Why Dogs are More Like Humans Than Wolves
The dumb dog days are over, says evolutionary anthropologist Brian Hare
- By Amy Crawford
- Smithsonian.com, February 20, 2013, Subscribe
Brian Hare began studying dog intelligence as an undergraduate at Emory University in the 1990s, after realizing that Oreo, his Labrador retriever, had a remarkable ability. Unlike other animals, even chimpanzees, Oreo could interpret human gestures, following a person’s gaze or a pointing finger. From early experiments with the family dogs in his parents’ Atlanta garage, Hare went on to found the Canine Cognition Center at Duke University. Now, in The Genius of Dogs: How Dogs are Smarter than You Think, Hare and coauthor Vanessa Woods detail recent research about man’s brilliant best friend. Not only do dogs possess social intelligence far beyond that of their wolf ancestors, Hare says, but in many ways they’re more like us than our own primate relatives. Hare is also the lead scientist behind Dognition.com, a new website that offers pet owners the opportunity to participate in a massive citizen science project—and uncover the genius in their own precious pooches.
What is the secret to dogs’ intelligence?
The genius of dogs is that they use probably the most powerful tool on Earth to solve problems—humans. At one point in wolf evolution, a group of wolves decided to take advantage of humans, and they have been really successful because of it. It’s probably not a surprise to people that dogs are socially tuned-in to us. But I think what’s new is the understanding that this skill is absolutely remarkable in the animal world. When you talk about survival of the fittest, most people think nature is “red in tooth and claw.” But dogs domesticated themselves through a natural process, where the less aggressive, most friendly, tolerant individuals actually did much better.
How has the scientific understanding of dogs changed?
We’ve learned more in the past 10 years than in the previous 100 years. When identifying intelligence in animals, what people are most interested in is where animals make inferences. These are situations in which they can’t actually perceive a solution, so they have to infer it spontaneously. If you are going to find that kind of intelligence, you’re not going to find it in a dog, or so it was thought. Scientists had theorized that dogs, through domestication, have become dumbed-down, because they just sit around and take scraps from us. What do they need to be smart about? The guess was animals like a bonobo or a dolphin or other charismatic megafauna were where to look. But it turns out in many ways dogs are more like us than even great apes.
How are they like us?
Dogs are the only species that have demonstrated that they can learn words in a manner similar to a little kid. It’s not that other species that we think of as being highly intelligent, like bonobos and dolphins, can’t become sophisticated at communicating using symbols, but there’s some nice evidence that dogs are using an inferential strategy, which takes advantage of what’s called the principle of exclusion. They know that a number of objects are named or labeled with a sound, and when a new one is introduced that they do not have a label for, and they hear a new sound that they’ve never heard before, they infer that the new sound must apply to this new object. That has only been observed in human children before. That was a big shocker, and it’s been replicated. It even gets crazier than that—several border collies are using what’s called the principal of iconicity. You can show them a two-dimensional picture, and they will then go fetch the object in the picture. That’s something people thought only kids could do, and that it would only be in a linguistic species that that would be possible.
That’s amazing, but it’s a small sample size—isn’t it possible these dogs were outliers?
We don’t know. I don’t think it’s chance that the dogs that have demonstrated this are border collies. But that is not to say that border collies are somehow the most intelligent breed. All dogs are probably able to make the type of inferences that the border collies are making. The question is, can they use that exclusionary principle when learning words? It’s entirely possible that all of our dogs have this hidden talent that we just don’t know how to take advantage of.
What are some other new findings about dog intelligence?
There’s a lot of research into how dogs solve problems. For instance, in a new experiment, a dog demonstrated opening a sliding door, using one of two techniques. It turns out other dogs will copy the first dog and use that same technique the very first time they open the door. That is not something that most people would have expected. [A hundred years ago, British psychologist] C. Lloyd Morgan was one of the first people to write about animal intelligence from an experimental perspective. One of the great anecdotes he tells is about how his dog Tony struggled to open a gate, and through trial and error, he slowly learned a solution. It looked like Tony the terrier was a genius, but because Morgan had watched the problem-solving develop, he knew that Tony didn’t understand anything, that it was all chance trial and error. Morgan then concluded that when you see animals doing intelligent things, you must consider that there’s a very low-level mechanism that allowed them to solve the problem. But the new finding is, if he had only shown Tony how to open the gate, Tony could have learned almost immediately how to do it. You make the problem social and dogs do fantastically.
You also cite studies that show dogs can be deceptive. How does that demonstrate genius?
Those studies show that dogs are using information about what humans can see or hear to make decisions about how to behave around us. In one study, dogs spontaneously avoid retrieving food from a box with noisemakers when they have been told not to eat it, [instead choosing to steal food from a box that a human has demonstrated does not make noise]. This suggests they might be aware of what we can and cannot hear. Similarly, a number of studies have shown that dogs avoid misbehaving if you are watching them, but are more likely to act up if you have your back turned, or even your eyes closed!
So there is such thing as a bad dog. But can this new science of dog cognition help us train them better?
No pun intended, I don’t really have a dog in the fight about how to train dogs, but it’s an important question. People love dogs, and they want to help their dogs have a rich life, and they can do that by helping their dogs obey some simple principles. But how do you get a dog to do that? One of the big schools of thought is you have to really be an alpha dog. You have to make sure the dog doesn’t think he can boss you around. That premise is probably based on some faulty rationale, that dogs evolved from wolves, and wolves have a very strict hierarchy. That’s a reasonable hypothesis, except that there’s one major problem: dogs are not wolves. Looking at feral dogs, what people have found is that they don’t have a strict hierarchy. It’s not that you follow the dominant individual. With feral dogs, the leader is the individual that has the most friendships in the group. It’s not about dominance.
There’s another school of training, which says that the more you practice the better they’ll be at sitting, staying, listening to you, obeying, etc. But there are studies that show that dogs that are trained less intensely actually learn faster and retain the information they learn longer. If you force animals to perform over and over, it actually makes a response less flexible.
Here’s a question that could get us in trouble. Are dogs smarter than cats?
It’s a very difficult question to answer in any meaningful way. I could ask you, which is a better tool, a hammer or a screwdriver? They’re designed to do different things. Compare the origins of these animals in the wild, their progenitors, the wolf and the wild African cat. You have one that is an endurance runner, a pack animal that relies on cooperation. You have another that is a relatively asocial, stalking hunter that relies on stealth to be successful. These are completely different social systems and ways of life, and evolution shaped those minds to be really different because they do completely different things in terms of how they make a living.
Fair enough. In addition to dog and cat partisans, I’m guessing that many pet owners will have another response to your book: “There’s no way my dog is a genius. He drinks out of the toilet and chases his own tail.” Would these people be wrong?
Everybody loves to talk about how amazing humans are as a species in terms of innovation and technology. We’ve invented the Internet and the iPad, and we have an International Space Station. Yes, as a species we’ve done that, but I can assure you that if somebody said to me today, “You have to invent the next iPad,” you might as well just shoot me. There’s also tremendous individual variation in dogs. In the case of the dog that chases his own tail, that may be a dog that the person thinks is a little bit on the dumb side, but there are some domains of intelligence that people aren’t really thinking about. Just because one individual dog isn’t particularly good at using gestures, for example, it doesn’t mean that they’re not absolutely remarkable in their memory, or that they can’t use your visual perspective to deceive you. One of the things we’re trying to do in the book is change the conversation about what is intelligence. A lot of people may find out, the dog that just chases his tail, there’s actually a lot more there than they expected.
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.









Comments (16)
My female Jack Russell Terrier is a great communicator. If she drops her toy off of the bed, she will go to the edge of the bed, turn her head to look at me and paw the edge of the bed. She knows mama will get up and retrieve the toy. She also "talks" to me when she wants something. She rocks back and forth and "talks" to me. When I get up, she will lead me to either the door to potty, or to the refrigerator for a treat. My Jack also rides in the backseat of the car and is seatbelted in. When we arrive at our destination, she undoes the seatbelt with her nose or paw. She's ready to go! Many stories with this great little dog. Her intelligence is amazing.
Posted by Julia Fendrick on April 14,2013 | 12:47 AM
Do your research, our some 450 dog breeds most of which has been in the last 150 years, there is proof of dogs existing at least 7,000 years ago (fossil record) and some believe it to be even longer(molecular record). Because the time-frame which the fossil records is inadequate. A dog's high variability one obviously comes from us(breeding dogs and such) but they are mainly of new origin, so the new breeds (150 years) were likely taken from a mixed, out-bred pool of dogs. (two individuals of dissimilar groups--occurs naturally or by us) I enjoy his work, but i have also studied the psychological aspect as well and have done studies on dogs for a few classes. I leave you with this, Where did we come from?
Posted by Subwaygirl on April 12,2013 | 04:54 AM
I find it strange that the author said that "But dogs domesticated themselves through a natural process..." - this is wrong in two ways (well, the same issue.) Dogs did not domesticate themselves. They were domesticated by humans. And on the same note, it was not a "natural" process. Again, they weren't "selected" by nature, they were selected by human beings, and selectively bred. This is an important distinction if you want to talk about not only why dogs are smart but how they are smart. Wolves didn't all of a sudden decide to respond to humans because it may increase their chances of survival. We made them the way we wanted them to be. Hopefully the author simply misspoke.
Posted by Nate G. on March 10,2013 | 11:45 PM
Thank you for pointing that out, Durabo. We've corrected the sentence.
Posted by Marina Koren on March 5,2013 | 11:40 AM
I believe the author meant "the principle of exclusion" (not "principal")
Posted by durabo on February 27,2013 | 06:48 PM
So our adopted kids know us better than our cousins. Guess that shouldn't be surprising.
Posted by Guy B. on February 25,2013 | 11:17 AM
Loved reading about dogs as I am such a dog lover. They are wonderful animals. I also love cats and now that I am 75 and live upstairs in a condo, it is easier for me to have a cat as a pet. I worked for RESQCATS for 10 years as a volunteer and it was my job to love the kittens and get them socialized. Now I have started working for DAWG, a wonderful dog shelter in Goleta, CA and I walk a couple of dogs on my shift and than end up going into this big yard where they keep the small dogs during the day. There is a bench in there and I sit down and just love all the little dogs that jump into my lap.
Posted by Kay Hewitt on February 24,2013 | 05:49 AM
I've had dogs and cats as pets. I love them both. My cat that I have now is very much like a dog. He knows probably 30 words, looks me in the eye, and he pays close attention to my body language. He also loves to go for walks on a leash. One reason that he is like this is that I have taught him language like you would a child. I label items and situations (go for a walk) when there is joint attention on that item and when it is important and relevant to him. People that say that cats are stupid have not stimulated and/or talked to them. Cats are very receptive to learning, but many people let them lie around without involving them in their lives.
Posted by Amelie on February 23,2013 | 07:01 PM
This is an excellent article and shines a different light on dog intelligence.I had observed some of these behaviors in my dogs but had not thought about how they related to how smart my dogs are.I will never see them in quite the same way.
Posted by Gloria Elliott on February 22,2013 | 10:07 PM
I certainly understood and accept most of your findings on dogs. I have two Lakeland Terriers and they try their best to out guess what I will do. And as for being deceptive they have demonstrated their skill and yes joy at doing it. They also deceive each other by (F)barking and partially runto the gate-but not all the way-She waits until he arrives at the gate then immediately returns to steal his bisquit. However, he has figured out to take his bisquit with him now when she does it. As for decieving me they both will jump on my furred boats the minuite I'm not aware/watching of them. There are many acts by these dogs that simple astound me. TV is watched. Only though if I turn to cartoons or the Nature shows. I catch them studying me all the time:my moods and a smiling face makes happy terriers.
Posted by Marie T Thomas on February 22,2013 | 05:55 PM
I certainly understood and accept most of your findings on dogs. I have two Lakeland Terriers and they try their best to out guess what I will do. And as for being deceptive they have demonstrated their skill and yes joy at doing it. They also deceive each other by (F)barking and partially runto the gate-but not all the way-She waits until he arrives at the gate then immediately returns to steal his bisquit. However, he has figured out to take his bisquit with him now when she does it. As for decieving me they both will jump on my furred boats the minuite I'm not awre of them. There are many acts by these dogs that simple astound me. TV is watched. Only though if I turn to cartoons or the Nature shows. I catch them studying me all the time:my moodsand a smiling face makes happy terriers.
Posted by Marie T Thomas on February 22,2013 | 05:43 PM
I know this is probably just a conditioned response, but when my dogs hear a click from my audio video receiver turning off, they stand up and head to the back door thinking its time for them to be let out before bed. Most often this is exactly what is going to happen. Also, when one of my dogs gets sick in her crate, I know she feels bad (body language, facial expressions)that I have to clean it up. She watches me do it through the glass sliding door. I do sense appreciation from her for that when she comes back in.
Posted by Drewboy on February 22,2013 | 04:46 PM
My labrabor retriever, Athena, has learned that when my wife is going to sleep, she must get down off our bed. She does this without being told. Athena can also tell when my wife is just coming into the room, but not going to sleep, so she stays on the bed. Now Athena has learned that if she gets up and lays down on my side of the bed, she doesn't have to get down at all. Sounds like Athena has got it figured out.
Posted by Gregory Urbach on February 21,2013 | 12:34 AM
@lynn Dominance is obviously important to you and means something to you. Who is most dominant? The mother bird who runs around finding food or the baby bird who is fed that food? Dogs and humans both benefitted form working together. You see it as humans dominating dogs but perhaps dogs could see it as they trained the humans. It all depends on the perspective and how each party benefitted.
Posted by Allan on February 21,2013 | 08:25 PM
I completely resent ANY inference that I decended from ANY primate. It is an insult to my religion and my faith. I was created as a human in the image and likeness of GOD. TRY telling Ahmendinejad he came from a monkey. I rest my case. Btw....dogs are MUCH smarter than cats.
Posted by Cheryl D. on February 21,2013 | 08:06 PM
theory or ( question statements) 9 and ten contradict each other. Dog's are hierarchy oriented, i see it everyday. If it wasn't for this order, which every species has. Where would us humans be? it's basic survival. If dogs didn't see us as "above" them, would they even be trainable in the first place???Wolves did not take advantage of our intelligence, we took advantage of them...why? because we were at the time and still are, the dominant species, which always comes back to order, "how could they benefit our family?, they are natural hunters, how could they benefit our health? could they protect us?" An endless list could be brought out. Canines ARE intelligent, but you would have to correctly study their past to understand their domesticated present.Not just throw out there that they are not wolves, just because they are not wild. Put a group of domesticated dogs together that have never met, and the pecking order will unfold before your eyes. It will, and always will be a natural aspect to how they look at the world. This is not a statement against Canine intelligence theory. This is simply stating that more history research on this species would need to be done to correctly back up "some" and few of these statements.
Posted by lynn on February 21,2013 | 12:30 PM