Sentence examples for dog response from inspiring English sources
†Participants with negative laboratory results but positive dog response.
In the event that handlers were indeed asserting dog alerts regardless of dog response (or lack thereof), there are two possible causes.
In fact, nonverbal cues including proximity of the human to the dog and contextual learning of verbal commands have been shown to moderate dog response to verbal commands (Fukuzawa et al. 2005).
However, the conclusion that handlers are asserting their dogs have alerted simply upon seeing the marked areas regardless of actual dog response does not account for the numerous additional alerts occurring in other areas.
While the proposed reason for their findings emphasized effects of context specificity on the detection dogs (Gazit et al. 2005), the current findings raise the possibility that at least some of the effects of Gazit et al. (2005) might have arisen due to handler beliefs that scent would not be present in that area, with subsequent attenuation of dog response.
The X-shape grouping has an inducing effect of shrinkage on the central tile exactly opposite to its previous expansions with the DoG responses at fine scales.
Figure 1 shows individual dog responses for diastolic blood pressure and rate pressure product.
Dog responses: X = positive indication as cancer; O = no indication; # = uncertain indication.
Human cues that direct dog responses without formal training include pointing, nodding, head turning and gazing (reviewed in Reid 2009).
Table 2 provides information on the occasions that the dog and the laboratory gave discrepant results (inconclusive dog responses, false positives, and false negatives).
Thus, the perceived likelihood that scent was present across conditions would have contributed to confidence in handler beliefs of scent and dog responses.
