KC DOG BLOG

Behavioral differences among breeds of dogs -- current status of science

Recently, a new research paper was published in the Applied Animal Behavior Science entitled "Behavioral differences among breeds of domestic dogs: Current status of the science."

The study does not present new data, per se, but instead looks at the depth and breadth of canine behavior science over the past 50 years and provides a very detailed look at what we know about behavior differences among breeds, what we think we know about these differences, and opportunities for more research.

The study includes references more than 120 other scientific studies about canine behavior (several I've referenced on this blog before) to create a thorough, and well-rounded report. While I doubt the conclusions will really surprise too many readers of this blog, I think the information is very interesting throughout (and I now have a lot more reading material ahead of me).  

Among the key findings based on the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior:

1)  Most studies have found convincing evidence of differences between breeds and breed groups with respect to behavior

2) Mant of these studies are based on survey results  -- and such studies are vulnerable to inaccurate reporting on a dog's behavior because the survey responder may be infuenced by cultural and media biases. Studies based on survey results reported larger differences in behavior among different breeds and breed groups than controlled studies.

3) Many of the studies also show very large within-breed behavior variations. This variation is due to  genetic differences within breed, and individual learning history as it relates to environmental differences and specific contingencies that the individual dog has contacted throughout its lifetime.

4) Breeds are not equally represented in the research - -and specifically, some breeds are vastly overrepresented, making conclusions about the influence of breed on behavior difficult to generalize as a whole. 

5)  When breed differences have been identified in scientific literature, they do not typically match behavioral descriptions in breed standards which are largely unsubstantiated.

In my opinion, some other key findings worth noting:

1) The study indicates that modern breeds are not closely related to ancient breeds because of a loss of genetic diversity due to historical, cultural and geographic factors.

2) Breeds that were commonly targeted in the media, and politics for human-directed aggression (pit bulls, German Shepherds and Rotweilers), in scientific studies actually consistently scored low on stranger-directed aggression as breed groups.

3) There were significant differences in behavior within breeds.  This is partciularly true in differences between individual dogs within a breed group were bred for show vs field work. I think this is particularly highlighted in this German Study in which German Shepherds from show lines and those from working lines showed to be genetically identifiably different even though they were the same breed of dog. 

4) There is a very interesting section on dog-directed aggression that notes that different dog breeds vary somewhat in their social signaling. In particular, some physical characteristics (snout length, ear structure, reduced skull shape) may influence social signaling and how dogs react to each other. 

5) Many breeds were differently ranked for dog-directed aggression, owner directed aggressiona and stranger-directed aggression -- which suggests that environmental stimuli, rather than breed alone, play a major role in the propensity to exhibit aggression. 

6) Physical characteristics often influence problem-solving tasks. For instance, short-snouted (brachycephalic) breeds seem more likely to use their paws in manipulation tasks where as long-snouted (dolchocephalic) breeds rely less on their paws better allow them to manipulate objects in small spaces with their muzzles.  Physical attributes like muzzle length may also impact a dog's sense of smell which may cause some breeds to be more or less likely to rely on olfactory sense for seeking. 

7) A dog's age, and experience working with humans (often as a result of the function of a dog in its use by the human) have a significant impact on human-responsive tasks and ability to follow human cues.

------------------

I highly recommend anyone interested in this topic to read the entire study.  I think it's an interesting study, and further confirms what experts have said for decades about the influences of canine temperament and behavior. Termperament and behavior is complex system based on a variety of factors including:Breed, Breeding (within breed), upbringing, how they are rewarded/punished, envirornment, history of human interactions (social cues) and that ancient history doesn't play a close role in the behavior we see today.

I think this information largely helps support the notion that the idea of "aggressive dogs" should be based on an individual dog's behavior, and not its breed or appearance. Due to all of the factors that go into shaping behavior, there is a significant differential in behavior and temperament even within specific breeds of dogs.

I think the importance of a dog's ability to read its human cues is an important part of why the National Canine Research Council's differential between a "resident dog" and "family dog" is so important and relevant when assessing major dog attacks.

For more reading:

American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior blog on the study.

The entire 13-page study: Behavioral Differences among breeds of domestic dogs: Current Status of the Science

Journal of the AVMA -- Co-Occurence of potentially preventable factors in 256 dog bite-related fatalities

Breed Differences in Canine Aggression -- KC Dog Blog

Factors Associated with Aggressive Responses in Pet Dogs -- KC Dog Blog

Academic Paper on the behavioral challenges when dogs are removed from litters too young -- KC Dog Blog

Very Good Sentences -- from the Huffington Post on Merritt Clifton

Earlier today, Douglas Anthony Cooper wrote a very nice article for the Huffington Post about Merritt Clifton.

In the piece, he calls out Clifton as a "fraud" from a research perspective -- and in the process, takes out Canadian Columnist Barbara Kay in the process who has oft relied on Clifton as the "primary resource" for her opinion pieces. 

In the piece, Cooper calls Clifton an "academic fraud" for stating that he had more than 100 different peer-reviewed articles when even after rigorous searching, Cooper could find only one.

Cooper also takes aim at Clifton's oft-cited "research" on dog "Maimings and Mortalities" and the fact that this "research" has been kept hidden from the public for more than 30 years.

Cooper cites one teacher at the University of Toronto:

 "The biggest problems are often found in one or more of three areas: collection, presentation, and interpretation. To my mind, collection is the big one when ameteurs, especially those with an ax to grind or a position they've staked out in advance, are involved. To be believable, the dataset has to be available in its entirety for examination and the collection methodology had to be described in full. In essence, one must be able to replicate and reach the same conclusion."

However, Clifton has never made the data available -- at least, not to anyone who might possibly disagree with him. I know no fewer than 6 people who have legitimately tried only to be denied. Cooper is one of them, and concludes:

"If the data even exists, my guess is that it's embarassing: inaccurate, incomplete ore incomprehensible. Otherwise, who better to share it with than the pit bull advocates ("nutters") -- so they might be convinced of the error of their ways?"

I tend to share Cooper's skepticism and would at this point almost be more surprised if the product of the raw data wouldn't look more like the picture on this page than anything worthy of scientific ponderance.

I've found many inaccuracies in Clifton's data over the years.

     -- I'd argue that any research based solely on media reports has a huge collection bias.

    -- His data also is under-representative of the entirety of the number of severe dog bites in this country, accounting for only about 2% of the total dog attacks in a given year. 

     -- And he's mathematically inaccurate. During at least one 3-year period, the number of dog attacks attributed to pit bulls, Rottweilers and Presa Canarios  in Clifton's "research" actually increased by more than the total number of attacks he recorded during that time.

    -- Clifton's numbers have increased dramatically over the past 5 years. Clifton attributes this to an increase in the number of attacks, however, it is far more likely to be a product of information availability and better access to information via the internet than he's ever had before. 

Nice work by Cooper and the Huffington Post. 

For more information:

KC Dog Blog: More deceit from Merritt Clifton attacking shelter pets....

KC Dog Blog: More misinformation, deceit and attempts to mislead from Merritt Clifton

KC Dog Blog: Creating Fear in the media and politics -- on terrorists, pit bulls and mis-information

KC Dog Blog: Merritt Clifton -- when the numbers just don't add up

Welcome back -- And Invite to the Best Friends Conference 2014

 

Admittedly, "welcome back" probably applies more to me than to you. We've had a LOT going on at KC Pet Project lately and blogging has had to take a back seat. Sorry. 

But I have a backlog of good stuff to share, so stay tuned this week!  

In the meantime, I also wanted to issue an official invite to come out to the Best Friends Conference in Las Vegas October 23-26. I will be speaking about KC Pet Project, how we were formed, about what I feel has made us successful, mistakes we made, how you can make positive life-saving changes in your community and things I wish someone would have told me before we started this journey. 

I'll also be part of a panel discussion on "Innovative Policies" -- which should be fun for a host of reasons. 

Best Friends has dropped the "No More Homeless Pets" language from their conference -- likely as they look to promote their new slogan "save them all" -- which, while still not perfect (the word "all"is still not fully attainable), I do prefer it to the term no-kill because it features more positive terminology and focuses on SAVING animals and not just not-killing them.  

This year's conference is just simply "The Best Friends National Conference".  Simple enough.

I find that the assortment and expertise of the speakers is unrivals among the national conferences and it's a great event.  So come on out and say hello.

More about the conference here. 

The speaker panel is here.

And the schedule is here. I'll be speaking on Friday morning.

So learn more about the conference -- and stay tuned for more here this week. 

 

 

New program in Kansas City cuts the number of dogs shot by police by 80%

The headlines seem common. Family pet, shot by police officer. The family is upset about losing their family pet and the police are painted as uncaring, uncompassionate people.

Being a police officer is tough work. By definition, they're often dealing with the criminal element. And often, find themselves caught in the situations where they have to make split-second, life or death decisions. 

A new program in Kansas City is helping to minimize the number of times these life-or-death decisions involve shooting, and killing, a pet.

For a couple of years, Anthony Barnett has been traveling with the city's SWAT teams when the go to serve warrants. It is not uncommon for the SWAT officers to encounter dogs when they serve these warrants. Sometimes the dogs are aggressive. Sometimes they are fearful -- which is understandable when a house is being raided by a group of uniformed officers. 

Barnett has been working with the officers to help them better understand situations from the dog's perspective -- to help them difuse more issues without using violent force. The police force has also purchased four dog-specific tasers -- designed specifically for dogs -- that can help them control a dog without using their guns. 

Since the program was put in place, the number of dogs that have been killed by police has dropped 80%.

A tip of the hat to the KCMO police department for working more compassion into their highly-challenging jobs and coming up with solutions that protect officers, and pets.

Read more at KCTV5 -- including a 2 minute video. 

 Edit: Note that it sounds like Austin has put in place a similar program to help control police shootings of dogs. Great news. 

New video on breed-specific preemption bills

Below is a good video put together that highlights much of the testimoy in South Dakota and Utah for the passing of their statewide bills that preempt municipalities from passing laws targeting specific breeds of dogs. 

The testimony tackles property rights issues and the state as a check of abusive local government policy. It tackles the issue of personal responsibility and accountability. And it tackles the issue of inconsistent laws that create scenarios where a person can be walking down the street with their dog and by the very nature of crossing the street and into another juristiction can then be subjected to criminal charges for simply walking their dog which is not legal on the other side of the street in the neighboring juristictions. 

"Law and policy should be based on individual actions and individual merits, not on classes "-  Representative Nielson, Utah.

Preemption laws have been passed in 18 states in the US. Learn more in the 8 minute video: