Dogs are hypersocial with humans, and their integration into human social ecology makes dogs a unique model for studying cross-species social bonding. However, the proximal neural mechanisms driving dog–human social interaction are unknown.

That's why I write in this ('Dual Core problems') topic. Programma anatomiya cheloveka 3d na russkom. Anyware Doom3 just have low-fps and non-very-critical artifacts, but never crash system (at 91.31 too). Anyware Doom3 just have low-fps and non-very-critical artifacts, but never crash system (at 91.31 too).

We used functional magnetic resonance imaging in 15 awake dogs to probe the neural basis for their preferences for social interaction and food reward. In a first experiment, we used the ventral caudate as a measure of intrinsic reward value and compared activation to conditioned stimuli that predicted food, praise or nothing. Relative to the control stimulus, the caudate was significantly more active to the reward-predicting stimuli and showed roughly equal or greater activation to praise vs food in 13 of 15 dogs.

To confirm that these differences were driven by the intrinsic value of social praise, we performed a second imaging experiment in which the praise was withheld on a subset of trials. The difference in caudate activation to the receipt of praise, relative to its withholding, was strongly correlated with the differential activation to the conditioned stimuli in the first experiment. In a third experiment, we performed an out-of-scanner choice task in which the dog repeatedly selected food or owner in a Y-maze. The relative caudate activation to food- and praise-predicting stimuli in Experiment 1 was a strong predictor of each dog’s sequence of choices in the Y-maze. Analogous to similar neuroimaging studies of individual differences in human social reward, our findings demonstrate a neural mechanism for preference in domestic dogs that is stable within, but variable between, individuals. Moreover, the individual differences in the caudate responses indicate the potentially higher value of social than food reward for some dogs and may help to explain the apparent efficacy of social interaction in dog training. , Introduction As the first domesticated species, dogs have a unique relationship with humans.

Dogs have been integrated into modern social life in many cultures, with millions serving as companion animals. As such, dogs benefit from a clear tendency of humans to bond socially with dogs (;;; ). But what is the nature of the relationship from the dog’s perspective? And, given the high degree of individual variability in dogs (see ), how consistent across individuals are the biological underpinnings of this relationship? A better understanding of the proximal mechanisms driving dog–human interaction and the extent to which these vary across individuals will illuminate the dog–human social relationship. It is worth highlighting just how unique this cross-species relationship is. Although commensalism and symbiosis are not uncommon in the animal kingdom, a species-wide extension of social bonding mechanisms to include a wholly unrelated species is apparently very rare, and raises the intriguing possibility that human social behavior has served as a strong adaptive pressure in the evolution of domestic dog sociobiology ().

Quantifying the relative value of food vs praise would also help inform ongoing and contentious debates regarding the most effective methods in dog training (e.g.;; ). Dogs are gifted at attending to, and interpreting, subtle human social cues (;; ), and a behavioral literature suggests that dogs act as if socially attached to humans (;; although see:; ).

Despite this, the motivations behind dog behavior toward humans can be difficult to disentangle from behavior alone. In terms of measuring preference, dog social behaviors are highly susceptible to prior patterns of food reinforcement (; ), and dogs frequently treat interaction with their owner as an avenue to acquire food (), even suppressing interest in food under communicative situations (). Mezhdunarodnij kontrakt na okazanie uslug obrazec 1.

In direct tests of behavioral preference, some dogs select their owners and others food (;;, )—but the behavior appears to be contingent on testing method, socialization history, reinforcement history and potentially many other factors including attention, stimulus salience and satiety. Further, although social reinforcement is a commonly used tool in dog training (), and many trainers believe it to be effective, it is quite difficult to experimentally isolate social and food reward in a training paradigm to measure their relative contribution to learning. Food delivery in dog training almost always includes a social component, and the acquisition rate of new behaviors can vary greatly depending on factors aside from reinforcement type. Notably, animals have long been known to show faculty for generalized learning (see ), meaning that novel behaviors may be learned more quickly due to prior experience with even tangentially related learning tasks. The difficulties of isolating variables contributing to choice behavior and learning rate in purely behavioral paradigms highlight the potential value of a neurobiological approach seeking a consistent signal underlying individual differences in behavior.