April 16, 2008
Should you pet that dog?
Michael Shermer in Scientific American:
The next time you come face to face with a dog wagging its tail, you can make a quick determination on whether to reach out and pet it or step back in deference: check the tail-wag bias. If the wagging tail leans to the dog’s right, you’re safe; if the tail leans to the dog’s left, don’t move.
This tail-wagging bias was documented in a 2007 article in the journal Current Biology by Italian neuroscientist Giorgio Vallortigara and his veterinarian colleagues at the University of Bari. In an experiment, 30 mixed-breed dogs were each placed in a cage equipped with cameras that measured the asymmetrical bias (left or right) of tail wagging while the pooches were exposed to four stimuli: their owner, an unfamiliar human, a cat and an unfamiliar dominant dog. Owners elicited a strong right bias in tail wagging, and unfamiliar humans and the cat triggered a slight right bias. But the unfamiliar dominant dog (a large Belgian Shepherd Malinois) elicited a strong left bias in tail wagging. Why?
According to the researchers, because the left brain controls the right side of the body, and vice versa, the nerve signals cross the midline of the body and cause the dog’s tail to wag more to the right when its left brain is experiencing a positive emotion.
More here.
Posted by Abbas Raza at 06:51 AM | Permalink






Comments
I agree with the reader of SA that considered this an April Fool Day's article...
Posted by: Felix E. F. Larocca MD | Apr 16, 2008 7:06:01 AM
Wouldn't that make your graphic incorrect? It shows green while the tail leans to the dog's left, and red when it leans to the dog's right.
Posted by: Cathy | Apr 16, 2008 9:40:20 AM
Cathy
What looks to you to be left, is dog's right. The image is from your perspective.
Posted by: MS | Apr 16, 2008 9:50:04 AM
I hope so Felix. Shermer's a smart guy, who has no business saying things like:
Posted by: Chris Schoen | Apr 16, 2008 2:49:00 PM
Chris - I agree that's a very weird article, but I don't understand why that particular line stood out for you so.
Posted by: D | Apr 17, 2008 12:08:02 AM
Since I was made aware of this, I have observed my dog carefully. The information in this post is absolutely correct!
Posted by: Bill | Apr 17, 2008 10:04:38 AM
After reading this article and observing my dog, I believe my dog may suffer from the psychological disorder bipolarism. He appears to switch between right and left aggressive and compliant attitudes at an alarming rate. This article has opened my eyes to my pet's mental turmoil and I will get him to a psychotherapist immediately!
Posted by: Rocky | Apr 17, 2008 10:56:58 AM
D,
You could replace "emotions" with any item X, and "cognitive thought processes" with any item Y, and the statement would have to be true. It's a meaningless assertion, dressed up as science.
Posted by: Chris Schoen | Apr 17, 2008 11:30:01 AM
No, Cathy is right. The graphic and text do not agree. "If the wagging tail leans to the dog’s right, you’re safe..." but the graphic clearly indicates that a bias to the dog's *left* (viewer's right) is the safer scenario.
Please clarify.
Posted by: Noah | Apr 17, 2008 11:36:09 AM
Noah, please drop your habit of reading 3QD in a mirror. Or try your "other" right! :-)
Posted by: Abbas Raza | Apr 17, 2008 11:45:54 AM
The problem with the graphic is a human perceptual one because it was done in perspective but without an adequate visual signifier of the dog's midline/spine (which one would see in reality) - depending on what one reads as the dog's "up" tail position, the graphic can be seen either properly or reversed - I saw it reversed initially, also...
So, poor graphic, as its perspective is highly ambiguous due to the elevated view angle away from the supposed human subject.
Posted by: Fred | Apr 17, 2008 12:50:38 PM
The only time when tail wagging is a sign of anger is when the dog is a cat. But this is a nice April Fools article, as it takes a minute or two to realize youre being had.
Posted by: aguy109 | Apr 17, 2008 5:31:22 PM
Surely that's a but harsh. Consider only X is "sense of smell" or "four-cylindered heart", and Y is "long legs", or "cognitive dissonance" and read the garbage that you'd have Shermer come up with :)
But yeah, it is a fairly banal statement. Then again, that's only to be expected sometimes from people who spend a lifetime engaged in the awful business of combating idiocy.
Posted by: D | Apr 17, 2008 7:45:54 PM
Post a comment