Spock are his views/experiments in sensory deprivation.
LorriM June 7th, 2009 11:40:37 AM
Smaki, I think they do have good memories, but probably not complex thinking surrounding it. For instance, long gaps between training to do a trick...but they remember it. Or seeing/smelling a person they have not been around in a long time & displaying the association with that person. Or cutting toenails & you get to the one you have previously "inflicted a hurt" and the pet is hysterical/anxious before you even 'cut'
Associating a routine, day after day. Isn't recognition of smell/voice/sound involve memory? Just my thoughts & the way I interpret.
Barbara/NH June 7th, 2009 02:59:41 PM
Barbara, that makes sense and I think we're on the same page =)
Smaki June 7th, 2009 04:57:51 PM
well quantifying and identiying emotion should really be best leaft to the poets
As for "living in the moment" that is such a myth for both cats and dogs, just ask any keeper of a once abused animal.
jim hall June 8th, 2009 05:11:50 PM
jim hall: perfect response. I distinctly remember one such abused Scottie...association with long objects such as brooms, mop, 2x4 decking and white sneakers.... we knew the owner hit him with a yardstick and suspected the owner's son kicked him....
oh, another sad but never forgotten memory over a dozen years ago. .. we tried 4 placements, all with up-front warnings..but in an instant he would go from the most loving , set off to a biting dog by an unpredictable "stimulus"
Barb A. June 8th, 2009 10:42:58 PM
"the 'peeing on the rug' is one example in which true regret may me mingled with generalized anxiety and/or the anticipation of routine punishment." How is that different from humans? Children do whatever they want until taught. With learning come emotional reactions; not one reaction but a mixture of emotions. We then act to get the "good" emotions, the ones that make us happy or satisfied or some kind of reward (internal or external) or avoid punishment; those who don't start racking up the list of psychopath symptoms. Just because we can speak and write doesn't make our emotions something different from those of animals it merely means we can express them in a way we can share in large groups. However, from what I've seen, animals communicate their emotions with each other just fine; it is we who do not always "listen" well to their variety of languages. We want to express an emotion or reaction in a single sound bite when it is really much more complicated than that.
"My main objection with Spock are his views/experiments in sensory deprivation." From what I've read, Spock was the one advocating against sensory deprivation of children and doing so in a time when deprivation was the gold standard for child rearing. Personally, I think he swung a little too far in the opposite direction and was amongst those who headed us down the instant gratification road
Animals don't get headaches, babies don't feel pain, autism is a result of cold mothering, and on and on. I don't know what underlies these arse backwards, counter intuitive presumptions that seem to be the underlying foundation of many alleged scientific "facts" that then result in "lots of hedging" so that those holding this foolish beliefs die off so that actual science can be adopted to change the "scientific facts" but it's tiring and seems anathema to science. Just my little old opinion.
PJBoosinger June 9th, 2009 05:55:50 AM
Even though it happened 40 years ago I clearly remember my dog showing regret and saying "sorry." She bit a man she really liked and lowered her head, moved it side to side, dropped her ears, sat, hunched her body and kept showing regret and sorrow by swaying side to side. The man's hand was badly injured and bleeding. He said "I don't understand it, I just"...and as he reached to pet her head, she snapped at him. Again her body language said "sorry." He refused to go to the doctor to get care for his hand until my dog went to the vet as he reasoned there was something wrong with her head and she bit him in pain. In those days there weren't vet techs and this was one big dog. So the vet got 4 men off the street to volunteer to hold my dog so he could examine her. These men were farmers who were used to handling big animals. The vet discovered a bad ear infection that may have also infected the head area which accounted for the bite as a result of pain. And my dog received treatment to clear up the infection. The friend went to the doctor for his hand. This incident was remarkable for the sensitivity and kindness of this man, and the dog's ability to communicate she was sorry and meant no harm.
Pat Herrmann
Patricia Herrmann June 9th, 2009 08:42:40 PM
That's a great story Pat. Ear pain can be so severe in some dogs that it's impossible to examine them unless they're completely anesthetised. Other times, dogs seem to have very bad infections, and yet don't exhibit quite the same degree of pain, so there are a lot of potential things going on there.
That man's sensitivity is exceptional; something we don't see all that often.
brebis noire June 10th, 2009 03:04:58 PM
A few years ago results from two different studies on fish made the news on or about the same day. The first concluded that fish had enough nerve endings in their lips to feel pain. The second concluded that fish did not have enough brain cells to interpret the sensation in their lips as pain. When I read the articles, suddenly this post neclear holocaust society we live in... (I know we must have had a global nuclear war since half the population dresses like Mad Max mutants) made sense.
Mutants have enough nerve endings to sense the piercings in all of their body parts, but not enough brain cells to interpret it as stooopid.
And the doc is right about antropomorphidoodleaflops. The other day all three goats were repeatedly going through the fence. fighting over food, walking on the ducks, chewing on the chickens... I was sure they were being rebellious. Then it occurred to me that they might just be stupid animals acting on instinct. They went through the fence because they wanted to be with me... the senior goat, on the other side. They have no rebeliousness, just no thought for anything but to satisfy their own instinctive natures. Once I realized that I could laugh at all the antics and start planning to properly contain, restrain and separate them from the poultry.
Then the real bright light came on. I realized that we also anthropomorphize teenagers when they are really nothing more than stupid animals with nothing on their mind than to satisfy their instinctive nature. For a moment I thought I might make a killing with a line of teenage sized collars and leashes only to realize that someone else already had the bright idea but are selling them to the mutants.
Bob Jones June 24th, 2009 10:12:35 PM
Add Commment