Small Dog Syndrome

[GeckoTree]

<h1 class="title" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"></h1>http://news.ninemsn.com.au/technology/2013/12/17/17/03/researchers-discover-small-dog-syndrome

Small dogs may suffer from a canine equivalent of short man syndrome, researchers believe, making them more aggressive and prone to mount people and objects.

Regardless of breed, the smaller the dog is, the more likely it is to be unruly, aggressive, noisy and prone to "humping", according to a study by the University of Sydney."Our research shows that certain physical characteristics in dogs are consistently associated with certain types of behaviour," said Professor Paul McGreevy from the Faculty of Veterinary Science.

"Essentially, the shorter the dogs the less controllable their behaviour is for their owners."Undesirable behaviours such as owner aggression, or mounting, occur more often among small dogs.

"The study, published in journal PLOS One, examined owners' reports of 8000 dogs from across 80 breeds. It found that 33 of 36 undesirable behaviours in dogs could be associated with height, body weight and skull shape.

"When average body weight decreased, excitability and hyperactivity increased," said Professor McGreevy.

Further studies will address whether these bad behaviours seen in small dogs are a result of nature or nurture.

"This suggests that, in small dogs, these behaviours are tolerated more than they would be in larger dogs where such behaviours are more unwelcome and even dangerous.

"Equally, such behaviours in small dogs may be a result of their being overindulged and over-protected," he said.

[Christina]

Oh no. Next thing Chihuahuas will be on the banned list

I do wish they would stop these kind of studies.

[GeckoTree]

To be honest out of all the small dogs I have met, i'd say a good 98% have been of good nature and confident dogs, about the same as the large and middle sized dogs I've met.

That's my study lol, if only I could get some grant $.

[mita]

Oh no. Next thing Chihuahuas will be on the banned list

I do wish they would stop these kind of studies.

You would like science in relation to dog behaviour to stop?

This finding about a tendency in small dogs was also found in a large study at the University of Cordoba. A statistical pattern means 'more likely', doesn't mean it would apply to every individual small dog. So it's not saying every small dog will be aggressive.

The value of these studies is to nip single-factor stereotyping in the bud. Like big dogs, as a group, are intrinsically more likely to be aggressive. And like, every individual small dog will be non-aggressive.

Size is also related to the environment provided for the dog... as the professor in this Sydney study pointed out. Environment interacts with genetic factors to shape behaviours. As he says, people tend to treat small dogs differently ... & even consider the provision of training differently. All of which results in how a dog will behave. BTW, most people on forums like DOL are usually pretty doggie-wise in raising their pets.... big, small & in-between. But many people aren't.

Of course, when a bigger dog develops aggression problems, they're more capable of inflicting more serious damage than a smaller dog. But even a small dog can cause nasty injuries around babies & small children with their finer skin & tissue.

So studies like this can lead to useful messages to pet owners. But, too often, the media report will turn the results into another stereotype, as seems to be happening in this case. Quality media sources usually employ science journalists who do a better job in 'translation' for the public.

BTW I own small dogs.

Edited December 18, 2013 by mita

[halfthewords]

What a load of crap! In my job I see a *lot* of dogs come through each day, and badly behaved/aggressive ones are distributed pretty evenly in terms of small and big. Pfft!

[_PL_]

Jesus, dogs are dogs! :laugh: They all have their moments, and owners who overindulge & under-train aren't limited to little breeds.

Lets go further... do research on Big Dog Syndrome. Balance out the results by testing for: counter-surfing, full stretch bed hogging, ability to clear a coffee table with a single wag, the lean in for a hug by nearly pushing you over, presentation of the soaked tennis ball in the middle of your lap or dinner plate, the room-emptying silent farts, their notion that they are in fact lapdogs and their artistic side: Pollock inspired snot and slobber paintings on the inside of the car.

Yes I'm making fun of the study and can't be bothered looking up exactly which the 36 undesirable behaviours were included.

[Guest donatella]

I think it comes down to good breeding and genetics not so much the size of the beast :p

[mita]

Jesus, dogs are dogs! :laugh: They all have their moments, and owners who overindulge & under-train aren't limited to little breeds.

The study has not said that over-indulging & under-training is limited to little breeds. It has picked up a statistical tendency .... not a situation that applies to every individual dog, of any size.

A good lesson about how not to apply statistical patterns to everyday life, is:

"Did you hear about the non-swimming statistician who drowned while trying to wade across a stream, the average depth of which he knew to be 4 feet.'

The average depth did not apply to every individual step he took.

The problem is not with the study.... nor with science. The problem is how the results are being given by the media to a general public not familiar with interpreting results. They've turned it into a stereotype. Which is what doggie-wise people are then reacting against.

Studies like this actually refute coming up with single-factor stereotypes about any individual dog .... of any size.

Edited December 18, 2013 by mita

[_PL_]

Like I said Mita, I'm poking fun at this 'study'.

With a little attention grabbing (slow news day) article and no web link to the results and snippets of interpretive quotes from a professor. Study might be a great piece of science but who knows? I feel slightly stupider after reading that faff.

[mita]

Like I said Mita, I'm poking fun at this 'study'.

With a little attention grabbing (slow news day) article and no web link to the results and snippets of interpretive quotes from a professor. Study might be a great piece of science but who knows? I feel slightly stupider after reading that faff.

Yes.... as reported in the 'regular' media. Which loves to produce its own creations which are far more dramatic. Small Dog Syndrome is more attention grabbing than.... "More reason not to judge any dog by size alone.'

And there's nothing new in the finding. It replicates a huge study done at the University of Cordoba. But that tended to be reported in better science journalism sources. Where no one shrieked 'Small Dog Syndrome'. But where the lead researchers concluded... Get into training & managing your dog appropriately.... whatever the size.

[Salukifan]

I predict this study will get a good workout from the SWF haters in the months to come/

Seems to me that if smaller dogs get away with more, that's an OWNER issue. They are focusing on the wrong end of the lead again.

[tdierikx]

"Equally, such behaviours in smALL dogs may be a result of their being overindulged and over-protected"

I think the bit I bolded actually tells the story...

T.

[Nushie]

I think also that the general public see small dogs as toys - well not exactly toys but because they are small, some people will see them as not needing to go for walks every day, not needing to be socialised and not needing to be properly trained. Someone owning a larger breed migh come across a problem and seek advice, where a smaller breed, you see a lot of people laughing it off. Just go to youtube.

I remember searching for a video on cutting difficult dogs nails and finding this video of a smaller terrier breed that was growling and snapping and lashing out as soon as the nail clippers came close to it, and both the owner and the person behind the camera where laughing their heads off, tormenting this poor dog with the clippers, just putting them close to it, it lashes out, then pull them away and then back again. They found it hilarious. If there were a big dog, no one would have found that funny.

[sandgrubber]

I would call it shallow science. Correlation without causation.

As for the causation . . . if your sample is heavy on small terriers and other breeds selected to kill vermin . . . a situation where gameness is of high value . . . you're likely to find you get a pack of aggressive little dogs. If your sample is heavy on pugs and Frenchies, you're likely to come to a different conclusion.

McGreevy seems to have a propensity for shallow science. A few years back he and associates did a much-quoted study showing that the brain layout in brachy breeds was different from that of other breeds. Hardly surprising. Change the skull shape and the grey and white matter has to go somewhere. The conclusions say something like: the next step is to find out if this has any behavioral consequences. But so far, the next step hasn't been taken.

[fuzzy82]

Where is the link to the study?

[_PL_]

Found it.

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0080529#s2

[RiverStar-Aura]

Small dogs may suffer from a canine equivalent of short man syndrome, researchers believe, making them more aggressive and prone to mount people and objects.

Regardless of breed, the smaller the dog is, the more likely it is to be unruly, aggressive, noisy and prone to "humping", according to a study by the University of Sydney."Our research shows that certain physical characteristics in dogs are consistently associated with certain types of behaviour," said Professor Paul McGreevy from the Faculty of Veterinary Science.

I read this as being a vague part of the research. Are these behaviours more prevalent in small dogs because owners are more likely to overlook the bad manners? It could also be due to the fact that the average person is probably under the impression that a small dog is 'easier to look after/train' rather than researching suitable breeds.

"Essentially, the shorter the dogs the less controllable their behaviour is for their owners."Undesirable behaviours such as owner aggression, or mounting, occur more often among small dogs.

"The study, published in journal PLOS One, examined owners' reports of 8000 dogs from across 80 breeds. It found that 33 of 36 undesirable behaviours in dogs could be associated with height, body weight and skull shape.

What exactly does it mean by "owners' reports'? That the owners have been asked for their own assessments of their dogs' behaviours? Also, considering a part of the small dog group are terriers, of course they look similar and have similar shaped skulls and size (although why size is an issue in a "small dog" survey -- one would expect the dogs to be a similar size).

"When average body weight decreased, excitability and hyperactivity increased," said Professor McGreevy.

Further studies will address whether these bad behaviours seen in small dogs are a result of nature or nurture.

"This suggests that, in small dogs, these behaviours are tolerated more than they would be in larger dogs where such behaviours are more unwelcome and even dangerous.

"Equally, such behaviours in small dogs may be a result of their being overindulged and over-protected," he said.

I'll be interested to read more of this study when it's released.

[kelpiecuddles]

I reckon we just see the bad natured little dogs more because big dogs with crappy natures are hard to take out and about so their owners leave them at home but little dogs are much easier to hold on to even if they are snapping and carrying on so their owners still take them out. Therefore more exposure skews the perception.

[_PL_]

I posted the study link above RiverStar :)

[WreckitWhippet]

Another McGreevy stroke of brilliance ( insert eye roll here )