Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41775942›Full record

ArticleAnimal cognition2026

Treats or affection? Understanding reward preferences in Indian free-ranging dogs.

Srijaya Nandi, Aesha Lahiri, Tuhin Subhra Pal, Anamitra Roy, Rittika Bairagya, Anindita Bhadra

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animal cognition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Srijaya NandiDepartment of Biological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science Education & Research (IISER) Kolkata, Mohanpur, Nadia, West Bengal, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9462-2374
Aesha LahiriDepartment of Biological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science Education & Research (IISER) Kolkata, Mohanpur, Nadia, West Bengal, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0605-3827
Tuhin Subhra PalDepartment of Biological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science Education & Research (IISER) Kolkata, Mohanpur, Nadia, West Bengal, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-8953-9485
Anamitra RoyDepartment of Biological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science Education & Research (IISER) Kolkata, Mohanpur, Nadia, West Bengal, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3406-1667
Rittika BairagyaDepartment of Biotechnology, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad University of Technology, Haringhata, Nadia, West Bengal, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-0910-5932
Anindita BhadraDepartment of Biological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science Education & Research (IISER) Kolkata, Mohanpur, Nadia, West Bengal, India. abhadra@iiserkol.ac.in.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3717-9732

Funding

Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India BT/HRD/NBA-NWB/39/2020-21 (YC-1)Department of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India INSPIRE PhD fellowshipUniversity Grants Commission, India PhD fellowship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Free-ranging dogs (FRDs) constitute approximately 80% of the global dog population. They are freely breeding and live without direct human supervision, making them ideal for studying how factors such as the lack of supervision, unmanaged breeding, and variable human contact shape dog-human relationships. Living in proximity to humans, FRDs in India frequently interact with people, and previous studies suggest humans to be a crucial part of their social environment. Positive reinforcement in the form of food and petting is commonly received from humans. In this study, we investigated which reward, food or petting, is preferred more during short-term and repeated interactions. Field trials were conducted on 61 adult FRDs. During the familiarization phase (Days 1 to 5), two unfamiliar individuals each provided either food or petting to the dogs. This was followed by a series of choice tests (Days 1 to 10), in which dogs could choose between the two individuals. On the first day, dogs significantly preferred the food provider. However, from the second day onward, preference was no different from chance, suggesting that the strength of food as a reward was reduced. These findings suggest that while food is a stronger short-term motivator, repeated interactions involving either food or petting contribute equally to the formation of positive social associations over time. This study sheds light on the development of the dog-human relationship in Indian FRD populations and highlights the nuanced role of different rewards in fostering affiliative associations.

Indexed as

RewardAnimalsChoice BehaviorDogsFemaleHumansIndiaMaleSocial BehaviorDog-human relationshipFood versus pettingFree-ranging dogsSocial cognition

Identifiers

PMID41775942
PMCPMC12979412

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.