The Dominance Theory - Norma Jeanne Laurette
Let me begin by saying that like most of you, I was taught the “dominance” theory - as it pertains to our relationship with pet dogs. Within my first year of instructing dog training classes, I stopped using choke chains, pinch (prong) collars, alpha rollovers and all use of force or physical punishment because I quickly realized the potential harm to a dog’s physical, emotional and/or psychological well being. This potential for harm can destroy the trust our dogs have in us, and as a result, the bond between a dog and its owner can be easily corrupted. Since trust and respect are sides of the same coin, I feel the dog's trust in its owner must be protected at all cost. Let’s face it, it takes years to learn to trust someone explicitly, yet that trust can be destroyed in the blink of an eye.
Along the same lines, I no longer use the words “obedience” or “command” in association with dog training. According to The Oxford Dictionary, “obedience” means “submissive to another's will.” The word “command” has its negative connotations as well. Instead I use the words “dog training” and “cue.” Because dog training should be a fun and positive experience for both the dog and its guardians, I have chosen to remove all words from my dog training program that imply unpleasant associations or any type of force.
At that point in my career I didn't realize there were many dog trainers already using positive methods. I was convinced I was the only one in my city with the beliefs I held, and I felt very much alone. Since then, I have met so many of like-mind, and I've learned so much. I continue to learn every day. I'm happy to say, my city now consists almost totally of positive reinforcement dog trainers.
Although I no longer taught the use of tools or techniques that involved pushing or punishing, I did teach the “dominance” theory and the importance of “leading the pack.” Over the past few years this theory has been challenged, and as a result, I renewed my research on the subject. Although we need to be good leaders in order to guide and protect our dogs, this “leadership” has nothing to do with dominance.
There is a common belief among dog owners and dog trainers that dogs will challenge their owners in attempt to rise in rank, and lead the pack. This theory has been around for decades, and although still popular, many of the most respected dog training and behaviour experts now believe this concept to be incorrect, and assert that we have misinterpreted the dog's motivation.
Dog owners and dog trainers often use the “dominance” theory to explain and make excuses for a variety of unwanted canine behaviours. This concept is also used to justify the use of aversive tools and techniques designed to over-power a dog with the objective of intimidating the dog into subservience in order to stop unwanted behaviours. This type of dog training works by virtue of the concept that the dog becomes afraid to “behave” in certain manners for fear of punishment. These techniques teach avoidance but do nothing to teach an alternative behaviour or address the root cause of the problem. It’s much like doctors who treat pain with pain killers as opposed to curing the disease. Unfortunately, this approach has cost many dogs their lives. “Dominance exercises” commonly cause fear, aggression and other unwanted behaviour that result in suffering by the dog and often euthanasia. In one case, a trainer in Florida actually killed a dog while attempting to force it into submission. After muzzling the dog and sitting on it for over an hour, the dog lost consciousness and later that day, had to be euthanized due to its injuries. R10
The concept of “ranking” comes from the idea that a wolf will challenge another of similar rank, hopefully winning the challenge thereby gaining higher status and eventually leading the pack. Many believe this behaviour has been passed down over thousands of years affecting the behaviour of domestic dogs and their interactions with their human guardians. R1
In reality, only “unacquainted” wolves living in captivity behave in a manner that appears as though they are competing for “status,” due to confined artificially created territories and limited resources. R7
Wolf packs living in the wild are dominated by one alpha male and female breeding pair, who guide and protect their cubs. R9 As soon as they are old enough to mate, these cubs will leave the pack to find mates, and raise families of their own. This would mean that every wolf healthy enough and able to find a mate will be “alpha” at one time or another during its lifespan, but only while raising its young.
During the socialization period of development, a puppy is imprinted with recognition of its own species. As a result, dogs do not identify humans as “canines” or “pack members” because we smell, = and behave differently. R2 According to John Fisher, because we are not perceived as dogs by dogs, they will not compete with us for rank. R3 With “alpha” position comes the responsibility of providing for the pack and because we provide everything our dogs need, such as food, shelter, protection etc., it would be counter-productive for a dog to challenge us for “alpha” position. R4
According to Coppinger dogs became isolated from their wild ancestors long ago resulting in a new species, the Canis Familiaris - the domestic dog. R6 Although some wolf-like behaviour remains in the domestic dog – because they are a different species it is not realistic to assume all dog behaviour will be the same as those of the wolf. However, if we choose to compare domestic dog behaviour to it's natural ancestors, it only makes sense that we should compare it to the wild wolf, not wolves attempting to survive in the face of human interference. R5
Every canine behaviour blamed on “dominance” is normal in canine terms and can be explained by simple motivation and reinforcement. It's quite simple, dogs want good things. R11 If you saw a $100 bill lying in the street would you not pick it up? Why then is a dog helping itself to your dinner “dominant” when they are scavengers by nature? It's not a “dominant” dog that takes your food it's a normal dog doing what comes naturally to its species. It’s not about dominance it’s about resources and the ever strong survival instinct.
This is what I believe now; one of the few commonalities between dogs and humans is – some are more assertive than others. Dogs that are more assertive will try harder to secure and hold onto valued resources, be it attention, food, comfortable sleeping places, freedom to run and explore etc. Because a dog’s human companion controls all the resources, the human becomes the most valuable resource of all. Dogs that are less assertive are quicker to relinquish the resource to a more assertive dog or human. Since it's about the resource, it stands to reason – if you can control what the dog values, you can control the dog. An assertive dog is more of a challenge to train, but it has nothing to do with dominance. If you use the intelligence of this assertive dog to your advantage, you can shape an amazing companion.
Although it may seem as though we are “splitting hairs” with terminology, the main difference is this. According to The Oxford Dictionary, “Dominance” means “in control over a group” and “assertive” means “to insist.” An assertive dog is challenging a person or another dog to win resources that it wishes to control, not to control the other person or dog; therefore, a dog’s competition for a desired resource has nothing to do with ranking, it has to do with the resource.
The bottom line is this: if we want dogs to behave in a manner that is not natural to its species, we have to control the environment to prevent the natural - yet unwanted behaviour. We also have to teach new, incompatible behaviours and reinforce them. Although dogs need guidance to be good companions, “dominating” them has proven to be counter-productive at the very least, and extremely abusive at its worst. It's time to teach those around us, dog owners and dog trainers alike, to stop blaming, labeling and punishing dogs with a “dominance” tag. When the world becomes aware that it is not only easier, it is also more fun and productive, to teach instead of punish, only then will the world be a more humane place for dogs. With so many positive and effective options available to us, there is no excuse. My rule of thumb is simple – if you don’t want someone doing it to you, you don’t do it to anyone else, animal or human.
References
R1 - Dominance Fact or Fiction Barry Eaton 2002, Page 4 – Dominance: Where Does It Come From?
R2 - Dominance Fact or Fiction Barry Eaton 2002, Page 4 – Pack Theory
R3 - Diary of a Dotty Dog Doctor, John Fisher 1997
R4 - Dominance Fact or Fiction Barry Eaton 2002, Page 5 – Pack Theory
R5 - Dominance Fact or Fiction Barry Eaton 2002, Page 7 – Origins Of The Pack Rules
R6 - The Domestic Dog, Edited by James Serpell 1999
R7 - Dominance Fact or Fiction Barry Eaton 2002, Page 6 and 7 – Origins Of The Pack Rules
R8 - Dominance Fact or Fiction Barry Eaton 2002, Page 7 – Origins Of The Pack Rules
R9 - Alpha Status, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs, David Mech, 2000
R10 - http://www.palmbeachpost.com/pbcentral/content/local_news/epaper/2006/07/19/s1b_deaddog_0719.html
R11 – The Power of Positive Dog Training, Pat Miller, Howell Book House, Wiley Publishing Inc., 2001
- back to top -
Along the same lines, I no longer use the words “obedience” or “command” in association with dog training. According to The Oxford Dictionary, “obedience” means “submissive to another's will.” The word “command” has its negative connotations as well. Instead I use the words “dog training” and “cue.” Because dog training should be a fun and positive experience for both the dog and its guardians, I have chosen to remove all words from my dog training program that imply unpleasant associations or any type of force.
At that point in my career I didn't realize there were many dog trainers already using positive methods. I was convinced I was the only one in my city with the beliefs I held, and I felt very much alone. Since then, I have met so many of like-mind, and I've learned so much. I continue to learn every day. I'm happy to say, my city now consists almost totally of positive reinforcement dog trainers.
Although I no longer taught the use of tools or techniques that involved pushing or punishing, I did teach the “dominance” theory and the importance of “leading the pack.” Over the past few years this theory has been challenged, and as a result, I renewed my research on the subject. Although we need to be good leaders in order to guide and protect our dogs, this “leadership” has nothing to do with dominance.
There is a common belief among dog owners and dog trainers that dogs will challenge their owners in attempt to rise in rank, and lead the pack. This theory has been around for decades, and although still popular, many of the most respected dog training and behaviour experts now believe this concept to be incorrect, and assert that we have misinterpreted the dog's motivation.
Dog owners and dog trainers often use the “dominance” theory to explain and make excuses for a variety of unwanted canine behaviours. This concept is also used to justify the use of aversive tools and techniques designed to over-power a dog with the objective of intimidating the dog into subservience in order to stop unwanted behaviours. This type of dog training works by virtue of the concept that the dog becomes afraid to “behave” in certain manners for fear of punishment. These techniques teach avoidance but do nothing to teach an alternative behaviour or address the root cause of the problem. It’s much like doctors who treat pain with pain killers as opposed to curing the disease. Unfortunately, this approach has cost many dogs their lives. “Dominance exercises” commonly cause fear, aggression and other unwanted behaviour that result in suffering by the dog and often euthanasia. In one case, a trainer in Florida actually killed a dog while attempting to force it into submission. After muzzling the dog and sitting on it for over an hour, the dog lost consciousness and later that day, had to be euthanized due to its injuries. R10
The concept of “ranking” comes from the idea that a wolf will challenge another of similar rank, hopefully winning the challenge thereby gaining higher status and eventually leading the pack. Many believe this behaviour has been passed down over thousands of years affecting the behaviour of domestic dogs and their interactions with their human guardians. R1
In reality, only “unacquainted” wolves living in captivity behave in a manner that appears as though they are competing for “status,” due to confined artificially created territories and limited resources. R7
Wolf packs living in the wild are dominated by one alpha male and female breeding pair, who guide and protect their cubs. R9 As soon as they are old enough to mate, these cubs will leave the pack to find mates, and raise families of their own. This would mean that every wolf healthy enough and able to find a mate will be “alpha” at one time or another during its lifespan, but only while raising its young.
During the socialization period of development, a puppy is imprinted with recognition of its own species. As a result, dogs do not identify humans as “canines” or “pack members” because we smell, = and behave differently. R2 According to John Fisher, because we are not perceived as dogs by dogs, they will not compete with us for rank. R3 With “alpha” position comes the responsibility of providing for the pack and because we provide everything our dogs need, such as food, shelter, protection etc., it would be counter-productive for a dog to challenge us for “alpha” position. R4
According to Coppinger dogs became isolated from their wild ancestors long ago resulting in a new species, the Canis Familiaris - the domestic dog. R6 Although some wolf-like behaviour remains in the domestic dog – because they are a different species it is not realistic to assume all dog behaviour will be the same as those of the wolf. However, if we choose to compare domestic dog behaviour to it's natural ancestors, it only makes sense that we should compare it to the wild wolf, not wolves attempting to survive in the face of human interference. R5
Every canine behaviour blamed on “dominance” is normal in canine terms and can be explained by simple motivation and reinforcement. It's quite simple, dogs want good things. R11 If you saw a $100 bill lying in the street would you not pick it up? Why then is a dog helping itself to your dinner “dominant” when they are scavengers by nature? It's not a “dominant” dog that takes your food it's a normal dog doing what comes naturally to its species. It’s not about dominance it’s about resources and the ever strong survival instinct.
This is what I believe now; one of the few commonalities between dogs and humans is – some are more assertive than others. Dogs that are more assertive will try harder to secure and hold onto valued resources, be it attention, food, comfortable sleeping places, freedom to run and explore etc. Because a dog’s human companion controls all the resources, the human becomes the most valuable resource of all. Dogs that are less assertive are quicker to relinquish the resource to a more assertive dog or human. Since it's about the resource, it stands to reason – if you can control what the dog values, you can control the dog. An assertive dog is more of a challenge to train, but it has nothing to do with dominance. If you use the intelligence of this assertive dog to your advantage, you can shape an amazing companion.
Although it may seem as though we are “splitting hairs” with terminology, the main difference is this. According to The Oxford Dictionary, “Dominance” means “in control over a group” and “assertive” means “to insist.” An assertive dog is challenging a person or another dog to win resources that it wishes to control, not to control the other person or dog; therefore, a dog’s competition for a desired resource has nothing to do with ranking, it has to do with the resource.
The bottom line is this: if we want dogs to behave in a manner that is not natural to its species, we have to control the environment to prevent the natural - yet unwanted behaviour. We also have to teach new, incompatible behaviours and reinforce them. Although dogs need guidance to be good companions, “dominating” them has proven to be counter-productive at the very least, and extremely abusive at its worst. It's time to teach those around us, dog owners and dog trainers alike, to stop blaming, labeling and punishing dogs with a “dominance” tag. When the world becomes aware that it is not only easier, it is also more fun and productive, to teach instead of punish, only then will the world be a more humane place for dogs. With so many positive and effective options available to us, there is no excuse. My rule of thumb is simple – if you don’t want someone doing it to you, you don’t do it to anyone else, animal or human.
References
R1 - Dominance Fact or Fiction Barry Eaton 2002, Page 4 – Dominance: Where Does It Come From?
R2 - Dominance Fact or Fiction Barry Eaton 2002, Page 4 – Pack Theory
R3 - Diary of a Dotty Dog Doctor, John Fisher 1997
R4 - Dominance Fact or Fiction Barry Eaton 2002, Page 5 – Pack Theory
R5 - Dominance Fact or Fiction Barry Eaton 2002, Page 7 – Origins Of The Pack Rules
R6 - The Domestic Dog, Edited by James Serpell 1999
R7 - Dominance Fact or Fiction Barry Eaton 2002, Page 6 and 7 – Origins Of The Pack Rules
R8 - Dominance Fact or Fiction Barry Eaton 2002, Page 7 – Origins Of The Pack Rules
R9 - Alpha Status, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs, David Mech, 2000
R10 - http://www.palmbeachpost.com/pbcentral/content/local_news/epaper/2006/07/19/s1b_deaddog_0719.html
R11 – The Power of Positive Dog Training, Pat Miller, Howell Book House, Wiley Publishing Inc., 2001
- back to top -
