RSS
Home
Dominance Theory - Don't Throw out the Puppy with the Bathwater!
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
Until a few years ago, most dog trainers believed that dogs lived in a rigid social structure, in which each animal was either dominant or subordinate to the other dogs - and to the humans - in the family. Many of the training methods used were based partly or entirely on this idea. This "dominance theory" evolved from some studies that had been done of wolves, who seemed to show just such a rigid social structure. Since dogs are wolf descendants, trainers thought it was logical to interperate all dog behavior along these "wolfy" lines, and to imitate the wolves' behavior in our own interactions with pet dogs. This certainly seemed to make sense, especially since we also have extensive research showing the importance of dominance and submission in several other species of animals...including humans! Dog trainers taught that humans had to "be the boss", the alpha, the pack leader, or else successful training could not occur, and peaceful dog-and-human family life would unravel into chaos and aggression.
Recently, however, new research has been done, and the old research has been re-examined, and many scientists and trainers have now come to a very different conclusion. The old wolf pack studies, although fascinating in their own right, are not a true window on the "natural" behavior of a pack of wolves in the wild for several reasons. First, the packs studied were primarily kept in captivity, which undoubtably affected their behavior. Second, most of these packs were composed of wolves the human caretakers had put together to form a group, and did not reflect the true nature of a wild pack. In the wild, a wolf pack most often consists of a mother and father and their pups of various ages. New wolves rarely ever join a pack - they are more likely to be driven away or killed. "Bachelor" wolves who have left their family may sometimes group together to form a pack, but the dynamics amongst them are different from the dynamics in a true family. In studying these family packs, researchers have found that the structure is not nearly as rigid or as frequently contested as had once been thought.
There is a similar example in recent history, when the man in charge of a Russian fox fur farm noticed that many of the captive, wild foxes were too nervous to breed. In an effort to increase production, he selectively bred together the foxes who were willing to eat in his presence, theorizing correctly that these bolder foxes would also be more willing to breed. He was quite right, and within a few generations the foxes actually became quite tame and friendly. Interestingly, they also began to bark like dogs, their ears dropped down like Retreivers, and their coats developed spots! Since spotted coats were not desired, the program was abandoned, leaving us only with some fascinating insight into the "piggy-backing" effect of genes so commonly seen in dogs. |
The currently accepted theory of how wolves evolved into dogs is that in the very early days of human society, some wolves learned that human dwelling areas contained garbage dumps full of scavengeable food. The wolves who were bold enough to eat at these dumps taught their pups the same easy way to find food, and they in turn passed it on to their own pups. Furthermore, the wolves who hung around the dumps were more likely to breed with each other than with the wolves who kept farther away from humans, and so a form of genetic selection began, based on a tolerance for the presence of humans. As generations passed, these wolves became so unafraid of humans that some of the pups were probably taken in and raised by the people, and thus began a most unique and extraordinary partnership.
Based on this new - and hopefully correct! - understanding of wolves and dogs, many people have come to the conclusion that all of the old dominance based dog training theories should be completely tossed out. This trend has been accelerated by the recent fame of the so-called "dog whisperer", Cesar Milan, whose training methods are steeped in dominance theory lore. Driven by an admirable desire to save both dogs and their human families from some of the more heavy handed and incorrect methods used by dominance-based trainers, many "positive" trainers are now, I believe, in danger of throwing out the puppy with the bathwater, to coin a phrase!
Although I agree completely that "positive" methods are far safer, quicker, more fun and produce longer lasting results than force-based methods, I do believe that there is an appropriate place for dominance theory in living with and training dogs. I base this belief on close to 50 years of living with, training and studying not wolves, but dogs. There are indeed strong similarities between the behaviors of dogs and the behaviors of wolves that I have seen on film. I have met a few wolves, and wolf hybrids, but I do not presume to actually know much about them.There are interesting and relevant correlations between the behaviors of humans (another species I know well!) and those seen in Chimpanzees, but I do not presume to be a Chimp expert based upon my knowledge of humans. Dogs, on the other hand, I know extremely well. Since I do rescue work, I have by now lived with several hundred dogs, up to 14 at a time, and I have rescued and/or trained many thousands.
Many years ago I became puzzled by the fact that although some dogs and some situations seem to be text book examples of dominance theory at work, in other situations there seemed to be no "dominance" element at all. My initial conclusion was that the dominance component was present, but I was failing to identify it correctly. As the years went on, I slowly decided that dominance theory was just not as important as I had been told, and that for many situations it was completely irrelevant. That does not mean, however, that it is completely wrong or that it has no use.
Because dogs, unlike wolves, are caught in a genetically produced, human reinforced "eternal puppyhood", they are able to have a very broad definiton of what constitutes their pack. I believe that human-social dogs do think of and behave towards us as if we were members of their own species. For example, a dog raised by people who has no positive contact with dogs during puppyhood seems firmly convinced that he and humans are "us" and dogs are "them", with extreme predjudice! Dogs show towards us many of the same behaviors they show to other dogs - playbows, submissive belly-up and growling, to name just a few.When we respond in "dog language" (for example, using calming signals towards them) they clearly understand our meaning.
When watching dogs interact with each other, displays of dominant/submissive behavior are common, especially when greeting each other. These behaviors are very similar to those I have seen shown by wolves on film, but are not identical. Chimps scream and beat their chests when in a confrontation with each other...similar but by no means identical behavior to that shown by angry humans!
Like many things in life, I believe that the art of dog training is all about balance. Sometimes the scale of facts tips far to one side or the other, sometimes it hovers more towards the middle. With some dogs "being the boss" (by controlling their access to whatever they want, not through displays of aggression) is very important, with other dogs it is a minor or even completely uneccessary method. With some dogs, a brief display of "alpha" body language and behavior is exactly what is needed, with other dogs it could even be damaging. Balance, a variety of methods to fit the different dogs, people and situations, compassion, ongoing education and a constant sense of wonder for this magnificent animal we live with - these are the most important qualities for a dog trainer to have.
For more information, visit www.alexandramorgan.com
Related Articles:
Add a Comment
