Sue Sternberg Assess a hand test.

Hey guys i'm wondering what you all think of Sue Sternberg temperment test.

The assess a hand test is basically where they start feeding the dog and then shove a rubber hand right infront of them to gauge there temperment.
If the dog responded with any sort of aggression the dog was deemed unadoptable and most ofter put to sleep.
This is still wildly practised around the world and alot of dogs still die because if this test.

Now i'm wondering whether you think this is really any acceptable way to gauge temperment?
Would you ever put a dog to sleep because of this test?
Would you deem this as the best way to learn of any resource guarding issues?

Here's a video which includes a rotty with food aggression and how they deal with it.
About half way into the video they show a mock assess a hand test thats quite hilarious. Enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/user/k91dogtr...28/3n1R0lXTgJ0

I'm looking forward to reading your responses.

Not yet looked at the video, but I must say I have strong reservations about the SS test in general - at least, the methods I saw ...

I was at what I think was her first visit to the UK, which ended up in a bit of a furore. Main reason being that, if a dog did not show sociability to humans, it was put to sleep.

In a way this seemed vaguely reasonable (if very sad) until we saw this in real life - a BC who was very well trained, clearly a nice dog, but who instead of fawning all over Sue, just lay down calmly at her feet.

She said that in her shelter, the dog would have been probably reassessed, and then after that, put to sleep, because it was not showing sociability, which is so important.

I thought breed was not taken into account - for example, you get dogs who would not be all over a strange human, but who would be more reserved until they knew a person. My dogs, for example, might not have passed that test, yet for me they were the best dogs ever

I was pretty shocked by some of the other stuff I saw too - such as her claims that a certain dog was food aggressive (I was quite certain it was not) and felt that she sort of set up dogs so that she could say "see, my test works".

That was my impression from her visit some years ago. Thankfully Peter Neville was there, who clearly disagreed with her tests and I think in a way, saved my sanity although he was not popular for speaking out in a way that was considered rude. However I think he had to, because people were sucking it all up

Quite a few people I really liked, and still like, felt the test was good and that rescue shelters had to be realistic. I just felt very strongly that it was not a good test.

However, I will say that some of her other methods, such as training shelter dogs basic stuff, has been great, as she has really helped dogs to be able to find a home due to their being more controllable etc.

I just don't really agree with those temperament tests, but perhaps they've now been modified. I don't know.

The actual Assess a Hand can come in useful as a tool, just for safety - the way it was used in the tests I saw was very pushy and IMO unfairly... JMO though!

I know Krusewalker also saw some SS methods being demonstrated at a different venue, so he may have some comments, too

Wys
x

Think you put the wrong vid on.

I have not watched the clip but I am very familiar with the rubber hand test.

The reason it is deeply flawed has nothing to do with premise behind it, it is far siimpler.

Most dog toys are made out of rubber, therefore the dog IMHO views the "hand" as a potential toy.

Nobody ever mentions this and observers, critics, supporters concentrate and what the hand means to US rather than what the hand means to the DOG!

Simple really but sometimes all of us are too close to a problem to see the wood for the trees (or in this case arm for the rubber)

Oh, yes - that is deffo the wrong vid

If I was in the middle of a meal and someone shoved a rubber hand in my face, I'd respond with aggression!

I've never seen the test but if that is the sole arbiter of whether a dog should be put to sleep then all I can say is: heaven help those dogs!

My first dog was a Rough Collie - the most gentle, calm, lovely dog you could ever wish to meet. But once when my parents had to try and remove a bone from his throat - he turned and would have bitten.

But he was not remotely aggressive; he had simply not been trained to allow someone to remove something from his mouth.

I think that to base a decision on whether a dog should live or die on one 'test' involving a rubber hand is atrocious. And SMOKEY BEAR makes a very valid point; how is it that the people who created this 'test' never considered that aspect of it???

I have read and watched a lot re Sue Sternberg and she, like most people I have ever met in my life, is not perfect. Neither does she have all the answers.

There is a key problems with making comparisons with what happens here as opposed to what happens elsewhere.

The situation in the US was vastly different from the UK. The stray problem in the US was, at any rate, a much bigger issue. Thousands more strays, very limited shelters and not the array of funds available to them as are here via the various charities.

They normally had to make decisions about dogs in far shorter timescales than we do here, added to this, because of the finite resources available,(this includes time to assess dogs in kennels and bods to do it etc) it was deemed more beneficial to concentrate those resources where they were best realised ie the many not the few. Many shelters did not have a “no kill” policy and the aim of the majority was “turnaround”.

Now I do not think her tests are foolproof and I know that they have been modified, but they were a rough tool to offer to those who did NOT have a consistent proven method of approach to decision making,

As for sucking things up, it has been my experience on the courses I attend, that there are a couple of issues which appear to be rife across the board.

1 is the “rule” that because a person is foreign they know more/are better than anyone here.

2 is the approach often taken by such as myself ie one of observation so that I can go home and consider things (although if the attendees and time allows I will challenge)

Finally, in my view, nobody has THE one answer, approach, outlook to a problem, and that old saying of "there is only one thing that 2 DTIs will agree on, that a 3rd is wrong" holds fast.

Debate is healthy.

You were at different first visit to the one I was at! The one I went to was one day of the APDT organised one and the furore was over a dog called Sid who was a staffie type.

She stressed over and over that it was HER tests and that no one had to take them on board. Battersea had chosen to do so and later on Wood Green had her over and they too followed them. It is really not her fault that the people present chose to ignore that part of what she was saying and visit on her the fact that two big centres who do (or did) pts regularly chose to go with them.

I used an adapted version of them with rescue dogs for a few years on and off. The hand never came in to play although we had one, if you know the dogs well enough you don't need one---you know when the dog is going to food guard in the kennel. Often the dogs DON'T show that behaviour in kennels but do show it when they are in a home----we didn't have a constant stream of really high value treats to try it out with anyway.

Eventually I found that often you can watch a dog for a while and know that it has the potential to bite. If you are hands on with them you can feel or see the body changes and avoid getting bitten---with luck and a following wind.

Then the challenge is to work on the issues and find the right home that will notput the dog in situations it can't yet cope with.

I liked SS and I thought her ideas were probably right for the society and area and dogs she was dealing with.

rune

Fully agree with all of the above.

The test is weird IMO. Is the dog seriously meant to think a rubber hand on a stick is a human?
Dogs really aren`t that thick. Maybe the testers are?