Canine Corner

"Animals that live in social groups are always smarter and have large EQ's than solitary animals."

However, between humans it is exactly the opposite, I think - the stereotype (and stereotypes have always some base in reality) is that humans with more intelligence tend to be of the misanthropic, schizoid, type

I believe that cats are typically more independent while dogs are more social. I noticed however when my friend had cats that the cats were more opportunistic than the dog. They would do more for food. He later gave them away and got 2 pups they are more about getting attention and playing. Where the cats were more about lounging and eating.

re: "At the risk of starting another argument, these data may explain why we never hear about such things as a "seeing eye cat," "police cat" or "search and rescue cat."" We have much more important things to do. For example, I am a feline "expert" for this blog. See my post for Psychology Today at She Bets Her Life. www.psychologytoday.com/blog/she-bets-her-life/201011/popular-demand-dr-...
If my writing doesn't convince you, then consider that canine feces are scattered everywhere - ours are buried.
Your colleague, Chi Chi LaChatte

And yet some cats are bigger than some dogs. Are only big dogs smarter than cats? Frankly I don't think this data proves anything one way or another. The thing I hate most about "cats vs dogs" debates is that some cats are smarter than some dogs, and some dogs are smarter than some cats. It's not universal.

In your descending list of intelligent animals, where does the pig fit in? We've all seen at one time or another people debating whether pigs are smarter than dogs. From what I have read in the past, I think the pig is more intelligent than it appears but not nearly as smart as a dog. Perhaps that is a given. But it wasn't even on your mini list here? I always thought they were a perennial addition to any list of intelligent animals?

Then why are dogs so needy and such sycophants and why do they eat out of the cat litter box and always smell bad?
Dogs need constant attention and eat their own sick.
They do more damage to propery and have been known to eat the faces off children and sometimes kill people.

Anyone familiar with YouTube has come across Nora, seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZ860P4iTaM

Cats just don't care to have their intelligence measured and their use of paws more than compensates for their solitary nature, in terms of overall intellectual development. But, most importantly, they are just attuned, artistic sensitive beings as this video demonstrates. No dog could ever have such a rich sensory experience with piano keys, tone and pitch.

Sure, I could probably beat Beethoven on a useless IQ test, since I have always aced standardized tests, including the GRE and the Stanford Binet test, but I could never dream of having the creative and musical genius of Beethoven.

I am thinking that the IQ of dogs and cats is roughly equal, with perhaps dogs getting the slightest edge, but that the overall imagination, sensitivity and the richness of the inner lives of cats far exceeds that of dogs, which are unimpressively simple animals.

Anyone familiar with YouTube has come across Nora, seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZ860P4iTaM

Cats just don't care to have their intelligence measured and their use of paws more than compensates for their solitary nature, in terms of overall intellectual development. But, most importantly, they are just attuned, artistic sensitive beings as this video demonstrates. No dog could ever have such a rich sensory experience with piano keys, tone and pitch.

Sure, I could probably beat Beethoven on a useless IQ test, since I have always aced standardized tests, including the GRE and the Stanford Binet test, but I could never dream of having the creative and musical genius of Beethoven.

I am thinking that the IQ of dogs and cats is roughly equal, with perhaps dogs getting the slightest edge, but that the overall imagination, sensitivity and the richness of the inner lives of cats far exceeds that of dogs, which are unimpressively simple animals.

Look at your own destruction, Dr. Did not do the research:

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/kinser/Int3.html

small birds 1/12 >
human = mice 1/40 >
cat 1/100 >
dog 1/125

from your loooonnnng list of dogs related publications, it did not show your expertise in the field but only the confirmation bias in your thinking.

My babies don't wanna be humans--they want to be kitties!

Ok, so they're dumb. But it's still really cute. What else am I supposed to be looking for, in a pet?

If rats lived longer (instead of dying and constantly breaking my heart), I'd totally have them as pets, instead.

I've grown up with primarily cats and dogs. I had 27 mice at one point during middle school (not by accident—I bred them) and I got my first rat in high school. Currently I have two cats and my current rattus (Hamlet... who I "illegally" got in college and lived in a cage under my dorm bed while I was an RA... lol). I must say that I've gotten into cat vs. dog arguments before and I think it comes down to preference, really. I like dogs plenty, but I also work 40-50 hours a week with a job that requires me to drop everything if I'm needed outside of my normal work hours (yaaay...) and frankly, I don't have time to deal with a needy dog.

"If rats lived longer (instead of dying and constantly breaking my heart), I'd totally have them as pets, instead."

I love rats and in my personal experience, they're smarter than dogs (... and cats lol) and much more easily trained. They also possess a lot of dog-like characteristics in social interactions. If rats were larger (that is—not so squishy), I could easily see bomb-sniffing rats and seeing-eye rats. Unfortunately, they have the stigma of being unclean... and a lot of people have serious issues with the tail (these same people tend to want a pet squirrel... odd).

If I actually had more than 3-4 hours a day of spare time a day, I'd probably be more of a dog person.

I am a 26 year old musician, which means I am not home a lot. So I got a cat. I grew up with cats, dogs, birds, and what else have you so I am a lover of all animals; except reptiles, they just creep me out.

The dogs I had growing up were hunting dogs; they were very smart in the fact that they knew all sorts of commands and were extremely obedient. So I recognize that dogs are very intellegent creatures. But I have to agree with most when it's said that cats are simply smarter because they do not need to rely on humans to survive.

Cats can be taught tricks if you do the same things as if you were teaching a dog; start them off young and reward them with treats. I have seen trained cats. Look at Sigfried (I know I didn't spell that right) and Roy. CATS!

To say that dogs are more social and smarter because they are from "pack animals" is obsurd; lions are cats. They live in prides and hunt as a group. When adopting kittens, most of the time the litters need to be adopted in pairs because they enjoy each other's company.

The easiest thing to cite is that cats do not need to be housebroken. I got my kitten when she was 8 weeks old, and she already knew how to use a litter box simply from watching her mother do it.

My cat is friendly, playful, and funny. She rubs up against my legs and purrs when I come home, so cats are capable of being loyal to their owners (she doesn't really show much affection for my roommates). She follows me around the house, licks my face (which hurts like hell with her kitty tongue), and meows at me when my alarm goes off. All in all, I'd say she's a smart little girl, in a tinier cleaner package than a dog.

I am the oldest of five human children. I have lived with three German Shepherd Dogs over my lifetime (all three from the same kennel), and several cats (of varied origin). I think that the problem with studies like this is that they treat animals with broad strokes, i.e., they compare Border Collies to Basset Hounds to Bengals. I have discovered that there is a bell curve of intelligence quotient amongst animals just as there is amongst humans. Studies like this are beyond comparing apples to oranges; they are comparing apples to butter sticks. My Egyptian Mau Cat taught himself how to open a doorknob (a feat that should have been impossible given his lack of opposable thumbs) and was a HUGE fan of Yoda from Empire. Just mentioning "do you want to watch Yoda?" would send him running to the screen, where he followed every movement with corresponding head and eye movements. This is not cat behavior that I have witnessed in other breeds, although a friend has Sphinx cats that seem to illustrate similar behavior patterns. All three of my German Shepherd Dogs have presented unique personalities, even though they share the same bloodline and training. And don't even get me started on the five different human personalities that grew up in my house . . . .
In short, the dog and cat people will wage war for time immortal. As scientific researchers, we need to move ourselves above the fray. We are accused of "personification" if we delve too deeply, but I think that is the exact argument that is needed here. I seek out animals with the highest level of intelligence that I can, because, for me, they are actually the easiest to deal with. So, I have dealt with a number of them throughout the years, from humans to birds to horses to the aforementioned dogs and cats. The main lesson that I have learned from them is that you approach them all with the same basic pattern of behaviors, adjusted only for their own natural instinct (e.g., a cat is a predator, a horse can't see straight on), and you have a good certainty of coming out ahead. Praise them whenever possible: all creatures love praise. Convince them all that they are special snowflakes. That's all it takes, regardless of the species. That tells me that we are looking at the wrong scale. Show me an animal that will not respond to praise and love, and I will concur that this animal is probably unintelligent.
It took a lot of years of research to come up with our modern IQ scale for humans, and still to the day it is controversial. It should come as no surprise, then, that we don't have a good scale for animals. If humans can't agree whether one IQ scale does or does not adequately reflect the IQ for a given race, why should we expect one scale to adequately reflect the IQ for all dogs of all breeds? Or all animals? I have found that those who would accuse me of personification are guilty of their own crime: hubris. They want one creature to "win," so they manipulate the scale to make it so. We are all guilty of it on a subconscious level. Wolfgang Pauli, one of the greatest of the quantum mechanics theorists, believed that the researcher CANNOT separate him/her-self from the experiment. That, I believe, is what is happening here. My "love" scale may be as flaky as all get out. But, at least I acknowledge it for what it is. Also, it allows me to identify dumb animals (including humans!) with high reliability.
Maybe the Beatles were right . . .

I think the reason there are no seeing eye cats etc. is lack of motivation. Dogs are codependent whereas cats are just here for the food. Slackers. I have 4 of em.