Dogs are continually surprising indeed!

We have a collie pup who has been attending romps (off lead socialisation with adult teaching dogs and other puppies), since about 11 weeks. This gentle pup, befiriends all the scaredy new pups and is incredibly gentle. She approaches slowly and gently, then will sit they explore her, then she will gently sniff them, backing off if they get nervous. Its amazing to watch.

This same collie puppy, gets very angry indeed with the staffie in question. Its amazing how some dogs just appear to have skills that are inherent or learned incredibly early. The collie in question does have other dogs at home, so socially is far more advanced than the singleton pups. Tis fascinating.

I agree with you Wys ~ science certainly does move on! Lots of theories have been disproved by later research ~ that's the whole point of it! Goodness ~ we'd still all be "flat-earthers" if we didn't continually research & question things . Not only that but we are gradually getting better & better technology to help with research, electron-microscopes, scanners, data analysis tools etc etc.

I don't think there's anything wrong with a scientist doing a volte-face in the light of new evidence, new research, different & improved techniques. In fact it takes a lot of courage to admit you're wrong about something, especially printed & peer-reviewed papers.

And that's the whole of point of publishing your research in the first place, for it to be critically reviewed & analysed by your peers.

And yes, the Bradshaw, Casey & Blackwell paper is the one I referred to in my post on the thread on "Dominance". The authors also say that RHP is not sufficient to describe all interactions between dogs (they say that the "V" part of the equation has some merit as the perceived value of a resource has an effect) but they seem to be stressing the importance of prior learning & experience & associative learning theory as a critical component of how dogs interact.

I have come across a GSD female who behaved like this. She didn't do it to diffuse, although she could but to do that she would run between dogs - like kids playing "cut the cake".

Same thing; she would insist on wriggling and grovelling up to other dogs and licking and nibbling up at their muzzles, however she demonstrated at other times she could read dogs well.

I tend to analysis behaviour by looking at what triggers it, what the behaviour actually is and what the outcome is.

My theory is it may be a way of turning something that is superficially one thing into another: superficially the behaviour looks submissive but these dogs are ignoring clear signals for other dogs to to "get out of my face/space" so they are, in that sense, being assertive and repeatedly and determinately invading the other dog's personal space, even despite aversives of physical aggression, as they are often confident dogs, despite the apparent grovelling.

Maybe there is even an element of deliberate confusion in it by acting differently to the standard rules, as Lotsadogs says her bitch is slowly giving up actively correcting this puppy, who is thus "winning" through persistence, by ignoring the correction - not unlike some pet dogs interactions with their owners and their reaction to physical punishment!

It's a bit like a child politely saying "may I please have?" but going on when told "no" to repeatedly whining "PLeassee, pleeasse, pleeasee, PPLLEEAASE" and maybe repeatedly pulling on your sleeve at the same time - superficially polite and deferential, but actually pushy and demanding

It is similar, but differently expressed, to a dog who looks deferential, in body language terms, to another dog but who stays where they are, rather than moving away from a favoured spot, despite knowing the other dog is trying to assertively claim it, so the action doesn't appear to match the body language, and as they say actions speak louder than words.

If you look at it this way Ben Mcfuzzylugs' Mia is not that inconsistent in how she is with the other dog, although IMO different dogs can take charge at different times, even in the same situation due to all sorts of variables.

I've never heard about this omega dog stuff. But got quite upset reading about dogs with muzzles covered in scars and such.

Wouldn't the obvious answer be for a dog like this to be homed where it isn't going to suffer at the jaws of other dogs?

They home dogs who are not good with children with families who have none and won't come in contact with them.

Does it have to be resigned to this miserable sounding fate?

The trouble with projecting human responses and concepts on to animals is that they don`t quite fit. Which is what I said in the post you queried. The dog may well not be anxious, but has learned that behaving in that way brings rewards.
Human psychology has largely moved on from analysis to behaviour modification. Isn`t it more productive to make life life better for the dog by building confidence and stopping bullying than to buy into an elaborate theory about hierarchy?

I've not followed the full thread, but IMO if any dog is suffering either physically or mentally, something should be done about it and that dog perhaps found a new home

This should be done regardless of any theories or views IMO

Wys
x

Why rehome a dog when the behaviour can be managed? I honestly wouldn't say Wolf suffered. He loved other dogs, loved to play with them and run around with them. He WANTED to interact with them. Once we worked out WHY he was being bitten it was simple enough to intervene before it got to that. And it wasn't the dog he lived with that gave him the majority of his scars, it was dogs we met while out. Not one of the bites he got needed vet treatment, most were just slight grazes, yet every single one left a permenant mark which I found strange.

Wolf eventually went to live with my uncle and the behaviour didn't change. He even behaved this way with cats and rabbits!

There is a difference between projecting (anthropomorphising) and using a parallel to aim to clarify an explanation.

The meaning of analysis in this context is very different from its meaning in human psychology, you are not doing repeated sessions asking the dog how it feels about it's dam

Behavioural modification can be much more effective if the problem is assessed (i.e "analysised") to sort out motivation so that can be addressed as part of the behavioural programme rather than just addressing the symptom, not the underlying cause.


Most social animals, as part of that social interaction have to have reciprocal deferential:assertive signals. Confidence and bullying are part of social interactions and understanding the power balance between the two helps to resolve the problem.

In this case who is bullying? The dog aggressively trying to drive off the "pest" or the apparently "submissive" dog who ignores very clear signals/instructions to go away and get out of the other dog's space?

IMO analysing what is going on enables better, more effective and more appropriate resolution. The analysis/assessment is just the first step, not the final one.

In my experience the majority of owners have a much better familiarity and understanding of human behaviour than canine behaviour, so a human parallel example enables them to better understand the canine behaviour, and the rationale behind a behavioural modification programme, which in turn can aid owner compliance.

...same with my Tupac....anyway its Tupac putting his own nose/face in Fleas mouth....still does it too.

In this case rehoming the dog per se would not change its behaviour to other dogs, which is where the problem is.

As I understand it this is not a cohabiting interaction problem. In terms of doing something about it, surely you need to know what you are looking at resolving before you can effectively do so?

E.g is this dog behaving in this way because it is over confident and has a high tolerance of physical correction from the other dogs, or is it under confident and trying harder to appease in face of increasing correction?

Aside from any other consideration this motivation would have an immense impact on what would be perceived by that dog to be positively or negatively reinforcing, hence the need to analysis/assess the situation accurately.