Looking for ANY studies on dog/pack behavior

[Boxergirl]

I understand that reactions happen, but I also think that type of physical punishment is very risky. I do hope that you will look for ways that aren't so physical to address problem behaviors in the future. And please make sure your children know that that type of punishment is a not an acceptable correction for them to administer. Ever.

 

[season]

Spanking is hitting. Whether it's abusive or not - I guess that depends. But it *is* hitting and I think there are better ways to teach children than by spanking.

Some may say it's not. My mom spanked me. It didn't ruin me or our relationship. It did make me stop doing what I did to earn it. Is it right or wrong. Depends on who u ask. Did she ever make a fist and hit me. Nope.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[season]

Im a very calm person but in these two scenarios I felt were extreme and needed extreme corrections. I know most wont agree, but had he got out and hurt/killed that lady or her child I would be in huge shiz and I couldn't live with myself. Plus the blatant disregard for the home needed something more than "NO!" or getting locked outside. Biting needed an extreme correction because what if it was one of my children? I'd feel horrible because I allowed that to happen. I'm normally not abusive but I am reactive. I do understand where u guys are coming from.

I'm on here to learn a better way of developing a great dog, but when I'm met with agression like a dog bite I go primal and react.

You did what u felt was right. Did your dog learn something? Probably. Did it ruin and scar your dog for life? I doubt it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[season]

I also think the word "abuse" isn't just physical. Many dog owners cause more harm to their dog by spoiling it/humanizing it. Allowing their dog to run the show. That stuff causes the dog unwanted stress and anxiety. The best owners create an environment where there are rules, boundaries and clear expectations.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Liz_M]

The first dog training book I ever read, back in the mid 1980s, was the Monks of New Skete book and I took their (now scorned) alpha rolling advice to heart. And you know what, the first few Rottweilers I had were alpha-rolled and whupped in Come To Jesus meetings for serious transgressions, and they were dogs I could take absolutely anywhere, no leash, with 100 percent confidence. I simply expected they would do as directed, and they did. Then I got derailed by the "science" of purely positive training and all that and had a couple of hard Rottweilers who were assholes and stuffing hot dogs up their noses really had no effect. Maybe I wasn't doing it right, but it was a fail. So I went back to prong collar and zero treats and zero cajoling, and that really worked. Constant nagging is unfair, I think. Say what you mean and mean what you say. Dogs get that. They get frustrated, I think, by nagging and cajoling and poorly-timed treats, and a solid dog is not ruined by hard corrections if they are fairly administered. Dogs are incredibly honest animals and we do them a disservice when we are not honest with them in return. Little leash tugs are not honest, milketoast rewards are not honest, treats for ten seconds of desired behaviour is not honest. Watch an older dog properly discipline a puppy: scary, brief, with serious intent. A good puppy gets that and won't re-offend; they get respectful really quick. Now it's been a while since I have had a hard dog, all three of my current ones would be crushed and stressed by a hard correction plus it would just be unecessary and overkill and unkind to them. But were I ever to have a hard dog again? I'd alpha-roll and hang a dog to make the point that I am not effing around in a heartbeat if necessary. It worked for me, and my early dogs (and working farm dogs I grew up with) were the most rock-solid dogs I've known. Devoted, happy and hard-working, because they clearly understood their boundaries.

 

[Boxergirl]

The first dog training book I ever read, back in the mid 1980s, was the Monks of New Skete book and I took their (now scorned) alpha rolling advice to heart. And you know what, the first few Rottweilers I had were alpha-rolled and whupped in Come To Jesus meetings for serious transgressions, and they were dogs I could take absolutely anywhere, no leash, with 100 percent confidence. I simply expected they would do as directed, and they did. Then I got derailed by the "science" of purely positive training and all that and had a couple of hard Rottweilers who were assholes and stuffing hot dogs up their noses really had no effect. Maybe I wasn't doing it right, but it was a fail. So I went back to prong collar and zero treats and zero cajoling, and that really worked. Constant nagging is unfair, I think. Say what you mean and mean what you say. Dogs get that. They get frustrated, I think, by nagging and cajoling and poorly-timed treats, and a solid dog is not ruined by hard corrections if they are fairly administered. Dogs are incredibly honest animals and we do them a disservice when we are not honest with them in return. Little leash tugs are not honest, milketoast rewards are not honest, treats for ten seconds of desired behaviour is not honest. Watch an older dog properly discipline a puppy: scary, brief, with serious intent. A good puppy gets that and won't re-offend; they get respectful really quick. Now it's been a while since I have had a hard dog, all three of my current ones would be crushed and stressed by a hard correction plus it would just be unecessary and overkill and unkind to them. But were I ever to have a hard dog again? I'd alpha-roll and hang a dog to make the point that I am not effing around in a heartbeat if necessary. It worked for me, and my early dogs (and working farm dogs I grew up with) were the most rock-solid dogs I've known. Devoted, happy and hard-working, because they clearly understood their boundaries.

I'll say again that I don't know any "purely" positive trainers. Not one. I know positive trainers, but they also use fair corrections. And if a trainer is nagging and cajoling then most likely something isn't being done properly. And I'm not being a jerk, Liz_M. I think you give very sound and helpful advice. I do think maybe you weren't doing something right if you felt you had to stuff the dogs with treats and nag them. In my experience it's also very different when you're dealing with a rescue dog as opposed to one that you've had from day one. Again, my concern is that there appears to be small children involved in this scenario. What a dog may accept as correction from an adult they most likely won't from a child and children tend to copy what they see their parents doing. My worry is for the children.

 

[goatnipples2002]

This dude just thought he was gonna run my house like his last family....lol. My kids really stepped up and have worked hard to desensitize him. Its working very well. I believe he isnt used to my consistency and i walk them 2.5 miles every night, but we're about to change that to 5 miles every night. Not sure about all dogs but Tig was really fighting me on the recall. I took it as his way of saying ur not my owner...lol silly puppy. I started doing the "bacon recall" with great treats and 3 days later his recall is good but not perfect. Raising a corso from pup is cake if u exercise, socialize and be a leader, but rescuing a corso is a battle for real. I love these dogs and my family does too. I just started gaving my 3 yo daughter help teach basic commands to Tig and he listens pretty dang good but theres treats involed who wouldn't listen lol. I just think he tested the waters like they do in the wild pack. He just didnt realize them waters turned into glaciers real quick lol.

 

[karennj]

Well said. So many people when they hear the word "correction" automatically think you must be hitting, kicking, locking your dog in a closet etc....not the case. I don't need to hit my dog in order to get my point across. But then you have some people who don't spank their kids because they consider that hitting or abusive.

Spanking (in kids) is abuse when there is anger behind it. There is a big difference in controlled spanking vs. hitting in anger. Obviously you cannot sit the dog down and explain what they did wrong and why they did it wrong and that their punishment is a spank. I don't think you can relate the two because your lacking that explanation component. Honestly many parents are able to raise well balanced and respectful kids without hitting them. My sister spanked her oldest (only her oldest) out of 6 children and I find that he has the hardest time out of all 6 kids controlling his anger. Force will be met with force. It may take awhile but if you continually whoop your dog's a$$ eventually they will fight back out of survival instinct.

OP, you said you want your dog to fear you. A fear biter is far worse than an aggressive bitter. I would take a straight out aggressive dog over a fear biter any day. They are just more unpredictable. If that is your goal to have your dog fear you I feel sorry for your dog. Respect is earned not forced. Don't be surprised if your dog starts to fear the leash you hit it with.

 

[karennj]

Im a very calm person but in these two scenarios I felt were extreme and needed extreme corrections. I know most wont agree, but had he got out and hurt/killed that lady or her child I would be in huge shiz and I couldn't live with myself. Plus the blatant disregard for the home needed something more than "NO!" or getting locked outside. Biting needed an extreme correction because what if it was one of my children? I'd feel horrible because I allowed that to happen. I'm normally not abusive but I am reactive. I do understand where u guys are coming from.

I'm on here to learn a better way of developing a great dog, but when I'm met with agression like a dog bite I go primal and react.

Honestly, I think if you got to that point you failed long before having to hit the dog. You have a dog with a known bite history. You will need to manage him and others better to keep everyone safe. I may be mistaken but it sounded like you were walking the dog off leash in a previous post (not when he got away), which I think is WAY too soon especially as you admit the dog does not have good recall. If your dog escapes his restraint and attacks someone it is your fault not the dogs. You in the end are responsible as the owner. Have you done any training around the food bowl? It is really unfair if you have a guarder and you push them beyond their limit and punish them without dealing with the core issue of their behavior. Yes, it is inexcusable for a dog to bite it's owner BUT, if he is guarding, have you done everything possible training wise before touching his bowl? Are you setting him up for success or failure? Be proactive not reactive. Train for the behaviors you want so you don't have to use emergency force after it is too late.

 

[karennj]

And by the way, we all lose our temper and react before thinking. Just understand excessive force can cause negative associations that you don't want. Dogs repeatedly hit can become very hand shy and skittish. You don't want a skittish CC. Learn from these scenarios.

 

[Boxergirl]

Honestly, I think if you got to that point you failed long before having to hit the dog. You have a dog with a known bite history. You will need to manage him and others better to keep everyone safe. I may be mistaken but it sounded like you were walking the dog off leash in a previous post (not when he got away), which I think is WAY too soon especially as you admit the dog does not have good recall. If your dog escapes his restraint and attacks someone it is your fault not the dogs. You in the end are responsible as the owner. Have you done any training around the food bowl? It is really unfair if you have a guarder and you push them beyond their limit and punish them without dealing with the core issue of their behavior. Yes, it is inexcusable for a dog to bite it's owner BUT, if he is guarding, have you done everything possible training wise before touching his bowl? Are you setting him up for success or failure? Be proactive not reactive. Train for the behaviors you want so you don't have to use emergency force after it is too late.

I wanted to address the management issue as well, but I wasn't finding the right words to say it well. This says it perfectly.

 

[season]

Spanking (in kids) is abuse when there is anger behind it. There is a big difference in controlled spanking vs. hitting in anger. Obviously you cannot sit the dog down and explain what they did wrong and why they did it wrong and that their punishment is a spank. I don't think you can relate the two because your lacking that explanation component. Honestly many parents are able to raise well balanced and respectful kids without hitting them. My sister spanked her oldest (only her oldest) out of 6 children and I find that he has the hardest time out of all 6 kids controlling his anger. Force will be met with force. It may take awhile but if you continually whoop your dog's a$$ eventually they will fight back out of survival instinct.

OP, you said you want your dog to fear you. A fear biter is far worse than an aggressive bitter. I would take a straight out aggressive dog over a fear biter any day. They are just more unpredictable. If that is your goal to have your dog fear you I feel sorry for your dog. Respect is earned not forced. Don't be surprised if your dog starts to fear the leash you hit it with.

I don't need to explain a correction to my dog. If he does something wrong it gets corrected. Simple. If he gets praise I don't explain to him why he got it either. Cause and effect. And the spanking/abuse thing is all up to the individual and how they choose to interpret it. My mom spanked me. She wasn't happy when she did it. She didn't need to explain it to me. I got the message loud and clear. No fire side chats after it. I simply stopped acting like an idiot. And I don't have anger issues or emotional baggage because of it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[goatnipples2002]

Okay by fear i dont mean fear me but maybe fear the consequences for the negative actions. This is a rescue dog that came to us in pretty bad condition. Nobody could get close to him except me and my female dog. I mean he had a chilling growl that made me VERY nervous. Now only 3.5 weeks later he takes commands from my 3yo. He still doesn't like kids standing by him to eat but we just started that phase of our counter conditioning. He was walked off leash but was still coupled to another dog. I was wanted to see where he was. Since that one time he is walked with a prong and a training tab with 2 ft leash too. This dog isnt abused or hit ever outside of those 2 times. Fear or respect are the only reasons ppl are obedient and thats the same philosophy i was using to explain how i want my dogs. U dont rob banks cause u fear prison and respect whats not yours.
Does anybody have any videos that can help me train him?

 

[SG1]

goatnipples2002 I admire your courage in taking on the challenges this particular CC is presenting. this dog can be brought around with the right person and the correct training method. If you can bring this guy around you will have raised your dog IQ exponentially. Dare I say you will have a deeper appreciation for this dog than any you've had before.

Now back to your question about training videos. I recommend against it, there is no training video anywhere that will teach you how to handle this dog, I have looked for them. All of the videos I've seen on the net and this forum are of trainers working malleable dogs not serious Superior Guardians as I like to call them, like the Akita, Dogo, TM etc. The dogs I've just mentioned and many on this forum are serious dogs with a serious attitude and If these video trainers could do it they would. Another reason for not training from a video is because you can't ask questions when something unexpected happens that the video did not cover. You can't go back and ask questions of a video, now what do you do? I'll tell you what you should do, seek professional help in your area so that you can call some one not if but when something unexpected occurs.

I have been in that same bottomless pit you are in now with five different dogs that were worse than what you have. I was fortunate enough to have some one with me to show me the way out. I was able to turn those five dogs into great family pets.

 

[Glasgowdogtrainer]

Dogs aren't pack animals, they have a common ancestor as wolves but they're not wolves. Pack belief studies came from misinterpreted data from captive wolves who will form hierachies but seeing as dogs aren;t wolves in the first place, they don;t apply to dogs. If we wanted to apply a wolf model to dogs, which we shouldn;t as, guess what, dogs aren't wolves, then we should use a wild study where they are living in their natural environment.

Look at Ray Coppinger's work if you are interested in finding out more about it.

On the subject of physical corrections etc. Dog's are trying to find their way in our world without understanding the shifting rules (shifting to the dog, we might think we're being consistent but the dog's behaviour will tell you otherwise if you're not getting the results you want. Teach your dog what the rules are and set then up so the can follow them. When they do, reinforce that behaviour so that it makes it more likely to happen. Make it difficult to do unwanted behaviour and if it happens, make sure it's not reinforced, inadvertently or otherwise.

I don't call myself "pure positive" but I don't ever use physical corrections, ever and rarely, as in almost never, will use a verbal correction. Because I don;t need to. Because I've taught my dog what I expect of her and help her follow it.

When we accept that a dog will be a dog, then the onus is on us to take responsibility for teaching what we want rather than physically correcting a dog for doing natural behaviours

 

[Iymala]

Accepting "a dog will be a dog" is like a bad parent saying "a kid will be a kid." Allowing any dependent to engage in inappropriate behavior without correction is failing at your duty of being a guardian. It is fantastic that your dog only needs, very rarely, a verbal correction, but I would bet your dog has low prey drive, low to no aggression, and is in general a mild tempered dog. Which you should count your lucky stars that you got a dog with a temperament that compliments your chosen training style. If you honestly think that a "slight, rare verbal correction" is going to mean anything to a dog with high drive, aggression (not fear aggression), or strong prey drive you are sadly mistaken. Yes, you could avoid all areas where your dog would have a reaction to its surroundings and claim your training works, but that would be a foolish claim.

I keep reading your posts and cannot help but to feel you have an incredibly narrow perspective and experience. I do believe balanced training works and some dogs never need more than a verbal correction. I also know that this is not the case for every dog. Shaping behaviors and tricks is easy, and positive training has shown itself to be far superior in this field. Dancing dogs, trick trained cats, even zoo keepers use it to help manage their wild chargers. Now the other side of the coin is managing inappropriate behaviors, and this is where you need to find what works for each UNIQUE animal. Some dogs are simply harder tempered than others, and your verbal correction and shaping will not be anything to that dog when it sees a small prey animal it instinctively wants to kill, or a person (I didn't want to leave out our beloved Filas).

Just because a behavior is "natural" does not mean it is acceptable, and some of these natural behaviors are much more serious than others. I am not going to physically correct a dog for peeing in the house. I am going to use positive reinforcement to shape the behavior of peeing outside. I am going to physically correct a dog for lunging at a small child running around or small animal. This behavior is serious and needs a serious correction to make sure the communication that it is not appropriate is clear. Shaping a positive response to the stimulus is part of the process, but with many dogs there will be a time when they decide their opinion/instinct is of higher value than any reward or expectation. I could sit back and say..."it's just a dog being a dog" as it mauls someone's small pet, but I really don't think that is the appropriate response.

Here is an interesting, recent article published in a scientific journal:
Wolves cooperate but dogs submit, study suggests | Science/AAAS | News

I love the complaints of... well it was not witnessed in the wild. I am much more interested in structured, controlled studies because that is much more relevant to a pet owner. Our dogs do not live in the "wild." They live in a structured environment that WE choose, with other animals of OUR choosing. If I was interested in studies about wild animals then I would be concerned that the "packs" of wolves or dogs were artificial in nature.

Of course I had to go all the way to the SECOND PAGE OF GOOGLE to find an actual scientific study about dog behavior. The first page is mainly full of trainers opinions about dog behavior that reference no studies, and are in no way scientific.

 

[karennj]

I think what glasgow is saying is not that you should ignore bad behavior but you should instead train acceptable behavior and if behavior modification needs to be done, it can be done without creating negative associations. Corrections can leave a dog confused and fearful depending on how and when it is done. Yes, they can be incredibly effective at changing behavior quickly BUT are you changing the disease or just the symptom? I say if your dog is lunging at children or mauling the neighbors pet you have failed at training the acceptable behavior and now are just doing clean up. You are either proactive (train the acceptable behaviors and manage the situations) or reactive (correcting after the behavior has already occurred). Glasgow is actually a dog trainer so even if his personal dog is mild tempered he deals with dog issues as part of his job. I applaud his approach because he makes the dog think and react appropriately through counter conditioning and desensitizing to triggers. It is MUCH harder to train a dog this way. I think if you can train your dog without creating any negative associations/fallout then go for it. As long as the end result is a happy, confident and under control dog then that is all that matters.

 

[Nik]

Spanking is hitting. Whether it's abusive or not - I guess that depends. But it *is* hitting and I think there are better ways to teach children than by spanking.

If we are taking children (human children) I have to say imo it is really dependent on the kid. There are so many different types of personalities. I know Sean and his brothers were all spanked regularly and they joke about it laughing about how their parents weren't strong enough to cause them any pain, and it was clearly not in any way traumatic for them. For me as a child anyone raising their voice to me would leave me in tears and raising a hand pretty much would shut me down mentally etc for at least a day. I don't think when it comes to child rearing that there is truly a "one size fits all" response. Then again I haven't raised kids yet (just helped raise my much younger sisters) so maybe there is some magical secret I don't yet know.

 

[Iymala]

I think what glasgow is saying is not that you should ignore bad behavior but you should instead train acceptable behavior and if behavior modification needs to be done, it can be done without creating negative associations. Corrections can leave a dog confused and fearful depending on how and when it is done. Yes, they can be incredibly effective at changing behavior quickly BUT are you changing the disease or just the symptom? I say if your dog is lunging at children or mauling the neighbors pet you have failed at training the acceptable behavior and now are just doing clean up. You are either proactive (train the acceptable behaviors and manage the situations) or reactive (correcting after the behavior has already occurred). Glasgow is actually a dog trainer so even if his personal dog is mild tempered he deals with dog issues as part of his job. I applaud his approach because he makes the dog think and react appropriately through counter conditioning and desensitizing to triggers. It is MUCH harder to train a dog this way. I think if you can train your dog without creating any negative associations/fallout then go for it. As long as the end result is a happy, confident and under control dog then that is all that matters.

Here is an example I can think of off the top of my head, and it involves a dog trainer (with certifications though I don't remember which ones) that worked at the positive only obedience facility we took Betty and Claymore to. She owned 2 Ridgebacks and both had been conditioned towards acceptable behaviors with positive training methods since puppyhood. One of the Rdigebacks was a very well trained well mannered dog. The other ridgeback was dog aggressive. It had been socialized extensively and often went to doggy day care at the facility during its youth, but after maturity became same sex dog aggressive. She had tried counter conditioning for years with positive reinforcement but the results were not consistent. Some times the dog would not react even though tense and other times the dog would pass it's threshold and react aggressively. Using negative punishment she received a much more consistent result. The dog was still tense, still wanted to be aggressive but did not act out.

Yes, counter conditioning can help alter the "cause" of the behavior in SOME cases, but not always. Sometimes that cause is instinctual and the only thing that will stop the dog from acting out is punishment. Punishment is very, very hard to do correctly in both humans and animals, but it can be done properly. It must be done with consistency, clear association to the action that is being punished, quickly(within seconds), without emotion, and an alternative correct action must always be present that the punished can choose from. The same requirements to make punishment effective in humans are required to make punishment effective in dogs. I personally do not agree with no punishment parenting anymore than dog training. I was a middle of the road child.... very stubborn, but never in any trouble. Punishment in my house was consistent, clear, quick, and better choices were available.... there was emotion sometimes involved. My mind set as a kid, was similar to a dogs (in my opinion) and there were times where i wanted to do what I wanted to do more than I wanted to make my parents happy. I cannot even explain why something was so important that I do or say, but I just wanted it more than I feared a verbal correction or more than what I knew I should do. I knew I was not supposed to do whatever I wanted to but did it anyways. Now I was spanked one time.... yes one whole time. I don't even remember what it was for but it was something very serious and I never did that again.

You condition first and you reinforce that conditioning with positive reinforcement, but there are times when a harder hand is needed in both kids and dogs. The punishment should be comparable to the offense. Maybe I am behind the times, but I do not believe some dogs can be completely desensitized to certain triggers, especially not the harder tempered dogs. Those dogs can be managed and able to be safe in public, but it would be a rarity to see that accomplished with only positive training or with only verbal corrections. This is not a black and white subject, and I would not ever pick a dog trainer who felt that it was.

 

[tmricciuto]

That was an interesting article.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk