questions and thoughts about "myth of alpha" and puppies
So I've been giving the Monks of New Skete's _The Art of Raising a Puppy_ a reread while waiting for it to be September when hopefully I will have a puppy arriving from TX.
While I really believe it's a great book a couple of dog lovers who are really deep into their mental and spiritual connections with their dogs, I couldnt help but notice that my copy, which is the latest copy and is after their revisions of the other book to take out the "alpha roll" stuff, has a lot of built-in commentary about the "dominance" and "submissiveness" of different puppies.
Now as near as I can tell, these concepts are rapidly falling out of favor in the dog training community, from the top down. if L. David Mech is going to recant the concept of instinctual hierarchical social structures in wild wolves and start talking about how they don't exist in the wild, then that's heavy enough for me.
Anyway, this Volhard Puppy Apptitude test mentioned in the Monks of New Skete book - it uses a lot of language that pushes puppies into categories along the "dominant - submissive" scale that is falling out of favor. Can this test be reconciled with the emerging view that dogs don't have an innate predisposition to dominance or submissiveness, that they simply adopt certain postures or attitudes on a case-by-case basis?
I figure the concepts of puppy "assertiveness" and relative level of energy are probably still useful.
Anybody have any thoughts on this?
While I really believe it's a great book a couple of dog lovers who are really deep into their mental and spiritual connections with their dogs, I couldnt help but notice that my copy, which is the latest copy and is after their revisions of the other book to take out the "alpha roll" stuff, has a lot of built-in commentary about the "dominance" and "submissiveness" of different puppies.
Now as near as I can tell, these concepts are rapidly falling out of favor in the dog training community, from the top down. if L. David Mech is going to recant the concept of instinctual hierarchical social structures in wild wolves and start talking about how they don't exist in the wild, then that's heavy enough for me.
Anyway, this Volhard Puppy Apptitude test mentioned in the Monks of New Skete book - it uses a lot of language that pushes puppies into categories along the "dominant - submissive" scale that is falling out of favor. Can this test be reconciled with the emerging view that dogs don't have an innate predisposition to dominance or submissiveness, that they simply adopt certain postures or attitudes on a case-by-case basis?
I figure the concepts of puppy "assertiveness" and relative level of energy are probably still useful.
Anybody have any thoughts on this?
Comments
I loved the book for one very simple reason...it delves deeply into pack mentality, something I have used (long before cesar) to work with dogs. Some people are averse to the idea that dogs are canines, not human...but training and socializing are sooo much easier when we accept their "canineness", and the book is excellent, I think, in explaining why dogs do what they do, and how to work with them with in those confines. As for the aptitude test, I think it's very subjective and is based on how the puppy is "currently" in its pack...take the dog from his birth pack and place it with a family as the only pet and you could get very different results in a matter of a week based on how that puppy is trained/socialized. A puppy may be pre-disposed to submissiveness, but given the opportunity to rise in the ranks he/she will!
In addition to re-reading the Monks of New Skete, I also picked up this book which you might also like, "Puppy's First Steps; the Whole Dog Approach to Raising a Happy, Healthy, Well-Behaved Puppy". The book is written by the Faculty of the Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University. This book is very much oriented towards "postive" training approaches, which I found to be incedibly insightful and offers different techniques from the monks.
Wow, we need to start a thread for expectant parents!! LOL...all of us who are in our waiting period!
Also, here's a good description of the revolution in our notion of wolf social behavior: http://leecharleskelleysblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/is-your-dog-dominant-or-just-feeling.html
What is happening in the field of wolf research right now is, scientists who study wolves are starting to repudiate the whole concept of the "pack" that we have been comfortable with for the past 50 years. They are saying that the social structure of wolves in the wild isn't a hierarchy with an "alpha" at the top - the structure is more mutable and based around what the pack is doing. Therefore, the concept that some dogs are more or less "dominant" by nature is challenged.
In fact, the aspersion is that the social hierarchy with superiors and inferiors, led by the orneriest, is a primate thing - so the age-old thinking that a dog needs to be shown that it is the subordinate to prevent behavior problems is where the actual anthropomorphisizing is!
But I guess I'm a little on the fence...and you know what, I saw an episode of "Dog Whisperer" last night where Caeser did an alpha roll on a dog, and he just said, I am trying to show him that there are very unpleasant consequences to his actions. He did not use the language of "I am trying to dominate the dog."
http://workingdogs.com/testing_volhard.htm
What worried me about the UPENN study is that they don't define or qualify "trainer". I think we as dog lovers have heard horror stories about "bad" trainers. As for those attempting corrective measures over dominance, when done in-correctly, should theoretically expect an agressive response from the dog. I would also guess, that if you broke the numbers down between "trainer" and "Self", you would find that the agressive repsponses are far higher for those correcting as self than those of trainer. What I would also like to know, does the study take the "home-life" into account? Was the dog properly socialized as a puppy. Is the dog kept indoors or outdoors, are there kids in the home, or other pets? Many different factors that combined with inproperly applied discipline could lead to agressive behaviors.
I do like cesar, I know he's suffered some serious PR issues of late and that not everyone is fond of his techniques, but I can't help but admire his ability to work with and re-habilitate some very distrubed dogs who otherwise would be put down. Training dogs who have not been properly trained/socilized is not always pretty. I know he worked with a very feral Shiba that, while it could not remain in his home, did find refuge with Cesar. The Shiba was born/raised in Japan as a guard dog and spent most of it's young life chained to a stake w/ little food and water and almost no human contact. Luckily, he and his brother were saved by two flight attendants whose mission is to love these "gaurd" dogs and if possible, bring them back to the USA.
In response to Kenshi - "Caeser did an alpha roll on a dog, and he just said, I am trying to show him that there are very unpleasant consequences to his actions. He did not use the language of "I am trying to dominate the dog."
I post this thought....Read between the lines you have to be very careful how wording is modified to placate viewers. He does not have to assign a label it to be a dominant action. It's like saying to your co-worker , yeah I am frustrated with you because you are fearful, anxious or over assertive (fill in the blank) so now I am going to throw you to the ground. Rolling still is a strong physical reaction quite similar to hitting when frustrated. Yeah it may make you feel better but you know it isn't always the best solution.
The episode with the Shiba, Cesar took the dog because the woman who had him basically gave up and she had no wish to work with the dog any longer. Cesar knew this and the fact it was a bad match and decided to swap with a more compatible pet. Once an owner gives up its over and he is wise enough to see that and not have the episode come to a negative end. He himself probably made it work with the Shiba and he learned from the process since he said he needed to find out more about them. It would be nice to see a follow up on it.....maybe down the road.
Snf
In my opinion that test reveals/rates the confidence level, reactivness, and fearfulness of a puppy. In the traditional sense, imo, the term "dominance" refers to traits most commonly found in dogs that are more reactive and confident or even more reactive and fearful. While "submissive" refers to traits more commonly found in less-reactive dogs that are either fearful or confident, depending on exactly what is being called "submissive" [or "dominant" for that matter]...
For example, a puppy that readily rolls on it's back when you approach it is not necessarily being "submissive", it may actually be very confident and comfortable with people and so it rolls on it's back exposing it's underbelly because it is not fearful of an attack.
Another example, a puppy that runs out of the puppy group first to "great" a human with a charge or pounce may be a puppy that is showing signs of being more reactive and fearful. The puppy could be showing fear, but this would mos def be labeled as "dominance" when in fact it may be fear motivated. Spend any amount of time with an under-socialized dog that has learned to show aggression toward fearful things and you will quickly see that it's not "dominance" the dog is displaying.
To that point...
Growling, barking, charging, and biting are LEARNED behaviors. Dogs learn early on how to communicate among each other as well as humans.
If a fearful dog growls at you when you go to take their bone away, they are not showing "dominance", they are showing pure fear - they are fearful you (or whomever, dogs included) will take their bone away. If you react by backing away and leaving them alone, they just learned that growling at you makes you go away. So guess how they will act next time they have a bone and you approach them?
Now, using the same example above and addressing the comment about Cesar's "alpha role", if you hit a dog for growling at you or "alpha role" them for growling at you, you teach the dog that behaving in a violent manner is OK, and that is how you act to get your way. By doing an "alpha role" or any other violent act toward a dog to correct them for a behavior like guarding a bone you are correcting a dog for being fearful and not TEACHING them to not be fearful. The next time you go to take that bone away the dog will more than likely act MORE aggressively towards you because now they are fearful you are going to take their bone AND hurt them.
Violence begets violence. There is really no need for it when dealing with humans or dogs. Cesar can call it whatever he wants, but rolling a dog over and holding it down is a violent act that is unnecessary and potential dangerous to your relationship with your dog.
[start side note]
Luytiy had acted aggressively towards me a few times shortly after we got him; He was unsure of me and fearful of me [not socialized with men enough - maybe]. When he charged me, teeth showing, growling, with aggressive posturing, he had the full intent of scaring me [very "shock and awe" style] - had I reacted in a fearful way he would have learned that acting that way towards me gets what he wants [I go away]. That would have been bad... But think about how bad it would have been if I had kicked him in the teeth [because I can't "alpha role" a 140lb CO]. The next time he felt the need to be fearful of me he would have passed right by the "shock and awe" technique and went right for the "eat his face" technique. Violence begets violence.
Luytiy acted this way toward me 5 times, we have since fixed the issue and he is comfortable with me now. At one time he did his "shock and awe" technique and startled me because I didn't even know he was in the office [I thought he was in his crate] - I was actually talking on the phone with Jessica at the time. I guess my response was very clear - he startled me, and I turned around and walked away... So guess what I had to do the next 3 times he did that... Just stand their and not act fearful. Had I not acted fearful that ONE time he may have stopped acting that way toward me after the 3rd time instead of progressing to 5 times.
My point is, it's all learned responses.
[end side note]
As for your question about the puppy "assertiveness" result from the test...
In my personal opinion, it goes like this:
> Confidence + Reactiveness = Assertive puppy.
> Confidence - Reactivenesss = Benevolent puppy.
> Reactivenesss - Confidence = Fearful puppy.
If you wanted a guard dog, go for the Assertive puppy [Ahi], if you want a dog to mix well with other dogs and be an observer of life, go for the Benevolent puppy [Hilo]. If you want a liability issue, go for a Fearful puppy [Maui].
Yes, I think there should be a new puppy aptitude test created - I have actually given it a lot of thought over the past few months.
Interesting questions Kenshi.
----
*That's all just my opinion, I am no expert.
----
On another note:
That aptitude test is what Tikaani's breeder used on him to help determine his personality, since Huskies can be quite assertive. Here's the link to her version of the puppy Aptitude test:
http://www.bogartsdaddy.com/bouvier/BuyersGuide/Puppy_Aptitude_Test.htm
Practically the exact same thing, just different wording. He had scored mostly 4s and some 5s, which makes him:
"A pup that scores a majority of 4's is an easily controlled, adaptable puppy whose submissive nature will make him continually look to his master for leadership. This pup is easy to train, reliable with kids, and, though he lacks self-confidence, makes a high-quality family pet. He is usually less outgoing than a pup scoring in the 3's, but his demeanor is gentle and affectionate."
His personality doesn't seem quite like that, but it's almost like a horoscope reading, the more you think about the more you "see" similarities.
Also an interesting read that I thought would fit with this discussion:
http://www.avsabonline.org/avsabonline/images/stories/Position_Statements/dominance statement.pdf
If I were testing and selecting a field Spaniel for service work, for example I would make sure that I had the most assertive dog in a litter to train. If I had a doberman I probably would reconsider that. It is subjective and IMO really what is important is recovery. How fast can an animal recover from a novel situation.
Training can go a long way to ameliorate some issues, it just may take longer than say a lower scoring dog. Always consider nature vs. nurture to talior to the needs of the dog when training. It's not all cut and dry through testing .
Usually for most pet owners you want a middle of the road score for a dog.
So to Brads diagram I add "Recovery" to the equation
Confidence + Reactiveness + Recovery = Assertive puppy (extra focus training needed but should be able to adapt to multiple tasks, requires more exercise) .
Confidence - Reactivenesss + Recovery = Benevolent puppy ( flexible and easiest to adapt to multiple tasks).
Reactivenesss - Confidence - Recovery = Fearful puppy ( not flexible, emotionally it will take the longest to train. Specific tasks must be chosen for a best fit, but not impossible with the correct match with training starting before 14 weeks).
Snf
This made me think about Loa and her temperament...
Loa is a little shy, but recovers quickly, and is not very reactive. So maybe we should add another entry:
Recovery - Reactiveness - Confidence = Shy Puppy (Not as flexible, requires "confidence building" exercises, but not a liability, if socialized properly can become a balanced dog).
What do you think?
----
Two questions though:
1) Shouldn't there be 8 classifications? If you have 3 attributes, each of which can either be present or not, that should be 8:
Confidence: yes
Reactiveness: yes
Recovery: yes
Classification: Assertive
Confidence: yes
Reactiveness: yes
Recovery: no
Classification: ????
Confidence: yes
Reactiveness: no
Recovery: yes
Classification: Benevolent
Confidence: yes
Reactiveness: no
Recovery: no
Classification: ????
Confidence: no
Reactiveness: yes
Recovery: yes
Classification: ????
Confidence: no
Reactiveness: yes
Recovery: no
Classification: Fearful
Confidence: no
Reactiveness: no
Recovery: yes
Classification: Shy
Confidence: no
Reactiveness: no
Recovery: no
Classification: ????
2) How would you go about beginning to test these characteristics. I suppose recovery could be measured using something similar to the sound sensitivity test. Unless, of course, they aren't fearful of the sound to begin with. I'm not as sure about the others though.
How about this:
Confidence: no
Reactiveness: no
Recovery: no
Classification: Pet Rock.
LOL
----
Lindsay - I dunno. I think I agree that their should maybe be a rating system for each cat that tells how accurately the pup falls into each cat (like 1-5 where 5 is the best a pup could get)...
but I don't think it's fair to categorize a pup when it is under extreme pressure/stress as it may be past it's threshold and therefore will not show it's true personality. I mean all dogs have a threshold, for some dog it is just easily attainable while for others it is not as easy. The recovery time is key there tho...
hmm...
so maybe there should be a rating for each cat that gives a final number that then would place the pup into each classification.
[Max 5 points for each cat.]
Confidence: (add up to 5 points)
Reactiveness: (subtract up to 5 points)
Recovery: (add up to 5 points)
[Max score 10 points]
Classification: Benevolent (10points)
Classification: Assertive (5-9 points)
Classification: Shy (0-5 points)
Classification: Fearful (-5-0 points)
Maybe Ike would look like this [based on what you just wrote]:
Confidence: 4
Reactiveness: 1
Recovery: 2
Classification: 5 (Shy)
Or maybe we should divide by the reactiveness points... or maybe by the amount of time it took to recover.
Thoughts?
----
To Patrice's point, each breed group would not necessarily have the same results since each breed was "designed" for a purpose. For example, in a hunting breed you would want more reactiveness than in a companion breed. Dues to this, I think we need some type of sliding scale. Like maybe, depending on the pup's purpose/breed group you add a certain number of points to off-set the reactivness.
In Shikoku, for example, you would want/expect more reactivness since they are a boar hunting breed - same applies to the Shiba really. So, maybe we add some points for a hunting breed, or any other breed that may need reactivness - like a herding breed. If we do it probably changes Ike's rating to be more accurate:
Ike [Shiba]: start with 2 points
Confidence: 3 [average]
Reactiveness: 1
Recovery: 2
Classification: 6 (Assertive) - a little assertive, but not shy
Now if he were a lab, or any retriever we would expect/want less reactivness...
Ike [Lab]: start with 1 points
Confidence: 3 [average]
Reactiveness: 1
Recovery: 2
Classification: 5 (Shy) - a little shy but not fearful
Now if he was a companion dog, like a French Bulldog..
Ike [Frenchy]: start with 0 points
Confidence: 3 [average]
Reactiveness: 1
Recovery: 2
Classification: 4 (Shy) - more shy, but not fearful
Thoughts??????????
----
I think adding the scores from the different categories breaks the model though. For example, assume there are two dogs with the same reactiveness, one with high confidence but low recovery, and the other opposite.
Dog 1:
Confidence: 5
Reactiveness: 1
Recovery: 1
Classification: a confident dog who gets traumatized if ever spooked
Dog 2:
Confidnece: 1
Reactiveness: 1
Recovery: 5
Classification: a dog who spooks at the drop of a hat but recovers immediately
Both of these dogs' scores add to 5, but I think we'd all agree they are completely different dogs.
I think it is perfectly fine to think about the numbers independently. If you really want to put them together, you should think about something like a Nolan chart rather than a single number.
Also, does "threshold" get covered by the other categories? It seems like its important, but it also seems to be related to all three of the categories thus far. Perhaps it should be its own?
http://www.volhard.com/pages/pat.php
Brought the pups out with me to walk around the block. Well, I walked the dogs and the pups were held and carried by my daughter and her friends. They got lots of attention and did very well.