Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40711725›Full record

ReviewBiologia futura2025

Social learning in dogs from an ecologically valid perspective.

Péter Pongrácz, Petra Dobos

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Biologia futura, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Péter PongráczDepartment of Ethology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Pázmány Péter Sétány 1/C, Budapest, 1117, Hungary. peter.pongracz@ttk.elte.hu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5126-299X
Petra DobosDepartment of Ethology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Pázmány Péter Sétány 1/C, Budapest, 1117, Hungary.

Funding

Innovációs és Technológiai Minisztérium EKÖP-24-2-I-ELTE-394Innovációs és Technológiai Minisztérium ÚNKP-23-2-II-ELTE-164Morris Animal Foundation D25CA-039Nemzeti Kutatási Fejlesztési és Innovációs Hivatal K143077
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Social learning is one of the most adaptive capacities for collecting information, which can enhance several key aspects of survival. Dogs represent a special case among other highly social species as they have been exposed within the anthropogenic environment to humans as source of information since their domestication. In this review article, we surveyed the literature of the various empirical approaches to social learning in dogs, with specific emphasis on biological relevance of the research methodologies. We applied a critical evaluation by comparing the included studies from the aspect of whether and how, the authors handled the question of evolutionary adaptiveness of social learning. Based on 61 publications that fulfilled our selection criteria, we identified three categories that corresponded with the focus of the investigations: (i) ecological validity was not included; (ii) copy the demonstrator when non-social learning is costly; (iii) copy the more successful demonstrator. We used the SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) evaluation paradigm to highlight each of these techniques' advantages and shortcomings. According to our survey, most of the empirical papers took into consideration ecologically valid hypotheses. Other studies aimed at testing particular social learning mechanisms, usually with applied conclusions. Hopefully our evaluation will help researchers to design biologically valid experiments, especially in such understudied areas as the relationship between social learning and the genetic relatedness of dog breeds, social learning between puppies and their mother, or in the case of free ranging dogs.

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalSocial LearningAnimalsDogsBiological relevanceDogsEcological validitySocial learning

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.