http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20618-the-first-advertising-campaign-for-nonhuman-primates.html
Keith Olwell and Elizabeth Kiehner had an epiphany last year. At a TED talk, the two New York advertising executives learned that captive monkeys understand money, and that when faced with economic games they will behave in similar ways to humans. So if they can cope with money, how would they respond to advertising?
Read on...
Showing posts with label psychology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label psychology. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Animals Said to Have Spiritual Experiences
Ever have an out-of-body experience? Your dog may have too.
By Jennifer Viegas
Fri Oct 8, 2010 07:00 AM ET
THE GIST
Research suggests that spiritual experiences originate deep within primitive areas of the human brain -- areas shared by other animals with brain structures like our own.
The trick, of course, lies in proving animals' experiences.
"Since only humans are capable of language that can communicate the richness of spiritual experience, it is unlikely we will ever know with certainty what an animal subjectively experiences," Kevin Nelson, a professor of neurology at the University of Kentucky, told Discovery News.
"Despite this limitation, it is still reasonable to conclude that since the most primitive areas of our brain happen to be the spiritual, then we can expect that animals are also capable of spiritual experiences," added Nelson, author of the book "The Spiritual Doorway in the Brain," which will be published in January 2011.
The finding is an extension of his research on humans, which has been published in many peer-reviewed journals. A Neurology journal study, for example, determined that out-of-body experiences in humans are likely caused by the brain's arousal system, which regulates different states of consciousness.
"In humans, we know that if we disrupt the (brain) region where vision, sense of motion, orientation in the Earth's gravitational field, and knowing the position of our body all come together, then out-of-body experiences can be caused literally by the flip of a switch," he said. "There is absolutely no reason to believe it is any different for a dog, cat, or primate’s brain."
Other mammals also probably have near-death experiences comparable to those reported by certain humans, he believes. Such people often say they saw a light and felt as though they were moving down a tunnel.
The tunnel phenomenon "is caused by the eye's susceptibility to the low blood flow that occurs with fainting or cardiac arrest," he said. "As blood flow diminishes, vision fails peripherally first. There is no reason to believe that other animals are any different from us."
Nelson added, "What they make of the tunnel is another matter."
The light aspect of near-death experiences can be explained by how the visual system defines REM (rapid eye movement) consciousness, he believes.
"In fact," he said, "the link between REM and the physiological crises causing near-death experience are most strongly linked in animals, like cats and rats, which we can study in the laboratory."
Mystical experiences -- moments that inspire a sense of mystery and wonderment -- arise within the limbic system, he said. When specific parts of this system are removed from animal brains, mind-altering drugs like LSD have no effect.
Since other animals, such as non-human primates, horses, cats and dogs, also possess similar brain structures, it is possible that they too experience mystical moments, and may even have a sense of spiritual oneness, according to Nelson.
Marc Bekoff, a professor emeritus of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of Colorado, Boulder, also believes animals have spiritual experiences, which he defines as experiences that are nonmaterial, intangible, introspective and comparable to what humans have.
Both he and primatologist Jane Goodall have observed chimpanzees dancing with total abandon at waterfalls that emerge after heavy rains. Some of the chimps even appear to dance themselves into a trance-like state, as some humans do during religious and cultural rituals.
Goodall wondered, "Is it not possible that these (chimpanzee) performances are stimulated by feelings akin to wonder and awe? After a waterfall display the performer may sit on a rock, his eyes following the falling water. What is it, this water?"
"Perhaps numerous animals engage in these rituals, but we haven't been lucky enough to see them," Bekoff wrote in a Psychology Today report.
"For now, let's keep the door open to the idea that animals can be spiritual beings and let's consider the evidence for such a claim," he added.
"Meager as it is, available evidence says, 'Yes, animals can have spiritual experiences,' and we need to conduct further research and engage in interdisciplinary discussions before we say that animals cannot and do not experience spirituality."
http://news.discovery.com/animals/animals-spiritual-brain.html
By Jennifer Viegas
Fri Oct 8, 2010 07:00 AM ET
THE GIST
- A neurologist and other scientists argue animals are capable of having spiritual experiences.
- The researchers hold that spiritual experiences originate within primitive parts of the human brain, structures shared by animals.
- The challenge lies in proving what animals experience.
Research suggests that spiritual experiences originate deep within primitive areas of the human brain -- areas shared by other animals with brain structures like our own.
The trick, of course, lies in proving animals' experiences.
"Since only humans are capable of language that can communicate the richness of spiritual experience, it is unlikely we will ever know with certainty what an animal subjectively experiences," Kevin Nelson, a professor of neurology at the University of Kentucky, told Discovery News.
"Despite this limitation, it is still reasonable to conclude that since the most primitive areas of our brain happen to be the spiritual, then we can expect that animals are also capable of spiritual experiences," added Nelson, author of the book "The Spiritual Doorway in the Brain," which will be published in January 2011.
The finding is an extension of his research on humans, which has been published in many peer-reviewed journals. A Neurology journal study, for example, determined that out-of-body experiences in humans are likely caused by the brain's arousal system, which regulates different states of consciousness.
"In humans, we know that if we disrupt the (brain) region where vision, sense of motion, orientation in the Earth's gravitational field, and knowing the position of our body all come together, then out-of-body experiences can be caused literally by the flip of a switch," he said. "There is absolutely no reason to believe it is any different for a dog, cat, or primate’s brain."
Other mammals also probably have near-death experiences comparable to those reported by certain humans, he believes. Such people often say they saw a light and felt as though they were moving down a tunnel.
The tunnel phenomenon "is caused by the eye's susceptibility to the low blood flow that occurs with fainting or cardiac arrest," he said. "As blood flow diminishes, vision fails peripherally first. There is no reason to believe that other animals are any different from us."
Nelson added, "What they make of the tunnel is another matter."
The light aspect of near-death experiences can be explained by how the visual system defines REM (rapid eye movement) consciousness, he believes.
"In fact," he said, "the link between REM and the physiological crises causing near-death experience are most strongly linked in animals, like cats and rats, which we can study in the laboratory."
Mystical experiences -- moments that inspire a sense of mystery and wonderment -- arise within the limbic system, he said. When specific parts of this system are removed from animal brains, mind-altering drugs like LSD have no effect.
Since other animals, such as non-human primates, horses, cats and dogs, also possess similar brain structures, it is possible that they too experience mystical moments, and may even have a sense of spiritual oneness, according to Nelson.
Marc Bekoff, a professor emeritus of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of Colorado, Boulder, also believes animals have spiritual experiences, which he defines as experiences that are nonmaterial, intangible, introspective and comparable to what humans have.
Both he and primatologist Jane Goodall have observed chimpanzees dancing with total abandon at waterfalls that emerge after heavy rains. Some of the chimps even appear to dance themselves into a trance-like state, as some humans do during religious and cultural rituals.
Goodall wondered, "Is it not possible that these (chimpanzee) performances are stimulated by feelings akin to wonder and awe? After a waterfall display the performer may sit on a rock, his eyes following the falling water. What is it, this water?"
"Perhaps numerous animals engage in these rituals, but we haven't been lucky enough to see them," Bekoff wrote in a Psychology Today report.
"For now, let's keep the door open to the idea that animals can be spiritual beings and let's consider the evidence for such a claim," he added.
"Meager as it is, available evidence says, 'Yes, animals can have spiritual experiences,' and we need to conduct further research and engage in interdisciplinary discussions before we say that animals cannot and do not experience spirituality."
http://news.discovery.com/animals/animals-spiritual-brain.html
Animals Said to Have Spiritual Experiences
Ever have an out-of-body experience? Your dog may have too.
By Jennifer Viegas
Fri Oct 8, 2010 07:00 AM ET
THE GIST
Research suggests that spiritual experiences originate deep within primitive areas of the human brain -- areas shared by other animals with brain structures like our own.
The trick, of course, lies in proving animals' experiences.
"Since only humans are capable of language that can communicate the richness of spiritual experience, it is unlikely we will ever know with certainty what an animal subjectively experiences," Kevin Nelson, a professor of neurology at the University of Kentucky, told Discovery News.
"Despite this limitation, it is still reasonable to conclude that since the most primitive areas of our brain happen to be the spiritual, then we can expect that animals are also capable of spiritual experiences," added Nelson, author of the book "The Spiritual Doorway in the Brain," which will be published in January 2011.
The finding is an extension of his research on humans, which has been published in many peer-reviewed journals. A Neurology journal study, for example, determined that out-of-body experiences in humans are likely caused by the brain's arousal system, which regulates different states of consciousness.
"In humans, we know that if we disrupt the (brain) region where vision, sense of motion, orientation in the Earth's gravitational field, and knowing the position of our body all come together, then out-of-body experiences can be caused literally by the flip of a switch," he said. "There is absolutely no reason to believe it is any different for a dog, cat, or primate’s brain."
Other mammals also probably have near-death experiences comparable to those reported by certain humans, he believes. Such people often say they saw a light and felt as though they were moving down a tunnel.
The tunnel phenomenon "is caused by the eye's susceptibility to the low blood flow that occurs with fainting or cardiac arrest," he said. "As blood flow diminishes, vision fails peripherally first. There is no reason to believe that other animals are any different from us."
Nelson added, "What they make of the tunnel is another matter."
The light aspect of near-death experiences can be explained by how the visual system defines REM (rapid eye movement) consciousness, he believes.
"In fact," he said, "the link between REM and the physiological crises causing near-death experience are most strongly linked in animals, like cats and rats, which we can study in the laboratory."
Mystical experiences -- moments that inspire a sense of mystery and wonderment -- arise within the limbic system, he said. When specific parts of this system are removed from animal brains, mind-altering drugs like LSD have no effect.
Since other animals, such as non-human primates, horses, cats and dogs, also possess similar brain structures, it is possible that they too experience mystical moments, and may even have a sense of spiritual oneness, according to Nelson.
Marc Bekoff, a professor emeritus of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of Colorado, Boulder, also believes animals have spiritual experiences, which he defines as experiences that are nonmaterial, intangible, introspective and comparable to what humans have.
Both he and primatologist Jane Goodall have observed chimpanzees dancing with total abandon at waterfalls that emerge after heavy rains. Some of the chimps even appear to dance themselves into a trance-like state, as some humans do during religious and cultural rituals.
Goodall wondered, "Is it not possible that these (chimpanzee) performances are stimulated by feelings akin to wonder and awe? After a waterfall display the performer may sit on a rock, his eyes following the falling water. What is it, this water?"
"Perhaps numerous animals engage in these rituals, but we haven't been lucky enough to see them," Bekoff wrote in a Psychology Today report.
"For now, let's keep the door open to the idea that animals can be spiritual beings and let's consider the evidence for such a claim," he added.
"Meager as it is, available evidence says, 'Yes, animals can have spiritual experiences,' and we need to conduct further research and engage in interdisciplinary discussions before we say that animals cannot and do not experience spirituality."
http://news.discovery.com/animals/animals-spiritual-brain.html
By Jennifer Viegas
Fri Oct 8, 2010 07:00 AM ET
THE GIST
- A neurologist and other scientists argue animals are capable of having spiritual experiences.
- The researchers hold that spiritual experiences originate within primitive parts of the human brain, structures shared by animals.
- The challenge lies in proving what animals experience.
Research suggests that spiritual experiences originate deep within primitive areas of the human brain -- areas shared by other animals with brain structures like our own.
The trick, of course, lies in proving animals' experiences.
"Since only humans are capable of language that can communicate the richness of spiritual experience, it is unlikely we will ever know with certainty what an animal subjectively experiences," Kevin Nelson, a professor of neurology at the University of Kentucky, told Discovery News.
"Despite this limitation, it is still reasonable to conclude that since the most primitive areas of our brain happen to be the spiritual, then we can expect that animals are also capable of spiritual experiences," added Nelson, author of the book "The Spiritual Doorway in the Brain," which will be published in January 2011.
The finding is an extension of his research on humans, which has been published in many peer-reviewed journals. A Neurology journal study, for example, determined that out-of-body experiences in humans are likely caused by the brain's arousal system, which regulates different states of consciousness.
"In humans, we know that if we disrupt the (brain) region where vision, sense of motion, orientation in the Earth's gravitational field, and knowing the position of our body all come together, then out-of-body experiences can be caused literally by the flip of a switch," he said. "There is absolutely no reason to believe it is any different for a dog, cat, or primate’s brain."
Other mammals also probably have near-death experiences comparable to those reported by certain humans, he believes. Such people often say they saw a light and felt as though they were moving down a tunnel.
The tunnel phenomenon "is caused by the eye's susceptibility to the low blood flow that occurs with fainting or cardiac arrest," he said. "As blood flow diminishes, vision fails peripherally first. There is no reason to believe that other animals are any different from us."
Nelson added, "What they make of the tunnel is another matter."
The light aspect of near-death experiences can be explained by how the visual system defines REM (rapid eye movement) consciousness, he believes.
"In fact," he said, "the link between REM and the physiological crises causing near-death experience are most strongly linked in animals, like cats and rats, which we can study in the laboratory."
Mystical experiences -- moments that inspire a sense of mystery and wonderment -- arise within the limbic system, he said. When specific parts of this system are removed from animal brains, mind-altering drugs like LSD have no effect.
Since other animals, such as non-human primates, horses, cats and dogs, also possess similar brain structures, it is possible that they too experience mystical moments, and may even have a sense of spiritual oneness, according to Nelson.
Marc Bekoff, a professor emeritus of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of Colorado, Boulder, also believes animals have spiritual experiences, which he defines as experiences that are nonmaterial, intangible, introspective and comparable to what humans have.
Both he and primatologist Jane Goodall have observed chimpanzees dancing with total abandon at waterfalls that emerge after heavy rains. Some of the chimps even appear to dance themselves into a trance-like state, as some humans do during religious and cultural rituals.
Goodall wondered, "Is it not possible that these (chimpanzee) performances are stimulated by feelings akin to wonder and awe? After a waterfall display the performer may sit on a rock, his eyes following the falling water. What is it, this water?"
"Perhaps numerous animals engage in these rituals, but we haven't been lucky enough to see them," Bekoff wrote in a Psychology Today report.
"For now, let's keep the door open to the idea that animals can be spiritual beings and let's consider the evidence for such a claim," he added.
"Meager as it is, available evidence says, 'Yes, animals can have spiritual experiences,' and we need to conduct further research and engage in interdisciplinary discussions before we say that animals cannot and do not experience spirituality."
http://news.discovery.com/animals/animals-spiritual-brain.html
Monday, June 28, 2010
Gorilla psychologists: Weird stuff in plain sight
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627660.900-gorilla-psychologists-weird-stuff-in-plain-sight.html
Gorilla psychologists: Weird stuff in plain sight
• 23 June 2010 by Liz Else
• Magazine issue 2766.
The "gorilla in our midst" psychology experiment is up there among the world's most famous. But as Liz Else found out from Christopher Chabris and Daniel Simons, the psychologists who devised it, exactly how it fools half of the people who take part is still a mystery
How did you come up with the experiment?
Christopher Chabris: We didn't say, "let's do a really intriguing experiment people will talk about for years". It was just a class project on visual attention in a course we were teaching 12 years ago. The gorilla suit was lying around in a lab. If it hadn't been there, who knows?
Daniel Simons: Our study revisited work from the 1970s by Ulric Neisser, where subjects had to watch a video and count the times players passed a ball. Neisser had someone with an open umbrella walk through the game, and many people didn't notice it. But his video had an odd, ghostly appearance which gave people an excuse for missing the person with the umbrella. We filmed the entire game with a single camera so that everything was fully visible - and the person in the gorilla suit was there for 9 seconds! When we showed the video, only half of the viewers saw the gorilla.
Is it the same for every group?
DS: The first subjects were Harvard University students but it worked as well with everyone we tested. For years, whenever I showed the video, I held my breath, thinking everybody would notice it. It took years before I could discount that gut instinct. Missing the gorilla is jarring. It's natural to assume that you would see it, so it's surprising and compelling when you realise what you've missed.
So why do people miss the gorilla?
CC: It's like a Rorschach (inkblot) test for cognitive abilities or personality: people think there must be something different about the people who see the gorilla compared with those who don't. Some speculate that if you are in a detail-oriented job, you are going to notice it because you notice everything, or you are not going to notice it because you are really good at focusing. But the truth is, so far no researcher has found anything that solidly predicts who is going to see it and who is not.
DS: We have looked at basic measures of attention and memory - how much you can hold in mind while doing something else, and how much you can take in with one attentional glance. These basic measures predict how well you can focus attention and count the passes, but they don't seem to predict whether you will notice the gorilla. I have just done a follow-up to the gorilla study, which I showed to about 1000 vision scientists who knew about the original video. As the gorilla enters, I introduced two changes: a backdrop curtain changes from red to gold, and one player wearing a black shirt leaves the court. The vast majority missed both, despite knowing the video was about unexpected objects. When they started looking for a gorilla, they missed other unexpected events.
Is there an evolutionary reason to miss things?
DS: I think that's the wrong way around. These failures of awareness are more a consequence of something that we need to do and that we do well - focus attention. To do any task, you need to focus on things that matter and avoid things that don't. One consequence is that sometimes you filter out things you might want to see. Intuitively we think that things that matter will catch our attention, but they don't.
CC: In our book (reviewed, right) we tell the story of a Boston police officer chasing a suspect. When you do that, you're paying careful attention, figuring out where he's going, if he's got a gun or is throwing evidence away. The officer ran past an incident of police brutality taking place close by and later claimed not to have seen it. He went to prison because the jury didn't realise the extent to which focusing on one task makes you unable to see outside that. They decided he lied to protect fellow officers.
So our picture of reality can be very wrong?
DS: Our picture of reality is correct most of the time for most of what we do. It is inherently incomplete, though, and most of the time we don't realise how much we miss. Usually, it doesn't matter - we see what's relevant to what we're doing. It's important to know that we have such limitations, though. We think we see more than we do, and that has consequences. We also think our memories are more perfect than they are, that we understand complex systems better than we do. If we were aware of our limitations, we wouldn't text and drive or think everybody who mis-remembers is lying.
Can you devise another experiment this good?
CC: The statistics are against it! But who knows what we'll find lying around tomorrow...
Profile
Christopher Chabris is a psychology professor at Union College in New York; Daniel Simons is a psychology professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The "Gorillas in Our Midst" study is at bit.ly/bg2rI7
Gorilla psychologists: Weird stuff in plain sight
• 23 June 2010 by Liz Else
• Magazine issue 2766.
The "gorilla in our midst" psychology experiment is up there among the world's most famous. But as Liz Else found out from Christopher Chabris and Daniel Simons, the psychologists who devised it, exactly how it fools half of the people who take part is still a mystery
How did you come up with the experiment?
Christopher Chabris: We didn't say, "let's do a really intriguing experiment people will talk about for years". It was just a class project on visual attention in a course we were teaching 12 years ago. The gorilla suit was lying around in a lab. If it hadn't been there, who knows?
Daniel Simons: Our study revisited work from the 1970s by Ulric Neisser, where subjects had to watch a video and count the times players passed a ball. Neisser had someone with an open umbrella walk through the game, and many people didn't notice it. But his video had an odd, ghostly appearance which gave people an excuse for missing the person with the umbrella. We filmed the entire game with a single camera so that everything was fully visible - and the person in the gorilla suit was there for 9 seconds! When we showed the video, only half of the viewers saw the gorilla.
Is it the same for every group?
DS: The first subjects were Harvard University students but it worked as well with everyone we tested. For years, whenever I showed the video, I held my breath, thinking everybody would notice it. It took years before I could discount that gut instinct. Missing the gorilla is jarring. It's natural to assume that you would see it, so it's surprising and compelling when you realise what you've missed.
So why do people miss the gorilla?
CC: It's like a Rorschach (inkblot) test for cognitive abilities or personality: people think there must be something different about the people who see the gorilla compared with those who don't. Some speculate that if you are in a detail-oriented job, you are going to notice it because you notice everything, or you are not going to notice it because you are really good at focusing. But the truth is, so far no researcher has found anything that solidly predicts who is going to see it and who is not.
DS: We have looked at basic measures of attention and memory - how much you can hold in mind while doing something else, and how much you can take in with one attentional glance. These basic measures predict how well you can focus attention and count the passes, but they don't seem to predict whether you will notice the gorilla. I have just done a follow-up to the gorilla study, which I showed to about 1000 vision scientists who knew about the original video. As the gorilla enters, I introduced two changes: a backdrop curtain changes from red to gold, and one player wearing a black shirt leaves the court. The vast majority missed both, despite knowing the video was about unexpected objects. When they started looking for a gorilla, they missed other unexpected events.
Is there an evolutionary reason to miss things?
DS: I think that's the wrong way around. These failures of awareness are more a consequence of something that we need to do and that we do well - focus attention. To do any task, you need to focus on things that matter and avoid things that don't. One consequence is that sometimes you filter out things you might want to see. Intuitively we think that things that matter will catch our attention, but they don't.
CC: In our book (reviewed, right) we tell the story of a Boston police officer chasing a suspect. When you do that, you're paying careful attention, figuring out where he's going, if he's got a gun or is throwing evidence away. The officer ran past an incident of police brutality taking place close by and later claimed not to have seen it. He went to prison because the jury didn't realise the extent to which focusing on one task makes you unable to see outside that. They decided he lied to protect fellow officers.
So our picture of reality can be very wrong?
DS: Our picture of reality is correct most of the time for most of what we do. It is inherently incomplete, though, and most of the time we don't realise how much we miss. Usually, it doesn't matter - we see what's relevant to what we're doing. It's important to know that we have such limitations, though. We think we see more than we do, and that has consequences. We also think our memories are more perfect than they are, that we understand complex systems better than we do. If we were aware of our limitations, we wouldn't text and drive or think everybody who mis-remembers is lying.
Can you devise another experiment this good?
CC: The statistics are against it! But who knows what we'll find lying around tomorrow...
Profile
Christopher Chabris is a psychology professor at Union College in New York; Daniel Simons is a psychology professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The "Gorillas in Our Midst" study is at bit.ly/bg2rI7
Friday, April 3, 2009
Dog owners do look like their pets, say psychologists
Researchers found that members of the public could predict which breed of dog a person would own almost twice as accurately as they should be able to, just by looking at a photograph of their owners.
Women with long, glossy hair stand with their Afghan hound during the Crufts dog show. Photo: REUTERS By Kate Devlin
Last Updated: 12:03AM BST 03 Apr 2009
Volunteers rightly connected poodles, labradors and Staffordshire bull terriers with their masters.
There were a number of physical reasons why owners looks suggested which dog they would have, including what clothes they wore and their build, said Dr Lance Workman, from Bath Spa University.
"There is a little bit of truth in the theory that owners look like their dogs, but if you are of a robust build you will probably have a more robust dog so that you can gets lots of exercise. If you are more slight you may want a poodle as you think that they need less exercise," he said.
Dr Workman, who previously carried out a study which showed that the Birmingham accent was the most hated in Britain, added: "When we tested the dog owners' personalities, we found no strong links between any particular personality trait and choice of dog breed, so any shared qualities are only skin deep."
Many celebrities have been compared to their dogs, including the petite Paris Hilton and her miniscule Chihuahua, Tinkerbell.
But dog lovers should be warned that volunteers also wrongly thought that choice of breed could predict the owners' personality
Overall, they judged bull terrier owners as less intelligent than the others, while those who had plumped for poodles and labradors were thought to be nicer.
However, personality tests revealed no such differences between the three groups.
Dr Workman added: "What this study shows is that you shouldn't judge a person by their dog, but we all do."
The tests also showed that overall the dog owners were nicer or "more agreeable" than the general population, the only major personality difference the study found.
Psychologists asked 70 people to match 41 dog owners, found through the Kennel Club, to their breeds.
They were correct between 50 and 60 per cent of the time, when chance suggested that they should have a success rate of around 33 per cent.
The volunteers were shown full-length pictures of the owners, mainly photographed in their own homes.
The team behind the study decided to look at Staffordshire bull terriers because the breed has had a lot of negative publicity in recent years, while they were interested to discover if poodles attracted more "sophisticated" owners and labradors were considered to be a "neutral" breed.
The findings were presented at the British Psychological Society annual conference in Brighton.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/5094835/Dog-owners-do-look-like-their-pets-say-psychologists.html
Last Updated: 12:03AM BST 03 Apr 2009
Volunteers rightly connected poodles, labradors and Staffordshire bull terriers with their masters.
There were a number of physical reasons why owners looks suggested which dog they would have, including what clothes they wore and their build, said Dr Lance Workman, from Bath Spa University.
"There is a little bit of truth in the theory that owners look like their dogs, but if you are of a robust build you will probably have a more robust dog so that you can gets lots of exercise. If you are more slight you may want a poodle as you think that they need less exercise," he said.
Dr Workman, who previously carried out a study which showed that the Birmingham accent was the most hated in Britain, added: "When we tested the dog owners' personalities, we found no strong links between any particular personality trait and choice of dog breed, so any shared qualities are only skin deep."
Many celebrities have been compared to their dogs, including the petite Paris Hilton and her miniscule Chihuahua, Tinkerbell.
But dog lovers should be warned that volunteers also wrongly thought that choice of breed could predict the owners' personality
Overall, they judged bull terrier owners as less intelligent than the others, while those who had plumped for poodles and labradors were thought to be nicer.
However, personality tests revealed no such differences between the three groups.
Dr Workman added: "What this study shows is that you shouldn't judge a person by their dog, but we all do."
The tests also showed that overall the dog owners were nicer or "more agreeable" than the general population, the only major personality difference the study found.
Psychologists asked 70 people to match 41 dog owners, found through the Kennel Club, to their breeds.
They were correct between 50 and 60 per cent of the time, when chance suggested that they should have a success rate of around 33 per cent.
The volunteers were shown full-length pictures of the owners, mainly photographed in their own homes.
The team behind the study decided to look at Staffordshire bull terriers because the breed has had a lot of negative publicity in recent years, while they were interested to discover if poodles attracted more "sophisticated" owners and labradors were considered to be a "neutral" breed.
The findings were presented at the British Psychological Society annual conference in Brighton.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/5094835/Dog-owners-do-look-like-their-pets-say-psychologists.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)