Breeding dogs for beauty and behaviour: Why scientists need to do more to develop valid and reliable behaviour assessments for dogs kept as companions

Effects of Breeding for Looks Rather than Behavior

Tammie King, Linda C. Marston, Pauleen C. Bennett

Breeding dogs for beauty and behaviour: Why scientists need to do more to develop valid and reliable behaviour assessments for dogs kept as companions

Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Volume 137, Issues 1–2, February 2012, Pages 1–12

Abstract

In the past, dogs were bred to perform specific utilitarian roles. Nowadays, the dog's most common role is that of human companion. Our world has changed dramatically since the first dog breeds were developed, yet many of these existing breeds remain popular as companions. While dogs kept as companions can provide a range of benefits to humans, in some cases the relationship between dog and human can be tenuous or even dangerous. Many dogs exhibit behaviours their owners consider undesirable and these dogs may cause disruption and injury to humans and other animals. As a consequence, many are relinquished to shelters. It is proposed that some of this unsuitable behaviour may be the result of inappropriate dog-owner matching, made more likely by the general change in the role of dogs, from working dog to companion animal, coupled with a strong tendency for modern owners and breeders to select dogs primarily on the basis of morphological, rather than behavioural, characteristics. This paper highlights how roles for dogs have changed and the importance of taking physical health and behaviour, as well as perceived beauty, into consideration when breeding and selecting dogs as companions. The measurement of behaviour and limitations of existing canine behaviour assessments are discussed. Finally, it is suggested that scientific development of accurate behavioural assessments, able to identify desirable canine behavioural traits, would provide invaluable tools for a range of dog-related organisations.

Behaviour of smaller and larger dogs: Effects of training methods, inconsistency of owner behaviour and level of engagement in activities with the dog

Behavior of Smaller and Larger Dogs

Christine Arhant, Hermann Bubna-Littitz, Angela Bartels, Andreas Futschik, Josef Troxler

Behaviour of smaller and larger dogs: Effects of training methods, inconsistency of owner behaviour and level of engagement in activities with the dog

Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Volume 123, Issues 3–4, March 2010, Pages 131–142

Abstract

The owner's behaviour is regarded to be a possible cause of unfavourable behaviour such as poor obedience or excitability in smaller dogs. The aim of this study was to investigate whether owner behaviour such as use of training methods, inconsistency in the owner's behaviour or engagement in shared activities differs between owners of smaller (<20 kg) and larger dogs (≥20 kg) and whether associations between the owner's and the dog's behaviour in smaller dogs differ from those in larger dogs. For this purpose, a questionnaire-based survey via postal mailing was conducted in an urban and suburban population of pet dog owners (response rate: 28%). Statistical analysis of 1276 questionnaires involved descriptive statistics, Chi²-test, t-tests and Spearman correlations. Our results confirm that smaller dogs are seen as less obedient (P < 0.001), more aggressive and excitable (P < 0.001) and more anxious and fearful (P < 0.001). Smaller dog owners reported being more inconsistent in interactions with their dog (P < 0.001) and engaging less in training and play activities (P < 0.001) than larger dog owners. More consistent owner behaviour (r_s = −0.4, P < 0.001) and more frequent engagement in training and play activities (r_s = 0.4, P < 0.001) correlated with better obedience in smaller dogs. No marked differences were found in the types of training methods used with smaller and larger dogs, but owners of smaller dogs reported slightly less use of punishment (P = 0.007). In smaller and larger dogs, a more frequent use of punishment was associated with increased aggression and excitability (smaller: r_s = 0.3, P < 0.001; larger: r_s = 0.2, P < 0.001) as was a more frequent use of reward-based responses to unwanted dog behaviour such as calming or distracting the dog (r_s = 0.2, P < 0.001). The main result of our study was that increased anxiety and fear was related to a more frequent use of punishment in smaller (r_s = 0.2, P < 0.001) but not in larger dogs. We conclude that smaller dog owners could significantly improve obedience in their dogs by being more consistent in interactions and engaging regularly in play and training activities with them. Behavioural problems could be reduced by avoiding habits of punishment that might reinforce fear or fear-related aggression.

The efficacy of systematic desensitization for treating the separation-related problem behaviour of domestic dogs

Separation Anxiety in Dogs

Rynae Butler, Rebecca J. Sargisson, Douglas Elliffe

The efficacy of systematic desensitization for treating the separation-related problem behaviour of domestic dogs

Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Volume 129, Issues 2–4, 31 January 2011, Pages 136–145

Abstract

The evaluation of systematic desensitization to treat separation-related problem behaviours, such as destruction of property, excessive barking, or house-soiling, has tended to rely on single case-studies. Eight dogs exhibiting separation-related behaviour, and their owners, participated in a controlled experiment using a within-subjects design to evaluate the efficacy of a combination of systematic desensitization and counter-conditioning. Treatment produced significant reductions in both the frequency (T(9)) = 0.0, P = 0.008) and the severity (T(9)) = 0.0, P = 0.008) of separation-related behaviours compared to baseline. Six dogs, for which follow-up data were obtained three months after treatment ended, showed almost complete elimination of the problem behaviour. The use of counter-conditioning, and other behavioural advice, did not appear to be related to the success of the treatment, suggesting that systematic desensitization was the critical element. Speed of progress and final success was not related to the consistency with which the owners applied systematic desensitization, indicating that even when owners apply systematic desensitization haphazardly, it can still be successful in treating separation-related behaviour in dogs.

Understanding the genetic basis of canine anxiety: phenotyping dogs for behavioral, neurochemical, and genetic assessment

Dogs and Separation Anxiety

Karen L. Overall, MA, VMD, PhD, Steven P. Hamilton, MD, PhD, Melanie Lee Chang, PhD

Understanding the genetic basis of canine anxiety: phenotyping dogs for behavioral, neurochemical, and genetic assessment

Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, Volume 1, Issue 3, November–December 2006, Pages 124–141

Introduction: the Canine Behavioral Genetics Project (CBGP)

Behavioral problems account for the death, relinquishment, or the end of breeding careers of more dogs than does any other set of problems ( [Miller et al 1996], [Patronek et al 1996], [Salman et al 1998] and [Salman et al 2000]; Scarlett et al., 1999; [Shore et al 2003], [Mondelli et al 2004] and [Shore 2005]). Whereas many behavioral complaints involve management-related issues or dog-human temperament mismatches, the behavioral concerns that are most interesting to scientists and breeders alike are those with familial patterns.

A number of conditions have been identified as running in family lines of a number of breeds including, but not restricted to, generalized anxiety/fear, noise phobia, impulse/control aggression, conspecific aggression, predatory aggression, and obsessive-compulsive disorder ( [Overall 1994], [Overall and Dunham 2002] and [Overall 2005]). Most of these conditions appear sometime between one and two years of age, the social maturity period, during which neural systems are undergoing extensive developmental changes. The potential benefit of genetic counseling is clear, and the potential to make dogs “safer” and happier is substantial. Understanding the genetic bases of behavioral problems will lead to more humane treatment of dogs, fewer public health risks, an improved public perception of dogs as pets, and a considerable lessening in the recycled pet problem. Additionally, elucidation of the biological systems underlying pathological behavior will heighten our general understanding of the underlying molecular biology of behavior, allowing the dog to contribute to this rapidly evolving field.

Over 50 breeds across all seven AKC groups have family lines in which “fear/shyness/nervousness/panic/anxiety” is a major breeder-reported concern (Overall, unpublished). Within these breeds, this “trait” often follows familial lines, suggesting a heritable basis. This pattern has been noted for many physical conditions in dogs ( [Sutter et al 2004] and [Lark et al 2006]), but little emphasis has been placed on behavioral conditions because of the difficulty in defining a clear phenotype. Although recognition of other genetically mediated conditions is often straightforward, based on easily observable clinical phenomena that are defined by consensus (e.g., cancer, retinopathies, narcolepsy), assignment of behavioral phenotypes can be open to misclassification or misinterpretation ( [Overall 2005] and [Overall and Burghardt 2006]).

The broad goal of the CBGP is to explore the genetic background of anxiety-related behavioral problems in dogs. To do so, we must: (1) solicit the participation of owners of candidate dogs possibly affected by anxiety-related behavioral problems; (2) identify affected and unaffected dogs, using the necessary and specific diagnostic criteria to make a diagnosis of the condition; (3) confirm the presence of the relevant diagnosis in these dogs and if possible in their family lines, using reliable, repeatable, and validated behavioral measures involving questionnaires and videos; and (4) obtain DNA samples for genetic linkage and association analyses, along with the relevant pedigrees. In this article, we discuss the distinction between diagnosis and phenotype, and we describe our protocol for assessing behavioral phenotypes in dogs, addressing the second and third aspects of our project just discussed.

Consistency of dogs’ reactions to threatening cues of an unfamiliar person

Judit Vas, József Topál, Borbála Győri, Ádám Miklósi

Consistency of dogs’ reactions to threatening cues of an unfamiliar person

Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Volume 112, Issues 3–4, August 2008, Pages 331–344

Abstract

Reliability is one of the most important aspects of the behaviour observations measuring personality traits in animals. The most fundamental way to test reliability is the assessment of the test–retest consistency. On the other hand, in situations where social interaction between a human participant and the animal subject is at the scope of the study, the behaviour of the humans in the test situation should be restricted by a set of rules. However, if more than one experimenter participates in the observations, the similarity of the behaviour of different persons is an important aspect of the reliability of the study.

In our first study we investigated the consistency of dogs’ behaviour during approach by a person in a friendly and in a threatening way, repeating the test either immediately after the first test or at least 6 months later. We found that the dogs’ sensitivity to the human's behavioural cues in this situation proved to be consistent over repetition when the second test was performed approximately 1 year after the first test, but it was not the case when the time elapsed between test occasions was a few seconds. The detailed analysis indicated that dogs performing extreme behaviour (friendly or threatening) tended to show more conservative responses than dogs showing intermediate reactions when the stranger approached threateningly. Nonetheless, the reaction of the dogs failed to be in accordance with the opinion of the owners about the dogs’ behaviour in similar situations in everyday life.

In the second study we examined the consistency of the dogs’ behaviour in the same situation when confronted with two different unfamiliar persons immediately after each other. The consistency of the dogs’ response to the two experimenters was found to be reliably high.

In sum, this test procedure proved to be reliable enough to be a valuable measure of a definite part of the personality characters of dogs.

The effect of time left alone at home on dog welfare

Effects of Time Left Alone on Dog Welfare

Therese Rehn, Linda J. Keeling

The effect of time left alone at home on dog welfare

Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Volume 129, Issues 2–4, 31 January 2011, Pages 129–135

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of time left alone on dog behaviour and cardiac activity. Twelve privately owned dogs, with no history of separation related behaviour problems, were video-recorded on three different occasions when left alone in their home environment. The treatments lasted for 0.5 h (T_0.5); 2 h (T₂) and 4 h (T₄). Video-recording started 10 min before the owner left the house and continued until 10 min after the owner returned, so that interactions between dog and owner as well as behaviour during separation could be studied. Data on heart rate (HR) and heart rate variability (HRV) were collected within the same time period in each treatment. In addition to analysing behaviours separately, behaviours were also grouped together and defined as new variables; physically active, attentive behaviour, vocal, interaction initiated by owner and interaction initiated by dog. There were no differences in behaviour between treatments at equivalent time intervals until the owner returned, although a number of differences were observed at reunion with the owner. Dogs showed a higher frequency of physical activity (P < 0.05) and attentive behaviour (P < 0.01) in T₂ (0.37 ± 0.07; 0.52 ± 0.08, mean frequency of occurrence/15 s ± SE) and T₄ (0.48 ± 0.08; 0.48 ± 0.07) compared to T_0.5 (0.20 ± 0.07; 0.21 ± 0.05). They also showed more tail wagging (P < 0.01) and interacted more with their owners (P < 0.01) in T₂ (0.27 ± 0.08; 0.47 ± 0.09) and T₄ (0.26 ± 0.04; 0.42 ± 0.09) compared to T_0.5 (0.09 ± 0.04; 0.14 ± 0.03). After a longer time of separation, the dogs also showed higher frequencies of lip licking (P < 0.05) and body shaking (P < 0.05) at the owner's return (T_0.5 = 0.09 ± 0.05; T₂ = 0.24 ± 0.08; T₄ = 0.27 ± 0.06 and T_0.5 = 0.03 ± 0.01; T₂ = 0.08 ± 0.03; T₄ = 0.07 ± 0.01, respectively). There was a tendency for higher HR (P < 0.1) during the first and second minute after reunion in T₂ (127.6 ± 1.25, mean bpm ± SE; 111.3 ± 1.24) compared to T_0.5 (106.2 ± 1.06; 87.5 ± 1.02). According to the results of this study, the effect of time left alone was shown by a more intense greeting behaviour by the dog towards their owner as well as by a higher frequency of physical activity and attentive behaviour when the owner returned, already after 2 h of separation. Although this study cannot distinguish between whether dogs were aware of the length of time they were alone (but did not signal it) or whether they were unaware until reminded of it by the return of their owner, it does confirm that dogs are affected by the duration of time at home alone.

Relationship between attachment to owners and separation anxiety in pet dogs (Canis lupus familiaris)

Attachement and Separation Anxiety Causes

Valli Parthasarathy, MS, PhD, DVM, Sharon L. Crowell-Davis, DVM, PhD, Dipl. ACVB

Relationship between attachment to owners and separation anxiety in pet dogs (Canis lupus familiaris)

Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, Volume 1, Issue 3, November–December 2006, Pages 109–120

Abstract

Dogs’ dysfunctional attachment relationships with their owners are assumed to be the underlying cause of separation anxiety. Thirty-two dogs with and 43 dogs without owner-reported separation anxiety (SA) participated in a formal attachment test (AT). After the AT, the dogs were videotaped for 30 minutes while alone at home. Dogs left free in the house were scored on how long they were in proximity to the owners’ exit doors. Dogs who were crated or closely confined were scored on several anxiety-related behaviors, which were then compared to those dogs’ behaviors during the attachment test. Dogs with SA spent no more time in contact with or proximity to their owners during the attachment test than dogs without SA (P>0.05). Instead, they tended to jump up on the door after the strangers left the room and remain stationary when alone with their owners (P<0.05). There was no significant difference (P>0.05) between SA and non-SA dogs in the amount of time spent in proximity to the owners’ exit doors when left alone at home. Dogs crated at home showed no relationship between the amount of anxiety-related behaviors during the AT or at home (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the type of proximity-seeking behaviors exhibited by dogs with and without SA in the home (P>0.02). These finding suggest that separation anxiety is not based on “hyperattachment” of the dog to the owner, but that a different attachment style may be present between dogs with and without SA.

Disambiguating the “guilty look”: Salient prompts to a familiar dog behaviour

Alexandra Horowitz

Disambiguating the “guilty look”: Salient prompts to a familiar dog behaviour

Behavioural Processes, Volume 81, Issue 3, July 2009, Pages 447–452

Abstract

Anthropomorphisms are regularly used by owners in describing their dogs. Of interest is whether attributions of understanding and emotions to dogs are sound, or are unwarranted applications of human psychological terms to non-humans. One attribution commonly made to dogs is that the “guilty look” shows that dogs feel guilt at doing a disallowed action. In the current study, this anthropomorphism is empirically tested. The behaviours of 14 domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) were videotaped over a series of trials and analyzed for elements that correspond to an owner-identified “guilty look.” Trials varied the opportunity for dogs to disobey an owner's command not to eat a desirable treat while the owner was out of the room, and varied the owners’ knowledge of what their dogs did in their absence. The results revealed no difference in behaviours associated with the guilty look. By contrast, more such behaviours were seen in trials when owners scolded their dogs. The effect of scolding was more pronounced when the dogs were obedient, not disobedient. These results indicate that a better description of the so-called guilty look is that it is a response to owner cues, rather than that it shows an appreciation of a misdeed.

Behavioral assessment and owner perceptions of behaviors associated with guilt in dogs

Julie Hecht, Ádám Miklósi, Márta Gácsi

Behavioral assessment and owner perceptions of behaviors associated with guilt in dogs

Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Volume 139, Issues 1–2, June 2012, Pages 134–142

Abstract

Dog owners ascribe guilt to dogs, and we explored this attribution with pet dogs and their owners using a questionnaire and experiment. The questionnaire found that the majority of owners perceive dog behavior as guilty in certain situations and believe that dogs know when they have committed a disapproved act. As a novel finding, the questionnaire revealed that dog presentation of guilty behavior could lead owners to scold dogs less.

The experiment aimed to investigate the owner-reported anecdote that dogs sometimes greet owners displaying guilty behavior. Owners claim to be unaware of a dog's misdeed and assert it is the guilty behavior that informs them of the dog's infraction. We studied whether dogs that were disobedient in owners’ absences showed associated behaviors of guilt (ABs) upon owners’ return to a room. We also assessed whether owners could determine their dog's disobedience by relying solely on the dog's greeting behavior.

Behavioral analysis revealed no significant difference between obedient and disobedient dogs in their display of ABs after having the opportunity to break a rule in owners’ absences. Analyses at the individual level, however, revealed a significant increase in cross situational presentation of ABs only by dogs that transgressed in owners’ absences. While owners appeared able to determine whether or not their dogs ate in their absences, a subset of owners—those whose decisions were most likely based solely on dog greeting behavior and not earlier experiment-generated cues—were not better than chance in their determinations. Taken together, our findings suggest that dog presentation of ABs during greetings is not necessarily a reliable indicator whether or not a dog engaged in a misdeed. The investigated phenomenon appears to be very sensitive to the social condition, which includes owner prior experience with their dog in specific contexts.

Influence of delayed timing of owners' actions on the behaviors of their dogs, Canis familiaris

Mariko Yamamoto, Takefumi Kikusui, PhD, Mitsuaki Ohta, PhD

Influence of delayed timing of owners' actions on the behaviors of their dogs, Canis familiaris

Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, Volume 4, Issue 1, January 2009, Pages 11–18

Abstract

This study examined the influence of delayed actions from the owner, including commands, reinforcement, and punishment, on already-learned behaviors in 10 dogs. The delay times were set to 2.0, 1.0, 0.5, 0.27, and 0.13 seconds (s). Responses to commands with a delay (Delayed) were compared with those that were not delayed (Nondelayed). The results indicated that appropriate responses to commands decreased in 2.0, 1.0, and 0.5 s delayed conditions. As delay time increased, response to commands decreased. The numbers of commands used by handlers to make their dogs obey was significantly increased with a 2.0 and 1.0 second delay compared to the nondelayed trials. The time required for dogs to obey the commands was significantly increased in 2.0, 1.0, and 0.5 s delayed conditions compared to those of the nondelayed trials. There were no significant differences between the 0.27 s, 0.13 s, and the nondelayed condition. These results suggest that timing is an important factor affecting a dog's behavior not only while learning new things, but also in the production of learned desirable behaviors that could occur during everyday interactions.

A double-blind placebo-controlled study into the efficacy of a homeopathic remedy for fear of firework noises in the dog (Canis familiaris)

Nina R. Cracknell, Daniel S. Mills

A double-blind placebo-controlled study into the efficacy of a homeopathic remedy for fear of firework noises in the dog (Canis familiaris)

The Veterinary Journal, Volume 177, Issue 1, July 2008, Pages 80–88

Abstract

Seventy-five dogs that showed a fear response to fireworks participated in a double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial to assess the efficacy of a homeopathic remedy for the alleviation of their behavioural signs. Dogs were randomly assigned to one of two treatments; the homeopathic treatment or the placebo treatment. At the baseline assessments the owners identified the behavioural signs of fear that their dogs normally displayed in response to fireworks, rated their frequency and intensity, and assessed the global severity of their dog’s responses. These measures were repeated at the final assessment and owners also completed weekly diaries for the length of the trial. There were significant improvements in the owners’ rating of 14/15 behavioural signs of fear in the placebo treatment group and all 15 behavioural signs in the homeopathic treatment group. Both treatment groups also showed significant improvement in the owners’ rating of the global severity of their dog’s responses. However, there was no significant difference in the response seen between the two treatment groups.

A comparison of dog owners' claims about their pets' guilt with evidence from dog behavior

Damon Horowitz, Alexandra Horowitz

A comparison of dog owners' claims about their pets' guilt with evidence from dog behavior

Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, Volume 4, Issue 2, March–April 2009, Pages 104

ABSTRACT

New research on the social cognition of the domestic dog has established the dog's skill at interpreting communicative behavior of humans. By contrast, human interpretations of dog behavior rely heavily on anthropomorphisms, claims generally unverified by scientific research. The current research aims to examine behavior associated with one claim dog owners make of their dogs: “guilt” at doing a behavior that has been disallowed.

Previous research asking owners what they believed their dogs “know” found “disallowance” (disobedient acts) as the most frequent response. This study looks at dogs' behavior after doing or not doing a disallowed act, and after being scolded or greeted. We hypothesized that the data will match a model that suggests that dogs are responding to human behavior, but not a model suggesting dogs know a disallowed act is “wrong.”

Dogs and their owners participated in 5 videotaped trials each in the owners’ homes. Only dogs who obeyed commands of “sit,” “stay,” and “no” were used. Using owner report and prior behavioral descriptions of “guilt,” 8 guilt-related behaviors (GRBs) were isolated: avoiding eye contact, rolling over, low wag, ears back, head down, licking, retreat, and paw-up. In each trial, the owner showed the dog a treat, forbade eating it, and left the room. The owner returned in 30 seconds, was told whether the dog ate the treat, and was asked to act normally to greet or chastise the dog, as appropriate. To test the hypothesis that GRBs do not appear exclusively to doing a disallowed act, the trials varied the availability of the treat: a confederate removed the treat; let it be; or gave it to the dog. To test the hypothesis that GRBs are a response to owner chastising behavior, the trials varied the owners' knowledge of the dog's disobedience: guilty, owner knows; guilty, owner misinformed; not guilty, owner knows; not guilty, owner misinformed.

In every trial in which the treat was available, the dogs disobeyed and ate the treat. Rate of GRBs in all trials was scored. Preliminary analysis found no difference in the number of GRBs between disobedient and non-disobedient trials. By contrast, more GRBs were seen in trials when the owner scolded the dog, whether the dog had disobeyed or not. Confederate permission of the treat resulted in more GRBs than confederate removal of the treat.

In the context of a disallowed treat, dogs’ GRBs corresponded to the human's scolding of the dog, following discovery of the disallowed act or the belief that the act had occurred. GRBs were not more common when the dog did a disallowed act than when it had not. GRBs are similar to behaviors indicating fear and submission. In this study, dogs’ behavior was associated with the human, not the disallowed act or object, perhaps in fearful anticipation of punishment or scolding by the owner.

Reported behaviour problems in pet dogs in Denmark: age distribution and influence of breed and gender

Jørgen Damkjer Lund, Jens Frederik Agger, Klaus S. Vestergaard

Reported behaviour problems in pet dogs in Denmark: age distribution and influence of breed and gender

Preventive Veterinary Medicine, Volume 28, Issue 1, August 1996, Pages 33–48

Abstract

In the period 1987–1991 the consultant service established by the Danish Animal Welfare Society and the Danish Civil Dog Training Association reported 3975 problems in relation to pet dogs in Denmark. With nine categories of problem behaviour a total of 2719 problems were recorded in 2238 dogs. The data were analysed for the influence of breed, gender and age on the risk of developing behaviour problems. The analysis was designed as a case-control study using two control groups: (1) dogs registered by Danish Kennel Club in a 5-year period and (2) dogs treated at The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Copenhagen, Denmark in a 4-month period. Thirteen breeds or breed groups including mixed breeds were compared with a reference group consisting of Labrador Retrievers. Compared with the reference group, Alsatians seemed to have higher risks of aggression towards other dogs, aggression towards strangers and general anxiety. For Cocker Spaniels higher risks of aggression towards the owner, aggression towards strangers and indoor urination/defecation were found. Collies seemed to have higher risks of aggression towards strangers, indoor urination/defecation and general anxiety. Furthermore, a higher risk of general anxiety was found in Poodles and Fox Terriers. Generally, Dachshunds, a group consisting of all terriers excluding Fox Terriers and mixed breeds, seemed to have a low risk of behaviour problems. Compared with females, males seemed to have a lower risk of general anxiety and a higher risk of problems related to lack of training and all kinds of aggression. About 80% of the behaviour problems were reported within the first 3 years of life. Only 5.5% of the dogs were suggested to be or were in fact euthanized.

Genetics of traits which determine the suitability of dogs as guide-dogs for the blind

M.E. Goddard, R.G. Beilharz

Genetics of traits which determine the suitability of dogs as guide-dogs for the blind

Applied Animal Ethology, Volume 9, Issues 3–4, January 1983, Pages 299–315

Abstract

The most important traits causing dogs to be rejected as unsuitable for training as guide-dogs were found to be fearfulness, being too easily distracted, especially by other dogs, and aggressiveness. The guide-dog trainers evaluate these traits and several others using a series of 17 scores. The between-trainer repeatability of these scores varied from 0 to 0.7. Factor analysis of these 17 scores yielded 5 factors, which can be labelled distraction, general performance, sensitivity, fearfulness and fearfulness accompanied by high activity. There were no negative correlations between desirable traits, so it should be possible to obtain an overall improvement in the performance of the dogs. Comparison of dogs from the breeding programme of the Royal Guide Dogs for the Blind Association of Australia with dogs donated to the Association as puppies showed that the breeding programme had improved the dogs in the 3 important traits. Also, dogs reared under the supervision of the Association were superior to dogs donated as adults in these 3 traits. Females were more fearful and distracted by scents but less aggressive and distracted by dogs than males. There was significant genetic variation for fearfulness and possibly for dog distraction, suggesting that future selection on these criteria will further improve the standard of the dogs. These 17 scores, which are given early in a dog's training, have little ability to predict the dog's final performance on specific tasks but they do correlate with the overall reliability of fully trained dogs.

Survey of undesirable behaviors displayed by potential guide dogs with puppy walkers

Angelo Gazzano, Chiara Mariti, Claudio Sighieri, Michele Ducci, Carlo Ciceroni, Elizabeth Anne McBride

Survey of undesirable behaviors displayed by potential guide dogs with puppy walkers

Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, Volume 3, Issue 3, May–June 2008, Pages 104–113

This research aimed to identify the frequency and type of undesirable behaviors observed by guide dog puppy walkers and management strategies used by them during the puppy-walking period.

All members of 36 puppy-walking families (N = 96), recruited from the National School of Guide Dogs for Blind People in Florence (Italy), completed an 80-item questionnaire. This sampling represented homes caring for 28 Labrador retrievers, 6 Golden retrievers, and 2 German shepherd dogs. Of these dogs, 47.2% (n = 17) were males and 52.8% (n = 19) females, and 66.7% (n = 24) were between 7 and 12 months old.

Three categories of undesirable behaviors were recorded. First, behaviors considered inconsequential to the guide dog role were: digging (11.8%, n = 11); chewing objects (4.4%, n = 4); stealing or begging for food (3.1%, n = 3); licking people (5.9%, n = 5); getting on furniture (4.4% n = 4); defending territory (2.8%, n = 2); and coprophagia (5.9%, n = 5). Second, the following behaviors considered easily resolvable through training were recorded: lack of recall (8.9%, n = 10); pulling on lead (11.8%, n = 11); jumping up (28.1%, n = 30); barking at other dogs (5.9%, n = 5); chewing the leash (1.5%, n = 1); and house soiling (5.9% (n = 5). Third, these potentially disqualifying behaviors were observed: scavenging (17.7%, n = 17); aggressive barking, growling, and biting (10.4%, n = 10); and fear of thunderstorms (6.2%, n = 6); loud noises (32.3%, n = 31); men (2.1%, n = 2); women (3.1%, n = 3); and people with unusual clothes (6.2%, n = 6). None of the puppies was reported to be fearful of children.

Overall, 67.7% (n = 66) of respondents recorded at least 1 undesirable behavior. However, only few of them might lead to disqualification. The results suggest that most of the puppies were well socialized to people and not fearful.

Puppy walkers could contribute to the early assessment of potential behavioral problems, which are a major cause of disqualifying guide dogs.