Effects of Affiliative Human–Animal Interaction on Dog Salivary and Plasma Oxytocin and Vasopressin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oxytocin (OT) and vasopressin (AVP) are neuropeptides with diverse effects on social behavior, cognition and stress responses. Recent studies suggest that OT facilitates and responds to affiliative forms of human-animal interaction (HAI). However, previous studies measuring OT and AVP in dogs have been limited to measures from blood or urine, which present concerns related to the invasiveness of sample collection, the potential for matrix interference in immunoassays, and whether samples can be collected at precise time points to assess event-linked endocrine responses. Previous studies from our laboratory validated salivary measures of OT and AVP in dogs, however, it is currently unknown whether these measures respond dynamically to aspects of HAI. Here, we investigated the effects of affiliative forms of HAI on both plasma and salivary OT and AVP in dogs. We employed a within- and between-subjects design with a group of Labrador retrievers and Labrador retriever × golden retriever crosses (23 females, 15 males). Half of the dogs engaged in 10 min of free-form friendly interaction with a human experimenter (HAI condition), and the other half rested quietly in the same environment, without human interaction (control condition). We collected blood and saliva samples before, and immediately following both experimental conditions, and all samples were analyzed using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) following previously validated protocols. Dogs participating in HAI exhibited a significant increase in both salivary OT (+39%) and plasma OT (+5.7%) whereas dogs in the control group did not. Salivary AVP showed no change in the HAI group but increased significantly (+33%) in the control group. Plasma AVP decreased significantly following HAI (-13%) but did not change across time in the control condition. Within the dogs exposed to HAI, increases in salivary OT, and decreases in plasma AVP, were predicted by the extent of affiliative behavior between the dog and human (indexed by scores from a principal components analysis of social behaviors between the dog and human). Collectively our results suggest that measures of salivary OT and AVP provide useful biomarkers in studies of HAI, and afford a flexible and non-invasive toolkit than can be employed in diverse research contexts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".