Cover not available
Part of
Intersubjectivity in Action: Studies in language and social interaction
Edited by Jan K. Lindström, Ritva Laury, Anssi Peräkylä and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 326] 2021
► pp. 397–428

Interactional reciprocity in human–dog interaction

| University of Helsinki, Finland
| University of Helsinki, Finland
This chapter explores the potential existence of interactional reciprocity in human–dog interactions by analyzing experimental data on situations where dog owners fail to produce reciprocally modified actions for two minutes. We found that their dogs soon realized the strangeness of the situation. While they pursued missing feedback with touch, gaze and vocalizations, they also addressed other humans and requested their attention. Therefore, the dogs oriented to the lack of reciprocity and attempted to repair it. We demonstrate that interactional reciprocity in human–dog interactions can be breached, thus proving its existence. Moreover, we show that it also returned when the experiment ended. The findings are compared with mother–infant experiments where evidence of interactional reciprocity has also been found.
Keywords: conversation analysis, dogs, experiment, Finnish, high-pitch vocalizations, intersubjectivity, interspecies interaction, reciprocity
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1The Still-Face Paradigm
    • 1.2The Strange Situation Paradigm
  • 2.The setting and methods
  • 3.Research questions
  • 4.Analysis
    • 4.1The Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retriever and the passive owner
      • 4.1.1The dog sets a new project
      • 4.1.2The dog requests help from the owner and others
      • 4.1.3Once contact is restored, the dog engages in play
    • 4.2The Saluki and its passive owner
    • 4.3Summary of the analysis
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 17 November 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.326.18sim
References (44)
References
Ainsworth, Mary D. Salter, and Silvia M. Bell. 1970. ‟Attachment, Exploration, and Separation: Illustrated by the Behavior of One-Year-Olds in a Strange Situation.” Child Development 41 (1): 49–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowlby, John. 1958. ‟The Nature of the Child’s Tie to His Mother.” International Journal of Psycho-Analysis 39: 350–373.Google Scholar
de Waal, Frans. 2019. Mama’s Last Hug: Animal Emotions and What They Tell Us about Ourselves. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Dixon, Suzanne Z., Michael Yogman, Edward Tronick, Lauren Adamson, Heidelise Als, and Berry Brazelton. 1981. ‟Early Infant Social Interaction with Parents and Strangers.” Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry 20: 32–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul. 1998. ‟Complaints about Transgressions and Misconduct.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 31 (3–4): 295–325. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold. 1967. Studies in Ethnomethodology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Goode, David. 2007. Playing with My Dog Katie. An Ethnomethodological Study of Dog–Human Interaction. West Lafayette: Pursue University Press.Google Scholar
Heffner, Henry E. and Rickey S. Heffner. 2008. ‟High-Frequency Fearing.” In The Senses: A Comprehensive Reference. Vol. 3: Audition ed. by Peter Dallos and Donata Oertel, 55–60. Amsterdam: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Horn, Lisa, Ludwig Huber, and Friederike Range. 2013. ‟The Importance of the Secure Base Effect for Domestic Dogs – Evidence from a Manipulative Problem-Solving Task.” PLoS ONE 8(5), e65296. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Itakura, Shoji. 2004. ‟Gaze-Following and Joint Visual Attention in Nonhuman Animals.” Japanese Psychological Research 46 (3): 216–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larson, Greger, Elinor K. Karlsson, Angela Perri, Matthew T. Webster, Simon Y. W. Ho, Joris Peters, Peter W. Stahl, Philip J. Piper, Frode Lingaas, Merete Fredholm, Kenine E. Comstock, Jaime F. Modiano, Claude Schelling, Alexander I. Agoulnik, Peter A. Leegwater, Keith Dobney, Jean-Denis Vigne, Carles Vilà, Leif Andersson, and Kerstin Lindblad-Toh. 2012. ‟Rethinking Dog Domestication by Integrating Genetics, Archeology, and Biogeography.” PNAS 109 (23): 8878–8883. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindwall, Oskar, Gustav Lymer, and Jonas Ivarsson. 2016. ‟Epistemic Status and the Recognizability of Social Actions.” Discourse Studies 18 (5): 500–525. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lynch, Michael. 2007. ‟Foreword.” In Playing with My Dog Katie. An Ethnomethodological Study of Dog–Human Interaction by David Goode, xiii–xv. West Lafayette: Pursue University Press.Google Scholar
Lyons-Ruth, Karlen, Nadia Bruschweiler-Stern, Alexandra M. Harrison, Alexander C. Morgan, Jeremy P. Nahum, Louis Sander, Daniel N. Stern, and Edward Z. Tronick. 1998. ‟Implicit Relational Knowing: Its Role in Development and Psychoanalytic Treatment.” Infant Mental Health Journal 19 (3): 282–289. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mesman, Judi, Marinus H. van I Jzendoorn, and Marian J. Bakermans-Kranenburg. 2009. ‟The Many Faces of the Still-Face Paradigm: A Review and Meta-Analysis.” Developmental Review 29 (2): 120–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza. 2018a. ‟Multiple Temporalities of Language and Body in Interaction: Challenges for Transcribing Multimodality.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 51 (1): 85–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018b. ‟The Multimodal Interactional Organization of Tasting: Practices of Tasting Cheese in Gourmet Shops.” Discourse Studies 20 (6): 743–769. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Murray, Lynne, and Colwyn Trevarthen. 1985. ‟Emotional Regulation of Interactions Between Two Month-Olds and Their Mothers.” In Social Perception in Infants ed. by Tiffany M. Field and Nathan A Fox, 177–197. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishers.Google Scholar
Naderi, Szima, Ádám Miklósi, Dóka Antal, and Vilmos Csányi. 2001. ‟Co-Operative Interactions between Blind Persons and Their Dogs.” Applied Animal Behaviour Science 74/2001: 59–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nagasawa, Miho, Shouhei Mitsui, Shiori En, Nobuyo Ohtani, Mitsuaki Ohta, Yasuo Sakuma, Tatsushi Onaka, Kazutaka Mogi, and Takefumi Kikusui. 2015. ‟Oxytocin-Gaze Positive Loop and the Coevolution of Human–Dog Bonds.” Science 348 (6232): 333–336. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ogden, Richard. 2010. ‟Prosodic Constructions in Making Complaint.” In Prosody in Interaction ed. by Dagmar Barth-Weingarten, Elisabeth Reber, and Margret Selting, 81–103. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prato-Previde, Emanuela, and Paola Valsecchi 2014. ‟The Immaterial Cord: The Dog–Human Attachment Bond.” In The Social Dog. Behaviour and Cognition ed. by Juliane Kaminski and Sarah Marshall-Pescini, 165–189. Amsterdam: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Rehn, Therese, Ragen T. S. McGowan, and Linda J. Keeling 2013. “Evaluating the Strange Situation Procedure (SSP) to Assess the Bond between Dogs and Humans.” PLoS ONE 8 (2): e56938. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Riede, Tobias, and Tecumseh Fitch 1999. ‟Vocal Tract Length and Acoustics of Vocalization in the Comestic Dog (Canis familiaris).” Journal of Experimental Biology 202: 2859–2867. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff and Gail Jefferson 1974. ‟A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation” Language 50 (4): 696–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sales, Gillian, and David Pye 1974. Ultrasonic Communication by Animals. London: Chapman and Hall. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2007. Sequence Organization in Interaction. A Primer in Conversation Analysis I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selting, Margret. 2010. ‟Prosody in Interaction: State of the Art.” In Prosody in Interaction ed. by Dagmar Barth-Weingarten, Elisabeth Reber, and Margret Selting, 3–40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, Jack, and Tanya Stivers. eds. 2013. The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stern, Daniel N. 1971. ‟A Micro-Analysis of Mother–Infant Interaction.” Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry 10 (3): 501–517. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya. 2013. ‟Sequence Organization.‟ In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 191–209. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, and Federico Rossano. 2010. ‟Mobilizing Response.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 43 (1): 3–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, and Jack Sidnell. 2013. “Introduction.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 1–8. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Streeck, Ulrich. 2013. ‟Implizites Beziehungswissen.” Psychotherapeut 58 (2): 143–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Szczepek Reed, Beatrice. 2006. Prosodic Orientation in English Conversation. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
. 2011. Analysing Conversation. An Introduction to Prosody. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Taylor, Anna Magdalena, Victoria Frances Ratcliffe, Karen McComb, and David Reby. 2014. ‟Auditory Communication in Domestic Dogs: Vocal Signalling in the Extended Social Environment of a Companion Animal.” In The Social Dog. Behaviour and Cognition, ed. by Juliane Kaminski and Sarah Marshall-Pescini, 131–163. Amsterdam: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Tiira, Katriina, and Hannes Lohi. 2014. ‟Reliability and Validity of a Questionnaire Survey in Canine Anxiety Research.” Applied Animal Behaviour Science 155: 82–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, Michael. 1995. ‟Joint Attention as Social Cognition.” In Joint Attention: Its Origins and Role in Development, ed. by Chris Moore and Philip J. Dunham, 103–130. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Topál, József, and Márta Gácsi. 2012. ‟Lessons We Should Learn from Our Unique Relationship with Dogs: An Ethological Approach.” In Crossing Boundaries. Investigating Human–Animal Relationships, ed. by Lynda Birke and Jo Hockenhull, 163–186. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Tronick, Edward, Heidelise Als, Lauren Adamson, Susan Wise, and Berry T. Brazelton. 1978. ‟The Infant’s Response to Entrapment between Contradictory Messages in Face-to-Face Interaction.” Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry 17 (1): 1–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Volodina, Elena V., Ilya A. Volodin, and Olga A. FilatovA 2006. ‟The Occurrence of Nonlinear Vocal Phenomena in Frustration Whines of the Domestic Dog (Canis familiaris).” In Advances in Bioacoustics 2, Dissertationes Classis IV: Historia Naturalis, ed. by Matija Gogala and Tomi Trilar. Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts (Ljubljana), XLVII-3, 257–270.Google Scholar
Walker, Gareth. 2013. ‟Phonetics and Prosody in Conversation.‟ In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 455–474. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Taşdizen, Burak, Erman Örsan Yetiş & Yekta Bakırlıoğlu
2024. Intersubjectivity as an analytical concept to study human-animal interaction in historical context: street dogs in Late Ottoman period. Frontiers in Sociology 9 DOI logo
Mondémé, Chloé
2023. Gaze in Interspecies Human–Pet Interaction: Some Exploratory Analyses. Research on Language and Social Interaction 56:4 ► pp. 291 ff. DOI logo
Reed, Beatrice Szczepek
2023. Designing Talk for Humans and Horses: Prosody as a Resource for Parallel Recipient Design. Research on Language and Social Interaction 56:2 ► pp. 89 ff. DOI logo
Harjunpää, Katariina
2022. Repetition and prosodic matching in responding to pets’ vocalizations. Langage et société N° 176:2 ► pp. 69 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.