Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 May 23.
Published in final edited form as: Anim Cogn. 2012 Jul 3;15(5):1031–1035. doi: 10.1007/s10071-012-0526-6

Fig. 2. Individual differences in responses to ambiguous stimuli.

Fig. 2

a Latency scores in response to the ambiguous Middle stimulus for the 24 subjects. Data of Owner-present and Owner-absent condition are pooled. Stars designate significant deviation from intermediate value of 50 (one-sample t test, p<0.05). b Latency scores in response to the three ambiguous stimuli Near Negative (NN), Middle (M) and Near Positive (NP) for two exemplary individuals. Fibi showed a continuous decrease in latency (9 dogs in our sample of 24 showed a pattern like this) whereas Saphira showed an indistinguishable response to two of the stimuli and a markedly different response to the third (10 dogs in our sample showed a pattern like this, with the sharp drop in latency either between the NN and M location as shown or between the M and NP location; the remaining 5 dogs showed intermediate patterns). All data are shown as mean and standard error.