The Doll Used In The Dog Temperament Test ?

[juice]

I have fostered many pig dogs, and they are my favorite, very chilled and easy going dogs.

2 of my dogs would fail an RSPCA temp test i have no doubt, my dally would kill a bunny or cat given the chance, which is an immediate fail.

I didn't watch it last night i get too wound up.

On a side note, i get fed up with all the publicity they get about helping native animals each week, if you ring them their bog standard reponse is "call Wires, we don't do native's". ( unless there is a camara rolling clearly)

I have a client who is a carer for wires, and she doesn't have anything good to say about them at all.

[huck house]

The whole show pissed me off to tell you the truth, making out as though the pig dogs could be dangerous to people. A pig dog would be dead if it even thought about growling at its hunter. They are bred to do a specific job, and since when does animal aggression relate to human aggression, within our rescue we see a number of Dane x's either bred for hunting or used as hunting....not one we've had an issue with.

Animal aggression can become human aggression if the dogs consider the human as prey.

It can happen. It has happened. Who can forget this one:

Death of Tyra Kuehne

When not well socialised and used for this kind of hunting, dogs may confuse children with prey. I know that many pig hunting dogs are family dogs but the assumption that all such dogs are safe with children could be a dangerous one.

The little girl went into the backyard of the dogs with a dead chicken to give them . In this case are many more pertinent factors relating to a pack of dogs than the purpose for what they were bred .?Toddlers confuse many breeds of dogs

Edited April 5, 2013 by huck house

[Salukifan]

I haven't made any comments about DA dogs. I'm simply stating that just because a dog is a pig dog doesn't mean it will maul a child.

I refuted your suggestion that just because a dog is a pig dog it wouldn't be HA. That's not the same as saying all pig dogs are child killers.

As has been suggested, a whole range of factors contribute to what makes a fatal dog attack. But the purpose for which a dog is used is one of them. I'll quote my oft quoted spiel from Karen Delise on this:

After reviewing over 431 cases of Fatal dog attacks it is apparent there is no single factor that translates in a lethal encounter between a person and a dog(s). A Fatal dog attack is always the culmination of past and present events that include: inherited and learned behaviors, genetics, breeding, socialization, function of the dog, physical condition and size of the dog, reproductive status of dog, popularity of breed, individual temperament, environmental stresses, owner responsibility, victim behavior, victim size and physical condition, timing and misfortune.

While many circumstances may contribute to a Fataldog attack, the following three factors appear to play a critical role in the display of canine aggression towards humans;

Function of the dog - (Includes: dogs acquired for fighting, guarding/protection or image enhancement)

Owner responsibility - (Includes: dogs allowed to roam loose, chained dogs, dogs and/or children left unsupervised, dogs permitted or encouraged to behave aggressively, animal neglect and/or abuse)

Reproductive status of dog - (Includes: unaltered males dogs, bitches with puppies, children coming between male dog and female dog in estrus.

Edited April 5, 2013 by Haredown Whippets

[Christina]

The question wasn't really about pig dogs in particular.

It was about dogs being able to relate to a doll supposing to be a child & not having a person smell.

I also think my little non aggressive toy poodles would be scared of that big doll coming towards them.

[huck house]

The doll was used more as a measure of sociability rather than an indicator of aggression in a recent temperament test my dog did .

[tdierikx]

Anyone seen the movie "Child's Play"? Those dolls remind me of Chucky... creepy!

My dogs would probably want to play with the bloody thing like any other toy... if it doesn't smell human, then what are they really to make of it?

T.

[Rosetta]

I just tried that test with my little placid poodle. Used by daughter's large doll similar to the one in the show. He ran away :D

This is the softest, gentlest little dog you would ever meet - no worries about kids patting him whilst out and about. So no I don't believe that test is fair to the dog at all - especially in that environment.

But, in all fairness, you haven't run the test under test conditions. You know the dog and it knows you. The dog has seen the doll before?

you can't assess the validity of a test on one test case.

No - he had never seen the doll. No that does not mean the test is not valid in some cases but the way it was presented in the program was that the dog was PTS on the basis of the reaction to the doll. I think my point is if my little placid dog can potentially fail "the test" in familiar surrounds with familiar people what hope for dogs in a shelter environment?

Edited April 5, 2013 by Rosetta

[mita]

There's been research testing the use of a doll to simulate a child, in behavioral assessment of dogs.

In the studies, dogs with varying known histories were tested with a doll, so that responses to the test could be checked to see if and how they fitted with the dogs' already known patterns of behaviour. And hence would the test pick up something that was a fixed pattern.

Their answer to,' Was the doll test a useful tool in evaluating a dog's propensity?'. can be read: here (Ontario Veterinary Behaviour):

http://www.animalbehaviour.ca/ab2/do.php?target=training

AND

There's far more detailed information on why and how the 'doll' test is carried out, in this page of a book 'Shelter Medicine for Veterinarians & Staff;'. Far more than a brief TV segment. Can be read here:

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=os-tRPMnPF4C&pg=PA562&lpg=PA562&dq=Purpose+of+the+doll+test+to+simulate+a+child+with+dogs&source=bl&ots=qJxq7qqLgw&sig=vryd3NCQ_mBOlCZ_pFBBcZc4VXs&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tTdeUb6iD8norAf2vIDoDA&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Purpose%20of%20the%20doll%20test%20to%20simulate%20a%20child%20with%20dogs&f=false

Edited April 5, 2013 by mita

[Cosmolo]

Having done assessments utilising a doll many times i can give the following anecdotal evidence to support the use of the test-

- The test should be used in combination with MANY other tests. Responses to all tests should be considered before passing or failing a dog. I have only ever had dogs that have had worrying reactions to that particular test ALSO display worrying reactions to other tests and it is the culimnation of those responses that lead to a final decision.

- The test can be used as an intensity indicator. When i have dogs that run at the doll, knock it to the ground and proceed to play with it they generally show similiar responses to some of the other sociability tests that indicate they will not be suitable for placement with children. The dog doesn't fail or get put to sleep- they just get placed in a home understanding of the above.

- The test can be used to ascertain the dogs response to novelty. If dogs are going to be homed with young children i like them to have a confident reaction to new and novel things. So for all of the dogs who actively avoid the doll AND show other behaviours not conducive to being in a home with young childrem- this test is of benefit. It helps to place them appropriately.

- For those worried about how their own dogs would fare. Don't make assumptions about what your dog would or would not do- the vast majority of dogs do far better than any owner would expect when subject to a properly conducted test.

- Some dogs at distance believe the doll is a child IMO and are friendly/ excited- you can clearly see the recognition which then fades as they get closer and realise yes it's a doll. This is a positive thing.

The issue here is not the use of a doll. The issues is those people assessing who use a single, non aggressive response to one test as a reason to kill a dog. Lets not confuse the two.

Edited April 5, 2013 by Cosmolo

[mixeduppup]

A few years ago I was doing a childcare course (so I obviously liked children) However, I did not like this doll very much. So this proves that you can like children but not like dolls :D

I do understand what Cosmolo was saying though. Intensity of attack/response, not necessarily what it's attacking/responding to.

Edited April 5, 2013 by mixeduppup

[mantis]

It's the RSPCA people, you expect common sense from these morons?

[BlackJaq]

The whole show pissed me off to tell you the truth, making out as though the pig dogs could be dangerous to people. A pig dog would be dead if it even thought about growling at its hunter. They are bred to do a specific job, and since when does animal aggression relate to human aggression, within our rescue we see a number of Dane x's either bred for hunting or used as hunting....not one we've had an issue with.

Animal aggression can become human aggression if the dogs consider the human as prey.

It can happen. It has happened. Who can forget this one:

Death of Tyra Kuehne

When not well socialised and used for this kind of hunting, dogs may confuse children with prey. I know that many pig hunting dogs are family dogs but the assumption that all such dogs are safe with children could be a dangerous one.

The article seems to describe HA dogs to me, they have bailed up and attacked other humans (adults not only children) so the prey drive argument is kind of invalid. Somebody also said the girl had a dead chicken to feed to them? I think there were more circumstances at play there.... And in my opinion, human aggression, dog aggression and prey drive are three different pairs of shoes. Prey drive does not equal aggression.

[mita]

I didn't see the program so don't know if it was said one or more of the dogs from the 'pigging' background were PTS because they failed the test with the doll.

If so, according to research studies, if a dog actually shows overt aggressive behaviour to the doll.... like biting ... then statistically it tends to be a dog that already has a pattern of aggressive behaviour towards humans.

Also, given that dogs used for pigging are reinforced for aggressive attacks on another animal, the authors of Shelter Medicine made the point that dogs from such backgrounds (like dog fighting, too), should also be tested with other dogs.

And they give specific details for doing so. They make the point that it's not invariable that all such dogs will fail the test with other dogs. A number, they point out, are totally reluctant to be aggressive with other dogs, even given their background.

The authors also say, from their experience, a significant number of these dogs do not behave aggressively to humans.

I would imagine that the RSPCA also tested these dogs with other dogs.

The fact that the RSPCA gave these 'pigging' dogs the Doll Test, shows they know the research.

It is not a foregone conclusion that dogs used in such a way will be aggressive towards humans. So they've been given the benefit of the doubt of 'facing' a test. And there's clear profiles, from research studies, on which responding behaviours in the Doll Test, signify already existing patterns of aggressive behaviour towards humans.

Which appears to be what the RSPCA has then acted on.

Edited April 5, 2013 by mita

[Salukifan]

Prey drive does not equal aggression.

It equals aggression when dogs are exposed to animals they consider prey.

[BlackJaq]

No. My dog has a very high prey drive but will deliver a bird or rabbit to hand without scrunching it. She grabs it without the intent to "damage" it. Not sure where aggression fits in here?

ETA: She will deliver a live bird alive for me to kill if possible. She has, in fact, retrieved my rooster several times without harming him (my fault for not paying enough attention, not on purpose)

Edited April 5, 2013 by BlackJaq

[tarope]

We all know what morons the R$PCA are and the stupid doll test they have used to murder many dogs.

I wonder if this dog would be re homed. :D

Edited April 5, 2013 by tarope

[Rosetta]

I didn't see the program so don't know if it was said one or more of the dogs from the 'pigging' background were PTS because they failed the test with the doll.

If so, according to research studies, if a dog actually shows overt aggressive behaviour to the doll.... like biting ... then statistically it tends to be a dog that already has a pattern of aggressive behaviour towards humans.

Also, given that dogs used for pigging are reinforced for aggressive attacks on another animal, the authors of Shelter Medicine made the point that dogs from such backgrounds (like dog fighting, too), should also be tested with other dogs.

And they give specific details for doing so. They make the point that it's not invariable that all such dogs will fail the test with other dogs. A number, they point out, are totally reluctant to be aggressive with other dogs, even given their background.

The authors also say, from their experience, a significant number of these dogs do not behave aggressively to humans.

I would imagine that the RSPCA also tested these dogs with other dogs.

The fact that the RSPCA gave these 'pigging' dogs the Doll Test, shows they know the research.

It is not a foregone conclusion that dogs used in such a way will be aggressive towards humans. So they've been given the benefit of the doubt of 'facing' a test. And there's clear profiles, from research studies, on which responding behaviours in the Doll Test, signify already existing patterns of aggressive behaviour towards humans.

Which appears to be what the RSPCA has then acted on.

Mita the way the program represented the situation was that the dog in question - a Staffy/BC cross - was shown the doll and exhibited avoidance not aggression. The RSPCA rep then stated that the dog could be a danger to children and "could not be rehomed" - which is RSPCA speak for PTS I guess. All of the dogs if I recall correctly were OK with the food being taken away test. Therefore it would be construed by most people watching that the failure of the dog to react favourably towards the doll decided his fate. They did not say that the dog failed any other test.

[*kirty*]

Blackjaq, I was of the understanding that retrieving and herding are 'modified' prey drive. Her genetics tell her to retrieve it but not hurt it. I'm guessing you've also done some training with her too because unguided instincts often don't work so well. :) A dog whose instincts tell it to retrieve a bird or rabbit is unlikely to view a child as prey, but a dog used to hunting large things like pigs or deer may very well view a human as a potential prey item.

Edited cos autocorrect changed blackjaq to Blackhawks lol!

Edited April 5, 2013 by *kirty*

[mita]

[Mita the way the program represented the situation was that the dog in question - a Staffy/BC cross - was shown the doll and exhibited avoidance not aggression. The RSPCA rep then stated that the dog could be a danger to children and "could not be rehomed" - which is RSPCA speak for PTS I guess. All of the dogs if I recall correctly were OK with the food being taken away test. Therefore it would be construed by most people watching that the failure of the dog to react favourably towards the doll decided his fate. They did not say that the dog failed any other test.

Is being reasonably comfortable around children .... as tested .... a criterion set for dogs rehomed by the RSPCA? Given that once out in the general environment dogs will at least at some time encounter children? And that small children & younger primary age children are the main target for dog bites.

If so, makes sense to me.

Shelter Medicine for Veterinarians & Staff says that avoidance behaviour by a dog in the Doll Test, should be teased out. A tester should shorten the leash preventing the dog from moving away from the 'approaching' doll.

It seems that a child- avoiding dog, being 'cornered' by what they're trying to avoid can become aggressive. They point out this fits one major scenario for dogs' biting children. When they are tied up & a child 'gets in their face'.

It seems that the RSPCA is knowledgeable about the research & practice literature.

Edited April 5, 2013 by mita

[BlackJaq]

Kirty, Weimaraners were originally bred to hunt large game like deer or pigs (by physically grabbing and holding, and killing if possible, the "ideal" way to kill large or resisting prey is by throttling it btw)and she has taken down a wallaby and killed it, too. The reason she killed it was because it resisted, not because she was aggressive. If the wallaby had surrendered like the rooster did, she would have attempted to retrieve it (again, this was an accident, I did not want her to kill a Wallaby obviously).

So, yes, she will kill an animal, if she deems it necessary, but not out of aggression but because it resists or is likely to escape if she doesn't. This makes her an efficient hunting dog but not an aggressive one.

What I am trying to explain is that prey drive does not really have anything to do with aggression, they are two separate things. An animal (or child) may be killed as a result of the prey drive (either by accidentally breaking the neck etc or because the dog deems it necessary to make the kill to secure the prey) but if a dog mauls an animal (or child) beyond what is necessary to secure the prey then that is what I would call aggression. A dog with a strong prey drive may react strongly to a ball being thrown, or a rabbit running past, but I do not find this to be aggression-related at all.

I think K9 pro had an explanation of the different drives on their website, they can probably explain better than I...

ETA: A lot of people who either lack the skill or knowledge to train a dog to do a specific job (for example Schutzhund, Working Gun Dog, Pig Hunting Dog etc) will choose an aggressive dog, in an attempt to create a behaviour that is usually created by training without the proper know-how. This is not a true representation of the behaviour, it generally creates a fear biting, potentially dangerous dog, instead of a competent and confident working companion. The difference is huge, believe me. And a lot of average pig dog owners do not necessarily have the know-how, if you get what I mean...

Edited April 5, 2013 by BlackJaq