Stunning new research: cats recognize their owners’ voices—but don’t much care

November 30, 2013 • 11:00 am

This will hardly come as a surprise to cat owners, but I suppose it needed scientific documentation.  A new paper in Animal Cognition by Atsuko Saito and Kazutaka Shinozuka (from the University of Tokyo and the South Florida College of Medicine, respectively; reference at bottom and link here) shows that cats appear to recognize the voices of their owners compared to the voices of other people. But the kicker is that they don’t show much response, and certainly don’t move their legs when they recognize the voice. This is in contrast to previous studies of d*gs, which show that they not only recognize their owners’ voices but respond much more readily and with more striking behavior.

It’s a short paper, and I’ll send the pdf on request, though I think you can get it free at the link.

In short, the authors exposed 20 domestic cats (19 indoor, one “kept on a university campus by a male owner”) to a sequence of five recorded voices played over  a speaker.  Each voice simply called the cat’s name, and the responses of the cats to each voice were measured “blind,” that is, another observer was given a single video clip of a cat’s response, and scored it without knowing which voice it heard. “Response” was measured six different ways: ear moving, head moving, pupil dilation, vocalization (any sound made by the cat), tail moving, and “displacement” (“more than one step of displacement of both hind paws to any direction”).

The recordings were controlled for volume and speakers were asked to say the name in “the same manner as the owners” (that, of course, is not easily controlled).  To “habituate” the cats to their names, the five recordings were played in sequence: three strangers’ voices, then the owner’s voice, and then another stranger’s voice.

The results are shown in the graphs below.  The first plot shows that there was habituation: the responses declined between the first and third voice, all from strangers.  Second, when the owner’s voice was played as the fourth sound, the cats perked up, showing higher ear and head movement—but no movement of tails or limbs, and no vocalization.  The last voice, of a stranger, showed responses (measured as the percentage of individuals showing one of the indicators of “attention”) similar to that toward owner, so there was no habituation here. (That has been shown in studies of dogs as well).

The results are statistically significant, but not overly impressive, with p values of 0.03-0.05 (the probability that the increased response would happen purely by chance; 0.05 or lower is regarded as statistically significant):

Picture 1

The figure below shows the magnitude of the cats’ responses (summed over all behaviors) as opposed to simply the percentage of cats responding. There is a significant difference between the size of responses to the third voice—after the cat had been “habituated”—and the owner’s voice, which elicited a larger response.  The last voice, as above, didn’t evoke a response larger than that toward the owner’s voice. The starred comparison is the only one that was significant: between stranger 3 and the owner:Picture 3

Besides the weak statistical power (and high p values), there’s another problem. It’s possible that the cats aren’t responding to to the sound of the owner’s voice per se, but to the way the owner pronounces the cat’s name. It’s impossible to know from this study which aspects of the owner’s pronounciation or intonation are the ones picked up by the cats, though that could presumably be tested with electronic manipulations of the recording.  Nevertheless, cats do recognize their name when spoken by the owner versus by strangers.  I suspect, though, that the sound of a can opener interpolated in the sequence would elicit all six behaviors, including rapid movement toward the sound!

Finally, the authors give an interesting paragraph that readers might want to ponder:

The communication style of cats is very different from that of dogs, as mentioned above. In fact, Serpell (1996) has shown that dogs are perceived by owners as being more affectionate than cats. However, dog owners and cat owners did not differ significantly in their reported attachment levels to their pets (Serpell 1996). This fact may reflect the difference in expectations between cat owners and dog owners. One research questionnaire revealed that the more affection the dog owners have toward dogs, the more frequently they tended to have physical contact with them. However, no such relationship was observed among cat owners (Ota et al. 2005). Thus, the behavioral aspects of cats that cause their owners to become attached to them are still undetermined.

I’m not sure how a lack of correlation between one’s attachment to a cat and the degree of physical contact with that animal (which is of course determined largely by the cat!) has anything to do with the question of why one bonds with a cat. We ailurophiles can of course give our own answers: the purr, the softness of the fur, the grace of movement, and of course the very independence of the animal.

Finally, a bit of a biology lesson. At the beginning the authors summarize which animals can recognize their own young or individual “herdmates” through vocal cues (they don’t mention penguins):

A social ability widely seen in a number of species is differentiation between conspecifics by using individual differences in vocalizations. For example, zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata castanotis) recognize mates on the basis of their calls (Vignal et al. 2004, 2008); bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) use whistles for mother–infant recognition (Sayigh et al. 1999); mother vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops) can distinguish their own offspring’s screams from those of others (Cheney and Seyfarth 1980); and female African elephants (Loxodonta africana) can distinguish the calls of female family and bond group members from those of female outsiders (McComb et al. 2000). Similarly, some domestic animals are also known to be able to recognize individual humans through voice. For example, horses can match the forms and voices of familiar handlers when the handlers were presented together with a stranger (Proops and McComb 2012). Dogs can match owners’ voices and faces from others (Adachi et al. 2007).

I’m curious whether a mother cat can recognize the mews of her kittens versus those of unrelated kittens.  Perhaps work has been done on this, but I think if it had, the authors would have mentioned it.

I wish the authors could use LOLcats as abstracts of papers, because this one is appropriate:

cats_do_not_come_when_called

h/t: Michael, Hans, Adrian

_______

Saito, A. and Shinozuka, K. 2013. Vocal recognition of owners by domestic cats (Felis catus). Animal Cognition 16 (4): 685-690.

The mysterious person in the Shermer/Dalton video

November 30, 2013 • 9:26 am

Three days ago I posted a humorous video in which Michael Shermer and Brian Dalton (“Mr. Deity”) went after The Woo. The video contained a very brief flash of someone’s picture, which puzzled me and other readers. Here’s a screenshot of the mystery man:

picture-17

Of course no puzzle goes unsolved on this site, and savvy readers quickly identified the man as Leonard Mlodinow, a physicist from Caltech. Just to complete the story, I’ll add (with permission) an email Shermer sent me explaining a bit more:

The mysterious face in our video is Leonard Mlodinow.

It’s a little bit of inside baseball: At the Caltech debate in which Sam Harris and I took on Deepak and Jean Houston, Deepak was pontificating about quantum mechanics and consciousness. Before the Q&A, the ABC Nightline crew were scouring the audience for anyone who actually knew something about quantum mechanics professionally to ask an intelligent question. They found Leonard Mlodinow, who is a physicist at Caltech, and he challenged Deepak, saying something to the effect “I know what all those words you are using mean, but when you string them together like that I have no idea what you’re talking about.” Len then offered to give Deepak some lessons in quantum physics, which Deepak accepted. They ended up writing a book together called War of the Worldviews.

If anyone’s read this book, please give us a brief summary and evaluation below.

Caturday felids: Awesome embroidered cat shirts, and a dog in a cat suit

November 30, 2013 • 5:58 am

Before we get to the video of the dog in a cat suit, I’d like to show you what I want for Christmas.  Imagine how awesome it would be to give a talk wearing one of these awesome shirts hand-embroidered by Japanese artist Hiroko Koboto. These photos come from Collossal and Bored Panda.

cat-1

cat-5

On second thought, if I gave a talk in one of these, everyone would be looking at the shirt and nobody would hear a word.

This is a great one:

cat-3

hiroko-kubota-1_1

In a short interview at Spoon and Tamago, Koboto explains the genesis of these shirts:

The Nara-based artist began creating clothes as a hobby, mainly for her family. “My son was of a smaller build and store-bought clothes wouldn’t fit him well so I would often make him clothes,” explains Kubota. “It was actually at his request that I began embroidering cats.”

As it turns out, Kubota’s son is somewhat of a cat fanatic and enjoys collecting images of cute cats he finds on the Internet. His favorite ones would become models for embroideries.

This is one of my favorites:

Screen shot 2013-11-30 at 6.43.45 AM

Another favorite, appropriate under a sport jacket:

Screen shot 2013-11-30 at 6.44.16 AM

Screen shot 2013-11-30 at 6.56.18 AM

cat-4

Of course when I saw these, my immediate thought was, “How do I get one?”  Since these have gone viral, it’s not easy:

After posting her creations online they quickly went viral (like most Internet cats do), prompting Kubota to open an etsy shop 6 months ago. Despite the hefty price tag for a shirt ($250 – $300) she quickly racked up 15 sales and her current inventory is looking a bit slim. According to her website she also used to do custom orders. But now that she seems to be getting busier that service may be in jeopardy.

Yes, they’re pricey, but the embroidery is lovely, and Professor Ceiling Cat simply must have one of these for lecturing.

I contacted Ms. Koboto, and she told to write back in six months. The orders are obviously pouring in, and given the number of internet cat fanatics, she’s hit a gold mine. I hope she remembers me (I’ve saved the correspondence).  But it looks like I won’t be getting one for Christmas. 🙁

****

The cat in the video below is obviously a small dog who has somehow put on a cat suit, perhaps for purposes of espionage. He barks exactly like a dog until he’s caught in the act, and then pretends to meow. Could be an alien.

h/t: Steve, Todd, Su

Pregnant Irish cat adopts ducklings, plus bonus cat/ferret bonding

November 29, 2013 • 3:03 pm

Time to end the week with a heartwarmer.

A cat about to give birth adopts a brood of ducklings, and almost immediately produces her kittens.  One thing’s for sure: those ducklings ain’t suckling!

A bonus: go over to The Metapicture and see a series of cute photos of a new kitten befriending some resident ferrets. One shot:

Picture 1

h/t: Sara

A Vatican astronomer explains why he sees God through the telescope

November 29, 2013 • 12:27 pm

Reader Grania sent me a piece from the Catholic News Agency called “Vatican astronomer: science opens the door to dialogue.”  Of course with a title like that the article is bound to be dire, and Grania added a note: “The cognitive dissonance is strong in this one.” But that’s not completely accurate, for cognitive dissonance is the condition of mental disturbance experienced when one holds conflicting views simultaneously.  There’s no evidence that the astronomer, Brother Guy Consolmagno, is disturbed in the least.

Consolmagno is described as “curator of the Vatican Meteorite collection” in the article, a job that surely allows him plenty of free time. He’s also a Jesuit, and, like Pope Francis, is from Argentina, although he got a Ph.D. at the University of Arizona and served in the Peace Corps in Kenya. (By the way, the director of the Vatican Observatory from 1978-2006 was one Fr. George Coyne, a name that caused me genuine cognitive dissonance.)

It’s a short article, but one replete with acommodationism; and I’ll highlight a few choice bits.  One of its most annoying implications is that astronomy brings us closer to God and helps us understand the deity and his creation—but not just for Consolmagno but for everyone.

Of those who share his same field of study, the brother stated that “we are really all in this field of astronomy for the same reasons.”

“Astronomy is not going to make you rich, it is not going to get you powerful, astronomy is not going to get you girls, didn’t work for me anyway, but astronomy does connect you up with that same moment of joy that I also experience in prayer.”

Unless Jesuits are allowed to have connubial bliss, I doubt that Fr. Consolmagno can have “girls,” but the invidious part is comparing the joy of scientific discovery with that of prayer. Maybe the emotions are similar (I wouldn’t know), but I’d think the joy of finding out something new would be of a higher order than the joy experienced by communing with a nonexistent being.

But I quibble here; in the rest of the article Consolmagno implies that astronomy is for many—religious and layperson alike—a way to answer The Big Questions about humanity:

Highlighting how it was not his “cat” that wanted to look through the lens, the brother observed that this experience of wonder at creation speaks about man’s constant search for God, because “this is something human beings do, this is something human beings ask about.”

“They want to know what are those stars, why are there stars, why are we here, what is this all about, where did we come from,” he explained.

“This is what makes us more than just well fed cows and if you starve somebody from being able to ask those questions, you are denying them their humanity.”

Speaking of the link between science and religion, Br. Consolmagno observed that “it is an important part of being human to ask, who are we, how do we fit into this big universe, and it is an important part of being of human to recognize in this creation the hand of the one who made it.”

I’m not sure what the “cat” is about, although he may be invidiously equating it with the presumably incurious and dull “well fed cows”. But of course cats are curious!  At any rate, what Consolmagno elides is the question of whether religion can actually answer those questions we’re compelled to ask. Perhaps he thinks that Catholicism gives answers, but then what about the divergent “answers” provide by other faiths? And if it’s an important part of being human to recognize the Creator God, then, well, I guess that most of us here aren’t human.

“The astonishing thing to me about astronomy is not only that the universe makes sense and I can come up with equations and explain it,” he continued, “but the way it makes sense is beautiful.”

“God chose to create a universe that was at the same time logical and beautiful, one that I can enjoy with my brain and enjoy with my heart,” he stressed, going on to say that this “tells me something about who God is and how He creates and how He’s expecting me to relate to Him.”

I challenge Fr. Consolmagno to give me an example of a universe containing us that doesn’t “make sense.” I doubt he can come up with one, though I can think of a universe that makes more sense than his. It’s a universe, as Sean Carroll mentioned in yesterday’s video, that contains only one galaxy—ours.  Why would God want all those superfluous galaxies and uninhabitable stars, or those without planets? I suppose he could respond that there may be life in other galaxies, but then he’d have to further explain how those inhabitants could also be saved by Jesus, who lived and died on Earth. (Philosopher Michael Ruse once did this by positing an “intergalactic Jesus” who traveled through the universe saving people left and right.)

Finally, I’d like to know exactly what Consolmagno has learned from his astronomy studies about who God is and how he creates and how he wants us to relate to him.  I suspect his answer would involve not astronomical observations, but special pleading involving what the Bible and Church teachings say. Can you really find out how God wants us to deal with him by looking through a telescope? And if God wants to make those answers clear, why didn’t he just put them in his holy scriptures? Did God really need us to wait until the 17th-century invention of the telescope to fully understand what he wants? Why is God so coy about revealing his presence and desires?

Addressing the fact that many are surprised at the existence of the Vatican Observatory, Br. Consolmagno stated that “that’s part of the reason we exist; to surprise people.”

“To make people realize that the church not only supports science, literally… but we support and embrace and promote the use of both our hearts and our brains to come to know how the universe works.”

Let us be clear. We can never understand how the universe works by using our hearts. Our hearts tell us what makes us feel good, and how we’d like things to be—but not how things really are. The heart is notoriously bad at ferreting out the truth.

As for the “dialogue” between science and religion touted in the article’s title, well, that’s just wishful thinking. It’s not a dialogue, but a one-way monologue: science tells religion that its claims are wrong or untestable, but religion has nothing to contribute to science. Such a dialogue is purely wishful thinking on the part of the faithful, and most scientists won’t have anything to do with it. As Sean Carroll noted, the idea of god doesn’t add, and never has added, anything to our understanding of the cosmos.

Here’s Consolmagno:

Br_Guy_Consolmagno_speaks_with_CNA_on_Nov_22_2013_at_the_Vatican_Observatory_in_Rome_Credit_Marco_Gandolfo_CNA_CNA_112813
Photo: Marco Gandolfo/CNA

His appearance reminds me of someone, but I can’t put my finger on who. Maybe George Clooney with glasses?

73524113

Spectacular video of fox hunting rodents under snow

November 29, 2013 • 9:45 am

I’m not a big fan of d*gs, but I make an exception when it comes to foxes. They’re cute (almost catlike), furry, have magnificent tails, and are smart and wily.  This video from Discovery, showing foxes hunting rodents under several feet of snow, shows their remarkable hearing.  It’s unbelievable that they can feed themselves this way, but the narrator says they succeed 75% of the time. Watch its ears twitching as it homes in—like mammalian radar.

The YouTube description below implies they use the magnetic field, but I have no idea how that would work. The explanation in the video is obscure.

A red fox pinpoints field mice buried deep beneath the snow, using his sensitive hearing and the magnetic field of the North Pole to plot his trajectory. For more North America, visit http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/nor…

h/t: Su

Another child doomed by faith, and an “ad” for vaccination

November 29, 2013 • 8:38 am

This time the child, a girl, was reared in an Amish home, which means she has virtually no chance of escaping that bizarre religious milieu.  It also means she will die. According to Yahoo News, a 10-year-old Amish girl with leukemia has apparently disappeared, probably spirited away by her parents so she wouldn’t receive chemotherapy:

A 10-year-old Amish girl with leukemia and her parents haven’t contacted a guardian appointed two months ago to make medical decisions for the girl after her parents stopped her chemotherapy treatments, the guardian’s attorney said Wednesday.

It’s unclear whether the girl has resumed treatments, and there are indications that the family has left its farm in rural northeast Ohio.

The girl, Sarah Hershberger, has not restarted treatments at Akron Children’s Hospital, said Clair Dickinson, the guardian’s attorney. He said it’s not known whether she is undergoing chemotherapy anywhere else.

Doctors at the Akron hospital believe Sarah’s leukemia is treatable but say she will die without chemotherapy. The hospital went to court after the family decided to stop chemotherapy and treat Sarah with natural medicines, such as herbs and vitamins.

An appeals court ruling in October gave an attorney who’s also a registered nurse limited guardianship over Sarah and the power to make medical decisions for her. The court said the beliefs and convictions of her parents can’t outweigh the rights of the state to protect the child.

The family has appealed the decision to both the appeals court and the Ohio Supreme Court.

Messages seeking comment were left Wednesday with attorneys representing the family.

One of the attorneys, John Oberholtzer, told The Medina Gazette he has been in contact with the family but does not know its whereabouts or whether the girl is being treated.

Dickinson, the guardian’s attorney, said that shortly after the appeals court ruling, a taxi was sent to the family’s home near the village of Spencer in Medina County, about 35 miles southwest of Cleveland. The taxi was to take the Sarah to the hospital in Akron, but someone at the home said the family was not there, Dickinson said.

Sarah’s condition is treatable—indeed, possibly curable—but she asked her parents to stop chemotherapy. Her last chemo session was in June, and according to doctors she will die in less than a year without further treatment. But she’s not competent to make that judgment, and there’s also the possibility of a). religious pressure from her parents and the community influencing her “decision,” and b). the fact that chemo makes one sick, which of course would make a child averse to it.  It makes you sick, but often cures you.

And I don’t know how an attorney in good conscience can defend what the Hershbergers are doing.  I know everyone deserves representation, but how could a lawyer with a conscience defend parents whose reckless actions will kill their child?

Andy Hershberger, the girl’s father, said this past summer that the family agreed to begin two years of treatments for Sarah last spring but stopped a second round of chemotherapy in June because it was making her extremely sick.

Sarah begged her parents to stop the chemo and they agreed after a great deal of prayer, Hershberger said. The family, members of an insular Amish community, shuns many facets of modern life and is deeply religious.

Hospital officials have said they are morally and legally obligated to make sure the girl receives proper care. They said the girl’s illness, lymphoblastic lymphoma, is an aggressive form of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, but there is a high survival rate with treatment.

I didn’t know much about the attitudes of Amish toward medical care, but several sites, including Amish America, note that their attitude toward modern medical care is mixed.  Some abjure it; others use it. But in general they use it less than do non-Amish, and often resort to alternative or herbal treatments for religious and cultural reasons. Unfortunately, Sarah Hershberger’s parents apparently belong to the last class, and that will cost her her life.

In An Amish Paradox, Hurst and McConnell detail use of institutional medicine among the various Amish affiliations in the Holmes County, Ohio settlement.

Hurst and McConnell report that Amish are generally less likely to undergo annual checkups or engage in preventative care.  A reluctance to go to the doctor can result from various factors, including  a desire to avoid needless medical costs, a generally higher pain threshold (as reported by doctors treating the Amish) and a failure to understand the importance of, or reasons for professional treatment.

The authors also note that more conservative Amish are less likely to seek medical care, and more likely to delay treatment, especially when physical symptoms are absent or minimal.

There is something ineffably sad about children like Sarah. By accident of birth they are brought up in families afflicted with religious delusions, and there is no way for them to escape (except, perhaps, during or after the famous Amish Rumspringa, when children get a taste of non-Amish life).  They will perpetuate the delusions, and so the cycle continues. And in Sarah’s case, those delusions will take her life. This makes me very angry, and even more so when the religious parents are pretty sanguine about this child abuse, attributing medical-abuse deaths to the will of god. It doesn’t have to be that way. Woo is always bad, but only in religion is it fatal.

****

Finally, this is relevant but a wee bit off topic: a parody “commercial,” from Upworthy, showing what it would look like if vaccines were advertised like other drugs.

And another addendum: Dr. Edzard Ernst has posted a scathing “tribute” to Prince Charles and the royal’s incessant promotion of quackery and “alternative medicine” (Charles just turned 65).

h/t: Matt