Dominance Theory

Hi everyone,

Was just wondering what people's views are on dominance theory? Especially looking for views from people who have read up in the area and waht they agree with/dont agree with.

Personally I dont agree that dominance theory works or is relevant to dog training.

Bit of an area for disagreement i know but Views please!

My personal opinion is that what many people consider to be dominance theory is completely misunderstood, not least because of it being a flawed theory due to being surmised around captive wolves, not a wild wolf pack among whom pack order is very different and very fluid.

I don`t believe it has a place for application to dogs in a human / dog family unit, and really I wish everyone would scrub out the word Dominance from the canine dictionary.

A truly dominant dog is pretty rare, but many people think an apha is dominant because they show it - when in reality a true alpha is very laid back and can usually easily control situations with just a `look`, not needing to be physically forceful at all unless challenged in which case they are the defender, not the instigator.
Many people also mistakenly, [ imo ], believe that as a human they should be `alpha` to their dogs.
Dogs are not thick enough to fall for that notion, a human can never be a canine alpha `equivalent`, and the sooner everyone realised that the sooner they would be able to work and live with their dogs on a more realistic and positive footing as a harmonious complimentary unit.
Being a `leader` or `guide` is not the same as being an alpha or being `dominant`, very different approaches as far as I`m concerned.

Dogs will never consider a human to be an `alpha` over them no matter what any human may think about it, but if the dog feels confident in, safe with, and respects their human, they will be led and guided willingly by that human

Before anyone says it doesnt exist, I would encourage them to 'Live' with a pack of 'Dominant' breed dogs and see how 'thick' those dogs are and how dominance among them doesn't exist

I pretty much agree with this article:
http://www.clickersolutions.com/arti.../dominance.htm

'Dominance theory' has a role, but I believe it's a bit over emphasised in training these days. I believe dogs are more likely to do things that have rewards, and less likely to do things that have punishments. I think this drives dog behaviour more than 'dominance'.

This isn't about dominance between dogs, I am referring to the idea that a human 'needs' to dominate their dog in order for it to respect and obey their commands. The idea that behavioural issues such as pulling on the lead or laying on the sofa is a dominant act and is a sign of the dog trying to be Alpha over the human.

I would guess that within a 'pack' of breeding dogs there will be tension over who is more 'dominant' because they are all mating and being strong and more powerful is a key to being 'chosen' for mating (at least in their minds).

For anyone with any doubts i recommend whole heartedly Barry Eaton's 'Dominance: Fact or Fiction?' as he explains it reallly well. And its not that long either.

The trouble with all these theories, to me, is that they try to translate the workings of a dogs` mind into human terms, with a fair bit of anthropomorphism on the way. My dog trying to get on my sofa is doing so because dogs get pleasure from being comfortable, and nothing has happened so far to suggest that there are consequences for doing so. He isn`t trying to establish a superior position. If his hackles were up and he were trying to climb on to my shoulders and bristling, yes, I would give it a different interpretation.

I wasn't referring to inter pack relations. I was answering your question re humans and dogs, and I'll say it again. For anyone who doesn't believe that it exists, or doesnt see how a dominant breed reacts to humans in this role, or how they try it on, I would encourage them to 'Live' with a dominant breed and see for themself. I don't see how anyone can say it doesnt exist, when they have never experienced it.

I think people use the term 'dominance' when in reality the dogs are being just dogs and that is opportunistic. If they see that a certain behaviour will get them what they want they will use it and that behaviour can be anything from rolling on their back to pinning someone down.
I don't see it as dominance but a dog just taking a chance to get what it wants and that's how I see it!
Becky

I think that dominance exists between dogs, but when it comes to dogs and humans, I think it's more of a 'respect' issue, than a dominance issue.
I think it totally depends on the dog and the situation.
I'd say that at work, there most certainly is a pecking order between the dogs. You know right off the bat which dogs are "dominant" and which ones are not so high in the hieratic scale, if you can call it that. For example, my boss's lab/dane mix will come into work, and all the other dogs will rush to him and lick his face/lips, and if he grumbles or even looks at them in a certain way they put their heads low and flip on their bellies. However, if a dog lower on the scale comes in, the same dogs that behaved that way towards my boss's dog will rush to the lower-dog and nip him/her in the rear.

But, that's dog-dog relationships, not dog-human. I think it's more of a matter of respect with people and dogs than dominance. Thats just my thoughts on it.

Can you define a 'dominant' breed for me? I am not being dumb, I just want to make sure we are on the same train of thought before we go any further.


When it comes down to it, dominance exists yes. But not in the way it has been wrongly perceived. IF anyone think their dog is trying to dominate them by pulling on the lead or not letting them have a toy or laying on the sofa, there are otehr more realistic explanations. Furthermore, pack relations between wolves are heavily misinterpreted. As are dogs.

Sadly I dont have time to reply and explain properly, I have to go to work.

On a quick passing note, would any of you actually consider using dominance in training?