A defining characteristic of primary emotions is that they occur in wide variety of species. Secondary emotions are thought to be restricted to humans and other primates. We report evidence from two studies investigating claims of primary and secondary emotions in non-primate species. Study 1. We surveyed 907 owners about emotions that they had observed in their animal. Participants reported primary emotions more frequently than secondary emotions and self-conscious emotions more frequently than self-conscious evaluative emotions. Jealousy was reported at very high levels (81% of dogs and 79% of horses), which was surprising as jealousy is generally defined as a secondary emotion. Study 2. Forty dog owners were interviewed about the contexts and behaviours that led them to claim their animal was jealous. There was coherence and consistency in the behavioural descriptions of jealousy. We claim that such reports provide evidence for the existence of secondary emotions in non-primate species as predicted by theorists such as Buck ( 1999 Buck, R. 1999. The biology of affects: A typology. Psychological Review, 106: 301–336. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] [Google Scholar] ).

: Belief in the mental lives of nonhuman animals can have an impact on how we view and treat them, yet little is known about how and why laypeople attribute emotions to other species. The current study investigated how familiarity with animals (in terms of ownership) relates to beliefs regarding different emotions within and across species. An opportunity sample of 200 participants completed a questionnaire that measured familiarity with animals and beliefs about the capacity of a variety of species to experience a range of 16 different emotions. Participants reported varied levels of experience with animals and it was found that, regardless of familiarity, participants reported a wide variety of emotions in all the species they were asked to consider. However, participants who had never lived with an animal reported far fewer emotions than those who had, regardless of species. Keeping more than one animal did not increase the number of emotions reported. Keepers of a particular species always reported more emotions for that species than nonkeepers of that species. We conclude that familiarity with animals is an important determinant of belief about emotions in animals and animal mind in general.

Most mammalian species produce facial expressions. Historically, animal facial expressions have been considered inflexible and involuntary displays of emotional states rather than active attempts to communicate with others. In the current study, we aimed to test whether domestic dog facial expressions are subject to audience effects and/ or changes in response to an arousing stimulus (e.g. food) alone. We presented dogs with an experimental situation in which a human demonstrator was either attending to them or turned away, and varied whether she presented food or not. Dogs produced significantly more facial movements when the human was attentive than when she was not. The food, however, as a non-social but arousing stimulus, did not affect the dogs’ behaviour. The current study is therefore evidence that dogs are sensitive to the human’s attentional state when producing facial expressions, suggesting that facial expressions are not just inflexible and involuntary displays of emotional states, but rather potentially active attempts to communicate with others.

Current views suggest that autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) are characterised by enhanced low-level auditory discrimination abilities. Little is known, however, about whether enhanced abilities are universal in ASD and how they relate to symptomatology. We tested auditory discrimination for intensity, frequency and duration in 21 adults with ASD and 21 IQ and age-matched controls. Contrary to predictions, there were significant deficits in ASD on all acoustic parameters. The findings suggest that low-level auditory discrimination ability varies widely within ASD and this variability relates to IQ level, and influences the severity of restricted and repetitive behaviours (RRBs). We suggest that it is essential to further our understanding of the potential contributing role of sensory perception ability on the emergence of RRBs.

Breast pain has been investigated in clinical populations; however we have yet to understand the prevalence and severity of this condition in the general population to determine whether more should be done to minimize the impact of this condition on women's quality of life. Therefore, this study investigated the prevalence, severity, and impact of breast pain on quality of life and factors associated with breast pain in a normal population sample. 1,659 females (34.1 ± 13.2 years) completed the Breast Pain Questionnaire online, providing information on demographics, duration, frequency, and severity of breast pain, its association with the menstrual cycle, relieving, and aggravating factors and the impact on quality of life. Over half the sample (51.5%) experienced breast pain, with a severity similar to that reported in clinical populations. There was a higher prevalence of breast pain in older participants, larger breasted participants and those who were less fit and active. Of symptomatic participants, 41% and 35% reported breast pain affecting quality of life measures of sex and sleep and 10% of symptomatic participants had sufferer for over half their lives. The results of this study suggest that breast pain is a significant issue within the general population and yet this is the first study to investigate it. It is concluded that this condition warrants increased investigation, awareness, and treatment. The reported relationship between breast pain and fitness/activity levels may offer an alternative treatment in the form of exercise intervention strategies to reduce breast pain.

The theory-theory is not supported by evidence in the everyday actions of infants and toddlers whose lives a Theory of Mind is meant radically to transform. This paper reviews some of these challenges to the theory-theory, particularly from communication and deception. We argue that the theory’s disconnection from action is both inevitable and paradoxical. The mind–behaviour dualism upon which it is premised requires a conceptual route to knowing minds and disallows a real test of the theory through the study of action. Taking engagement seriously avoids these problems and requires that both lay people and psychologists be participants rather than observers in order to know, and indeed to create, minds.