The article discusses how our understanding of dog-human bonds, dog behavior, and dog cognition is limited to Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic (WEIRD) societies, and the question of whether associations between dogs and humans are representative worldwide. The study collected data on the function and perception of dogs in 124 globally distributed societies using the eHRAF cross-cultural database. The results showed that keeping dogs for multiple purposes and/or employing dogs for highly cooperative or high investment functions is associated with closer dog-human bonds, increased primary caregiving, decreased negative treatment, and attributing personhood to dogs. The study challenges the notion that all dogs are the same and opens questions about how function and associated cultural correlates could fuel departures from the ‘typical’ behavior and social-cognitive skills we commonly associate with our canine friends.

The article discusses how our understanding of dog-human bonds, dog behavior, and dog cognition is limited to Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic (WEIRD) societies, and the question of whether associations between dogs and humans are representative worldwide. The study collected data on the function and perception of dogs in 124 globally distributed societies using the eHRAF cross-cultural database. The results showed that keeping dogs for multiple purposes and/or employing dogs for highly cooperative or high investment functions is associated with closer dog-human bonds, increased primary caregiving, decreased negative treatment, and attributing personhood to dogs. The study challenges the notion that all dogs are the same and opens questions about how function and associated cultural correlates could fuel departures from the ‘typical’ behavior and social-cognitive skills we commonly associate with our canine friends.

Using a sample of 60 societies from eHRAF, this study explores the cross-cultural commonalities and differences in human-pet dynamics. The authors focus on understanding the range of functions of pets and the positive or negative treatment of pets. In addition, they test whether human investment in pets is a significant challenge of evolutionary theory. First, the results support that there are distinct functions of pets, challenging the common view of contemporary function of pets as emotional surrogates. Secondly, the data collected show an ambivalent treatment of pets across cultures, including small-scale societies. Finally, the research does not support the idea that human investment in pets sacrifices their reproductive success.

Using a sample of 60 societies from eHRAF, this study explores the cross-cultural commonalities and differences in human-pet dynamics. The authors focus on understanding the range of functions of pets and the positive or negative treatment of pets. In addition, they test whether human investment in pets is a significant challenge of evolutionary theory. First, the results support that there are distinct functions of pets, challenging the common view of contemporary function of pets as emotional surrogates. Secondly, the data collected show an ambivalent treatment of pets across cultures, including small-scale societies. Finally, the research does not support the idea that human investment in pets sacrifices their reproductive success.

Using a sample of 60 societies from eHRAF, this study explores the cross-cultural commonalities and differences in human-pet dynamics. The authors focus on understanding the range of functions of pets and the positive or negative treatment of pets. In addition, they test whether human investment in pets is a significant challenge of evolutionary theory. First, the results support that there are distinct functions of pets, challenging the common view of contemporary function of pets as emotional surrogates. Secondly, the data collected show an ambivalent treatment of pets across cultures, including small-scale societies. Finally, the research does not support the idea that human investment in pets sacrifices their reproductive success.

In this article, the authors seek to understand dog-human coevolution by considering predictors of different aspects of dog-human relationships across cultures. In order to measure dog-human relationships, the researchers created three indexes: dogs' utility for humans (DUH), humans' utility for dogs (HUD), and the personhood of dogs (PD). Each of these indexes were tested against various pre-coded variables that were empirically and theoretically relevant to this subject.

In this article, the authors seek to understand dog-human coevolution by considering predictors of different aspects of dog-human relationships across cultures. In order to measure dog-human relationships, the researchers created three indexes: dogs' utility for humans (DUH), humans' utility for dogs (HUD), and the personhood of dogs (PD). Each of these indexes were tested against various pre-coded variables that were empirically and theoretically relevant to this subject.

In this article, the authors seek to understand dog-human coevolution by considering predictors of different aspects of dog-human relationships across cultures. In order to measure dog-human relationships, the researchers created three indexes: dogs' utility for humans (DUH), humans' utility for dogs (HUD), and the personhood of dogs (PD). Each of these indexes were tested against various pre-coded variables that were empirically and theoretically relevant to this subject.

In this article, the authors seek to understand dog-human coevolution by considering predictors of different aspects of dog-human relationships across cultures. In order to measure dog-human relationships, the researchers created three indexes: dogs' utility for humans (DUH), humans' utility for dogs (HUD), and the personhood of dogs (PD). Each of these indexes were tested against various pre-coded variables that were empirically and theoretically relevant to this subject.

In this article, the authors seek to understand dog-human coevolution by considering predictors of different aspects of dog-human relationships across cultures. In order to measure dog-human relationships, the researchers created three indexes: dogs' utility for humans (DUH), humans' utility for dogs (HUD), and the personhood of dogs (PD). Each of these indexes were tested against various pre-coded variables that were empirically and theoretically relevant to this subject.