Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
The paper introduces CREMD, a new multimodal dataset of 923 dog video clips designed to investigate the impact of presentation mode (context, audio, video) and annotator characteristics on dog emotion recognition. Analysis of crowd-sourced annotations revealed that visual context improves annotation agreement, non-owners and male annotators exhibit higher agreement than owners and female annotators, and audio cues increase annotator confidence in identifying anger and fear. The dataset and findings aim to facilitate the development of more reliable and nuanced dog emotion recognition systems.
Surprisingly, non-dog owners are better at recognizing dog emotions from video than dog owners, highlighting the potential for bias in subjective animal emotion assessment.
Dog emotion recognition plays a crucial role in enhancing human-animal interactions, veterinary care, and the development of automated systems for monitoring canine well-being. However, accurately interpreting dog emotions is challenging due to the subjective nature of emotional assessments and the absence of standardized ground truth methods. We present the CREMD (Crowd-sourced Emotional Multimodal Dogs Dataset), a comprehensive dataset exploring how different presentation modes (e.g., context, audio, video) and annotator characteristics (e.g., dog ownership, gender, professional experience) influence the perception and labeling of dog emotions. The dataset consists of 923 video clips presented in three distinct modes: without context or audio, with context but no audio, and with both context and audio. We analyze annotations from diverse participants, including dog owners, professionals, and individuals with varying demographic backgrounds and experience levels, to identify factors that influence reliable dog emotion recognition. Our findings reveal several key insights: (1) while adding visual context significantly improved annotation agreement, our findings regarding audio cues are inconclusive due to design limitations (specifically, the absence of a no-context-with-audio condition and limited clean audio availability); (2) contrary to expectations, non-owners and male annotators showed higher agreement levels than dog owners and female annotators, respectively, while professionals showed higher agreement levels, aligned with our initial hypothesis; and (3) the presence of audio substantially increased annotators' confidence in identifying specific emotions, particularly anger and fear.
