Why Do Sighthounds Tend To Be Timid/sensitive?

[Aidan3]

ps for example, the hypothesis here "Why do sighthounds tend to be timid/sensitive" has a huge bias, as it assumes that sighthounds are timid/sensitive.

But how do you know that is her hypothesis? It is just a topic name she started on DOL.

I don't think we're imagining it.

Corvus:

It's a huge generalisation, but it's a significant one according to my survey results. I'd rather not debate whether they are timid or not. Obviously there are timid and bold individuals as there are in any breed group. But my data indicates sighthounds in general are more timid than many other breed groups, and that's what I'm left with at the end of the day.

That's an interpretation of data (a premature one). An hypothesis is a specific, operationalised, testable prediction. I'm not defending her interpretation of the data, but fair is fair and I think megan's point is reasonable.

[WreckitWhippet]

I'd also suggest that 99.9999999999% of DOL members (myself included) aren't qualified enough to judge whether her science is flawed or not, even if we had all the details regarding her research - and I have a statistics degree *hangs head in shame*.

Corvus's original assertion has been shown, on the basis of evidence and experience, to be flawed - qualifications or not.

BINGO

[Alyosha]

I'm also not convinced the behaviour of adopted greyhounds will say anything significant about the other sighthound breeds.

But what would you know?? :p

[Rebanne]

I'm also not convinced the behaviour of adopted greyhounds will say anything significant about the other sighthound breeds.

But what would you know?? :p

[Longclaw]

Aidan, thanks for your explanations. I am slightly mollified to think that this is not a finding in and of itself, but merely a preliminary indication which the OP thinks worthy of further investigation.

There are a few separate issues which stand out to me... others have already covered them but, by golly, I want to have my say too

1. The majority of the dogs making up the sighthound group are greyhounds.

This is a statement made by the OP. But greyhounds are not representative of sighthounds as a whole, and therefore a sample group consisting predominantly of greyhounds cannot be said to be indicative of sighthounds as a whole.

Is this something that will somehow be accounted for in the overall analysis? I surely hope so.

2. The overwhelming majority of greyhounds in Australia are race bred.

We're talking tens of thousands of race bred, to one or two hundred show bred. Therefore, it is likely that the vast majority (if not all) of those greyhounds in the survey are race bred.

The way the majority of race bred greys are raised is quite different to the upbringing of pet dogs. Nature vs nurture? Another potential flaw in the data, but one the OP is not willing to discuss at all. Indeed, the OP dismisses it by saying that the assumption that the majority of the dogs in the sighthound category are race bred (or ex-racing) greys is unsupported. For me, that reads: OP will give it no further consideration.

There is no explanation that I could see as to why the background of the dogs surveyed is considered to be of no importance.

3. The terminonlogy, to 'lay' people such as me, is provocative and offensive.

Again, thanks Aidan for explaining that this terminology is tried and tested, and that the OP would have had to use this terminology as a starting point in order to draw comparisons with previous studies.

And, importantly, that it does not have the same meaning that 'timid' and 'shy' commonly do in the dog world. They are not unemotive terms. They have very negative connotations. I read 'timid' and 'shy' and I think 'Abnormal temperament. Increased risk of fear biting.' Applying these meanings to sighthounds is woefully inaccurate. Greyhounds, in particular, have a well-earned reputation for their stoicism.

'Sensitive' is fine, but not if it is being used interchangeably with timid!

I found it extremely unhelpful that the OP refused to offer any particularly useful clarification of the terminology used, or the basis for that assertion. How can you expect people to offer opinions on an issue, then refuse to clarify your question when it becomes obvious that there is confusion? How can you expect to get opinions as to why sighthounds 'are' more timid, when the sighthound owners/breeders reject that statement outright because of a misunderstanding of the definition of the words you are using?

I can totally understand if the OP does not have the time or inclination to walk us through the survey answers that contributed to this preliminary indication, but I think it is unfair to dump such a loaded and potentially damaging statement (that survey results show that sighthounds are more timid than most other groups - end of story) on a public forum without any kind of explanation, clarification or justification.

Edited October 12, 2011 by Longclaw

[Aidan3]

Thanks Longclaw, I'm glad you found it useful I think your insight is spot-on, it would not be a representative sample. Of course I say that with the caveat that I haven't seen the survey or the data, I can only speculate.

[Keshwar]

:wave: :wave: :wave:

A wave each for the 2 guest and 5 anonymous users watching this.

I wonder if one of those anonymous users is Corvus?

Edited October 12, 2011 by Keshwar

[Weasels]

1. The majority of the dogs making up the sighthound group are greyhounds.

Just one quick point on this statement: it could mean 51% are greys, it could mean 99% are greys either end of those percentages will have a big effect on how much the unique upbringing will affect the analysis (which only Corvus knows).

Edited October 12, 2011 by Weasels

[Weasels]

:wave: :wave: :wave:

A wave each for the 2 guest and 5 anonymous users watching this.

I wonder if one of those anonymous users is Corvus?

:D

[Longclaw]

1. The majority of the dogs making up the sighthound group are greyhounds.

Just one quick point on this statement: it could mean 51% are greys, it could mean 99% are greys either end of those percentages will have a big effect on how much the unique upbringing will affect the analysis (which only Corvus knows).

Sure, you are right, but the actual word used by the OP was 'most'. Most of the sighthounds were greyhounds. To me, this says it would be a figure well over 50%, but you are right, only Corvus knows what she actually meant by that.

Hello Keshwar - another anonymous here!

[Rebanne]

2. The overwhelming majority of greyhounds in Australia are race bred.

We're talking tens of thousands of race bred, to one or two hundred show bred. Therefore, it is likely that the vast majority (if not all) of those greyhounds in the survey are race bred.

excellent post

I just counted off 62 showbred greys in Australia, being generous with numbers in a couple of cases where exact numbers aren't know. So at the very most there would only be 100 in the country, more likely 80. And I know most of those wouldn't have taken the survey, so adopted race bred greyhounds win hands down

[Kirislin]

While looking for something else I came across the thread Corvus started about her survey so thought I'd tie it in here.

http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/215190-scientific-survey-on-dog-personality/

[corvus]

Wait, you can check a thread without your name coming up on the bottom??

[Kirislin]

Wait, you can check a thread without your name coming up on the bottom??

I'm not sure what you mean.

[Are You Serious Jo]

It's more fun if you don't tell her