The human-canine bond exists for over 15,00 years ago, when humans began to socialize the European wolf-dogs. The influence of humans on the appearance of dogs created the extraordinary variety of...Show moreThe human-canine bond exists for over 15,00 years ago, when humans began to socialize the European wolf-dogs. The influence of humans on the appearance of dogs created the extraordinary variety of phenotypic diversity among the modern dog. Humans seem to be particularly interested in certain paedomorphic features in animals, such as a round face and large pupils, which is related to the Kindchenschema. Remarkably, one of the characteristics in dogs is an extra dark colouring around the pupil which seems to create an enlarging effect of the existing pupil. This so-called ring might be part of the human influence within the domestication of the modern dog. As well as a higher contrast between the iris and the ring, which creates a more visible ring and therefore strengthens the influence of the ring. The current study hypothesized and expected that 1) the ring is a predictor of the level of perceived cuteness in humans, 2) contrast is a moderator of this relationship and 3) attitude is correlated with the level of perceived cuteness. The 1100 participants were asked to rate 36 pictures of dogs on cuteness via an online questionnaire. The results showed that the larger the ring, the higher the level of perceived cuteness, as well as a positive correlation between attitude and the level of perceived cuteness. However, the contrast between the ring and the iris did not influence the relationship between the ratio ring/iris and the level of perceived cuteness. These results carefully confirm the influence of humans on a dog’s appearance. Future research could focus on gazing as a predictor of perceived cuteness, including isolating the eyes as presented stimuli.Show less
The human-canine bond exists for over 15,00 years ago, when humans began to socialize the European wolf-dogs. The influence of humans on the appearance of dogs created the extraordinary variety of...Show moreThe human-canine bond exists for over 15,00 years ago, when humans began to socialize the European wolf-dogs. The influence of humans on the appearance of dogs created the extraordinary variety of phenotypic diversity among the modern dog. Humans seem to be particularly interested in certain paedomorphic features in animals, such as a round face and large pupils, which is related to the Kindchenschema. Remarkably, one of the characteristics in dogs is an extra dark colouring around the pupil which seems to create an enlarging effect of the existing pupil. This so-called ring might be part of the human influence within the domestication of the modern dog. As well as a higher contrast between the iris and the ring, which creates a more visible ring and therefore strengthens the influence of the ring. The current study hypothesized and expected that 1) the ring is a predictor of the level of perceived cuteness in humans, 2) contrast is a moderator of this relationship and 3) attitude is correlated with the level of perceived cuteness. The 1100 participants were asked to rate 36 pictures of dogs on cuteness via an online questionnaire. The results showed that the larger the ring, the higher the level of perceived cuteness, as well as a positive correlation between attitude and the level of perceived cuteness. However, the contrast between the ring and the iris did not influence the relationship between the ratio ring/iris and the level of perceived cuteness. These results carefully confirm the influence of humans on a dog’s appearance. Future research could focus on gazing as a predictor of perceived cuteness, including isolating the eyes as presented stimuli.Show less
This research had generated insight in the relation between math anxiety of parents and teachers and genderstereotyped thinking of parents, teachers and pupils on pupils’ math performance. In total...Show moreThis research had generated insight in the relation between math anxiety of parents and teachers and genderstereotyped thinking of parents, teachers and pupils on pupils’ math performance. In total 42 teachers (nwomen = 30), 279 pupils (ngirls = 156) and 206 parents (nmothers = 188) participated during this research. The pupils have been asked to fill in a questionnaire based on the Student Attitude Questionnaire. For the parents and the teachers this questionnaire was expanded with the Math Attitude Scale. There was also asked for pupils’ math skills from the Leerlingvolgsysteem. The first result showed that boys were better in math than girls (p = .03). Secondly no relation was found between teachers’ math anxiety (p = .41) and genderstereotyped thinking of teachers (p = .58) and pupils (p = .45) on pupils’ math performance. The same relations were found for male and female teachers on pupils’ math performance. Opposed to this, parents’ math anxiety had a negative relation with pupils’ math performance (p = .01), but the genderstereotyped thinking of parents (p = .75) and pupils (p = .70) did not predict pupils’ math performance. In conclusion, the influence of parents on pupils’ math performance is larger compared to the influence of teachers. For further research is suggested to include more male teachers and fathers. In addition, it would be interesting to investigate the difference between male and female pupils and the input of pupils own math anxiety to get insight in their own influence on their math performance.Show less
