Latest news with #Markman
New York Times
23-04-2025
- Sport
- New York Times
Why this year's NFL Draft could draw a huge audience: ‘Hope is off the charts'
The NFL Draft is a television show at its core. Occasionally, it provides chaos, shocks, and surprises, especially if a high-profile prospect 'Manziels' his way down the first round. But it also holds the promise of possibility. 'It's the ultimate reality show meets awards show meets hope for 32 teams,' said Charlie Yook, the executive producer of NFL Media and the point person for the NFL Network's draft coverage. 'That one player, that one pick, whether it's at No. 1 or Mr. Irrelevant, can actually change and alter what a franchise becomes.' Advertisement But this year, at least upon this writing, ESPN and the NFL Network executives have been gifted something unique: All 32 teams still own their first-round draft picks. According to NFL research, if this holds up, it will be the first time since 2014 that no first-round selections in the upcoming draft were moved between the start of the league year and the first night of the draft. What this means, as far as television purposes, is that every team's fan base has a reason to watch Round 1. 'That is a massive, massive plus for us as we sit here right now because hope is off the charts,' said ESPN executive producer Seth Markman, the point person for the network's coverage of the NFL Draft since 2010. We will get to network specifics below, but the broad strokes information is the 2025 NFL Draft will be televised nationally by ABC, ESPN and ESPN Deportes and the NFL Network. Round 1: Thursday, April 24 8 p.m. ET ABC, ESPN, ESPN Deportes, NFL Network Rounds 2-3: Friday, April 25 7 p.m. ET ABC, ESPN, ESPN Deportes, NFL Network Rounds 4-7: Saturday, April 26 Noon ET ABC, ESPN, ESPN Deportes, NFL Network Live audio coverage: SiriusXM NFL Radio (Rounds 1-7) ESPN Radio (Rounds 1-7) Westwood One (Round 1) Both Markman and Yook say Green Bay, the site of this year's draft, will be a major character on their telecasts. Expect a lot of shots of Lambeau Field and tributes to the Packers of yore. 'Call it what you want — holy land, a mecca, a cathedral — it's an iconic place,' Yook said. 'It's Yankee Stadium, it's Fenway Park, it's Wrigley Field. It will be a big part of what we do. It's a character in our production and in our broadcast.' There will be 16 players in the 'green room' in Green Bay and an additional 24 prospects who have remote cameras that both ESPN and NFL Network will have access to when they are selected. Both Markman and Yook said they expect this draft will have certain tipping points where chaos could ensue. Advertisement 'There's a quarterback in this draft (Shedeur Sanders) that could be very parallel to what happened to Aaron Rodgers, what happened to Brady Quinn, what happened to Johnny Manziel,' Yook said. 'We don't know where he's gonna land. Is a team gonna move up to get him? We've all identified universally what those tipping points are. The Giants at No. 3, the Panthers at No. 8 come into play if someone wants a particular quarterback to move in front of the Saints at No. 9. Trades are something that brings an energy and a juice for all the broadcasts to the fans watching at home.' For those following the NFL Draft on social media, ESPN and NFL Network staffers will once again not tip picks ahead of the broadcast. Obviously, those who work for non-broadcast partners of the NFL will do so. I asked Markman how he saw this. 'The tipping picks thing, it doesn't take that much skill for a reporter nowadays to find out who's being drafted ahead of the TV broadcast,' Markman said. 'Just so people know, the teams make their picks before they're announced by the commissioner. All the other teams in the league have to find out who that pick is so they can proceed with the draft. It only takes one person in one building around the NFL to text a reporter what the pick is and they can then tweet it out. We've seen that happening over the last couple years. We're not going to do that. 'We've said it over and over again that our fans constantly have told us they want to hear from the commissioner. It's not like our people can't be on Twitter during the draft. They just can't report the picks before they're announced. They should be engaging and providing perspective. But I'll tell you: Those people that are tipping picks, they're not Edward R. Murrow Award-winning reporters for getting scoops.' Last year, the first round of the NFL Draft had its best audience in three years as the combined broadcasts averaged around 12 million viewers. That was the most-watched first round of the draft since 2021 (12.5 million). The most-watched opening round came in 2020 when sports shut down due to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. That draft — a QB-loaded opening round with Joe Burrow, Tua Tagovailoa, Justin Herbert and Jordan Love — drew a whopping 15.26 million viewers. Advertisement Below, a quick breakdown of the broadcasts: This is the 19th year the NFL Network will provide live on-location coverage of the draft. The future of NFL Media remains in limbo with continued reports that the league is looking to sell NFL Network along with other NFL Media products. How a potential sale would impact NFL Network's coverage of the NFL Draft remains unclear, but there is financial value in keeping NFL Network's draft coverage, so I'd bet it continues even if it moves beyond league ownership. But that's in the future. This year, the NFL Network's first-round coverage features the longest-tenured current NFL Draft host, Rich Eisen, alongside analysts Daniel Jeremiah, Charles Davis, Joel Klatt, Kurt Warner and Ian Rapoport. Jamie Erdahl interviews the draftees on stage following their selection. The Rounds 2 and 3 main desk is the same as opening night. Rounds 4-7 on NFL Network get scaled down a bit with Eisen, Jeremiah and Davis on the main set and Rapoport on a theater set. The NFL Channel — the NFL's free ad-supported streaming offering — has Mike Yam, Bucky Brooks and Lance Zierlein as the on-air hosts. Yook said the NFL Network has footage of 630 prospects and 1,200 highlight tapes in total. This is often a great benefit in the later rounds. Every year, this space lists the names of those staffers who work on the highlight tapes because these are behind-the-scenes people who grind for months to bring viewers insight into the picks. They include lead college and draft tape senior producer Zach Arnstein, production assistant Bryan Valladares, segment producers Ben Fennell, Chris Jenkins, and Nick Shepro, editors Andrew Moussa, Chris Guanzon, Andrew Promey, Todd Jensen, Paul Fox, Nick Stewart, Jose Guzman, Jeff Levitt, Brandon Gambino, and Tye Giddens, and associate producers Aaron Housenga and Marcus Davis. 'These guys have been working on tapes since January,' Yook said. 'We want to make sure there's a reason why we're airing any of these tapes so there's a story being told, whether it's in 20 or 40 seconds. If you're a fan of the team, the player drafted, or an opposing fan, you can get a glimpse of what that club is getting in that player.' Advertisement The NFL Network usually has a ton of reporters at league sites, and this year is no exception. That list includes Judy Battista (Giants), Stacey Dales (Bears), Jane Slater (Saints), Sara Walsh (Titans) and Cameron Wolfe (Browns). Mike Garafolo, Omar Ruiz and Steve Wyche will be at the NFL Network studio in Los Angeles. This is ESPN's 46th consecutive year of broadcasting the NFL Draft — here's a piece I did in 2020 on ESPN's first-ever NFL Draft broadcast, if interested — and the definitive signature of the company's coverage is tonnage. ESPN, ABC, ESPN2, ESPN Radio, and ESPN Deportes will provide 14 hours of coverage, in addition to an army of social media folks. Each first-round broadcast has a specific focus. ESPN coverage is specific to the pick's impact on the NFL team and the selection's on-field performance. The on-air group for ESPN's coverage includes host Mike Greenberg and analysts Mel Kiper Jr., Booger McFarland and Louis Riddick. Adam Schefter serves as an on-air reporter. Molly McGrath will interview prospects from the main NFL Draft stage following their selection. ABC's presentation, now in its seventh year, will emphasize the players' college experience and the draftees' road to the draft. Rece Davis serves as the host. The analysts are Kirk Herbstreit, Nick Saban and Desmond Howard. Field Yates and Laura Rutledge will be in the green room for family interviews. College football insider Pete Thamel is also part of the coverage. In addition to linear coverage, The Pat McAfee Show Draft Spectacular will air across YouTube, TikTok, the ESPN App and stream on ESPN+. 'Adding Nick Saban last year was spectacular and we expect the same,' Markman said. 'From what I am hearing from him and how he sees some of the players at the top of the draft, if he was able to do a mock draft, it would not look like anybody else's mock draft.' Rounds 2-3 will air on ESPN and ABC beginning at 7 p.m. ET. The Saturday coverage of Rounds 4-7 begins at noon ET on ESPN and will also simulcast on ABC. The on-set talent for Rounds 4-7 includes Davis, Kiper Jr., Riddick and Yates, along with NFL Draft analyst Matt Miller and insider Peter Schrager. ESPN always has reporters assigned to team facilities with picks high in the draft. They include Jeff Darlington (Titans), Jeremy Fowler (Browns), Sal Paolantonio (Giants), Mike Reiss (Patriots) and Lindsey Thiry (Saints). Advertisement ESPN Deportes will deliver exclusive Spanish-language coverage featuring on-air talent Eduardo Varela, Pablo Viruega, Sebastián M. Christensen, Miguel Pasquel and M.J. Acosta-Ruiz. Markman said the ESPN/ABC production has 700 highlight packages available. The massive behind-the-scenes group that put those highlights together includes staffers Christine Taylor, Stephen Cabrera, Chris Kourtzidis, Eric Robinson, Tristan Perez, Katt Hoover, Matt Tomer, Corey Picard, Eric Feinstein, Melissa Braun, Matt Brooks, Adam Bauer, Corey Taylor, Jeremy Drummond, Mikell Harvey. Eric Sellers, Steven Kim, Andrew McConville, Caitlyn Logsdon, Cliff Chartrand, Ryan Beckman, Luke Strnad, Nick Gonya, Dan Lagnado, Taylor Pugliese, Brooklyn Vaughan, Sania Blu, Kris Schwartz, Ethan Gaines and Harry Hawkings. 'The NFL Draft is my favorite thing I do,' Markman said. 'There's a lot of people in Bristol that feel the same way. This is a little inside baseball, but we have some people that work on live events and some people that work on studio shows who work separately for most of the year. The NFL Draft is the one event we do at ESPN where those people all work together. You can have someone that works in the truck for Monday Night Football, the control room on Sunday NFL Countdown and part of the staff of College GameDay all coming together for this.'
Yahoo
07-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
UT ends Flag courses requirements, including diversity; plans new model. Here's why.
The University of Texas will end its Flags program effective immediately, eliminating its graduation requirements for cultural diversity, global cultures, ethics, quantitative reasoning, independent inquiry and writing courses, the university announced Monday. Interim President Jim Davis and newly appointed Provost David Vanden Bout authorized retiring the program after reviewing the preliminary results of a Flags Review Committee, which drew from data and faculty, student and employer perspectives. It affirmed the value of the Flags program and its purpose but recommended reforming it to better align graduation requirements with program outcomes, regularly review skills for current career and world preparedness, implement an alternative administrative model, and better communicate the value of these skills. On its website, UT says its Flag program prepares students "to communicate effectively, engage in ethical decision-making and independent problem-solving, and understand the diverse, data-dense world." In an exclusive interview with the American-Statesman on Monday, Art Markman, senior vice provost for academic affairs, said UT will launch a new skills-based approach called a Comprehensive Learner Record project in fall 2026. It will take 36 skills from six categories, as determined by both academics and employers, and "infuse" them into its curriculum. Without the Flag requirements, students will have more agency over which skills to acquire, he said. More: Texas House bill proposes to ban DEI in required university curriculum UT's decision to eliminate its Flags program comes at a time when lawmakers are considering bills to bar diversity-related core requirements and are pressuring universities to comply with the "spirit" of Senate Bill 17, a 2023 state law that banned diversity, equity and inclusion in hiring, support offices and programs at all public universities and colleges. The law, which went into effect Jan. 1, 2024, explicitly exempted DEI in academic courses and research. Republican lawmakers who are pushing bills to end diversity requirements say their proposals will prevent "indoctrination" and better prepare students for the workforce. Opponents of the proposals, however, say they will invite government censorship into higher education and harm students. Markman said the Comprehensive Learner Record has been in the works for years, and the timing of its rollout as lawmakers are weighing curriculum bills was "unfortunate" but not related. "The Comprehensive Learner Record approach is the right way to ensure that our students are maximizing their value of a college education," Markman said. "Even if it leads to some perceptions that it's being done in a reactive way, what we're doing is actually very proactive and something that we think is going to be an enormous benefit to our students." More: What are 'flags' at UT, and why is the school reviewing them? Senior Vice Provost explains The state has its own core curriculum requirements, but Flags were created about 20 years ago to prepare all UT graduates with skills that are valuable for civic and professional life. Former UT President Jay Hartzell announced that the university initiated a review of its Flag program to lawmakers during an interim Senate Higher Education subcommittee hearing in November, saying UT would ensure the core requirements were timely and did not impede with graduation rates. At a UT Faculty Council meeting in March, some faculty members asked the Flags Review Committee's chair pointed questions about the need for an expedited review of the program and why the university was targeting skills and experience instead of pushing for producing knowledge. The Comprehensive Learner Record seeks to simplify curriculum and streamline paths to graduation by allowing students to consider what skills to learn that will directly affect their future careers without subjecting them to university requirements, administrators said. Markman said UT is piloting the new project now — by connecting skills that are already being taught to evidence that students are acquiring them — to better communicate the value of such education to the public and employers. "This is really something that we see as helping to transform a university education, and so we're very excited about this approach," he said. "At a time when we know that there is growing concern and sometimes even mistrust about the value of a college education, it's important for universities to step up and really demonstrate the critical value of a four-year college education." The university's decision to end the Flags program was announced Monday because it's the first day of fall course registration, Markman said. The six categories in the new program are communication; quantitative and empirical research; global awareness and social awareness; creativity and innovation; leadership, ethics and collaboration; and critical thinking and problem solving. The 36 skills derived from these categories that will be infused into the school's curriculum will change over time, however, to align with changing workforce needs, Markman said. More: Texas senators threaten no new university funding until schools fully comply with DEI ban He said the university values cultural diversity and global cultures and its relation to the workforce, but the shift will allow students to decide for themselves to take such courses. "The university continues to believe that an understanding of the world, an understanding of the global marketplace, and global society is crucial for the success of our students," Markman said. "We recognize that this is extremely important but really want to make sure that it is infused through the curriculum in a way where students are aware of the skills that they're developing and the value of those skills." At a Senate Finance Committee meeting Feb. 6, Sen. Brandon Creighton, a Republican from Conroe who chairs the Senate Education Committee, asked Hartzell, the school's former president who was UT's chief at the time, about the "likelihood" of university flags being eliminated. For "courses that have very few students applying and they don't have an equivalent value in the workforce, and is that what the University of Texas chooses to offer or should offer?" Creighton asked. At that hearing, Creighton touted decisions by the University of North Texas removing mentions of diversity from its curriculum and Texas A&M University eliminating its LGBTQ minor and 51 other minors and certificates for low enrollment as complying with the "spirit" of SB 17. This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: University of Texas ends flag courses requirement, including diversity
CNN
09-03-2025
- Entertainment
- CNN
The science behind why dogs look like their owners may surprise you: ‘I don't think people should feel embarrassed'
Disney fans probably remember the scene in the classic 1961 film '101 Dalmatians' in which the Dalmatian Pongo sits by a window, watching other dogs and their owners walk by outside. Each dog that goes past looks uncannily like its owner. Dogs who resemble their human owners has been observed in research, too. In one study, published in 2015, women with long hair tended to prefer dogs with similarly long ears, and women with short hairstyles preferred prick-eared dogs. Experts say this psychological phenomenon is a result of us humans preferring pets, people or even objects that resemble ourselves. After all, we are exposed to our own faces daily in the mirror. If we choose a dog that resembles what we see in ourselves, it can be comforting. The dog's features may feel familiar. 'Let's say you're at a shelter and you're looking at lots of different potential options. You're not necessarily spending a lot of explicit time trying to figure out what features of each dog you want. It's more of this overall feeling, and when you have those overall feelings, then you've got to understand what drives those. One of the things that drives that feeling that something is desirable, is that it has some familiarity to it,' said Art Markman, a cognitive scientist and senior vice provost for academic affairs at the University of Texas at Austin. 'There's lots of ways that something can begin to feel familiar to you, one of which is you might have had a dog just like that as a kid,' Markman said. 'But another thing that could make something feel familiar is that it resembles something that you've encountered before – like, say, yourself.' The dog may have a mop of hair like yours or the same quizzical look on its face, Markman said. 'Whatever it is, it's something that you recognize,' he added. 'That flash of recognition gives you this feeling that this is something that you resonate with, which can then increase your likelihood of picking something without ever realizing that you've chosen it, in part, because of its resemblance to yourself.' In another study, published in 2004, strangers who looked at 45 dogs and their owners who were photographed separately were able to match the purebred dogs with their people, based on the images alone. 'Our research showed that people were able to match pictures of dogs and owners together at a rate higher than chance. However, this only worked when the dog was purebred. We think that this is likely because purebred dogs are predictable in both their looks and their temperament. This allows people to pick a dog that best fits them in looks, personality, and activity level,' Michael Roy, an author of the study and a psychology professor at Elizabethtown College in Pennsylvania, said in an email. 'The resemblance between dog and owner can be at a physical level – they look similar – or at an overall level – this looks like the type of person who would own that type of dog,' he wrote. 'For example, you might match someone that looks outgoing and outdoorsy with Labrador over a Chihuahua.' Some experts say this is an example of the 'mere-exposure effect,' a psychological phenomenon in which people prefer things that they have been exposed to – and this can go beyond pet dogs. Another example includes people who may be more likely to enjoy a song if they have listened to similar music before. 'Think about it like this: When you go to a rock concert, somewhere during the show, the band plays the song that's been on the radio recently, and the crowd goes wild,' Markman said. 'The crowd goes wild not because that is objectively the band's best song but because it's the band's most familiar song.' Another study, published in 2014, found that observers were able to match car owners with the front views of their vehicles because they resembled each other. Even with consumer products, people tend to be attracted to something more when they are exposed to it more. 'More we see or hear something, the more we tend to like it. It would not necessarily explain why you might like a specific dog but can explain trends in dog ownership. If most of the people around you have Labradors, your liking of them might grow due to seeing them often, thereby increasing your chances of getting one too,' Roy said in the email. The phenomenon appears to emerge only when selecting a dog as a personal companion, not when choosing one for an occupation, such as to work with a police department or on a farm, according to researchers. This might be because, for decisions related to occupation, more time and research is put into making the selection process. 'There seem to be these two systems underlying the way we think. One of those systems is a fast, kind of intuitive judgment system, and the other is a slower, more deliberative system,' Markman said. 'These effects, like the mere-exposure effect, tend to influence decisions you make based on that faster, more intuitive system,' he said. 'When you allow yourself to be slower, to be more deliberative, to really write down the strengths and weaknesses of the decision that you're making, and to the extent that you try to rely on other expert opinions, you'll get less of an influence of factors like the mere-exposure effect.' In some cases, this intuitive attraction toward things that feel familiar or resemble ourselves – characterized as 'self seeking like' – may occur when selecting not only a pet but a human companion too, said Klause Jaffe, a scientist at the Universidad Simón Bolívar in Venezuela. He has researched how humans choose their pet dogs based on a phenomenon known as assortative mating, which has been studied experimentally among various species and even plants. It appears that the principles governing this phenomenon are the same whether applied to human relationships or to those between animals and humans; similarity or familiarity play a key role. 'In order for sexual organisms to be successful, they have to choose a partner that somehow resembles them,' Jaffe said. 'If a donkey tries to mate with a cow, nothing happens. 'Similarly, we attract partners who reflect some of our characteristics, and this happens outside of someone's race, skin color and sexual orientation,' he said. Similarities between partners can range beyond appearance to having familiar mannerisms, experiences, education, similar tastes in fashion or even daily habits. According to researchers, no matter the intricacies or type of relationship, the theory still appears to apply. 'The relationship we found between dogs and owners is like other relationships. The best indicator for sustained friendships and romantic relationships is similarity,' Roy said. 'We surround ourselves with people that are like us in some way.' So when faced with that decision of choosing a pet, people shouldn't worry or stress about the role that the mere-exposure effect or other psychological phenomena may play, Markman said. 'If your decision gets driven in part because the pet feels familiar, and that happens because it looks a little bit like you, that's not a bad thing,' he said. 'I don't think people should feel embarrassed that that went into their decision in some ways. I think if that's going to make you love the pet more, hey, more power to it.'
CNN
08-03-2025
- Entertainment
- CNN
The science behind why dogs look like their owners may surprise you: ‘I don't think people should feel embarrassed'
Disney fans probably remember the scene in the classic 1961 film '101 Dalmatians' in which the Dalmatian Pongo sits by a window, watching other dogs and their owners walk by outside. Each dog that goes past looks uncannily like its owner. Dogs who resemble their human owners has been observed in research, too. In one study, published in 2015, women with long hair tended to prefer dogs with similarly long ears, and women with short hairstyles preferred prick-eared dogs. Experts say this psychological phenomenon is a result of us humans preferring pets, people or even objects that resemble ourselves. After all, we are exposed to our own faces daily in the mirror. If we choose a dog that resembles what we see in ourselves, it can be comforting. The dog's features may feel familiar. 'Let's say you're at a shelter and you're looking at lots of different potential options. You're not necessarily spending a lot of explicit time trying to figure out what features of each dog you want. It's more of this overall feeling, and when you have those overall feelings, then you've got to understand what drives those. One of the things that drives that feeling that something is desirable, is that it has some familiarity to it,' said Art Markman, a cognitive scientist and senior vice provost for academic affairs at the University of Texas at Austin. 'There's lots of ways that something can begin to feel familiar to you, one of which is you might have had a dog just like that as a kid,' Markman said. 'But another thing that could make something feel familiar is that it resembles something that you've encountered before – like, say, yourself.' The dog may have a mop of hair like yours or the same quizzical look on its face, Markman said. 'Whatever it is, it's something that you recognize,' he added. 'That flash of recognition gives you this feeling that this is something that you resonate with, which can then increase your likelihood of picking something without ever realizing that you've chosen it, in part, because of its resemblance to yourself.' In another study, published in 2004, strangers who looked at 45 dogs and their owners who were photographed separately were able to match the purebred dogs with their people, based on the images alone. 'Our research showed that people were able to match pictures of dogs and owners together at a rate higher than chance. However, this only worked when the dog was purebred. We think that this is likely because purebred dogs are predictable in both their looks and their temperament. This allows people to pick a dog that best fits them in looks, personality, and activity level,' Michael Roy, an author of the study and a psychology professor at Elizabethtown College in Pennsylvania, said in an email. 'The resemblance between dog and owner can be at a physical level – they look similar – or at an overall level – this looks like the type of person who would own that type of dog,' he wrote. 'For example, you might match someone that looks outgoing and outdoorsy with Labrador over a Chihuahua.' Some experts say this is an example of the 'mere-exposure effect,' a psychological phenomenon in which people prefer things that they have been exposed to – and this can go beyond pet dogs. Another example includes people who may be more likely to enjoy a song if they have listened to similar music before. 'Think about it like this: When you go to a rock concert, somewhere during the show, the band plays the song that's been on the radio recently, and the crowd goes wild,' Markman said. 'The crowd goes wild not because that is objectively the band's best song but because it's the band's most familiar song.' Another study, published in 2014, found that observers were able to match car owners with the front views of their vehicles because they resembled each other. Even with consumer products, people tend to be attracted to something more when they are exposed to it more. 'More we see or hear something, the more we tend to like it. It would not necessarily explain why you might like a specific dog but can explain trends in dog ownership. If most of the people around you have Labradors, your liking of them might grow due to seeing them often, thereby increasing your chances of getting one too,' Roy said in the email. The phenomenon appears to emerge only when selecting a dog as a personal companion, not when choosing one for an occupation, such as to work with a police department or on a farm, according to researchers. This might be because, for decisions related to occupation, more time and research is put into making the selection process. 'There seem to be these two systems underlying the way we think. One of those systems is a fast, kind of intuitive judgment system, and the other is a slower, more deliberative system,' Markman said. 'These effects, like the mere-exposure effect, tend to influence decisions you make based on that faster, more intuitive system,' he said. 'When you allow yourself to be slower, to be more deliberative, to really write down the strengths and weaknesses of the decision that you're making, and to the extent that you try to rely on other expert opinions, you'll get less of an influence of factors like the mere-exposure effect.' In some cases, this intuitive attraction toward things that feel familiar or resemble ourselves – characterized as 'self seeking like' – may occur when selecting not only a pet but a human companion too, said Klause Jaffe, a scientist at the Universidad Simón Bolívar in Venezuela. He has researched how humans choose their pet dogs based on a phenomenon known as assortative mating, which has been studied experimentally among various species and even plants. It appears that the principles governing this phenomenon are the same whether applied to human relationships or to those between animals and humans; similarity or familiarity play a key role. 'In order for sexual organisms to be successful, they have to choose a partner that somehow resembles them,' Jaffe said. 'If a donkey tries to mate with a cow, nothing happens. 'Similarly, we attract partners who reflect some of our characteristics, and this happens outside of someone's race, skin color and sexual orientation,' he said. Similarities between partners can range beyond appearance to having familiar mannerisms, experiences, education, similar tastes in fashion or even daily habits. According to researchers, no matter the intricacies or type of relationship, the theory still appears to apply. 'The relationship we found between dogs and owners is like other relationships. The best indicator for sustained friendships and romantic relationships is similarity,' Roy said. 'We surround ourselves with people that are like us in some way.' So when faced with that decision of choosing a pet, people shouldn't worry or stress about the role that the mere-exposure effect or other psychological phenomena may play, Markman said. 'If your decision gets driven in part because the pet feels familiar, and that happens because it looks a little bit like you, that's not a bad thing,' he said. 'I don't think people should feel embarrassed that that went into their decision in some ways. I think if that's going to make you love the pet more, hey, more power to it.'
CNN
08-03-2025
- Entertainment
- CNN
The science behind why dogs look like their owners may surprise you: ‘I don't think people should feel embarrassed'
Disney fans probably remember the scene in the classic 1961 film '101 Dalmatians' in which the Dalmatian Pongo sits by a window, watching other dogs and their owners walk by outside. Each dog that goes past looks uncannily like its owner. Dogs who resemble their human owners has been observed in research, too. In one study, published in 2015, women with long hair tended to prefer dogs with similarly long ears, and women with short hairstyles preferred prick-eared dogs. Experts say this psychological phenomenon is a result of us humans preferring pets, people or even objects that resemble ourselves. After all, we are exposed to our own faces daily in the mirror. If we choose a dog that resembles what we see in ourselves, it can be comforting. The dog's features may feel familiar. 'Let's say you're at a shelter and you're looking at lots of different potential options. You're not necessarily spending a lot of explicit time trying to figure out what features of each dog you want. It's more of this overall feeling, and when you have those overall feelings, then you've got to understand what drives those. One of the things that drives that feeling that something is desirable, is that it has some familiarity to it,' said Art Markman, a cognitive scientist and senior vice provost for academic affairs at the University of Texas at Austin. 'There's lots of ways that something can begin to feel familiar to you, one of which is you might have had a dog just like that as a kid,' Markman said. 'But another thing that could make something feel familiar is that it resembles something that you've encountered before – like, say, yourself.' The dog may have a mop of hair like yours or the same quizzical look on its face, Markman said. 'Whatever it is, it's something that you recognize,' he added. 'That flash of recognition gives you this feeling that this is something that you resonate with, which can then increase your likelihood of picking something without ever realizing that you've chosen it, in part, because of its resemblance to yourself.' In another study, published in 2004, strangers who looked at 45 dogs and their owners who were photographed separately were able to match the purebred dogs with their people, based on the images alone. 'Our research showed that people were able to match pictures of dogs and owners together at a rate higher than chance. However, this only worked when the dog was purebred. We think that this is likely because purebred dogs are predictable in both their looks and their temperament. This allows people to pick a dog that best fits them in looks, personality, and activity level,' Michael Roy, an author of the study and a psychology professor at Elizabethtown College in Pennsylvania, said in an email. 'The resemblance between dog and owner can be at a physical level – they look similar – or at an overall level – this looks like the type of person who would own that type of dog,' he wrote. 'For example, you might match someone that looks outgoing and outdoorsy with Labrador over a Chihuahua.' Some experts say this is an example of the 'mere-exposure effect,' a psychological phenomenon in which people prefer things that they have been exposed to – and this can go beyond pet dogs. Another example includes people who may be more likely to enjoy a song if they have listened to similar music before. 'Think about it like this: When you go to a rock concert, somewhere during the show, the band plays the song that's been on the radio recently, and the crowd goes wild,' Markman said. 'The crowd goes wild not because that is objectively the band's best song but because it's the band's most familiar song.' Another study, published in 2014, found that observers were able to match car owners with the front views of their vehicles because they resembled each other. Even with consumer products, people tend to be attracted to something more when they are exposed to it more. 'More we see or hear something, the more we tend to like it. It would not necessarily explain why you might like a specific dog but can explain trends in dog ownership. If most of the people around you have Labradors, your liking of them might grow due to seeing them often, thereby increasing your chances of getting one too,' Roy said in the email. The phenomenon appears to emerge only when selecting a dog as a personal companion, not when choosing one for an occupation, such as to work with a police department or on a farm, according to researchers. This might be because, for decisions related to occupation, more time and research is put into making the selection process. 'There seem to be these two systems underlying the way we think. One of those systems is a fast, kind of intuitive judgment system, and the other is a slower, more deliberative system,' Markman said. 'These effects, like the mere-exposure effect, tend to influence decisions you make based on that faster, more intuitive system,' he said. 'When you allow yourself to be slower, to be more deliberative, to really write down the strengths and weaknesses of the decision that you're making, and to the extent that you try to rely on other expert opinions, you'll get less of an influence of factors like the mere-exposure effect.' In some cases, this intuitive attraction toward things that feel familiar or resemble ourselves – characterized as 'self seeking like' – may occur when selecting not only a pet but a human companion too, said Klause Jaffe, a scientist at the Universidad Simón Bolívar in Venezuela. He has researched how humans choose their pet dogs based on a phenomenon known as assortative mating, which has been studied experimentally among various species and even plants. It appears that the principles governing this phenomenon are the same whether applied to human relationships or to those between animals and humans; similarity or familiarity play a key role. 'In order for sexual organisms to be successful, they have to choose a partner that somehow resembles them,' Jaffe said. 'If a donkey tries to mate with a cow, nothing happens. 'Similarly, we attract partners who reflect some of our characteristics, and this happens outside of someone's race, skin color and sexual orientation,' he said. Similarities between partners can range beyond appearance to having familiar mannerisms, experiences, education, similar tastes in fashion or even daily habits. According to researchers, no matter the intricacies or type of relationship, the theory still appears to apply. 'The relationship we found between dogs and owners is like other relationships. The best indicator for sustained friendships and romantic relationships is similarity,' Roy said. 'We surround ourselves with people that are like us in some way.' So when faced with that decision of choosing a pet, people shouldn't worry or stress about the role that the mere-exposure effect or other psychological phenomena may play, Markman said. 'If your decision gets driven in part because the pet feels familiar, and that happens because it looks a little bit like you, that's not a bad thing,' he said. 'I don't think people should feel embarrassed that that went into their decision in some ways. I think if that's going to make you love the pet more, hey, more power to it.'
