There is no conscious interpretation of the stimulus by the dog.
Nociception usually involves the transmission of a signal along a chain of nerve fibers from the site of a noxious stimulus at the periphery to the spinal cord and brain.
This process evokes a reflex arc response generated at the spinal cord and not involving the brain, such as flinching or withdrawal of a limb.
Nociception is found, in one form or another, across all major animal taxa.
The concept of nociception does not imply any adverse, subjective "feeling" – it is a reflex action.
An example in humans would be the rapid withdrawal of a finger that has touched something hot – the withdrawal occurs before any sensation of pain is actually experienced.
In 2012 the American philosopher Gary Varner reviewed the research literature on pain in animals.Nociception can be observed using modern imaging techniques; and a physiological and behavioral response to nociception can often be detected.However, nociceptive responses can be so subtle in prey animals that trained (human) observers cannot perceive them, whereas natural predators can and subsequently target injured individuals.Convergent evidence indicates that non-human animals have the neuroanatomical, neurochemical, and neurophysiological substrates of conscious states along with the capacity to exhibit intentional behaviors.Consequently, the weight of evidence indicates that humans are not unique in possessing the neurological substrates that generate consciousness.Non-human animals, including all mammals and birds, and many other creatures, including octopuses, also possess these neurological substrates.In the 20th and 21st centuries, there were many scientific investigations of pain in non-human animals.In 1789, the British philosopher and social reformist, Jeremy Bentham, addressed in his book An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation the issue of our treatment of animals with the following often quoted words: "The question is not, Can they reason? He goes on further to argue that we do not assume newborn infants, people suffering from neurodegenerative brain diseases or people with learning disabilities experience less pain than we would. In his interactions with scientists and other veterinarians, Rollin was regularly asked to "prove" that animals are conscious, and to provide "scientifically acceptable" grounds for claiming that they feel pain.The absence of a neocortex does not appear to preclude an organism from experiencing affective states.Initially, this was based around theoretical and philosophical argument, but more recently has turned to scientific investigation.The idea that non-human animals might not feel pain goes back to the 17th-century French philosopher, René Descartes, who argued that animals do not experience pain and suffering because they lack consciousness. " Peter Singer, a bioethicist and author of Animal Liberation published in 1975, suggested that consciousness is not necessarily the key issue: just because animals have smaller brains, or are ‘less conscious’ than humans, does not mean that they are not capable of feeling pain. federal laws regulating pain relief for animals, writes that researchers remained unsure into the 1980s as to whether animals experience pain, and veterinarians trained in the U. before 1989 were taught to simply ignore animal pain.