Desexing And Trainability

[mjk05]

Found on another site:

Effects of breed, sex, and neuter status on trainability in dogs

Authors: Serpell, James A.; Hsu, Yuying

Source: Anthrozoos: A Multidisciplinary Journal of The Interactions of People & Animals, Volume 18, Number 3, 2005 , pp. 196-207(12)

Publisher: Berg Publishers

Abstract:

In a previous study of canine temperament (Hsu and Serpell 2003), a distinct “trainability” factor was identified, characterized by a dog's willingness to attend to its owner and obey simple commands, combined with a high “fetch” motivation, and low levels of distractibility and/or resistance to correction. This paper explores the distribution of this trait in a large sample of dogs in relation to breed, sex and neuter status. The owners of 1,563 dogs belonging to 11 common breeds were invited to assess them for “trainability” using a standardized questionnaire (C-BARQ©). Highly significant breed differences in trainability were detected. In two breeds with distinct field and show bred lines, show bred dogs obtained significantly lower trainability scores. Although no overall sex differences in trainability were detected, male Dachshunds and West Highland White Terriers were found to be significantly more trainable than females. Neutering was not associated with any differences in trainability in female dogs in any breed, but was associated with positive effects on trainability in male Shetland sheepdogs. The findings suggest that there is scope for improving trainability in most breeds of dog, and emphasize the dangers of generalizing among breeds with respect to sex differences in trainability or the benefits of neutering. The biological basis of the trainability trait is also discussed in light of recent research on the evolution of canine social cognition.

Full text here

[jesomil]

Interesting read but there seems to be alot of variables not being taken into account.

Eg. One of the questions in trainability is, does you dog sit immediately when commanded.

I would have thought that depended more on the trainer than the dog. Maybe Lab owners are more likely to spend time training than Yorkie owners for example. Doesnt mean the Yorkies are less trainable but it might mean the kind of owner attracted to a Yorkie may not spend as much time training.

Also with the working lines. Do the working lines come out as more trainable because the type of people who buy working lines are more likely to train them?

And with the desexing, it says there is a difference in some males with neutering but with others there isnt. I wonder if they took into account the age of neutering and maturity etc.

I dont know much about how these research papers work but I would think it would have to be more structured without all the training and environmental factors (which would be really hard to do) to come out with real answers having any real meaning.

[Staranais]

Eg. One of the questions in trainability is, does you dog sit immediately when commanded.

I would have thought that depended more on the trainer than the dog. Maybe Lab owners are more likely to spend time training than Yorkie owners for example. Doesnt mean the Yorkies are less trainable but it might mean the kind of owner attracted to a Yorkie may not spend as much time training.

Also with the working lines. Do the working lines come out as more trainable because the type of people who buy working lines are more likely to train them?

I wondered that too, it is a good point.

An interesting article. But to me it seems like it was really a survey of how well trained the dogs were, as much as a survey of how trainable they were.

[corvus]

The problem is it's hard (read impossible) to control for all the variables when the dogs are being raised and trained by other people. The C-BARQ questionnaire has been inter-rater tested, which means they got two different people to rate the same dog and then tested how similar the two ratings were. They found that on most aspects the agreement was quite high. Trainability comes up in a lot of different personality and performance studies, and as much as I feel uneasy about it I have to admit that it appears to be a valid measurement. Some dogs are easier to train than others no matter what method you use or how good or bad a trainer you are. That's what they are rating. It kinda smooths out with a lot of participants, because what they are rating is from the perspective of an average pet owner.

There was a similar study done testing the personality factors that make good performance dogs. They used the Swedish Association of Working Dogs test, which is different to the C-BARQ approach because it measures actual behaviour, not human perceptions. Their findings were very similar across many personality aspects by my interpretation (and that of later studies). They found that in general, male dogs were better performers than female dogs (possibly because they are in general bolder), but that good performance dogs are spread evenly between the sexes. It sounds contradictory, but what it means is that an average male dog will be a better performer than an average female dog (in some breeds, mind you, not all), but a good performance dog has qualities that override these effects.

[lanabanana]

Interesting read but there seems to be alot of variables not being taken into account.

Eg. One of the questions in trainability is, does you dog sit immediately when commanded.

I would have thought that depended more on the trainer than the dog. Maybe Lab owners are more likely to spend time training than Yorkie owners for example. Doesnt mean the Yorkies are less trainable but it might mean the kind of owner attracted to a Yorkie may not spend as much time training.

Also with the working lines. Do the working lines come out as more trainable because the type of people who buy working lines are more likely to train them?

And with the desexing, it says there is a difference in some males with neutering but with others there isnt. I wonder if they took into account the age of neutering and maturity etc.

I dont know much about how these research papers work but I would think it would have to be more structured without all the training and environmental factors (which would be really hard to do) to come out with real answers having any real meaning.

Excellent points in there regarding the lab and yorkie owners. I will use myself as an example, we have a large dog (36kgs) and a small dog (5kgs). A lot more effort is put into the large dog because if he becomes uncontrollable or misbehaves he can cause damage (not necessarily to people) or be very scary due to size. The little dog not so much effort. she is smart though and learns quickly but the effort is lesser because she is easy to control regardless of whether she is behaving well or not. If you get what I mean. (this is goign to change though and both dogs will be having the same effort for training).

Sorry, I cant offer anything further to this discussion - just thought that was a really good point and very very true.

[corvus]

It is true, but equally, the C-BARQ questionnaire doesn't just address whether your dog is reliable with obedience commands, but also whether your dog learns new things quickly and that kind of thing. You can fill out the questionnaire online if you're interested. I did one time. It was a good exercise. Made me think about some aspects of behaviour that I don't normally think about. It spits out a little report where you get red flags for potential problem behaviour. It's pretty general, but it's an excellent place to start for any enquiry into dog behaviour. Especially because it has been validated and covers the basics of pretty much every aspect of dog behaviour.