What Is "effective Socialisation"?

[Henrietta]

I massively failed in socialising my girl. Yes, we went to puppy school and yes we went to training, but at the time I didn't have the number of dog savvy friends with dogs like PF is describing, that I do now. The puppy school and training school we went to did not help in this area. I had a dog that was fearful, but I was constantly being told that she would grow out of it. And it felt like this happened 'suddenly' when in reality it didn't, I just missed/misread the signs.

The same thing happened to my mum.

Yes, I'm sure there are many like us. It would be just wonderful if we could prevent this kind of thing happening and give dogs and their owners the best chance for a harmonious life, where the world is neither dangerous nor daunting. It was certainly a lesson learnt the hard way for me. Sorry - gone slightly OT.

Edited May 4, 2011 by Henrietta

[Cosmolo]

I'm a bit in between Corvus and PF with my own pups. My dogs do learn how to ignore, interact or diffuse dogs that lack social skills or show aggression. But they learn it outside their critical period of development in a very controlled environment at distance to start with. Its important to remember that the average dog owner has different requirements to many of us and its important to teach them where possible how to socialise their dog in a way that meets those requirements. One of the areas i work in is highly urban with many apartments and tiny yards AND lots of off lead parks. I know that 90% of the people in these areas are going to use dog parks so i teach them how to do it safely and effectively rather than simply say "don't go".

A well run puppy pre school is NOT a waste of time. A rubbish one is. Its that simple.

[moosmum]

Wuffles,I read it that

Neutralization and socialisation aren't mutualy excluse.More a different approach to a well adjusted dog.

A dogs not discouraged so much it doesn't want to interact when free to do so.He can still be a dog,but learns interaction (and the positive mental stimulation it provides) depends on restraint,manners and attention to his handler.

More inanimate experience earlier,then progress to more controlled introduction to animate subjects,with more freedom to interact as restraint and controll are demonstrated in each new situation.

Someone correct me if thats wrong..Seems to well work for me.

eited for sp.

Edited May 4, 2011 by moosmum

[corvus]

I'm a bit in between Corvus and PF with my own pups. My dogs do learn how to ignore, interact or diffuse dogs that lack social skills or show aggression. But they learn it outside their critical period of development in a very controlled environment at distance to start with.

Just so it's clear, I don't expect them to learn to deal with inappropriate canine behaviour instantly. Both my boys have built their social skills over 2 years. It will probably be longer for Erik as he's a slow maturer. I assess each situation as it comes and decide if we're in or out based on what I think our dogs will do, the risk inherent in the behaviour of the other dog, and the degree of control we have. I have aborted a few times when the lack of control is cause for concern. There's no sense trying to work through something when you think your dog might get jumped and all your careful work will be ruined anyway. If I want to teach them non-aggressive coping strategies, they HAVE to be well under threshold and I have to be sure I can keep them there. Both my boys have not appeared to struggle with this in the slightest. I thought they might learn a warped notion of what was polite canine behaviour from exposure to impolite dogs early, but they didn't. They just learnt to be tolerant of it.

A well run puppy pre school is NOT a waste of time. A rubbish one is. Its that simple.

Agreed. For all that the one my mother went to with her timid pup probably made matters worse, I'm still big on puppy pre school. She went back to that one with her next puppy, determined that she wouldn't let them push her into anything. They had changed their policy significantly, having found out from somewhere that forcing pups can have a really awful outcome.

I took it that neutralisation aimed to leave a dog with a neutral value towards dogs and socialisation aimed for a positive value.

[JoeK]

There is one back drawing on the neutral dog I be honest. Is they not good approached by the jumpy dog and can be aggressive with other dog in their face. Is suiting me because I dont go to the dog park and if off lead dog run up I shew him off and if my dog bite him bad luck he should be on lead if it coming to that, but really depending on what you wanting for dog. If you want to train easy and have dog that dont go stupid for other dogs, neutral is best. If you wanting the dog park and play happy and freindly dog is best who learn how to react with other dogs.

My wifes Labrador is neutral dog, hes never played with a dog after litter mates and no one has ever pat him and hes not caring about anyone. People and other dogs he react like nobody there. Hes socilaised as far as aware but not interacting and in the crowded place hes like a guide dog on the blind people just walking along no interest. If dog gets in his face and is tail come up in defence, I call here and he come to me on the frontal sit in focus and just leave the dog no worries. Neutral dog is good for me, but not for everyone I respecting that.

Joe

[aussielover]

My labrador also doesn't care for interacting with people and will ignore everyone except family when walking down the street etc. This is despite extensive socialisation as a puppy. So this type of thing I think comes down to personality.

It is a bit of a shame as I had wanted her to be a therapy dog, but she doesn't enjoy being patted by strangers. Mind you, she doesn't hate it, she is more neutral and will just stand there rather than showing any excitement or enjoyment. She will wander off if not restrained by a lead or told to stay.

Puppy school is only as good as the instructor.

Dog parks are something that is an individual choice, but like Corvus, I live in suburbia and dog parks are the only real option for strenuous exercise for my dog. She is very good with other dogs and seems to know which dogs will want to play and which dogs she should ignore. However, my dog has been trained to ignore other dogs when on the lead, so even though she received lots of socialisation with other dogs, she shows no interest in them on the lead so I don't believe you need to "neutralise" your dog to achieve this.

In my personal experience, i find that many over the top, pull over their owner to get to another dog type dog are ones that rarely see other dogs and rarely have a chance to interact with them.

I'm not sure exactly what neutralisation involves but I can see how it could be interpreted as keeping your dog away from others, not allowing them to play etc. I personally believe its better to let them play with as many friendly dogs as possible and constantly be doing recalls when they are playing and heavily rewarding for coming back. Additionally I like to get some boring older dogs (to my puppy) who don't care for play and then i like to play an exciting game with my pup in their presence so she thinks being with me is more fun than being with other dogs.

Both socialisation and neutralisation have their benefits but both can also be stuffed up. I think whichever method you choose will be determined by your situation, your dogs intended purpose and your personal values ie what you want in a dog.

Edited May 4, 2011 by aussielover

[poodlefan]

There is one back drawing on the neutral dog I be honest. Is they not good approached by the jumpy dog and can be aggressive with other dog in their face. Is suiting me because I dont go to the dog park and if off lead dog run up I shew him off and if my dog bite him bad luck he should be on lead if it coming to that, but really depending on what you wanting for dog. If you want to train easy and have dog that dont go stupid for other dogs, neutral is best. If you wanting the dog park and play happy and freindly dog is best who learn how to react with other dogs.

My wifes Labrador is neutral dog, hes never played with a dog after litter mates and no one has ever pat him and hes not caring about anyone. People and other dogs he react like nobody there. Hes socilaised as far as aware but not interacting and in the crowded place hes like a guide dog on the blind people just walking along no interest. If dog gets in his face and is tail come up in defence, I call here and he come to me on the frontal sit in focus and just leave the dog no worries. Neutral dog is good for me, but not for everyone I respecting that.

Joe

If that's the case, I'd not be calling them neutral.

[Inevitablue]

I find all this interesting, as I am going through these decisions with my pup who is now 21 weeks.

Exposure to different environments has been a given, and my pup got no shortage of this. I want this pup for obedience etc but I am also aware that the ACD has also been used in the same sentence as BSL so I weighed up the option of teaching her life skills and perhaps maybe losing some of her focus on me. I enjoy having my dog in public, walking, parks, beach etc.

What I have done is made things site specific, she has her park that she gets to play with other dogs. I dont want a dog that doesn't know how to deal with a variety of situations. She has learnt that if she wants her whippet friend to stop chasing her she stop, drops and rolls, if she wants her stafford friend to stop overpowering her she lies still. I don't want to have a dog that for the next 12 years I have to worry about her getting into minor scuffles. Unfortunately I have to acknowledge that with my dogs if there is an incident then the accusation could be unfairly skewed towards my breed.

As part of the site specific training she goes to shows, show training and when out in public generally she is focused on me by playing the drive games and by allowing no play at all.

Im going ok with this method. JoeK, I like your posts, but how would you go about training/ managing a dog like your wife's but one with a temper? For the dog that doesn't like others in it's face. I just wouldn't like to have to manage a dog like that constantly, wouldn't be a pleasure for me.

[Inevitablue]

Adding to my post, how beneficial do others think it is for dogs to learn to freeze in unpleasant experiences. Whilst flight and flight is instinctual, freeze appears to be a learnt behavior.

Edited May 5, 2011 by Jakemon

[corvus]

Just a note of caution for site-specific training, one of my dogs is HIGHLY routine-driven. He is notorious for latching on to cues that are almost invisible to us and becoming convinced that he knows exactly how things go from here. It's really hard to dislodge him from these habits once they form, and inevitably they spread like cancer into other areas. For example, we had to take a break from agility training because he'd come to identify agility as being all about food, and then that bled into any activity that was ever paired with practising things we would practise in agility, and then that became linked with any place where we did any activity that had ever been paired with practising agility... I made a move on it just 3 weeks after it first started and it took me months to bring him back around to use my cues alone to figure out what we were doing. I'm kinda getting the hang of it now and learning how to make my cues the only dependable ones, but it is really hard work for me, who is a pretty routine person myself. Too much specificity for Erik leads to inflexibility.

[Inevitablue]

Over the years I have learnt pretty good self control of my body language as having the dogs so cued to different tasks sometimes led to confusion "nooooooo!!! I didnt release you.... Oooops my fault"

I suppose I'm lucky that the cattle dogs thrive on having set tasks

[JoeK]

There is one back drawing on the neutral dog I be honest. Is they not good approached by the jumpy dog and can be aggressive with other dog in their face. Is suiting me because I dont go to the dog park and if off lead dog run up I shew him off and if my dog bite him bad luck he should be on lead if it coming to that, but really depending on what you wanting for dog. If you want to train easy and have dog that dont go stupid for other dogs, neutral is best. If you wanting the dog park and play happy and freindly dog is best who learn how to react with other dogs.

My wifes Labrador is neutral dog, hes never played with a dog after litter mates and no one has ever pat him and hes not caring about anyone. People and other dogs he react like nobody there. Hes socilaised as far as aware but not interacting and in the crowded place hes like a guide dog on the blind people just walking along no interest. If dog gets in his face and is tail come up in defence, I call here and he come to me on the frontal sit in focus and just leave the dog no worries. Neutral dog is good for me, but not for everyone I respecting that.

Joe

If that's the case, I'd not be calling them neutral.

You can a train a dog to accepting jumpy dog in the face, but is difficult exercise but what for? Is up to us to stopping jumpy dog interfere with our dogs space. Neutral dog meaning he has no interest to interact with other dogs for self reward.

Joe

[JoeK]

Jakemon' date='5th May 2011 - 09:43 AM' post='5291073']

Im going ok with this method. JoeK, I like your posts, but how would you go about training/ managing a dog like your wife's but one with a temper? For the dog that doesn't like others in it's face. I just wouldn't like to have to manage a dog like that constantly, wouldn't be a pleasure for me.

Is very good question for considering. I have had many Shepherd Dogs who wont accepting strange dog in is face and jumping but a lot depending on the personality of the dog what he accepts. The dog I believing is like us and he derserve his right for other dogs not to interfere with him in his personal space, so as is handler, I try to stop interferring dog and shew him away, piss off is good wording for this I am finding? I am also not wanting to trigger reactivity or dominance in the dog from bad experience of the jumpy dog so is a battle for contending on the street walking with the unleashed dog running around is annoying. For the effort it takes to slowly desensitising dog to accept the jumpy in the face dog for me wasting valubale training time, so if the dogs personality is getting cranky with jumpy dog, I avoid those situation and try for it not happening. I dont liking to correct my dog either for minding his business and jumpy dog run at him is not his fault this is happening, so is fine line in managing the situation to projecting the right message to your dog.

This bloody unleashed dog running making me very angry and the people allowing their dog to do this outside the dog park is responsible for many training problems for the people who abide on the ruling and manage their dogs responsible. I have hung up a Shepherd Dog a few times with little aggressive dog challenge him and I hang the Shepherd to stop him killing the little nasty dog, but is very bad situation for the dog and the handler and unfair on the dog for this to happen. Even with beautiful obedience trained on the dog, is reaction from attack from other dog is time when great dog can loose is head for some reason and different sensings on the dog kicking in. Even Schutzund 3 trained dog will out in the fighting perfect but if he defending on another dog, he dont listen to command like is head in different zone I dont knowing the answer to this?

Joe

[Inevitablue]

Trying to take the best of both positive associations/ skills to communicate with other dogs and neutralization do you guys think it's feasible to take the young dog and allow them to associate with others in a controlled environment and then work towards total handler focus? With my last dogs I kinda learnt all this in a backwards manner (trial and error!) Correcting the dog for running off wouldn't be a negative association towards other dogs but a negative reinforcer to disobeying a command.....?

I know JoeK that you don't want to waste valuable training time on a task that won't be beneficial in the sport dog world but the need for dogs that fit into society, and hence such a good thread to have, can make it time well spent?

Completely agree that it is up to the owner to protect a dog that has a temper/ poor social skills from conflict (the chasing away the other dog) but the responsibility of that owner towards society in general has just increased dramatically. They are now the owners of literally a loaded weapon. We have seen that owner struggling with their dog in public and thought to ourselves 'it's only a matter of time before that dog is involved in something'

By desensitizing the dog to others jumping in it's face, wouldn't that just be proofing the dog further in it's work?

Edited May 5, 2011 by Jakemon

[moosmum]

Trying to take the best of both positive associations/ skills to communicate with other dogs and neutralization do you guys think it's feasible to take the young dog and allow them to associate with others in a controlled environment and then work towards total handler focus? With my last dogs I kinda learnt all this in a backwards manner (trial and error!) Correcting the dog for running off wouldn't be a negative association towards other dogs but a negative reinforcer to disobeying a command.....?

****************************************

Yes,I think its very possible with the right dog,if you do keep controll of the environment.I know of several where this has worked very well,but they are all working breeds raised in family/home environments.(in my personal experience only )And I guess it depends what you mean by" total "handler focus and what you want of the dog.

We do have a dog that is beautifully socialised,loves children and is good with all other animals.She will ignore anything around her on lead or off home territory but sits for pats and enjoy them if thats asked of her.

She does have a temper thats only displayed at a direct threat to us or herself.I think her socialisation has been a real benefit since her judgement has been faultless.She will still follow while we walk on,though she will have eye contact with the threat as she does,watching us with quick glances.She will only actualy retaliate when a threat is real and no longer just threatening,but will give as serious a warning as is justified,even knocking down..

I.M.O shes less a threat to any one than most dogs because she is so calm and business like and doesn't ever lose it enough that she hasn't one eye on what we want.No dog or person can mistake whats she is saying or mistake her holding off for fear.

In a serious dog fight with another very dominant daughter I was able to grab the younger and hold this girl off with the words "Back".She didn't once take her eye off the other dog or let down her guard,just stayed right where she was while I removed the younger .She backed with taps of my foot.

I think we have been lucky and she has been an ideal dog for our situation and methods tho', and she does need people who are aware of her very strong protective instincts.

We do protect her from threats and she allows us to do that,but she won't stand meekly if we can't or she is quicker.She seems to see it she is second only to us who work together,we are the leaders who decide how far it goes.

She has had a lot of time spent with her and high expectations,but she was just what we had been looking for temprament wise.

******************************

I know JoeK that you don't want to waste valuable training time on a task that won't be beneficial in the sport dog world but the need for dogs that fit into society, and hence such a good thread to have, can make it time well spent?

Completely agree that it is up to the owner to protect a dog that has a temper/ poor social skills from conflict (the chasing away the other dog) but the responsibility of that owner towards society in general has just increased dramatically. They are now the owners of literally a loaded weapon. We have seen that owner struggling with their dog in public and thought to ourselves 'it's only a matter of time before that dog is involved in something'

By desensitizing the dog to others jumping in it's face, wouldn't that just be proofing the dog further in it's work?

Edited May 5, 2011 by moosmum

[huski]

The way neutralisation has been explained to me is that the dog has a neutral to low positive value for things outside the handler and it's immediate family. It doesn't mean the dog is never socialised with other dogs or never sees another dog or is never around other dogs (quite the opposite in fact) but that it's taught other dogs are not high value or highly rewarding.

I can't imagine a time where I'll get a puppy and want to teach it that other dogs are super rewarding and super exciting. Daisy wasn't a dog I intentionally tried to neutralise as a puppy but she naturally developed a low value for other dogs, not a negative one but she's just not overly interested in other dogs (she was always more interested in scenting than playing with other dogs). I like it that way.

[JoeK]

Trying to take the best of both positive associations/ skills to communicate with other dogs and neutralization do you guys think it's feasible to take the young dog and allow them to associate with others in a controlled environment and then work towards total handler focus? With my last dogs I kinda learnt all this in a backwards manner (trial and error!) Correcting the dog for running off wouldn't be a negative association towards other dogs but a negative reinforcer to disobeying a command.....?

I know JoeK that you don't want to waste valuable training time on a task that won't be beneficial in the sport dog world but the need for dogs that fit into society, and hence such a good thread to have, can make it time well spent?

Completely agree that it is up to the owner to protect a dog that has a temper/ poor social skills from conflict (the chasing away the other dog) but the responsibility of that owner towards society in general has just increased dramatically. They are now the owners of literally a loaded weapon. We have seen that owner struggling with their dog in public and thought to ourselves 'it's only a matter of time before that dog is involved in something'

By desensitizing the dog to others jumping in it's face, wouldn't that just be proofing the dog further in it's work?

Problem is in my seeing, there are too many personality in other dogs to the densitising of all because different dogs have different personality and behavior when greeting dogs. Your dog has to be desenitised to quite dog, happy dog, jumpy dog, timid dog, aggressive dog and dominant dog is a lot of work to achieving this so the dog is fine for people to ignoring the rules of off leash dogs to run around hwere is not allowed. Unless we are liking the dog park, for me to train my dog to handle untrained off leash dogs is not my problem to fix. Sometimes if the off leash dogs getting a bite from the leash dogs it maybe making the handler realising his dog should be leashed and not running around being nusance to others?

The problem on the dog park, is even if your dog is desensitise to dogs and is good, you cant trusting what other dogs personality is like is always place for mishappening unless the dogs at the park are known in behavior and trusting that people not taking reactive or dominant dogs to the park for run?

In the correction training, you must correcting for disobey the command the dog is knowing and the dog must know the correction comes from the handler for disobeying command. The reasoning why the negative association happens in correction training is they dont do the training properly so if you saying nothing and give the dog a yanking because he run off to see other dog, he can feeling negative from seeing a dog this is true. The negative association he must learn is the correction come from disobey is the biggest mistake I seeing in the corrrection training done wrong. I always teaching the stop command on my dogs so when he know the commanding stop and he start to run and ignor the stop command I give him a correction for disobey is how is wroking.

Joe

[RallyValley]

I have had a dog that is so interested in other dogs that he wouldn't even make eye contact for 4 or 5 mins (broken leg and inadequate handler knowlegde meant he never met many dogs between 9 weeks and 5 months). He is now coming much better but it's not a battle I want to fight again, nor has it been easy.

On the flip side I have had a dog that completely ignored other dogs and focused only on me. I was so important to him to the point he resource guarded me (among other things) and would lash out at dogs nearby. I know this is NOT an example of neturalization but I would never raise a dog again that wasn't social with other dogs as living with a dog that is DA is hell.

Toby who used to find other dogs so appealing he couldn't even sit or take food this morning recalled away from playing with 2 SWF's and was able to engage with me and play tug and a little training right away. He also goes to remedial socialization class for older dogs run by a behaviourist and is doing well with the dogs there, some of which are quite extreme in behaviour. I find the more Toby see's and meets other dogs the more he becomes handler focused.

[JoeK]

The way neutralisation has been explained to me is that the dog has a neutral to low positive value for things outside the handler and it's immediate family. It doesn't mean the dog is never socialised with other dogs or never sees another dog or is never around other dogs (quite the opposite in fact) but that it's taught other dogs are not high value or highly rewarding.

I can't imagine a time where I'll get a puppy and want to teach it that other dogs are super rewarding and super exciting. Daisy wasn't a dog I intentionally tried to neutralise as a puppy but she naturally developed a low value for other dogs, not a negative one but she's just not overly interested in other dogs (she was always more interested in scenting than playing with other dogs). I like it that way.

Any interaction with other dog can causing either positive or negative value neutral value is zero. In the socialise for neutral you expose to the sight of other dogs but no interation is how its done.

Joe

[JoeK]

I have had a dog that is so interested in other dogs that he wouldn't even make eye contact for 4 or 5 mins (broken leg and inadequate handler knowlegde meant he never met many dogs between 9 weeks and 5 months). He is now coming much better but it's not a battle I want to fight again, nor has it been easy.

On the flip side I have had a dog that completely ignored other dogs and focused only on me. I was so important to him to the point he resource guarded me (among other things) and would lash out at dogs nearby. I know this is NOT an example of neturalization but I would never raise a dog again that wasn't social with other dogs as living with a dog that is DA is hell.

Toby who used to find other dogs so appealing he couldn't even sit or take food this morning recalled away from playing with 2 SWF's and was able to engage with me and play tug and a little training right away. He also goes to remedial socialization class for older dogs run by a behaviourist and is doing well with the dogs there, some of which are quite extreme in behaviour. I find the more Toby see's and meets other dogs the more he becomes handler focused.

People often forgetting that it depends on the dogs personality how he reacts with other dogs more than the socialisation. Many reactive dogs were caused by socialisation dislike of domimant dogs in their face can causing aggression to happen. If the same dog never experience dominant dogs in the face, he never become aggressive. Same for timid dog scared buy boisteros dog can cause timid dog to be aggressive. If unsocialised dog is aggressive on a other dogs is because of his genetics, not becuase he is not socialised. Is more chance of creating dog aggression from bad memory of socialisation than creating aggression from not socialising at all in my opinion.

Joe