In this 2021 commentary, Thomas R. Zentall responds to Kujala’s influential discussion on canine emotions, offering a detailed critique of how emotional states are inferred in dogs. While acknowledging the strength of evidence from behavioral tests and neuroimaging studies that show parallels between dogs and humans, Zentall urges researchers and practitioners to remain cautious in attributing human-like emotions to animals.
Zentall notes that dogs’ responsiveness to humans naturally encourages anthropomorphic interpretations. A growl, for example, might be labeled as anger, fear, or a largely unemotional territorial signal. Without careful experimental design, these interpretations risk projecting human emotional frameworks onto nonhuman behavior.
The commentary emphasizes the need to distinguish primary from secondary emotions. Studies on “guilt” are cited as a cautionary example: dogs often appear “guilty” when scolded, regardless of whether they misbehaved, suggesting they respond to owner cues rather than experiencing remorse. Similarly, research on inequality aversion or a sense of “fairness” may be confounded by simpler mechanisms such as frustration over an expected reward not being delivered.
Zentall highlights the importance of assessing whether animals understand the consequences of their actions in altruism experiments. Dogs helping a familiar conspecific, for instance, could be motivated by social affiliation or avoidance of conflict rather than empathic concern.
The commentary also critiques interpretations of the cognitive judgment bias test, which classifies animals as “optimistic” or “pessimistic” based on their response to ambiguous cues. Zentall points out that performance may instead reflect differences in fear of novelty rather than emotional expectation.
Throughout the article, Zentall returns to Morgan’s Canon, which states that animal behavior should not be explained with higher-level psychological processes when simpler mechanisms suffice. He argues that in the study of emotions—where internal states cannot be directly measured—this principle is especially important.
Overall, Zentall’s commentary underscores the need for rigorous alternative explanations and careful experimental controls when interpreting evidence for emotions in dogs. By doing so, researchers can better determine whether complex emotional constructs are truly warranted or whether simpler behavioral processes provide a more accurate account.
Source: Zentall, T. (2021). Commentary on Kujala on Canine Emotions. Published 2021.
