The Concept Formerly Known As "dominance"

[corvus]

This one has been doing the rounds since it appeared last week. Not sure if anyone has posted it yet, so here it is just in case.

http://www.theotherendoftheleash.com/the-c...d-as-dominance/

She has now expanded with a Part 2:http://www.theotherendoftheleash.com/the-d...nships-in-dogs/

[Kelpie-i]

Interesting but not surprising. I watched a DVD with Pamela Reid discussing the very same thing and it's not surprising that as far as both are concerned, the "Jury is still out".

[Lablover]

Corvus, I am so tired. Visit,- at the moment have 3 entire males (entirely different so called dominant), one speyed female and one "in perfect timing/progestone tested" female. O and one sick husband, with a staph infection.

My life is bliss.

[Prydenjoy]

I know a lot of people who struggle with this bit:

Here’s what “dominance” ISN’T: It has nothing to do with decision-making about the actions of a group or one other individual. There is no relationship in the literature between who decides when to move on, where to go or what to do. Period. (Bookmark this point!)

It has nothing to do with “who’s in front.” (In prey animals, the ‘dominant’ member of the group is often found in the middle of the herd if the group is in an area that might be dangerous.)

[BJean]

It's amazing and amusing

to see so many attempts to 'describe' dog behaviour;

but really I suppose whatever rocks peoples boat.

This is one of my favs:

Personally, I prefer to describe my relationship with Ranger as a partnership. Ranger is expected to abide by my rules because we live in a human society and I’m the native guide. I like to imagine that if we lived in canine society I’d be as willing to follow his lead as he is to follow mine. When we meet strange dogs on our walks I try to follow his lead on the principle that he’s the native guide to canine behavior.

Bcz that's a lot more plausible than imagining there might be a hierachial system in a pack animal

Edited April 6, 2010 by lilli

[corvus]

I think there needs to be more attempts to "describe" dog behaviour, as you put it, lilli. Because clearly there are a lot of dog caretakers/pack leaders/human dog parents or whatever they choose to call themselves that don't have a great understanding of dog behaviour. Understanding our animals helps us to improve their welfare. It is a fact that there are dogs that are mistreated in the name of dominance. Anyone who cares about dogs ought to be concerned about that. Equally, I think it highly likely that there are dogs that are suffering due to lack of structure in their lives, or the ignoring of social behaviour because of the pendulum swing away from dominance hierarchies. Anyone who cares about dogs ought to be concerned about that as well. So bring on the scientific descriptions. I for one would like to see this settled for the sake of all dogs. Dog welfare sure floats my boat.

[Prydenjoy]

I for one love trying to work out what makes my dogs tick

I agree with corvus, there are too many dogs suffering abuse in the name of dominance, and there are also too many dogs that suffer the confusion of a lack of leadership. Understanding how dogs work is the path to creating meaningful interactions to improve a dogs quality of life.

[poodlefan]

I thought the jury had been out on dominance theory ever since the "D word" studies on zoo wolves were shown to be unrepresentative of pack behaviour in the wild.

[kiesha09]

I think there needs to be more attempts to "describe" dog behaviour, as you put it, lilli. Because clearly there are a lot of dog caretakers/pack leaders/human dog parents or whatever they choose to call themselves that don't have a great understanding of dog behaviour. Understanding our animals helps us to improve their welfare. It is a fact that there are dogs that are mistreated in the name of dominance. Anyone who cares about dogs ought to be concerned about that. Equally, I think it highly likely that there are dogs that are suffering due to lack of structure in their lives, or the ignoring of social behaviour because of the pendulum swing away from dominance hierarchies. Anyone who cares about dogs ought to be concerned about that as well. So bring on the scientific descriptions. I for one would like to see this settled for the sake of all dogs. Dog welfare sure floats my boat.

I agree with Corvus too! Dog welfare also floats my boat

[corvus]

I don't think it's so much "the jury is out" as "it's not what everyone seems to think it is but nor is it nothing". That is the message I get from McConnell's writing on this topic. To me she's saying it's not a matter of whether it occurs or not, but rather understanding the complexity and subtlety of it. And the sheer flexibility of sociality in dogs, as well. To say that it does or does not exist is far too broad.

[Erny]

... there are too many dogs suffering abuse in the name of dominance

Only, I think, because people have allowed (or for whatever their reason might be, encouraged) the use of the word to be misunderstood.

... there are too many dogs suffering abuse in the name of dominance

Are there? How many dogs suffer in the name of "dominance"? What are the stats? In what way are those dogs known to suffer?

... and there are also too many dogs that suffer the confusion of a lack of leadership.

And because, instead of clarifying the interpretation of "dominance", "leadership" has been used as a substitute word (because, after all, there is order in a pack relationship) and now by a select one or two who have been quite well known to want to dispel "dominance" as having any part in the 'pack' relationship, don't like to use the word "leadership" any more either.

[Prydenjoy]

Are there? How many dogs suffer in the name of "dominance"? What are the stats? In what way are those dogs known to suffer?

I don't know the stats, but as long as there is one dog suffering that is one too many in my opinion.

I know about 15 years ago I was encouraged to roll my puppy on her back to establish my "dominance" over her. If she growled during play it was because she was trying to assert her dominance and must be punished. None of it was fair on her, I feel guilty now for buying into such stupidity, but I thought it was the right thing to do.

I only wish I knew then what I know now, and she would have led a much happier life.

[Erny]

I know about 15 years ago I was encouraged to roll my puppy on her back to establish my "dominance" over her. If she growled during play it was because she was trying to assert her dominance and must be punished. None of it was fair on her, I feel guilty now for buying into such stupidity, but I thought it was the right thing to do.

But that's not the fault of the concept of "dominance". Anything that you were told to apply that was "unfair" on her would be just poor training/poor reaction to dog behaviour. I presume, from the way you've written, that your dog "suffered" as a consequence of what you were told to do by the trainer/s you went to. I'm sorry if that occurred to you/her and hope you got her through it ok.

Edited April 7, 2010 by Erny

[Prydenjoy]

It's true it's not the term dominance itself that is "wrong", but the way people have used it over the years. I understand that dominance is only a description of a relationship, I guess it's all the baggage that has caused it to be referred to as "the concept formally known as..."

[Zug Zug]

I think that a better understanding of dog motivations and behaviours is very important.

I have seen people deal out VERY harsh corrections to their dogs, because the dog wasn't listening (or whatever) and the owner/handler was trying to re-establish dominance. There have been days when my jaw has just dropped - one in particular that I will never forget.

I've also seen some very ill-informed owners proudly encouraging 'alpha' behaviour in their animals - which was really encouraging aggression. They think they're creating a tough dog - but it's actually dangerous.

I do think status is important to dogs. I also think it is extremely important to some people. I think you've hit the nail on the head by defining the difference between 'dominance' and 'leadership'. A better understanding of this stuff by dog owners can only be a good thing.

[Nekhbet]

I think stop blaming the 'dominance theory' and simply dont let idiots train dogs. I've seen purely motivational positive jingle jangle what ever you call it in this 5 minutes - go terrible wrong too. But hey we dont talk about those ones .. then us 'dominanace theory' barbarians are usually called in to fix it.

Training is about understanding the dog and doing least harm in your methods whatever they are. Not pigeon holing people because of what jargon they choose to use this week.

[Staranais]

I too have seen and heard some rather silly things done in the name of dominance.

As an example, years and years ago, when I had recently adopted my previous dog, I had one trainer come to my house, and diagnose him as "dominant". She refused to look at my dog through half way through the consultation to establish her "dominance" over him. When he grunted, that was called "dominance". When he watched me, that was "dominance". When he sat by my feet during the consult, that was "dominance". I was also to squirt him in the face whenever he tried to initiate any form of interaction with me, since only "dominant" dogs initiate interaction (good way to spoil a nice relationship, huh? I don't think I'd like it if my family members started squirting me with water whenever I politely ambled up to say hi).

This was the least dominant dog in the world, by the way. He was extremely soft and in no way interested in increasing his rank over me. I strongly suspect that every problem dog this woman saw was automatically labelled "dominant", no matter the circumstances.

On the other hand, pretending that some, perhaps most, dogs don't understand or value status, or pretending that some dogs don't try to increase their social rank by subtle or aggressive means is, IMO, equally silly. Perhaps we need to reclaim the term dominance!

[Prydenjoy]

I've seen purely motivational positive jingle jangle what ever you call it in this 5 minutes - go terrible wrong too. But hey we dont talk about those ones .. then us 'dominanace theory' barbarians are usually called in to fix it.

It works both ways...

Staranais, your poor puppy! I hope it went on to lead a happy life. I always have a laugh when Mango is doing something some might coin "dominant", she is the least dominant pup in the world but still some of her behaviors would be refered to, by some, as "dominant", I'll message my sister and say something like "oh Mango growled at me while we were playing, should I alpha roll her to re assert my dominance?" and we'll both have a good laugh

[corvus]

Erny, maybe if you read McConnell's blog entries about it you would see that it's not the D word itself that is the problem, but the way it's been interpreted. And the way it's been interpreted is not the fault of the humans doing the interpreting, really, because in our society it has a different meaning to that intended when it was first applied to canine society.

As far as I know there are no stats describing or inferring how many dogs in the world are mistreated as a result of the misinterpretation of the dominance hierarchy concept (or a lack of structure, for that matter). It would be a little hard, considering we haven't figured out how applicable the dominance hierarchy concept is to dogs in the first place. You only have to look around on dog forums and email lists to see how commonly dominance is used (or misused), though. Jeanne provided a classic example. Shrugging that off as "not the concept but the interpretation of it" doesn't do anything to help dogs that are suffering due to the common interpretation of what "dominance" means in canine society. Like Jeanne, I think that one dog suffering needlessly is too many. Sometimes it's just not enough to stubbornly stick to the correct use of a term in a sea of people using it to mean something else. That's kind of trivialising the suffering of the dogs that are subjected to aversive practices designed to address the misinterpretation of the dominance hierarchy concept, don't you think?

[Staranais]

Staranais, your poor puppy! I hope it went on to lead a happy life.

Oh he was fine, he was a tough boy, he bounced back pretty quick. Yeah, he was always a pretty happy camper. Short story is that using a combo of methods (mostly prey drive rewards & corrections) I finally ended up with enough control that we were able to start competing in obedience, until the end of his life he still secretly wanted to eat most dogs & other animals that he came across, he just learned it was more fun to work with me instead. Have his ribbons hanging here above the computer as I type - still miss him!

My current girl would probably be a lot less forgiving of me randomly squirting her in the face (interesting, she's also a lot more likely to actually have designs on taking over the world, or at least our small part of it).