dog psychology...debunking the dominance myth

[Carrie]

A lot of good, sound educational material...not only the first article, but many of the links. This ever flourishing dominance panacea and faulty interpretation of the motives of dogs should once and for all be put to rest. I can't believe how much I still see people thinking they need to dominate their dogs with collar corrections and other forceful aversives. It simply is not needed to train or "rehabilitate" a dog...regardless of the dog..."red zone" dogs included and perhaps especially.

Dog Whisperer, Dog Psychology and Cesar Millan

[Ritz459]

Very good article, and I absolutely agree.

[Raised By Wolves]

LOL! Doesn't this belong in the debate section?

Carrie, I love ya...but all I can say is tell it to the two dogs (headed for death row) I helped last year using Cesar's (basic) techniques.

Yeah, yeah...my handling methods are little softer, slower, and more nurturing.(...maybe because I'm older and female, lol). However, the basic philosophy is the same.

Oh well, to each his own.

[k9hullio_sam]

I am a Ceasar fan, but this article makes a lot of sense.

Mandi has a problem with barking at the window, and I tried the 'Ceasar way' with no succes, and the positive training method also with no success. Not too long ago, I started calling her into the other room when she started barking and this is the only thing that works, and she is much better about it now.

I do have a question though, about the Forced Exercise--Is it pointless then for people that run with their dogs, or bike with their dogs? Or is the article saying you can't do those things alone and it be sufficient?

[Carrie]

LOL! Doesn't this belong in the debate section?

Carrie, I love ya...but all I can say is tell it to the two dogs (headed for death row) I helped last year using Cesar's (basic) techniques.

It doesn't belong in the debate section. There isn't anything to debate. Debates are made of subjects which are a matter of opinion. This article is in large part made of facts and well substantiated information. One has to look at the sources too. Do you honestly think that CM is the only person who rehabilitates death row dogs?

I put this article up for educational purposes...for those who are interested in expanding their knowledge and if not that, then just getting a more enriched or full view of how dogs are. I don't want to debate with anyone. I personally find the research and findings of dogs' evolution fascinating and how they became domestic has great bearing on the dog-human relationship.

Mandi has a problem with barking at the window, and I tried the 'Ceasar way' with no succes, and the positive training method also with no success.

What was Ceasar's way?

What was the positive training method you used? There are various ways of working that problem. Perhaps I can help. I've got a very reliable and quick response from my two yappy Chihuahuas and my mix breed to quiet when cued. I also have a client with the same problem, among others which were exasperated by the use of an electric shock collar. But in a couple of sessions, this little dog has learned a new way of dealing with those triggers which set him off when he's inside. He didn't learn to simply "obey." He learned that it was profitable to stop barking. A win win situation for both owner and dog. Outside we'll be going through a gradual desensatizing-counter conditioning, step by step program to help him get more comfortable around other dogs...to turn the dogs into good things instead of scary things. (electric collar made the other dogs into very bad things) The idea is to change his view, to get to the root of the problem, to change his emotions..... not simply supress the behavior that comes from the emotions inside.

Modifying behavior, any behavior doesn't require dominance, force, pain, flooding or creating a learned helplessness or dissassociative behavior in dogs. That is fact. Pure and simple. I wouldn't argue with someone whether or not the earth is flat or spherical. I wouldn't argue whether gravity is a real law of physics or if it's imagined. Learning behavior is a science. There are certain laws of this science. And it's pointless to argue over that. And it pointless to argue over the effectiveness of training which is utilitizing the laws of behavior.

If you want more help on teaching your dog "quiet" on cue...any place, any time, in any context, let me know and I'll spell out the method I use step by step.

[GSD]

I definiteatly didn't miss this attitude. Here's some facts as well, i'll post it again and again.

Here's a quote from Stephen Lindsay, "properly understood, reward and punishment are morally neutral, the one being neither better nor worse thatn the other. Both outcomes serve equally vital functions in perfecting an animal's adaptation ot the social and physical environment. Lerning to respond and cope appropriately with the treats and trials of life is an important part of normal development for dogs... Although punishment is unpleasant, precisely what aspect makes it so beneficial and useful."

He also says about punishment, "not only is punishment often poorly misunderstood as a behavioral procedure, it is just as often bogged down in dire warnings of serious side effects and, more importantly, the false view that it does not work."

I like this one the best. " .... the pedulum has swung from a stubborn rliance on punishment and negative reinforcement to an equally unnatural extreme in which the use of punishment and negative reinforcement (in some quarters) is shunned to embrace a so-called "positive" approach to training and behavioral control. Extreme positions, whether based on good intention or not, are typically based on irrational beliefs and assumptions,- not scientific knowledge and experience. The adoption of an exclusive reliance on punishment or reward alone reflects a core of misunderstanding about how dog behavior is most effeciently modified."

[Carrie]

Sorry, but harsh punishment, it is obvious causes a lot of problems in lots of dogs. Of course it works to stop a behavior. But there's more to a dog-human relationship than absolute obedience imo and that of many, many behaviorists. And of course, punishment is part of life but it does not have to be used to the point where it is causing documented, ill side effects. Negative punishment or removing something the dog likes is punishment enough in most cases and it doesn't carry with it the baggage that say, pain or undue force carries with it.

Anyhow, that is not the point of my posting the article....to argue or debate. As I said, it is simply something to read and take in, absorb, turn it, look at it...if anyone is interested.

[GSD]

I've seen it many times before. There's some good stuff and some not so good stuff. So all this talk about facts pure and simple is really nothing more than an opinion which are always up for a debate, and facts are always open to debate as well, but I don't think these really qualify as facts.

The wolf studies were seriously flawed. First, the studies were of wolves in captivity and not in their natural habitats. Second, the wolves had been captured from different wolf packs, creating a volatile and unnatural pack structure. None of which provided researchers at the time with an accurate view of normal wolf behavior.

That's their first premise to "prove" its false. The studies weren't seriously flawed, the way they're interpreting it is though. Just because it took unrelated wolves and put them together doesn't mean they had unnatural reactions to each other, it just intensified them. IT makes 100% perfect sense that it would happen that way and packs under more natural circumstances would have less fighting for rank, as it is established at a very early age.

I've watched many documentaries on wolves, and they all have shown the traditional behaviors that some would like us to believe don't exist in wolf packs. Trying to tell me it doesn't happen is a bunch of BS not facts.

More in-depth studies of wolves in their natural habitats have since revealed that a wolf pack is made up of a family; the breeding animals and their offspring, who stay with the pack until 2-3 years of age, when they start their own pack. Eventually, almost every wolf becomes the "alpha" once they successfully mate and breed.

second premise. Major problems, there are many packs where very very few of the animals are ever "alpha" and they NEVER breed to anyone in their original pack or another one. Sure some leave and start new packs, very natural, nature knows what she's doing and this helps ensure genetic diversity and spreading of genes. It doesn't in any way show that somehow pack structure in wolves doesn't exist.

3. Dogs are not tame wolves. The domestic dog is a separate species that evolved from wolves more than 10,000 years ago and exhibit behaviors that wolves do not.

so they show some behaviors that wolves do not. They also show hundreds of behaviors that are almost 100% identical to wolf behavior. What, do we just disregard those because they don't fit with the agenda they're trying to promote???

In Dogs: A Startling New Understanding of Canine Origin Behavior & Evolution, Ray and Lorna Coppinger write:

"Today, the popular dog press seems to feel that if dogs descended from wolves, they would have wolf qualities. But the natural selection model points out that the wolf qualities are severely modified. Dogs do not think like wolves, nor do they behave like them."

Smart people, have spent a lot of time traveling and looking at dogs, but I gotta say, I only need to go home to my living room and I'll see pack behavior staring at me straight in my face from my 2 dogs. I don't care how many PhD's they have or what niche of pariah dogs they've studied, saying dogs do not behave at all like wolves, is like saying beer doesn't have any properties like water.

These dogs rarely form packs, and when they do the packs are loosely structured with animals joining and leaving randomly and frequently, a trait not seen in wolf packs.

Hate to say it, but I don't own Pariah dogs, and i'm sure nobody reading this does. In fact we have a type of dog that has filled a much different niche than any pariah dog. My dogs aren't solitary scavengers. If I allowed them to be, i'm sure they'd still seek out human companionship, and would act nothing like the pariah dogs the coppinger's have studied. Sure they'd have similarities with them, just like they have lots of similarities with wolves.

Dogs, of which there are many feral types throughout the world, have not reverted back to wolves either in appearance or behavior. Instead, they revert to the appearance and behavior of the pariah dogs.

and if these pariah dogs didn't have human scrap heaps to scavenge off of, i'm sure they'd display much more wolf like behavior, i've seen domestic dogs run in packs with strict heirarchy and hunting and killing domestic animals and wild ones. I'll trust my own experience over one I read in a book, especially a theory that has many many holes in it.

Leaders in all animals control assets more often than they control individuals through the use of force. As stated by Myrna Milani, DVM, author and veterinary ethologist:

"...the mark of a true leader is the ability to control without force. And, in fact, wild animals who rely on brute force to maintain their status typically get eliminated from the gene pool because this approach requires so much energy."

That first part is true, just by controlling the food, you're already on your way to becoming a strong pack leader. In the wild animals do rely on brute force when they have to, without hesitation and administer it severely. If they don't, they are surely eliminated from the gene pool. Sure they use body posture, and psychological methods as well, but when push comes to shove, it's on, no questions asked. Why leave that part out?? It doesn't fit the agenda?

So, in effect, these methods communicate a lack of leadership, rather than the other way around.

All I can say is that is 100% BS. Controlling a situation does not communicate a lack of leadership, I don't even know how to argue this one. Sure somebody can be just a bully to their dog at all times and take it way too far to the point the relationship is affected, but i'm not talking about the misuse of principle's, which is what that would fall under.

Humans are neither dogs nor wolves. So when we try to replicate the behavior of either, we are genetically doomed to fail. We lack the proper physiology, timing and accuracy with which to deliver the same types of signals and corrections that dogs use with one another to maintain peace.

What???? Care to read any stuff from Temple Grandin, yes she is an animal behaviorist and has a PhD, so surely her research and opinions should count right? or do only certian behaviorsts that fit the agenda get air time? Dogs can read humans, they learn to very well. They may not know when they are first from the womb what my look means or what a collar correction means, but they surely learn quickly how to interpret them.

Those who work with wolves and wolf-dogs (formerly called wolf hybrids) learned very quickly that wolves will not tolerate forceful handling by humans. If the reason we have used these methods on dogs is because of wolf behavior and it elicits aggressive responses in wolves, why then do we continue to use these methods on dogs?

so now they found a bit of evidence about wolves that would work with their agenda so they can use it?? I thought wolves were not dogs and did not behave the same act the same or anything. So there are differences, we know that, that isn't in question.

I suppose you'll tell me we aren't dogs, they won't understand again. How come a duck can be placed with baby kittens and they see the duck as a member of their species?? How come a bull calf raised with human interaction is more dangerous than a bull raised with no human interaction?

Because the bull raised with humans senses the human as an equal and something to be dominated when it matures. The bull raised with no human interaction doesn't see the human as a counter part and has no reason to flex its maturing muscles at us. Care to explain that?? surely humans and bovines are much further apart that dogs and wolves. And dogs work much more closely with humans than any cow does, so explain it to me how a puppy raised from the time it leaves the womb with human interaction will not see a human as being part of their pack????

also dogs aren't pigeons or rats, yet they apply those theories of behavior to dogs all the time, and humans. The only thing any of this stuff ever proves to me is that mis using a learning theory can create problems (just like the misuse of anything can), the rest is all just opinion with an agenda.

[Carrie]

We know GSD. You and Ceasar Milan are the true experts and all these people are full of b.s. Ok, ok.....

[Carrie]

Again...I posted that article because I found it interesting and informative...................for people who are interested what scientists and experts in the field have to show us. If you don't buy it and think they're all full of hot air, that's OK. Don't turn this into a big debate. It wasn't meant to be that.

[GSD]

yeah, i'm a huge cesar supporter, you've got it. (sarcasm)
just here to add a little levity.

If you don't think some of the stuff i posted was done, said and researched by scientists and experts in the field I suggest you do some more reading.

And again, if you're going to post something and pass it off as fact that can't be debated or questioned, then you better make sure it is so, until then, I'll put forth evidence to the contrary.

If you don't want to believe anything I have to say fine, I'm not saying its absolute. I have no other agenda than to talk about dogs. I realize there are a thousand ways to Rome and don't feel the need to make everyone else feel that they are uneducated, not willing to learn, stuck in a time warp, etc if they don't agree with me. But please, don't talk down to or make it seem like the some of us don't read, don't take time to learn, and don't know a thing or two about training dogs.

[k9hullio_sam]

We should not blindly accept any information presented to us, and a critical evaluation is essential. It is worth much more if you not only take into account what it is, but also what it is not. Thanks GSD for evaluating the article.

Thanks Carrie, I would love any help that I can get!

Phew...Mandi's Problems lol Maybe this should go in another thread??
My version of Ceasars way is to place myself inbetween her and the window and correct her (verbally) and direct her off her little couch thing that is in the window. It wasn't really effective at all, because after she was away from the window she just sat there huffing in the middle of the floor.

My verison of positive reinforcement was to be there when she starts, and ignore the barking but when she was quite, rewarding her profusely. This sort of didn't make sense to me though, because I think it just confused her and kept her excited and then indirectly encouraged the barking. I tried to use the same method, but to distinguish what I was actually encouraging, I called her into the other room, so she realized it was good to not pay attention to what was outside, and to stop barking.

The tricky part is that she is fine when she isn't in the front window. She used to be scared (as in shy...not shaking or anything) of other dogs, but since we have been hanging out with the dogs from the barn and going to agility, she isn't (she was even playing ball with the german shepherd the other day!!). Usually she will 'look' at get that breathy bark thing if we are on our block (but if she is off leash...she runs up to them...sort of charging them. And this is only if we are near our house), but besides that, she ignores them, and will walk right past them without a problem. The window thing is mostly out of boredom and she does it just because she thinks it is fun, or something. Today there were some dogs outside on our block so I brought some treats to see if I could get her to pay attention to me and not the dogs, but she didn't even look at them? Maybe it was too hot outside for her to get worked up? haha

Thanks!!!

[Raised By Wolves]

Originally Posted by