Unraveling the Myth of the Viral Talking Dog from TikTok
Written on
The Desire for Animal Communication
As a pet lover, I often find myself wishing that my cats could converse with us. Whenever Maya and Wyatt display unusual behavior, I tell my partner, Tristin, how much I wish they could voice their thoughts. I'm curious about what they would say if they could speak. Maya has unpredictable mood swings—one moment she’s affectionate, and the next she’s scratching. On the other hand, Wyatt seems perpetually grumpy, making me wonder, “If only he could chat with us for a day, what would he demand? More food, perhaps?”
If you're someone who also dreams of a world where animals can communicate verbally, you might be inclined to believe the viral TikTok videos featuring a dog named Bunny. Bunny's owner, Alexis Devine, claims that her dog uses buttons to express herself. While it's a delightful thought, today we aim to dissect and debunk the notion that Bunny truly communicates in this manner.
It's important to acknowledge that dogs are incredibly intelligent creatures. Many animals exhibit significant cognitive abilities. As an admirer of psychologist B.F. Skinner, I recognize the potential of behaviorism—animals can be trained to perform a variety of tasks with the right motivation. However, the ability to speak is, unfortunately, not one of them.
Skeptics suggest that Alexis simply edits Bunny's best moments with the buttons, but I believe there's a deeper psychological explanation at play. We will explore the ideomotor effect and its role in animal behavior, but first, we must consider the human inclination toward anamorphism.
Understanding Anamorphism
In their book The Mind Club: Who Thinks, What Feels, and Why It Matters, authors Daniel Wegner and Kurt Gray delve into why we assign mental capacities to some animals and not others. One of the concepts discussed is anamorphism—a perspective distortion that often leads to misconceptions about animal intelligence.
This phenomenon can explain how Alexis might genuinely believe Bunny communicates through the buttons, and how viewers are led to think the same. By examining the history of talking animals, we can inch closer to the reality of these claims. This brings us to the story of Clever Hans, a math-solving horse.
Clever Hans: The Math-Solving Horse
Long before Bunny, there was Clever Hans, a horse owned by Herr Wilhelm Von Osten in the early 1900s. Hans gained fame for apparently solving complex math problems. Von Osten showcased Hans across various venues, where the horse would tap his hoof to indicate answers—24 taps for "12 plus 12," for instance.
Despite the lack of modern viral platforms, Hans captured public attention through newspapers and word-of-mouth. Yet, even in that era, skeptics existed. Psychologist Carl Stumpf investigated whether Hans truly possessed mathematical skills or if there was another explanation for his abilities.
Stumpf designed a series of experiments to eliminate potential cues from Von Osten. By hiding Von Osten from Hans’ view, they discovered that the horse could no longer answer correctly, revealing that Hans was responding to subtle cues rather than understanding math.
The Ideomotor Effect
The consensus among researchers is that both Clever Hans and his owner were unaware of the unconscious signals at play. This phenomenon, known as the ideomotor effect, explains how individuals can make involuntary movements without realizing it—similar to how we might think Ouija boards are being moved by spirits.
Clever Hans exemplified intelligence, but not in the way people assumed. Instead of solving equations, he was adept at picking up on his owner's body language, which misled observers into believing he understood the questions posed to him.
Now, let's return to Bunny and Alexis. Many may feel defensive about Bunny's abilities, insisting she is a genuine communicator. Some might even point to primates that use sign language as a counterargument. While it's true that some apes can learn sign language, we must remember that the neurological structures of gorillas and dogs differ significantly.
Evaluating Bunny's Communication
So, does this mean Alexis is deceiving us? Personally, I prefer to assume honesty. I suspect that, much like Von Osten and Clever Hans, Alexis may be unknowingly giving Bunny signals that create the illusion of communication.
To truly assess Bunny's abilities, a well-structured experiment would be necessary. We could test whether Bunny responds accurately when other people ask questions, or if she can answer without seeing Alexis. It's possible that Bunny associates certain tones in Alexis’s voice with specific button presses, leading to conditioned responses.
We would also need to confirm that Bunny genuinely desires what she expresses. For instance, if Bunny indicates hunger but doesn't eat, that would challenge her understanding of language. Similarly, if she claims to need to go outside but doesn't, it would cast doubt on her communication skills.
Finally, it's essential to address how we ascribe meanings to seemingly random actions. Our brains are wired to make connections, which is why we might interpret our pets' behavior as attempts to communicate. For example, when Bunny presses buttons that convey "Love you. No," it reflects anamorphism in action.
If you were to observe Bunny throughout the day, you might notice her pressing numerous buttons at random. This randomness could lead us to find meaning in the chaos, similar to the infinite monkey theorem—given enough time, randomness will yield recognizable patterns.
If you're seeking support for your mental health, I highly recommend BetterHelp, an affordable online therapy service. By using this affiliate link, you assist The Rewired Soul.
Stay connected with me on Twitter and Instagram @TheRewiredSoul. For more mental health discussions, visit www.TheRewiredSoul.com.