A scientist in Scotland tested the so-called DogPhone, allowing her dog to make video calls. He did use it, but mainly wrong.

Give any friend a story

As a subscriber, you have 10 gifts to send every month. Anyone can read what you share.

When away from home, dog owners can use technology to talk to their pets, track their every move, launch projectiles into the air, and even monitor them while they are sleeping.

The dogs had no choice but to look out the window longingly. Perhaps this is why the possibility of "DogPhone" briefly entered the world of media. Who doesn't want to answer that call?

But the new research that inspired these stories led by assistant professor Ilyena Hirskyj-Douglas at the University of Glasgow is mostly aspiring.

The study involved only one dog. This device is not a real mobile phone, nor is it any product close to the market. The result is uncertain at best.

Dr. Hirskyj-Douglas specializes in animal-computer interaction, using a ball equipped with a motion detection device that triggers a video call, allowing her 10-year-old Labrador Retriever Zack to move his toy.

"I think things like this can help dogs gain more control and choice to some extent," Dr. Hirskyj-Douglas said in an interview. "We have determined many things in their lives, and perhaps making this choice alone is a bit exciting in itself."

This research was published in the journal "ACM Human-Computer Interaction Proceedings" last month, and lasted 16 days, the sensitivity of the device was different. Researchers say that Zach has not received training to use the so-called DogPhone.

During the experiment, Zach called Dr. Hirskyj-Douglas about 5 times a day, for a total of more than 50 calls. According to research, almost all calls appear to be made accidentally.

"The dog was playing with his pig and accidentally pushed the ball in," a 30-second call log read.

"The dog accidentally barked (climbed on the sofa) and fell asleep," read the next one, which lasted 16 seconds.

In dozens of calls, when he pushed the motion sensor to work, the dog was already asleep. "The dog is sleeping with a ball."

Leading animal behaviorist Dr. Patricia McConnell is skeptical of this research. "A sample of a person and a dog is not a study," Dr. McConnell said. "I hope there will be more effort to train dogs to use the device, rather than hope he can figure it out."

But she said the authors "because they are interested in finding ways to give dogs more autonomy in their lives, especially when they leave home alone, which is commendable."

She said that this study raises interesting questions. "Does our dogs want to hear from us when we are not at home? Or they will say,'Don't call me, I will call you?'"

In the paper, Dr. Hirskyj-Douglas and her colleagues admitted that they have limitations in understanding what dogs mean or what they don’t intend to do. They wrote: "We humans may not know what the intentions of animals are or how they will intentionally interact with computer systems."

In the last few days of the study, the interaction with Zach was longer, and he called more frequently regardless of his intentions.

During their video call, Dr. Hirskyj-Douglas recounted her day to Zack and talked about the dog park she is about to visit. She said that when she flipped the camera to show him the city she was walking through, walked by street performers and commuted underground, he was particularly involved.

He is not always that dedicated. "Dog called me, but was not interested in our calls, but checked things in his bed," Dr. Hirskyj-Douglas wrote when talking about a call. "He is busy elsewhere."

She noticed that Zac never answered when she called.

Dr. Hirskyj-Douglas said that although her research did not reveal Zack's intentions, it showed that dogs could use interactive digital devices like hers if they had a choice.

She said: "They don't always use the technology we are developing passively, but most of the technology that emerges is passively used." She added that her research "shows that the future of dog technology can be very different from the present. "

The pet surveillance business is booming. With the proliferation of products with cameras, speakers, and GPS devices, more and more pet owners are turning to devices that allow them to be with their pets even if they are not in the room.

According to an industry report by the research company Global Market Insights, the pet technology market was valued at more than US$5.5 billion last year, and the market is expected to swell to more than US$20 billion by 2027. The best-selling products include collars and equipped with GPS trackers.

Dr. Hirskyj-Douglas said that technology like her device was not developed for sale, and it may help alleviate pets’ isolation and separation anxiety-many pet owners have noticed this issue during the coronavirus pandemic. .

Experts said that it is not yet clear to what extent dog technology products can help.

Dr. McConnell, a retired professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and Dr. Andrea Tu, a behavioral veterinarian, were also not involved in the study. He said that there is very little research on technology made for dogs.

They said that the current products on the market, such as video cameras, may be good for some pets, but may cause more anxiety to other pets. They also pointed out that research on whether dogs can fully recognize human faces on screens is still inconclusive.

"Dogs are so changeable, they are just like us," Dr. McConnell said. She said she would love to see more research on pets' mobility and autonomy, and how it changes the relationship with dogs.

Dr. Hirskyj-Douglas, who dedicated this research to her dogs, said that she hopes that the use of network devices will be transformed to expand the pet world and give them a greater sense of freedom.

"I am a mad dog woman, and I want to see more technology controlled by dogs," she said.