Dog Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Let's talk about Dominance Theory

3K views 21 replies 11 participants last post by  Ursie 
#1 ·
I would like to start an open discussion about the discrediting of Dominance Theory in dog training. All of the "scientific experts" feel that the argument is over. Yet, some dogs still exhibit the behaviors. I insist on positive reinforcement training methods. I agree that aversive punishment is counterproductive (not to mention inhumane) in pet-dog training and behavior modification. But, is it possible that some dogs behave like captive wolves because by domesticating them, that is exactly what we made them into? I'm not trying to assert that this applies to all dogs, as each dog is an individual. I'm not trying to start a fight. I'm just REALLY interested in any feedback that I can get. Any thoughts?
 
Discussion starter · #15 ·
Dominance theory in a nutshell suggests to use force and intimidation to overpower your dog into submission. I think most all of us agree that this is what we disagree with however "dominance"/leadership can be utilized in many other forms which are not construed as aversive. The human intellect gives us a huge advantage over our canine companions in regards to earning the leadership role. In my eyes, putting a collar and lead on a dog is a dominant action as you are restricting or controlling the dog's motion with archaic devices. For those who train over a food bowl, it's a protocol involving dominance. I fail to see it otherwise.

CoyotePro makes a great point : " How do you define Dominance?" If one describes "dominance" as my original assertion as the use of force and intimidation to get a dog to submit then I am in agreement that the dominance theory is baloney. However, if a human uses it's intellect and insight as a wise leader to shape a dog's behavior, I would still contend this is a form of dominance. Dominance is defined as power and influence AKA command and control. It is the human's responsibility to have command and control of their dog, every dog park I have been to has a big sign stating that every owner must have command and control of their dog while off leash.

When a dog is pulling it's human around, the dog is exhibiting learned behavior which was permitted from day one. When a dog is heeling properly it is exhibiting trained behavior by it's leader/guide/teacher. When my dog is on a long lead tracking and pulling out in front of me this is completely different than a simple walk through the neighborhood with the dog in proper heel position. However both are learned processes which were taught to the dog via my requirements and guidance.

All of us have been influenced by "dominant" figures, in good ways and in negative ways, and THAT is were the HUGE difference lies. If a person thinks they are not dominating their dog by training over a food bowl or withholding a treat they are sadly mistaken. Using a dog's food drive to obtain a desired result is nothing less than the human taking advantage of a dog's innate drive and if it continues over time all you end up with is a dog which works for food. Personally, I view this practice as somewhat harsh because the basic tenet of this protocol is based on regulating a necessity of life, it does not make for the best dog/human relationship by any means.

I'm beginning to think certain breeds of dogs and the intelligence they possess is integral in the overall process. I have never beat my dog but have used my leadership position in a dominating fashion to obtain the desired results. The human controls most all of a dog's resources, for example NILIF is a great example and many all positive trainers will employ this tactic. All I see with NILIF is the human using a reward in a fashion which reeks of dominance. In essence, controlling a dog's resources to obtain a result is completely a dominating protocol but it's just more palatable to many who suggest they are all positive.

I'm not quite getting why some people feel that a dog having a worthy leader team leader is such a negative thing ? Perhaps it has to do with the breed and nature of the dog. I would guess most people who have performance dogs appreciate how their dog looks to them for guidance and instruction.

Dominance comes in many forms, if you choose to really think about it.
Wow, I start a thread just to bounce around a thought and the whole thing explodes. I getting was ready to jump in but you did such a great job of expressing my argument that all I can do is offer kudos. Seems like it all comes down to one's perception and the Dominance of fluffy-feel-gooders involved in Dog Behavior now days. After working with dogs for the better part of 40 years (most of my adult life), I have evolved from the "alpha dog theory" into a true love for dogs in all of their grungy and goofy ways. I can't imagine a life not surrounded by dogs but they do look to us for leadership and the responsible owner/trainer will provide that for them. But if one enjoys being drug around on the end of a leash, I guess that is a viable choice, just not one that I would make. Too many dogs are injured or killed by poor management from their owners not to mention giving us a bad reputation with "Cat People."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top