The Doll Used In The Dog Temperament Test ?

[Rosetta]

[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'.

Fear & aggression can go hand in hand.

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

I was merely informing you of what occurred in the show - you said you had not seen it.

Nothing will convince me that this test should be the determining factor of whether a dog lives or dies - as it was presented on this show. My dog by the way originally came from the RSPCA but he was spooked by me showing him a doll in his home environment, so whether he originally "failed" or not at the shelter I don't know.

Edited April 5, 2013 by Rosetta

[mita]

[

I was merely informing you of what occurred in the show - you said you had not seen it.

Nothing will convince me that this test should be the determining factor of whether a dog lives or dies - as it was presented on this show. My dog by the way originally came from the RSPCA but he was spooked by me showing him a doll in his home environment.

And I responded to what you said you heard on the program .... that it was avoidance behaviour mentioned.

And I asked a question.... was not having a go at you. I have no need to discomfort other people by doing that.

A fair question... to which I don't know the answer. is there a criterion set by the RSPCA that there has to be a degree of comfort around children according to the response to the Doll Test? There certainly appears to be reference to the significance of child avoidance behaviours in the research & practice literature.

Edited April 5, 2013 by mita

[m-j]

Hi

I didn't see the show so can't comment on it but I have used a life size doll (4-5 yr old) on a stick when doing assessments on dogs. Yes in some situations it was hard for the dog and pending on the intensity of the reaction I reccommended caution when further assessments were being conducted. Most dogs were wary of it but usually came round when they did approach the fist places they generally checked out were the armpits and the crotch which made me think that possibly they did form some sort of association with a child. The doll always had used kids clothes on. I used the doll and a hand on a stick for food guarding assessment also. Yes dogs aren't stupid but if the reaction was fast and intense to me it was a heads up there may be an issue.

I have been using a toy dog on dog aggressive dogs for many years as I can direct the body language of the toy and assess triggers if there are any. If I misread the dog Fido will cop it instead of one of my dogs. They do think he is a real dog until they have checked him out thoroughly up close, poor Fido's even been mounted. The good thing is that Fido doesn't react in any way. Fido is stored with my dog gear so would smell like dogs. I think it does smooth the way for the real dogs.

[corvus]

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 this is probably a false distinction. Predatory behaviour is predatory behaviour. A real predator does not need to make a clean kill. It just needs to kill. If the prey gets mauled so be it. Predatory behaviour in dogs has surely been terribly messed with so that in some cases it is barely recognisable or highly stylised, but let's not lose sight of its original purpose, which is obviously to kill things so they can be eaten. I think that you are conflating artificial selection with natural selection. We can talk all we like about what kind of predatory behaviour a dog ideally displays, but it doesn't mean those behaviours are the only ones that can be called predatory.

[BlackJaq]

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 this is probably a false distinction. Predatory behaviour is predatory behaviour. A real predator does not need to make a clean kill. It just needs to kill. If the prey gets mauled so be it. Predatory behaviour in dogs has surely been terribly messed with so that in some cases it is barely recognisable or highly stylised, but let's not lose sight of its original purpose, which is obviously to kill things so they can be eaten. I think that you are conflating artificial selection with natural selection. We can talk all we like about what kind of predatory behaviour a dog ideally displays, but it doesn't mean those behaviours are the only ones that can be called predatory.

So you're saying an extremely ball obsessed dog = an aggressive dog? Again, I believe that an animal will do what it deems necessary to stop the prey getting away. Do you feel that every prey driven dog is dangerous and may maul children at random?

Edited April 5, 2013 by BlackJaq

[mita]

I'm asking questions because I don't have any expert knowledge about it. But isn't predatory aggression a distinctly different form of canine aggression? Where the dog's behaviours are actually different from when 'doing' territorial aggression or fear aggression?

And aren't there degrees of it .... given how dogs are now so domesticated & socialised?

Like, for many dogs, they go for non-prey substitutes ... like chasing moving 'things', like the lawn mower or cars? Or even more benign items, like toys?

One thing that's come out of research is that dogs trained & used in prey hunting.... like pig dogs... don't necessarily transfer that to being aggressive with humans. Being aggressive to humans.... including children .... or being so fearful of them that they could act out of fear if cornered.... should be assessed as a separate factor.

http://www.aspca.org/Pet-care/virtual-pet-behaviorist/dog-articles/predatory-behavior-in-dogs

[dogbesotted]

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.

that is correct i watched that program seething.. the bias about dogs used for hunting came across loud and clear. The black and white dog did exhibit avoidance. At the end of the program they said that it was great that two of the pig dogs had found loving homes.. nothing was said about the balck and white dog.. i guess it does not sound so good saying : as for the black and white dog we killed it cos it was not sure around a huge doll". reminds me why i do not watch that program.

I remember Clifford

H

[WreckitWhippet]

I think LouAnne would pass the test, she's had a Dolly since she was 8 weeks of age , although hers is not the cheap nasty thing the RSPCA drags out to terrify dogs with

[mita]

that is correct i watched that program seething.. the bias about dogs used for hunting came across loud and clear. The black and white dog did exhibit avoidance. At the end of the program they said that it was great that two of the pig dogs had found loving homes.. nothing was said about the balck and white dog.. i guess it does not sound so good saying : as for the black and white dog we killed it cos it was not sure around a huge doll". reminds me why i do not watch that program.

I remember Clifford

H

If there was bias about dogs being used for hunting, then why did the RSPCA give any of those pig dogs the benefit of being tested?

The research is clear that coming from a 'hunting' or 'fighting' background does not necessarily mean that the dogs will be human aggressive. So there's good reason to give the dogs the benefit of testing.

As to the 'avoidance' behaviour, the Shelter Medicine for Vets & Staff manual points to how this is significant in how a dog can behave around children... & all dogs come in contact with children at some times.

Edited April 5, 2013 by mita

[WoofnHoof]

The problem of course is presenting what should be a comprehensive test regime in snippets as part of a tv show. Whether the RSPCA delivers the test appropriately and interprets it accurately is of course unknown, more problematic is the subsequent extrapolation of this information that can be made by the general public. If Joe Blow sees his dog ripping up a toy doll is he then going to PTS the dog? That is the danger with a tv show focusing on entertainment rather than effective education, the whole story is not as important as the ratings.

[Sheridan]

I have a question: which RSPCA was it? They do not seem to have been created equal.

[Salukifan]

Dodger has a dolly. He loves her.

[Rosetta]

I have a question: which RSPCA was it? They do not seem to have been created equal.

Definitely Qld - I think Bundaberg?

Loving the pictures of dogs with their dollies :D

Just to add, I don't think because some report or study somewhere advocates the use of this test that it should be taken as gospel. There can always be "research" found to support any supposition but when it defies common sense and a sense of fairness I don't buy it. I lost faith in the RSPCA a while ago after seeing some questionable things happen on the rescue show and after reading about the treatment of the cavalier mum and pups in a previous thread.

[m-j]

I have a question: which RSPCA was it? They do not seem to have been created equal.

Definitely Qld - I think Bundaberg?

Loving the pictures of dogs with their dollies :D

Just to add, I don't think because some report or study somewhere advocates the use of this test that it should be taken as gospel. There can always be "research" found to support any supposition but when it defies common sense and a sense of fairness I don't buy it. I lost faith in the RSPCA a while ago after seeing some questionable things happen on the rescue show and after reading about the treatment of the cavalier mum and pups in a previous thread.

What alternative do you suggest?

To me it is better to have some test in place, even if the results aren't entirely conclusive, rather than rehoming the dog only to find out it is wary of/aggro to children with a real child.

I have a dog here that I won't rehome because of food aggression, she is brilliant with people and dogs when her full food bowl isn't in the picture. She was just as happy to bite the fake hand (which is far less realistic than the doll) as she was mine. I can now take her food off her easily but I don't trust people to be responsible, so I'm stuck with her. Unfortunately because I don't have the room to take anymore dogs that has stopped me from taking in two lovely dogs to rehome, don't know what happened to them and I don't want to know. Maybe the RSPCA feel the same???

[WoofnHoof]

One thing I'm confused about is that there seems to be some sort of overlap or interchangability between the behaviours of the dog being wary of the doll (which I would imagine a lot of dogs would be - including mine) and behaving agressively towards it.

[corvus]

I'm asking questions because I don't have any expert knowledge about it. But isn't predatory aggression a distinctly different form of canine aggression? Where the dog's behaviours are actually different from when 'doing' territorial aggression or fear aggression?

Exactly. Predatory aggression is not really aggression at all. It's kind of a misnomer and many researchers acknowledge that. If anyone is interested in this kind of thing, I suggest they look at Jaak Panksepp's work. He works in affective neuroscience. The relevant section of his text book suggests that there is a fair bit of evidence that predatory behaviour is completely different to other forms of aggression at a neural level. The most fundamental difference is predatory behaviour appears to be fun and any other form does not. With the possible exception of inter-male aggression, which is slightly more complicated. But still not especially fun.

And aren't there degrees of it .... given how dogs are now so domesticated & socialised?

Like, for many dogs, they go for non-prey substitutes ... like chasing moving 'things', like the lawn mower or cars? Or even more benign items, like toys?

Yes, it is believed socialisation plays a large role. Dogs learn what are social objects by what they are exposed to and how as youngsters, but there is drift to varying degrees. For example, my dogs grew up with a pet rabbit, whom they largely ignored, but the other day they saw a wild rabbit and it sure was on for young and old.

It's sometimes hard to figure out what's predatory behaviour and what is play behaviour in dogs. I expect there is overlap. Usually play can be identified by context and body language, but chasing things can occur in a variety of contexts and maybe sometimes it's play and sometimes it's predatory behaviour. Some trainers may claim they know the answers, but I'm telling you they don't. No one does because the work simply hasn't been done and drives are barely recognised in scientific research because they are difficult to define objectively.

One thing that's come out of research is that dogs trained & used in prey hunting.... like pig dogs... don't necessarily transfer that to being aggressive with humans. Being aggressive to humans.... including children .... or being so fearful of them that they could act out of fear if cornered.... should be assessed as a separate factor.

http://www.aspca.org/Pet-care/virtual-pet-behaviorist/dog-articles/predatory-behavior-in-dogs

I agree. From a purely scientific standpoint, predatory behaviour tends to be like a switch that comes on when the right stimuli are there. For cats, it almost is literally a switch in their brain you can press and make them go catch a mouse. Although they might not eat it. There's a study I really like that suggests that Elkhounds are 'switched on' more readily by large prey animals than small. It seems likely there is some kind of inherent template that tells a dog what is prey and what is not that they are born with and this is built on with experience. And like you said before, socialisation plays a significant role. It would be extremely simplistic to suggest that predatory behaviour towards non-social objects was indicative of higher potential for predatory behaviour towards social objects, and we don't need to call one aggression and one not to indicate that. Most inter-dog aggression is based on fear and distance-increasing behaviour, but if it looked like a dog was displaying predatory behaviour directed at other dogs, I would be worried about where that might drift. Although it's probably a moot point because dogs that want to kill other dogs because it's fun probably have no place in most environments.

[tarope]

Would this dog fail the R$PCA doll test ?

Maybe the R$PCA should use a Chucky Doll.

[mantis]

Would this dog fail the R$PCA doll test ?

Maybe the R$PCA should use a Chucky Doll.

Chucky would scare the bejeezus out of Kenny & Cougar.

I have a 4 inch high Kyle figurine from South Park, when you press the button it says, *you bastard, you killed Kenny*. Kenny was terrified of it & used to run out of the room. I know, I was a naughty mummy to tease him, but it was bloody hilarious.

[Cosmolo]

What corvus said! :)

[tarope]

Would this dog fail the R$PCA doll test ?

Maybe the R$PCA should use a Chucky Doll.

Chucky would scare the bejeezus out of Kenny & Cougar.

I have a 4 inch high Kyle figurine from South Park, when you press the button it says, *you bastard, you killed Kenny*. Kenny was terrified of it & used to run out of the room. I know, I was a naughty mummy to tease him, but it was bloody hilarious.

Maybe we should let Chucky loose on the R$PCA as payback for all the dogs this vile pack of bastards have murdered. I wonder if poor Clifford the pitbull had a doll shoved in front of him before he too was murdered. :mad