all 6 comments

[–]cant_even 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Dogs "recognize" what their handlers are looking for.

[–]WoodyWoodPecker[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I can't read it because of pop-ups that won't close for me.

[–]cant_even 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Here's the original: The archiver catches all the popups.

[–]WoodyWoodPecker[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It does not load for me, it times out.

[–]cant_even 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well, here's the meat of it...

Abstract

Our aim was to evaluate how human beliefs affect working dog outcomes in an applied environment. We asked whether beliefs of scent detection dog handlers affect team performance and evaluated relative importance of human versus dog influences on handlers’ beliefs. Eighteen drug and/or explosive detection dog/handler teams each completed two sets of four brief search scenarios (conditions). Handlers were falsely told that two conditions contained a paper marking scent location (human influence). Two conditions contained decoy scents (food/toy) to encourage dog interest in a false location (dog influence). Conditions were (1) control; (2) paper marker; (3) decoy scent; and (4) paper marker at decoy scent. No conditions contained drug or explosive scent; any alerting response was incorrect. A repeated measures analysis of variance was used with search condition as the independent variable and number of alerts as the dependent variable. Additional nonparametric tests compared human and dog influence. There were 225 incorrect responses, with no differences in mean responses across conditions. Response patterns differed by condition. There were more correct (no alert responses) searches in conditions without markers. Within marked conditions, handlers reported that dogs alerted more at marked locations than other locations. Handlers’ beliefs that scent was present potentiated handler identification of detection dog alerts. Human more than dog influences affected alert locations. This confirms that handler beliefs affect outcomes of scent detection dog deployments.

[–]outside 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"Science" says X. Zero links to studies.

That said, it's common knowledge dogs sense aggression, fear, etc, and more outwardly mimic their owner's subtle reactions to people. Definitely not as simple as good people:bad people.