Dogs can understand natural communication more easily than trends -aic keys

A new study in published in Scientific reports the functionality of the use of the AIC button (Augmmentative Interspecies Communication) with dogs. This tool fascinated social media and fueled a global citizen science movement.

Researchers of the Department of Ethology at Eötvös Loránd University in Budapest, Hungary, show that the audio quality significantly influences the ability of a dog to recognize and react recorded words.

While dogs recognize the recorded language to a certain extent, they fight more when the deterioration becomes stronger, as is the case with the AIC keys. The researchers examined how dogs react to known words with two types of audio recordings and playback devices: AIC buttons and a smartphone loudspeaker configuration, each have different levels of the sound closure.

The study tested 17 dogs with trained action verbal information such as “lie”, “spin” and “a paw” by the two re -gaberger devices and the direct human language. Dogs were excellent in the reaction to direct human language and achieved almost 100% success, and their success was around 70% when using speakers. However, the correct answers of the dogs went back to only 30% of the correct attempts with AIC buttons.

Similar results were observed for GWL dogs that are known for their extensive vocabulary when they were tested with the same devices to identify familiar toys.

“The frequency analysis showed that the loudspeaker preserves the most sound frequencies of human language; the AIC button loses frequencies that would be necessary to transmit human language to dogs,” explains co-author Dr. Tamás Farago.

The incredible ability of GWL dogs to quickly learn researchers with toy names caused these dogs an additional challenge. GWL dog owners were asked to teach new toy names with recordings instead of using their voice. Only the speakers were used for this study.

During teaching, the owners dealt with their usual social, playful interactions with the toys and the dogs, while they, for example, “Look! That is …”, but instead of saying the novel toy name, they typed the game symbol on their smartphone, which made the pre-drawn toy name via the speaker. After two weeks of lessons, the owner played a recording of the name of a toy during the test and asked the dogs to get him out of a selection of toys in another room.

GWL dogs were able to learn new toy names by reproducing speakers. However, their performance was around 70%. Next, the scientists tested whether the dogs could only recognize the toy name from the recordings when they heard this as directly spoken by the owners.

GWL dogs achieved a little better in these direct verbal tests, although they had learned from recorded names during their training. This indicates that GWL dogs what they have learned from recordings -which implies a certain level of sound deterioration, can be transferred to live language and that a direct human voice improves their performance. This shows how adaptable GWL dogs are in the processing of language, but indicates that a more natural context in harmony with the spontaneous social interactions between humans and dogs can play a role in the reaction of dogs to human language.

Fumi Higaki, the main author of the study, said: “At first I was really surprised to see how dogs looked confused and tried to react to recorded words that were emitted on AIC buttons. How probably many people assumed, I believed that dogs perceive those who do the same as I do.

“We hope that our research will help improve methods in dog research that use the recorded human language,” said project manager Dr. Claudia Fugazza.

The authors also suggest that, despite these interesting results, family dog ​​owners are more dependent on natural communication interactions than on arbitrary devices.