This article on cats is published here with permission from The Conversation. This content is shared here because the topic may interest Snopes readers; however, it does not represent the work of Snopes fact checkers or editors.
There is an old stereotype about the difference between cats and dogs. Dogs are loving and very loyal, they say, while cats are aloof and indifferent. Most cat people probably disagree – I find it hard to believe with my cat in my lap that she does not care about me.
In general, cat cognition indicates that cats form emotional bonds with their humans. Cats seem to experience separation anxiety, respond more to the voice of their owners than to strangers, and seek reassurance from their owners in difficult situations.
But a new study by researchers in Japan complicates the picture of our relationship with cats. The researchers found that cats, unlike dogs, a method previously used to study dogs, do not avoid strangers who refuse to help their owners.
Shutterstock / PHOTO Michal Bednarek
In the experiment, a cat watched as her owner tried to open a box to get something inside. Two strangers sat on either side of the owner and the owner turned to one of them and asked for help. In ‘helper trials’, the stranger helped the owner open the box. In ‘non-helper trials’, the stranger refused. The other stranger sat passively and did nothing.
Then both strangers offered the cat a treat, and the scientists looked to see which cat was approaching for the first time. Did she prefer to take food from a helper over a passive bystander? This indicates a positive bias, which shows that the cat has a warm feeling towards the stranger. Or did she avoid taking food from the non-helper? This negative bias can mean that the cat feels distrustful.
When this method was used to test dogs, they showed a clear bias of negativity. The dogs preferred not to take food from a stranger who refused their owner. In contrast, the cats in the new study were completely indifferent. They had no preference for the helpful person and avoided the helpless person. As for cats, food is apparently food.
Social cues
What should we take from this? An enticing conclusion would be that cats are selfish and can care less about how their humans are treated. While this may fit our prejudice against cats, it is an example of anthropomorphic prejudice. It involves interpreting the behavior of cats as if they are hairy little humans, rather than creatures with their own distinctive ways of thinking.
To really understand cats, we need to come out of this human-centered mindset and think of them as cats. If we do, it is likely that the cats in this study were selfish, but that they could not detect the social interaction between humans. They were not aware that some of the strangers were helpless.
Shutterstock / Michael Roeder
Although cats can detect some human social cues – they can follow human directions and are sensitive to human emotions – they are probably less focused on our social relationships than dogs are.
Cats have recently been domesticated and have been changed by household much less than dogs. While dogs are descended from social pack animals, ancestors of cats were largely solitary hunters. Housekeeping probably increased the existing social skills of dogs, but it may not have done the same for cats who were less socially aware at first. So we should not decide too quickly that our cats do not care if people are bad with us. What’s more likely is that they just can not know.
Despite their popularity, we still know relatively little about how cats think. Future research may show that cats’ understanding of humans is even more limited than we currently realize. Alternatively, it may appear that cats are better able to recognize human social dynamics in different contexts.
But no matter what studies reveal, we must avoid prejudice or anthropomorphism promoting our interpretation of cats’ behavior. Before we judge our cat friends as indifferent or selfish, we must first try to look at the world through their eyes.
Ali Boyle, Research Fellow in Intelligence (Philosophy), University of Cambridge
This article was published from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.