|
|
Location: East Midlands, UK
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,775
|
24-05-2009, 09:57 PM
Originally Posted by Ripsnorterthe2nd 
This is a very good point. TBH research is only really anygood if it's been critiqued by someone and then verified as viable. Anyone can do a research study, but if the methods used to carry it out are flawed then the results themselves will be flawed. If only dogs with kennel stress were used then the findings will be skewed and reflect this in the results.
For example, if I did a research study on the credit crunch and did a questionnaire, but only asked questions outside of Poundstretcher, then the results of the questionnaire would be skewed as it would only reflect the opinons of the type of people that shop in Poundstretcher. To make sure the study was fair I'd have to make sure I asked the questions in a variety of places to ensure my population for the study varied enough.
But I doubt anyone will pay attention to this post as I'm guessing you're all too busy arguing about CM and SE!
Well said !
|
|
|
Location: East Midlands, UK
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,775
|
24-05-2009, 10:02 PM
Originally Posted by Lionhound
I totally agree, you can only tell how good a paper is by reading it but the fact that it has been published by a well respected journal also points to its relevance in this area.
|
|
|
|
Location: East Midlands, UK
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,775
|
24-05-2009, 10:25 PM
Originally Posted by spot
Firstly it does sound as either you do not visit rescue kennels etc very often or do indeed see only the extreme cases. Ive yet to visit any rescue (and trust me I have been to many and varied ones all over the country) that only has completely mad, hysterical, aggressive dogs. Obviously some of the dogs get excited, barky whatever but more often than not if you read their body language they are not desperate but more thinking oh theres a treat coming. Maybe you should visit a few more and a bit more often to get more of an insight into their behaviour and body language but don’t try to bring them all home!
Of course there may also be another reason some of the dogs behaviour you may see as disturbed
At Dogs Trust, the UK’s largest dog welfare charity, rehoming centre staff see the results of misguided dog training all the time. Veterinary Director Chris Laurence MBE, added: “We can tell when a dog comes in to us which has been subjected to the ‘dominance reduction technique’ so beloved of TV dog trainers. They can be very fearful, which can lead to aggression towards people.
“Sadly, many techniques used to teach a dog that his owner is leader of the pack is counter-productive; you won’t get a better behaved dog, but you will either end up with a dog so fearful it has suppressed all its natural behaviours and will just do nothing, or one so aggressive it’s dangerous to be around.”
You quoted the link which takes you straight to the home from home page and read the one line that said kennel stressed – now either these dogs were kennel stressed and therefore living in a home – ie foster home or the link was perhaps put on mistakenly and so not all the dogs were kennel stressed.
I also think that if you had again a bit more hands on in a rescue especially like the dogs trust you would see that being in rescue does not traumatise all the dogs, some of them maybe, others adapt well, others don’t know much different, so all in all a good cross section of dogs really for the research.
As I stated rescue dogs living in a rescue are not always vicious, traumatised and unbalanced either. Once settled into a new home they may indeed be a good subject matter but once again they may or may not have other dogs to interact with.
Having skimmed through some of the pages that have appeared since I last looked I would agree with others Im afraid that my pack has no hierarchy as such they more swap roles or whatever regarding what the situation is and what is more important to them.
Gnasher you say you have experienced this dominance alpha thing in your pack or those of people you know, can I ask how many dogs you have had at any one time to witness this pack behaviour?
I have never said that being IN a Dogs Trust home would stress out dogs. I am saying that whatever happened to CAUSE them to be there in the first place will have stressed them out, all of them, to some degree at the very least. Through no fault of their own, every single dog in that Rescue Home has been taken away from his home, for whatever reason, and we all know that dogs are so loyal that they will even pine for an owner who abused them, such is the nature of these wonderful animals. It is traumatic for any dog, even those that have been beaten, abused and starved, to be moved into a new home. And of course for those dogs who have suddenly lost their beloved owner who only ever gave them everything they wanted or needed in life, the trauma must be unimaginable.
I can't imagine a WORSE group for research quite frankly.
|
|
|
|
Location: East Midlands, UK
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,775
|
24-05-2009, 10:27 PM
Originally Posted by mike_c
"If only dogs with kennel stress were used"
Have you ever been to a Dog's Trust centre? - they are fantastic, and they never, ever put a dog down.
The report would never have passed peer review if biasing factors hadn't been analysed and proved to not be significant, so I would guess a mixture of breeds.
Read what Dr Yin's and other qualified and trained Veterinary Behaviorists (Veterinary equivalent of what human clinical psychologist ie a vet+psychologist) say (and the research papers) how domainance techniques have already led to an increase in dog biting and euthansia.
I would rather believe them rather than trainers with no training, no qualifications (although may have paid $30 to be a member of a dog club) and no science to prove their point, - but who look good on TV (eg natural actors/actresses).
I've never seen a veterinary behaviorist tell me that it would be too dangerous for me to attempt to give my dog a biscuit when it does what I want.
|
|
|
|
Location: East Midlands, UK
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,775
|
24-05-2009, 10:30 PM
Originally Posted by mike_c
I forgot to say - the paper says the domestic dogs were 'maintained by a rehoming charity in a 0.28 hectare enclosure' suggesting that they weren't kept in a normal rescue centre kennel. Plus, some of the study was on free ranging feral dogs and they showed a similar lack of 'dominance hierarchy' as the dogs.
Whether the dogs were kept in a 0.28 hectare enclosure, or on the moon, will not make me think any better or any worse of the suitability of their use in research of this kind.
|
|
|
|
Location: East Midlands, UK
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,775
|
24-05-2009, 10:31 PM
Originally Posted by Ripsnorterthe2nd
Reading it isn't enough though, you need to know how to critique a paper in order to know how valid it is.
I have thanks, I spent time volunteering at my local DT centre and I rescued two dogs from there also!
And for what it's worth there appeared to be many kennel stressed dogs at my local DT centre, probably because they were lucky to get one 20 minute walk a day most days. 
Oh and I've never said the study wasn't relevant (I haven't read it, hence why I said IF only kennel stressed dogs were used) and I haven't stated that I support dominance theory, my point was that people need to be aware that just because something has been publised in a journal, doesn't mean it's 100% correct. You just have to look at the MMR fiasco to realise how terribly flawed some research studies are.
Wakefield MMR Fiasco
|
|
|
|
Location: Elsewhere
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,227
|
24-05-2009, 10:45 PM
Originally Posted by Gnasher
Hmmm, not sure I go along with that. My doctor is a highly respected GP, by me and thousands of others, but he still makes mistakes every day of his life, just like we all do. He is a human being first and foremost, before he is a doctor.
My point is, when you are looking at a paper one of the first points you look at is where it was published. Everyone wants their research looked at and cited so they want it to be published in one of the leading journals (the more respected and bigger circulated the better). The leading journals will only publish work that it sees as credible, and worthy of space. So by making an appearance in this journal, it is at least worthy of reading the whole article and not dismissing it from the abstract alone. The point you have raised may well be noted and dealt with within the paper. We will never know until we read it.
PS I would be changing my GP if I were you
|
|
|
Location: Essex, UK
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 14,147
|
25-05-2009, 08:43 AM
|
|
|
Location: UK
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,122
|
25-05-2009, 08:46 AM
Originally Posted by Gnasher
I have already said that I do not visit rescue homes very often, as I would most likely come away with a string of dogs, or else be devastated because OH wouldn't let me ! But I will repeat [B]that I have never ever been to one where even one dog has been "normal". They are not all mad, hysterical and aggressive, but absolutely ALL of them have been traumatised in some way. None of them are without scars, and although thankfully many of them will bounce back very quickly once they realise that their forever home is a great one, too many are traumatised - often because they have been ripped away out of the blue from a fantastic home where their beloved master or mistress has suddenly died - and it takes years to settle them in a new home. Such dogs are very definitely not suitable subject material for research - however well they might interact and play with other dogs.
I have never said that being IN a Dogs Trust home would stress out dogs. I am saying that whatever happened to CAUSE them to be there in the first place will have stressed them out, all of them, to some degree at the very least. Through no fault of their own, every single dog in that Rescue Home has been taken away from his home, for whatever reason, and we all know that dogs are so loyal that they will even pine for an owner who abused them, such is the nature of these wonderful animals. It is traumatic for any dog, even those that have been beaten, abused and starved, to be moved into a new home. And of course for those dogs who have suddenly lost their beloved owner who only ever gave them everything they wanted or needed in life, the trauma must be unimaginable.
I can't imagine a WORSE group for research quite frankly.
At your own admission, you have not visited many rescue centres, and seem to have developed a universal opinion on them , from the few you have!
All of them have been traumatised , how do you work this one out...
I have a friend who volunteers at our local pound, which I also visit on occasion.
Some have regrettable pasts, but many have simple been abandoned, not through neglect or cruelty..but through people tiring of them.
Some as you have also mentioned are their through owners dying , many of these dogs will have come from nothing but the most loving homes.. and the fact they are set down in a kennel for a few wks...will not turn them into raving lunatics, as you seem to think .
Other wise, using this logic, all dogs who visit boarding kennels while owners are on holidays , will be equally as traumatized , dont you think!!
As for all dogs pining for their owners, yet again, your logic is flawed... I have one here , who would not give a hoot where he went to rest his head,
He would quite happy go off with anyone , if they made it worth his while.
Tell me if all these rescue dogs are so traumatised, with so many hang ups and , needing yrs to settle into a new home......how do so many actually do the opposite and show loyalty and devotion to their new owners in a matter of days, for some.
Now just to put your theories to the test, did you read the thread from Shona, on Millie..
Rather blows your theories out the water , dont you think!!
|
|
|
|
Location: UK
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 23
|
25-05-2009, 09:16 AM
Originally Posted by ClaireandDaisy
Is anyone going to comment on the research or is this going to turn into another Gnasher thread?
Feral groups varied in size up to 200 individuals.
They studied dogs living in a stable group with free access to each other, and free to roam (non-feral group in big enclosure), with zero or near-zero human interaction so that they were studying dog behaviour with minimal human influence.
For an example of human influence I would have to mention the dog I saw a few months back who seemed to think it perfectly normal to be doing 40 mph sitting in a motorbike- sidecar, dressed in a doggie equivalent of a world war 2 fighter pilot outfit, leather jacket, leather helmet (ear cutouts), and doggie flying googles.
|
|