This is obvious if you have a dog, but cool to see it studied.
My dog is a velcro dog, he follows me everywhere. If I change direction he will too. If I start to run he will too. One amusing thing on our walks is he will walk confidently, determinedly in one direction, as if he is rushing to a destination. Then if I change direction, he immediately does too, as if forgetting about his original destination in the first place. Anthropomorphizing a bit I know.
This article suggests all dogs are like this, mine just might do it to a stronger degree.
Dogs also spend a lot of time on leashes where they'll get yanked around if they don't pay attention to their human's movements. And many families specifically train and reward dogs to move in sync with them (heeling, agility). It seems obvious that synchrony is something that humans both train and selectively breed dogs for. I guess the point of this study is that synchrony is another way to measure social connection between dogs and humans and that this connection extends to children.
Incidentally, my dog behaves and is far more synchronized off than on leash, so much so that I'm trying to train her to be leash free. She listens a lot better like that for some reason.
Even if you are right to be 100% confident others may have phobia of dogs (possibly due to traumatic events in their past) or simply can't tell at a glance how well trained your dog is so you should still use a leash in close proximity to others.
As someone who grew up in a family of pet owners, the joke is anytime there is a story with "study" and "dog", that any dog owner could have told them that. This study is what we refer to as the "invisible leash" that dogs have with with their masters. The article also touches on mirroring behavior, which is also well known and even has a whole class of dog training based around it called "Do as I Do"[1] I trained my dog this way as a pup. AMA.
Dogs spend their lives trying to figure out what we want and the meaning of our words. Science has year to catch up to learn just how much they understand and how in-tune they are with their adopted pack.
There is a tendency to feel this way when anything in day to day experience (pet ownership, parenthood, career experience, etc.) overlaps with scientific study.
It's tempting to say "well, obviously" but it's a slippery slope. Beyond the obvious potential for confirmation bias, etc., when you do the science carefully, sometimes you find out what people "knew" was just wrong.
This happens often enough to make it worth the effort.
In the case of dogs you will probably find more things that is common knowledge with dog owners that science got wrong vs. things where science showed that owners were wrong.
They demonstrate that a wolf can be domesticated, but will still keep its distance and act independently from the domesticating humans.
Surprisingly, domesticated wolves test higher than dogs on intelligence tests. The show attributes dog behavior to a genetic mutation from their wolf ancestry. A similar mutation occurs in humans at 1:10k frequency called Williams Syndrome. One feature in this mutation is a form of learning disability; another is friendliness.
I've seen a canine behavioral study that said wolves were better problem solvers because, given the same task of opening a box, dogs gave up and switched tactics to asking for help from a human.
My dog moves when my two-year old does and is generally still otherwise. But I attribute this to my dog's survival instinct rather than an emotional bonding.
A few years ago I was in the Galapagos and met a German evolutionary biologist who pointed out some fur seals sleeping on the beach. It was a hot day but they were arranged in a neat line to sleep so they were touching.
He explained it was a group evolutionary advantage - if one of them wakes up because of a predator attack, for example, they’d all be woken up and hopefully most of them would manage to get away. I specifically remember him mentioning that dogs and puppies still have a slight preference for sleeping the same way.
I haven’t for the life of me been able to remember the word (or phrase?) he used to describe the behavior and every so often I Google in vain for more information. I can’t even recall whether the term he used was in english or german. Perhaps someone here can point me in the right direction?
I can't help you with the term you're looking for, but as far as seals are concerned, they're genetically very close to dogs. I'd expect similar behaviors.
A friend who works in a conservation role was telling me about the time he took a seal to the beach to get it off the road in a small town.
The window was open, and like a dog it was happiest with its nose in the breeze.
The posture for a sleeping fur seal in water is called a jug handle. When seals are awake on the beach, they often lay in a banana pose, where they hold up their heads and tails out of the water.
Every Pennsylvanian who lives by the New Jersey border knows about jughandles and how absolutely ridiculous these things are. We also know about the idiocy that is the New Jersey traffic circle. Do not get these abominations confused with the modern roundabouts because they're nothing alike.
Emotional bonding can be a survival instinct. If your dog has built a psychology (for lack of a better word) that leads it to mirror your family's behavior in appropriate ways, you're probably more likely to keep it (on the margins).
If you raise a cat from kitten so it doesn't experience negative memories/associations with humans, consistently and empathetically analyze what it wants, and earn it's trust, they will be unbelievably affectionate and attached.
If they meow at you or otherwise try to get your attention, they are trying to communicate something. I used to think they were just being cats doing random useless things like sniffing, pawing or meowing, but nearly every single time there was some scent I needed to deal with, a desire to poop/eat/move or something real that they were trying to communicate. If you consistently ignore their attempts at communication, they will stop trying after a few times (wouldn't you?) unless they're like starving. But if they know you pay attention and respond, they will communicate their wants to you pretty clearly. Nothing they do is random, there is always a reason for it.
I agree cats are much more intentional in their communication than people appreciate, but sometimes you can't just give the cat what it wants. my cat mainly meows for two reasons. he either wants food or he wants to go in the kitchen. unfortunately he can't be free fed because he will quickly become overweight. he's not allowed in the kitchen because he eats plants and jumps up on the stove, sometimes right next to an open flame. serious question: how would you handle this situation?
A properly fed cat, with an established routine, should only start going crazy around it's normal feeding time.
Most cats and dogs crave a routine. Unfortunately, sometimes a routine is difficult to establish if your work hours don't permit, or other activities get in the way. That was the original intention behind the free-feeders, however as you noted that can lead to obesity in your pet (not all pets, some regulate their intake well on their own).
So, if you're one that is establishing a feeding time, make sure you stick to exactly the same time every day (like clockwork, seriously). You may even consider providing "breakfast" and "dinner" to your cat (again on a fixed schedule), dividing the daily intake into two meals.
Your cat wants into the Kitchen because they are curious creatures, and you've made the Kitchen some fun forbidden zone. Ideally you're in the Kitchen when the stove is on, so you can prevent burns. You could also try training them into a negative association with the stove by squirting them with a squirt gun (low pressure) every time they walk on it... same with nibbling the plants.
Incorporating some of what u/aksss stated, don't let them freely and peacefully hang out there or it will be a habit and be harder to stop. They will understand at some point.
Always be calm and gentle, while also very firm and clear, when you correct their undesired activity. If you get mad, they will instinctively get scared for their life that the 15x heavier giant will lose control of themself in anger, and kill them. You know you won't hurt them, but they don't know that - in the animal world, animals get killed suddenly by larger animals out of sharp anger. Plus, when you need to discipline them in the future, they won't run away and make it way harder to correct their behavior.
Some behaviors, the only way is prevention. I still can't stop the cats from sometimes running into unwanted areas of the house, so most of the time I must block them. When they get past, I just let them check out the area for a bit then they eventually let me nicely pick them up and move them to the proper area. Perhaps a more firm owner could employ a better strategy, but this is much better than before. Before, they would escape into the house for 10+ minutes while I got very frustrated at them, they were scared to let me pick them up, and it was just an all around bad experience. Now, they know that when I pick them up, I'm petting them and it can even be a small bonding experience.
On another note, the cat's behavior (meowing in your case) may be due to a different underlying need. One big thing I can think of is, is it bored? We humans spend a lot of time entertaining ourselves, cats have the same needs too. I try to have one 30m session of exciting cat wand play a week at the very least. Indoor cats might be better with a little more. Hunting is so, so fulfilling for these animals, if you look at how specialized they are at hunting, you could imagine how strong their desire to hunt is. So just a small session occasionally would do wonders for their happiness and contentment, and also their love for you that you would fulfill this need for them.
If you know that you have sufficiently provided for and can rule out hunger, thirst, need to pee/poop, boredom, pain, then you at least know that their fundamentals are covered. From there, you can determine if it's something else that's important, or if their behavior is actually frivolous.
Probably depends on how old the cat is. I would aim towards a day where the cat can go into the kitchen without worry. Time is on your side because eventually the cat won’t find the energy expenditure of jumping that height worth it (nor the risk of recovering from a bad jump). Start with supervised trips to kitchen but long term never leave anything up there that a successful cat burglar could access as a reward. If seen, I would react negatively (maybe spray bottle if u use that, loud remark, physically picking cat up off counter and putting on ground immediately). Never let cat have freedom or peace on the counter. I would watch for the cat’s preferred landing spots on the counter and put some temporary barriers in place (e.g. 1lb sack of flour, etc), just so it has to think twice about its movements (don’t let the path upwards become automatic/unconscious), and may doubt its ability to safely alight on the counter (remember it can only see what’s on the ledge). I would also be sure to interrupt the action of jumping up before it happens - like you can see the cat’s wheels turning as it stares at the counter, bobs it’s head around slightly to accurately gauge distance, depth, etc. at that time, interrupt the thought process. Distract it with something else, maybe even something good, so not jumping is a positive association. I think that pattern interrupt is really powerful with cats, but you have to be watching the cat to catch the right moment. You could also let the cat in the kitchen with no other purpose than to watch for and interrupt those moments. There’s a few other tricks like this to interrupt the action (moving a barrier according to its intentions) that just frustrate the cat into eventually losing interest. Cat ownership occasionally involves small battles of will power.
Regarding food, I can’t say enough about the value of robots here - timed food distribution. Get a cat feeder that will release x amount three or four times a day. I think cat binging behavior is an outcome of an unpredictable feeding schedule, basically food insecurity. When the cat just knows that every day at these predictable times it will have food available it will be a happier, less anxious cat for sure. Cats don’t have watches, but they’ll show up at the feeding station like clockwork anticipating the food drop. The flip side is the binging will stop just because of scarcity, but also the cat worries less about food security and develops behaviors of moderation. If feeding cat wet food (which I wouldn’t recommend unless cat is very young or very old) you’ve just got to dole it out yourself on as a predictable basis as possible.
Anyway, just my two cents, worth what you paid for it. Will be curious to see other people’s input.
so I actually do have an automated feeder. unfortunately, I think he remembers the time before we had the feeder when humans would put food in his bowl. he waits patiently in the morning for the most part (maybe he realizes it's futile while I'm sleeping), but he usually starts meowing for food a few hours before the feeder is scheduled to dispense it in the afternoon. BTW, the portions are exactly what the vet recommended; he's not starving.
with the kitchen, I do let him in if I'm going to be in there for a while. I think he really just wants to be where the people are. I don't use spray bottles or anything like that. I've read that sometimes the animal forms a negative association with the human rather than the proscribed behavior. I just put him out the first time he jumps on the counter or chews on a plant.
anyways, it's not really a big deal. I don't find the meowing terribly annoying. I just want, if possible, to be sure I'm making the distinction between ignoring his requests and acknowledging them but "saying no".
Yeah, I don’t use a spray bottle either. I think there are better ways to modify behavior, such as that pattern interrupt. Cats are also way more empathetic than they’re given credit for, so I do think that they understand when main human is not happy with them.
My cat has an uncanny ability to ask for food right before my alarm goes off. I’ve often wondered how it pulls this off even after a DST changeover, and figured it was because she could hear the rest of my neighborhood start to get active so not unreasonable to bug us. Simple fix: I set the first food drop about 15mins before my alarm. By the time I’m up she’s already chilling out post-feed. The cat and I agree that more food=better, particularly in frequency, with the caveat that I’m just trying to keep her from gaining or shedding any significant weight between vet visits, so that’s really the only limit I put on it. A decent pattern for us seems to be four times during my normal waking hours. Like morning, noonish/early afternoon, late afternoon, mid-evening. She’s a little scrounger though, definitely interested in whatever I’m eating, particularly cheese, and will try to convince any stranger that she hasn’t eaten for days and is on the verge of death (OmG). But yeah, healthy weight and stable.
I like your tip of 'Never let cat have freedom or peace on the counter', have ended up doing this (the intent will be more purposeful now thanks to you) for my young, very strongheaded cat jumping on the car.
Repeated this 5 times in 10 minutes, with it seemingly not listening. But it now knows I don't want that and has stopped for now.
I remember when I was kid coming home and seeing our cat at the top of the stairs. I walked up, picked him up and put him at the bottom of the stairs. He then went back up the stairs and sat down.
I wondered how often I could do that until he just walked away. I still wonder about that because the answer seemed to be that he was a hell of a lot more persistent then I was at 10 or however old I was.
I wouldn't say I was or am an expert at feline body language but the odd thing to my mind (then and now) was that he never seemed particularly annoyed.
As a side note - I've read that the common idea that angry cats swish their tails back and forth isn't exactly true. Cat - from what I read - do that when they're uncertain. Fight or flight. Or if you see a cat before an open door on a rainy day. They want to be outside but they don't want to be wet.
The thing I read was that the emotion manifested itself as a physical response to being unbalanced. Like a cat using it's tails as a counter when it's a precarious spot. It seemed - and seems - a fascinating insight into an animals mind though I have no idea if there's any truth to it.
Tangential, but I wonder how does it affect the cats having nearby another cat that's different personality-wise. I've a guinea pig that's kind of insecure, and planning to get another that's probably more outgoing. Can security be learned by osmosis?
in my experience, there's a limited amount of osmosis. i adopted my current (female) cat as a kitten when my prior (male) cat was declining toward death, in the hopes that she would provide some youthful companionship after his sister had passed away a few months before (they were littermates, got them as kittens).
surprisingly, he became solemnly composed and accepting of her almost immediately, despite spending his whole life trying to dominate his sister (out of both competitiveness and territoriality, i imagine). i picked her from the kitten rescue specifically for her mild temper, knowing how dominating and insecure he could be. she was playful but respectful, and i'd like to think he was a little less lonely in those last few months with his sister already gone.
fast forward a couple years, and i have an accidental (male) foster kitten who's a crazy ball of energy next to my mild-mannered, now-adult cat. otherwise pretty lazy, she's learning how to play more energetically and socialize with the little devil (as i socialize him as well--his first-time cat owner didn't seem to know if or how to do this).
so yes, there's some osmosis going on, as cats learn from each other and the social structure shifts, but it's limited. no wholesale changes in my experience.
I used to have a weird dog that wasn't food motivated (which made it really hard to train her), had a lot of separation anxiety, and pooped when we left the house. At least she was otherwise well potty-trained and didn't pee inside.
We got another dog to teach our first one how to be a normal dog and keep her company. Dog #2 was a rescue that had grown up on the streets. He was good about eating food but never learned to not pee inside.
We ended up with two weird-ass food-disinterested anxious dogs that pee and poop indoors.
> I wonder how does it affect the cats having nearby another cat that's different personality-wise
I've had cats all my life. I would say it all depends on the cat. For some cats there is nothing worse that having another cat in their territory but some are more social.
I've had older aloof cats come to life, perk up and become more social when there is new social cat in the house.
In the case of my pair they mostly ignore each other - brother and sister pair - they played together when they where young and they aren't aggressive, they just rotate opposite ends of whatever room they are in.
"Your faithful golden retriever might sit next to your dead body for days, starving, but the tabby won’t,” she writes. “Your pet cat will eat you right away, with no qualms at all. I’ve seen the result.”
I seem to recall brain scanning research that showed that, unlike how it might seem from their behavior, cats recognize being called by name as good or better as dogs, they just often chose to ignore it.
Cats can like you. The difference is that dogs think of you as a big upright dog, and cats think of you as something other than a cat. Dogs think of you as a peer, cats think of you as a pet or a fancy piece of furniture.
I've always thought the difference between a cat and a dog is that for a dog being with you is like a job. You might have a great job. You may love your co-workers. You might have a crap job. Your co-worker may occasionally kick you in the side. But, you know, what are you going do? It's a J O B.
It makes a dog a great companion. Loyal even to those who have done nothing to deserve it. Even an untrained dog will do it's canine best to be a good dog - though it will generally have no idea what we expect that to be.
The problem with that from my point of view is that when you meet a good dog. Well, they're all good dogs aren't they? Who's a good dog? This dog right here! Anyhow - the problem is that I don't trust them. Because they're punching a clock. Do they really like me? Or am I just a co-worker they landed?
A cat on the other hand is different. A cat is like that dude who lived with you and 3 other guys when you were all going to school. I think he was enrolled? Honestly I wonder; it seemed like all he did was sit around, smoke pot and try to fight off all the women running after him with that stupid guitar he played. Classical of course.
Anyhow. If you had kicked him he might have kicked back if he thought he could but maybe he wouldn't if he thought he'd get hurt. What he would have done though is move out the first chance he'd get. If for some reason he couldn't he'd avoid you.
Here's the thing though. When you come home and your cat rambles over and jumps up on your lap. When you scratch him behind the ears or rub a warm belly. It's a genuine thing. It's not much really but it's an unnatural act of empathy.
People say cats view us a kittens. Or as mother cats. Or something. I'm not sure that's the case. I think it's possible at least that they know us to be something alien and strange to them. That they're living their life apart from us but they can choose to try and relate to us - and they do that in the ways that they know.
Seriously, dog owners know all this already. They know that me puting my hat on means I'm going outside, if I grab my keys they know I'm leaving the yard, when I pick up a ball to throw, they know to look at my face (facial cues) to determine which direction I am going to throw it in.
I think I’m ok with studies determining that things we think are obviously true are true.
1. Sometimes they turn out not to be true so it is good to do the study
2. It would be bad to do the study looking for a surprise, find no surprise, and then not publish the results. Probably some university PR department is trying to come up with something to say.
One thing that strikes me about my dog's awareness is he picks up on landmarks really easily. Once we get within a mile of the vet his demeanor changes and he becomes sulky. On the contrary, once we're in a mile or so from my mother's house he perks up and gets extremely excited. It'd be interesting to read research on how good a dog's spacial awareness is and how they manage to find themselves home while being miles away.
Their ability to smell is hundreds of thousands of times better than ours. We think outside smells like outside. They think every sidewalk tile smells a little different. They know that landmark because that smell reminds them of the vet.
I suspect all domesticated animals, and many non-domesticated animals that live in close human contact, also display such behaviors. My horses respond to hearing the door of the house close early in the morning, knowing that grain is soon on the way. My cattle hear the tractor start and start moving in their slow fashion to the hay feeder. If I holler in a particular way that often presages grain, they'll stampede to the location.
> People who take up dancing together, for instance, often express greater closeness and cohesion afterward. Moving in tandem seems to generate intangible, intimate bonds.
As a dancer in my youth, it's a bit funny reading someone writing this as research. Dancing is physically close, intimate, other-person-way-closer-than-your-regular-comfort-zone by nature. Add to that that eye contact, again inherently intimate, is crucial for coordinating any nuanced moves and you'd be hard pressed to find anything other than the above result. There is no way to put in the hours of rote practice, sweat, awkward mishaps and more without becoming intimate with your dance partner. I'm not saying it's bad there's research into this, I'm more so surprised this is something that was only strictly established by research in 2015.
I feel similarly about wrestling. The culture can be extremely macho (often to its detriment) - but the physical contact and trust involved similarly builds bonds.
Wrestled from an early age. Totally agree. Takes a lot of trust to let someone shoot in trip and slam you. Knowing that it's your turn next. You truly know someone's strength and skill and all the social tough guy posturing means nothing when it's just two people on the mat.
> You truly know someone's strength and skill and all the social tough guy posturing means nothing when it's just two people on the mat.
I ultimately decided wrestling wasn't for me, but I did appreciate this part of it. there were quite a few matches in highschool where some scrawny kid got matched against one of the "athletic" types. often turned out to be quite the upset if the scrawny guy had actually been paying attention to the coaches.
this is the reason you're supposed to "leave room for jesus" when dancing. the evils of dancing have been propogated by religious beliefs directly because of its known proclivity towards initimate behavior.
They were wrong in teaching it to children, but I don't think many people would want to see their significant other holding hands with someone else. There is a lot of wisdom in ancient religions but it's often wielded by less-than-capable people.
This is pretty cultural and contextual -- in many social groups, at least on the west coast, holding hands and cuddling between friends is common. In some Asian countries you often see two boys walking down the street holding hands. I don't really agree that there's wisdom in teaching people jealousy over perfectly innocent behavior.
I said there's wisdom in ancient religions that have observed something about human nature that is otherwise hard to observe from a single individual's vantage point (not to mention trying to explain it in a concise/precise way). Saying it's equivalent to "teaching people jealousy" is illustrating my point, that teachings are often reduced and bastardized and then taught to children. Regardless, point taken and I agree there is cultural context, but even in hand-holding cultures, there will be an equivalent of an exterior but subtle show of attraction and the point Christians make (IMHO) is that you can be dishonest with yourself and then fall into the "trap", so it's almost a reductionist approach to morality, since if you intend never to "cheat" then why would you even be interested in the "first step", whatever that is for the culture.
As a Pākehā boy in Aotearoa in the 1960s I used to hold hands with my friends quite often. Especially if we were in conversation. Never even though twice about it. Eight years old
I challenge that notion as toxic. Holding hands, hugging or otherwise expressing physical closeness with "someone else" is considered normal, healthy and valuable in various cultures, including mine.
I don't understand this idea that a partner holding hands with a non-partner is inherently threatening or uncomfortable. On the contrary, seeing my partner being comfortable and able to express intimacy is a strong positive signal of their ability to form a secure attachment with me and other people dear to me.
The entire reply is about how contrived physical closeness leads to emotional closeness so it seems out of left field to think this was a euphemism for sex.
>Dancing is physically close, intimate, other-person-way-closer-than-your-regular-comfort-zone by nature. Add to that that eye contact, again inherently intimate, is crucial for coordinating any nuanced moves and you'd be hard pressed to find anything other than the above result.
Also puts in new perspective the early 20th century attitudes towards Jazz, Rock N Roll, dancing, flappers, etc.
There is anecdote that Sayyid Qutb really turned away from modernity and towards Islamism when he witnessed a Church in Colorado (he was at UC Boulder) that held a mixed dance in one of the Church buildings.
> She and her colleagues also are interested in studying the bonding and interwoven movements of people and other types of pets, particularly cats. “We’ve done a little work with cats and, so far, they blow everything out of the water in terms of being socially responsive to their owners’ behavior,” she says.
If it's an article about research, you can always find the original paper or at least the abstract: https://thehumananimalbond.com/publication-media/. I usually find the news articles about them don't have much more value than letting me know a new study exists, and in fact they often misunderstand the research and overstate the conclusion.
Sure, let me get my credit card real quick to pay for the article about how dogs move in synchrony with their family members. I‘m sure most of the readers here have subscriptions for nytimes and 100+ other publications.
Sounds like you're not interested enough to pay for it, which is fine. You're not required to read it, you're not entitled to read it, and you can move on from FOMO.
It's fine to miss out. It's fine to not read content. It's fine to not want to pay for a publication if you're fine with not accessing it.
Oh, I thought I was required to read this specific article. You saved me a yearly subscription, I was about to click on „buy with your second newborn“ when I read your comment. Thanks!
The New York Times is arguably the nations newspaper of record (more Californians subscribe to the NYTimes than New Yorkers). I’d expect lots of people who value being well read to have subscriptions.
In most cases, they already serve the entire content to the browser and just put a paywall overlay on top. It’s usually trivial to remove the overlay in a desktop browser by inspecting the source. You may also need to enable scrolling with css if it was disabled.
I'd like to hope they address the issues of the fake news research around "Google Earth shows that cow and deer herds align like compass needles" and "Do Dogs Have Their Own Poop Compass"
I see the difference between the controversial ideas around magnetoreception in many mammals and what I'd see as un-controversial, animals have some level of herding with humans and it will be different with children for various reasons.
But clearly people are misusing the difficulty of measuring alignments on animals to get exciting research.
Lots of wacky things like hiding magnets under things and looking at power lines. The studies never replicated. Wishy washy 'alignment' of animals and poo measuring proving 'big' things.
It's the 21st century, 20 years post internet. It should not still be considered 'unknown', but it is, old articles still online, that clearly have not actually proven anything.
And it does matter, it could change the way we look at whole eco-systems, farming and human behaviour. It's how our bodies work. I do not understand what scientists are doing. I can only assume there is no money or prestige proving magneto-reception isn't in most mammals, or perhaps it's to hard to fight the dodgy research / media machine.
Everything in the study can be completely explained with a mechanism no more powerful than "dogs tend to follow their owners". Plus a little bit of quantifying whether they are more loyal at following adult owners/shelter workers/children.
"Move in synchrony" is a very clickbaity way to suggest that there's something magical or insufficiently understood here (like magnetoreception). That seems to be editorializing from the NYT, rather than the authors of the study.
Why have the New York Times when you can read the study yourself with all the scientific jargon included? I thought their purpose in covering science is to make it easier to understand for a layman. What is synchrony? Do you think an average person actually knows? I'm educated in the sciences and I'm not sure of what it really means.
My dog is a velcro dog, he follows me everywhere. If I change direction he will too. If I start to run he will too. One amusing thing on our walks is he will walk confidently, determinedly in one direction, as if he is rushing to a destination. Then if I change direction, he immediately does too, as if forgetting about his original destination in the first place. Anthropomorphizing a bit I know.
This article suggests all dogs are like this, mine just might do it to a stronger degree.