Phd Study

[Echo]

It's being run at Monash.

Overseen by Dr Pauline Bennett and Dr Linda Marston.

Like someone else already said........run the other way.

[Steve]

run far far away ... the working dog survey backfired big time ... Why would this one be any different.

hmmm DNA test breed and look at personality. Do you want to give the government fuel for scientifically proven BSL?

Do you mean McGreevy's working dog survey - Sydney Uni? What happened with it?

[sandgrubber]

Here's an extract from the sheet inviting people to participate.

. . . many owner-dog relationships fail each year, resulting in owner distress, community disruption and thousands of dogs being admitted to, and often euthanased in, welfare shelters and pounds. Results from a recent questionnaire study found that dogs which were easy going, friendly, non-aggressive, relaxed and sociable were rated as “ideal” by the Australian public. The development of an accurate behavioural assessment that measures these characteristics in dogs would assist in identifying dogs best suited for living in Australian society and could be used to select breeding dogs. This, along with educating the public about dog behaviour and training, has the potential to improve owner-dog relationships.

In my reading it looks like pretty normal PhD research. Possible that the student is trying to get at the genetic basis of aggression -- a taboo subject in human psychology. Highly unlikely that a psych department would support a study that took on both breed and aggression, as that would open a can of worms regarding racism.

I sent a note to the PhD student concerned saying that her letter had caused a hubub on DOL and inviting her to clarify. Hope this draws a result.

[tdierikx]

Results from a recent questionnaire study found that dogs which were easy going, friendly, non-aggressive, relaxed and sociable were rated as “ideal” by the Australian public.

Funnily enough, most of that comes from good socialisation and training... very few dogs are born that way...

You don't need to do a PhD thesis to know that... *sigh*

T.

[Bokezu]

I don't know how they can make a "true" assesment in one visit. I also don't understand the bit to be "used to select breeding dogs"..........

Edited December 27, 2009 by Bokezu

[mita]

First , sandgrubber, 'the genetic basis for aggression' is not a 'taboo subject in human psychology'. It's just that complete & total 'genetic determinism' has not been found to hold up.

The shorthand analogy is that genes supply the gun & the environment fires the bullet.

Second, the environmental issues in a dog's developing tendencies to aggression have been studied. And human influence found significant.

For example, the University of Qld found that socialisation of puppies, with people and home environments, is critical for dogs later being able to form 'proper' social relationships with people. The U of Q pointed out the significance of this finding, given that 2/3 of the many dogs euthed in sheltes for aggression, are aggressive to people. Which underlines the critical importance of early socialisation for dogs.

Go read the 2009 study from the University of Cordoba which looked at dominance aggression in dogs. The research concluded, re its development, that 'Dog-dependent factors (gender, breed, age, size & coat color) are FEWER than owner-dependent factors.'

http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:lLmN1...p;client=safari

Third, the OP study refers to the 'ideal' companion dog, in its title. What's a word like 'ideal' doing in a scientific study? Its meaning is, existing only as an idea. The opposite of 'real'. Yet, it's 'real' dogs that people acquire as companion pets. And 'real' dogs develop into companions to humans via a process where socialisation/training has been found significant.

And, interestingly, other work at the u of q showed the main reason people gave for dumping their dog, was that it hadn't lived up to their expectations.

Seems they'd idealised what a pet dog should be.....rather than knowing humans need to work at shaping its behaviour.

More reason why human behaviour should figure largely in any study that relates to companion dog behaviour. But doesn't in the OP study.

Edited December 28, 2009 by mita

[kingsfolly]

Hi everyone,

My name is Tammie King. I am the PhD researcher who is conducting the study that has caused quite a discussion. First of all, thank you to the person on this forum who kindly contacted me. I have read over each of your posts and really wanted to clear a few things up. It seems many people have jumped to conclusions about what this research is all about. I will endeavor to cover most people’s concerns and queries but if any of you have other questions or comments please let me know. I rely on dog owners like you to assist me during my research. Also, if there are any people on this forum who have already participated with their dog please let others know about your experience.

Overall, the aim of my study is to develop a valid and reliable canine behavioural assessment. After conducting a literature review on existing behaviour assessments I found that after their reliability and validity were tested, the assessments were actually unreliable and/or inaccurate. Furthermore, many have not been developed using a systematic scientific approach. So what I am trying to do is develop a dog behaviour assessment from scratch taking into account both the reliability and the validity of the assessment. Reliability refers to how repeatable and consistent the measure is while validity concerns the extent to which the measurement actually measures the desired behaviour in question and how it can predict behaviour in the outside world. The complexity of dog behaviour makes the development of accurate ways to measure behaviour difficult. That is why I am in the process of recruiting 200 dogs and their owners to assist me in trying to develop this assessment. Conditions are standardised as much as possible and the owner accompanies their dog through a short behaviour assessment which involves meeting an unknown person. The dog is observed both with and without the owner. The behaviour of the dog is video recorded and I have found many owners actually enjoy watching their dog when they are not present. Few of us get the opportunity to see what our dogs will get up to when we aren't around! The assessment is simple and straightforward and I am in no way judging your dog or yourself. Basically, I am trying to find out if we can accurately measure a specific canine personality trait; amicability. That is, dogs which exhibit friendly, relaxed, sociable, easy-going and non-aggressive behaviours. The reason we chose these behaviours is that after conducting a questionnaire we found that majority of participants considered these types of behaviours "ideal". Currently, we do not know what measures are important in determining which dogs are more or less amicable than others that is why we need so many dogs. Statistical analyses of data taken from video footage will help determine which behaviours are important. So, in order for me to find out whether we can accurately measure one element of canine behaviour and thus identify amicable dogs then I need dog owners like yourselves as well as your dogs to help me out. I am looking for ALL types of adult dogs (18months +) of various age, sex, neutering status, breed, training level, temperament etc. I will also be assessing a sample of puppies (6-8 months) who will be re-tested 12 months later to examine the assessments predictive validity.

The DNA cheek swab that I am taking from each dog is not part of my study. The DNA will potentially be used for another study which is investigating whether certain genes are linked with particular behavioural traits. All very interesting, but something I am not examining during my study.

Having been involved with breeding dogs for many years, as well as being a dog owner, exhibitor and trainer, I believe the more information we have about a dog regarding its conformation, health and behaviour, then the better equipped we are in making breeding choices. If we had a valid and reliable tool which assisted with assessing the behaviour of dogs then we could be selecting and breeding for the types of dogs that possess behaviours that we find desirable. We could also be better matching dogs and owners. Yes, I agree not one dog is suited to everyone but there are definitely behaviours that most people agree are important. I also think it is paramount that we continue to educate the public about dog training and behaviour, perhaps even be doing a better job at it. Maybe more research is required in that area too, perhaps someone else’s PhD?! (Unfortuneatly, I don't have time to examine this in my study). Nonetheless, I also think we could be better selecting, breeding and matching dogs with owners, taking into account a dog's behaviour. This is why I am attempting to develop a behaviour assessment.

I hope I have explained my research clearly and dispelled a few myths and misconceptions so now you and your dogs can get involved and be part of this exciting study! I was actually pleased to see that my research had caused such a discussion here as it means you are all as passionate as I am about our canine friends!

Regards,

Tammie King

Anthrozoology Research Group

Monash University

[Cosmolo]

Tammie is your research different to that done by Kate Mornement? As i thought the behavioural assessment had already been developed and was in its final testing stages?

[Elfin]

Basically, I am trying to find out if we can accurately measure a specific canine personality trait; amicability. That is, dogs which exhibit friendly, relaxed, sociable, easy-going and non-aggressive behaviours. The reason we chose these behaviours is that after conducting a questionnaire we found that majority of participants considered these types of behaviours "ideal".

The DNA cheek swab that I am taking from each dog is not part of my study. The DNA will potentially be used for another study which is investigating whether certain genes are linked with particular behavioural traits. All very interesting, but something I am not examining during my study.

Two things that immediately jumped out at me.

Are you testing the behaviours of specific breeds? Is it individual DOGS that will be noted as "ideal", or breeds (or crosses thereof)? Will differences in breed characteristics be taken into account? eg. I am guessing you will get a different response from an Afghan with a stranger than you will with, say, a Labrador.

Why are you taking DNA if it is not part of your study? No other study is mentioned in the email or flyer, leading one to believe that the DNA is for your study.

Edited December 28, 2009 by Elfin

[dancinbcs]

I can see this type of study being valid if done on 6 week old puppies but not with adult dogs who have so many variables in their training that the results would not mean anything. The inherited temperament is obvious at a few weeks . After that the wrong owner can destroy a good dog and a the right owner can do much to improve a puppy that initially showed problems.

Temperament testing in adult dogs is far more about training than it is about heritability.

[kingsfolly]

Tammie is your research different to that done by Kate Mornement? As i thought the behavioural assessment had already been developed and was in its final testing stages?

Kate is developing a behaviour assessment specifically for dogs within in a welfare shelter. You are right she is nearing completion of her study.

[kingsfolly]

Basically, I am trying to find out if we can accurately measure a specific canine personality trait; amicability. That is, dogs which exhibit friendly, relaxed, sociable, easy-going and non-aggressive behaviours. The reason we chose these behaviours is that after conducting a questionnaire we found that majority of participants considered these types of behaviours "ideal".

The DNA cheek swab that I am taking from each dog is not part of my study. The DNA will potentially be used for another study which is investigating whether certain genes are linked with particular behavioural traits. All very interesting, but something I am not examining during my study.

Two things that immediately jumped out at me.

Are you testing the behaviours of specific breeds? Is it individual DOGS that will be noted as "ideal", or breeds (or crosses thereof)? Will differences in breed characteristics be taken into account? eg. I am guessing you will get a different response from an Afghan with a stranger than you will with, say, a Labrador.

Why are you taking DNA if it is not part of your study? No other study is mentioned in the email or flyer, leading one to believe that the DNA is for your study.

Hi elfin,

I am primarily interested in whether we can accurately measure dog behaviour. If there are adeqaute numbers of various breeds represented then I would be very interested to see if breeds significnatly differ from one another. I am almost certain the breed I own won't rate as very amicable, but that is neither good nor bad. It just means these types of dog aren't suited to a most people. Again, as I said, the more information we are armed with to inform potential dog owners, the better!

In regards to the DNA sample, I can assure you I am being totally honest. My research has to undergo human and animal ethics clearance to commence and the reason I am taking DNA samples is as I already stated, it may potentially be used in another project.

[Elfin]

Hi elfin,

I am primarily interested in whether we can accurately measure dog behaviour. If there are adeqaute numbers of various breeds represented then I would be very interested to see if breeds significnatly differ from one another. I am almost certain the breed I own won't rate as very amicable, but that is neither good nor bad. It just means these types of dog aren't suited to a most people. Again, as I said, the more information we are armed with to inform potential dog owners, the better!

In regards to the DNA sample, I can assure you I am being totally honest. My research has to undergo human and animal ethics clearance to commence and the reason I am taking DNA samples is as I already stated, it may potentially be used in another project.

So what if the media and/or government take your scientific findings that your own breed is not "suitable for Australian society" (your own words) and gives your breed bad press/legislates against it?

Surely the person conducting the "other study" would be able to get clearance to collect DNA for themselves?

[kingsfolly]

I can see this type of study being valid if done on 6 week old puppies but not with adult dogs who have so many variables in their training that the results would not mean anything. The inherited temperament is obvious at a few weeks . After that the wrong owner can destroy a good dog and a the right owner can do much to improve a puppy that initially showed problems.

Temperament testing in adult dogs is far more about training than it is about heritability.

Unfortunately, some studies indicate that puppy temperament tests are notoriously unreliable in predicting a dogs’ future behaviour or personality.

I agree that owners can influence their dog's behaviour. We know that how a dog behaves is a result of a combination of factors relating to its inherent temperament and the environment it lives in, as well as its past experience. Dogs within the same breed share common temperament traits but also differ by possessing individual behavioural characteristics some of which are heritable. These combine with experience to produce distinct personality traits, which then influence the tendency of each dog to react in specific but generally consistent ways to future stimuli. This is significant because it means that personality can be inferred from how an individual behaves in certain situations, and that this, by extension, tells us something about the dog’s underlying temperament. Although dog temperament is thought to be present from an early age and remains stable over time, it is unknown when temperament is fully developed in a young animal and therefore it is not known when the optimal time would be to assess temperament as a future predictor of behaviour. Therefore, the age when individual dogs are tested can influence the predictability of how that dog will behave in the future.

We have chosen adult dogs for this study, to ensure their personality/temperament is fully developed.

[kingsfolly]

Hi elfin,

I am primarily interested in whether we can accurately measure dog behaviour. If there are adeqaute numbers of various breeds represented then I would be very interested to see if breeds significnatly differ from one another. I am almost certain the breed I own won't rate as very amicable, but that is neither good nor bad. It just means these types of dog aren't suited to a most people. Again, as I said, the more information we are armed with to inform potential dog owners, the better!

In regards to the DNA sample, I can assure you I am being totally honest. My research has to undergo human and animal ethics clearance to commence and the reason I am taking DNA samples is as I already stated, it may potentially be used in another project.

So what if the media and/or government take your scientific findings that your own breed is not "suitable for Australian society" (your own words) and gives your breed bad press/legislates against it?

Surely the person conducting the "other study" would be able to get clearance to collect DNA for themselves?

I understand your point of view and why you are concerned but one of the reasons I am conducting this research is so there is no BSL. We already know from past research that BSL is completely unjustified and an individual dog's behaviour should be assessed, hence why I am developing this assessment. This is something I discussed at a recent conference. It may be possible that certain breeds rate more or less highly than others overall, which will be very interesting.. it is also possible that there are no significant differences... but this by no means infers that a breed should be banned, if that's what your're implying. I, as the researcher would be the first to inform government, media etc. But, maybe the findings will mean that it would become mandatory to have your dog's behaviour assessed prior to breeding, registration etc. This would not only encourage more resposnible dog breeding but also encourage people to train and socialise their dogs. Also ensure suitable dogs are matched with suitable owners.

In regards to the DNA sample again, as I will have access to 200 dogs, I have been asked to collect the samples. Please refer to Corvus' post which sums it up nicely "Without knowing anything about the project, it's possible the DNA side of things is just standard procedure. Initial talks with my PhD supervisor and a geneticist involved doing cheek swabs for my project even though I have no intention of looking at genetics. The idea is that if someone eventually does want to look at it, there will already be a DNA bank to plunder."

[spottychick]

I am almost certain the breed I own won't rate as very amicable, but that is neither good nor bad. It just means these types of dog aren't suited to a most people.

It sounds to me like you are doing this research with good intentions but I am concerned at what will be done with the results - not by you but by the rest of the world.

Thanks for coming in and talking with everyone about it tho!

However I tend to take the approach that certain types of people aren't suited to most dogs. Now that's a study I would be interested in.

[tdierikx]

The DNA cheek swab that I am taking from each dog is not part of my study. The DNA will potentially be used for another study which is investigating whether certain genes are linked with particular behavioural traits. All very interesting, but something I am not examining during my study.

And this is exactly why many people here will be reluctant to participate in your study...

Personally, I would be reluctant to have a DNA swab done on my dogs to be potentially used in another study of which I have no knowledge of the desired outcome.

My girls have been brought up to not be overly friendly to strangers when I'm not at home - however, they are totally differently behaved when not on their own territory. How do you measure that?

I see the potential for misuse of your results by certain lobby groups to "prove" their points about certain types of dogs.

Dogs are also like people when it comes to developing certain behavioural traits - environment plays a MUCH larger part than genetics in how an animal will "turn out"...

T.

[Danois]

I would have no issues in participating in this study for the behavioural side.

However, the added inclusion of a DNA sample for some other project by some other person for some unknown purpose turns me right off the idea. If I am being asked to participate in something then it is done with full disclosure (which Tammy has done for her project) and not with some other vague suggestion in the background. Makes me think there is an ulterior motive in trying to get the DNA via a back door method - why is that not a separate study with its own approval?

[Steve]

First , sandgrubber, 'the genetic basis for aggression' is not a 'taboo subject in human psychology'. It's just that complete & total 'genetic determinism' has not been found to hold up.

The shorthand analogy is that genes supply the gun & the environment fires the bullet.

Second, the environmental issues in a dog's developing tendencies to aggression have been studied. And human influence found significant.

For example, the University of Qld found that socialisation of puppies, with people and home environments, is critical for dogs later being able to form 'proper' social relationships with people. The U of Q pointed out the significance of this finding, given that 2/3 of the many dogs euthed in sheltes for aggression, are aggressive to people. Which underlines the critical importance of early socialisation for dogs.

Go read the 2009 study from the University of Cordoba which looked at dominance aggression in dogs. The research concluded, re its development, that 'Dog-dependent factors (gender, breed, age, size & coat color) are FEWER than owner-dependent factors.'

http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:lLmN1...p;client=safari

Third, the OP study refers to the 'ideal' companion dog, in its title. What's a word like 'ideal' doing in a scientific study? Its meaning is, existing only as an idea. The opposite of 'real'. Yet, it's 'real' dogs that people acquire as companion pets. And 'real' dogs develop into companions to humans via a process where socialisation/training has been found significant.

And, interestingly, other work at the u of q showed the main reason people gave for dumping their dog, was that it hadn't lived up to their expectations.

Seems they'd idealised what a pet dog should be.....rather than knowing humans need to work at shaping its behaviour.

More reason why human behaviour should figure largely in any study that relates to companion dog behaviour. But doesn't in the OP study.

Agreed and while I havent looked at it for a while because I dont work in the field any longer there have been several studies with aggressive prisoners[ murderers] They found that when babies cry and they are comforted and soothed by their Mum that they secrete seretonin so their body learns how to produce this as they grow to counteract stress and testosterone.Without that experience regardless of genes they grow up as individuals which are anti social or more prone to violence or depression because their bodies never learned as babies how to manufacture the chemicals they need.

Regardless of breed its about how they are reared ,socialised and handled as babies and based on the fact that certain traits suit different people trying to tie this to breeds is missing a very large chunck of the info required to determine what dogs make the best pets. Another part is how capable the owner is at bonding with a dog too.

[newfsie]

My mistake, mita; I was the one that wrote temperament test. I have just re-read the info, and it actually only uses the phrase "behavioural assessment".

There is a passing reference to educating the public about dog behaviour and training. They also want the owners of the dogs to complete some questionaires. They seem to want to find out a way of measuring which dogs are the most "easy going, friendly, non-aggressive, relaxed and sociable".

That rules out my dogs, who would probably completely ignore a stranger! Snobs!

That's OK, Elfin. My comment would still hold true. Behaviour is far more complex than one assessment made at one time in one location.

Their 'finishing' point of measuring dogs that are the 'most easy going, friendly, non-aggressive, relaxed sociable'... may actually be dogs who were significanly helped to be so, by human behaviour. So they could pick up consequences of something they're not taking into consideration at all.

Critical issues re dog behaviour (& training) shouldn't be just the stuff of passing reference in a study with their stated aims. Especially as they're going to be using DNA data to nominate which dogs are suitable for Australian society.

I'm still very much not impressed.

I don't think you can assess a dog's behaviour without taking into consideration it's upbringing.......My rescue newf is a perfect example. She failed the RSPCA temperament test and was to be put to sleep. We took her on and after a lot of re-training she is now again very much like the average newf, friendly and social. But had she been tested eighteen months ago she would have failed any assessment. If the test was taken now, it would be a totally different outcome. I truly believe environment has a lot to do with dog behaviour.