“Canine Behavior A Photo Illustrated Handbook” By Barbara Handelman

Barbara Handelman on September 21, 2011

The developing field of canine behavior and communication needs a consistent vocabulary with which to describe observed behaviors. This book is offered for the purpose of creating a consistent lexicon of commonly used terminology.

The information required to interpret behavior lies in the environmental contexts in which the behaviors are offered. Distinct communication behaviors rarely appear in isolation; instead, three or more forms of bodily expressions may be present concurrently. The resulting impression is greater than the sum of the component expressive parts.

Not all behavior has communicative intent, but all canine communication emanates from behavior. Humans can be both angry and sad, or happy and anxious in relation to a single event or interaction. Conflicting emotions exist in canid interactions, just as ambivalence is a component in most human relationships.

Wolfgang, a Beta wolf uses many signals to threaten Renki, a lower ranking wolf. Note that Wolfgang, on the left, assumes a tall confident posture, with both his tail and his head raised, ears forward, and piloerec tor reflex apparent (hackles raised). Renki crouches submissively, as he moves forward, with his tail dramatically tucked between his legs. Renki further expresses his submissive intent with his ears pressed back, and his head slightly lowered. He shows mild piloerector reflex. (Photo: Monty Sloan)

To accurately label canid behavior the observer must watch the animal’s whole body. Note whether he appears relaxed, tense, stiff, aroused, fearful, aggressive, submissive, or appeasing.

Also spot the ways in which elements of more than one feeling state coexist. Prior to discovering Monty Sloan’s Wolf Park photos and the “Wolf Ethogram,” (Goodman, et al., 2002), this author had not considered that there might be very close similarities between the communication signals, displays and expressions conveyed by the various canine cousins. For hundreds of years, humans have genetically manipulated dogs. Dog breeds evolved to fulfill the vanity, utilitarian purpose and companionship needs of humans. One might be drawn to the conclusion that those genetic changes would have caused considerable dilution or alteration of inherited communication behaviors.

Domestic dogs, in general, no longer depend on submissive displays for their own survival to the extent that their canine cousins do. Dogs rely more on humans to intervene to prevent or interrupt agonistic encounters, and after fights, to heal their wounds. Such wounds occurring in a wild population would most likely lead to death of the injured individuals (Goodwin et al., 1996, p. 302).

The idea that human families and their pet dogs join to form packs that mirror the pack order of wolves became popular among pet dog trainers and owners during the late 1970s and ensuing decades.

The 1978 publication of the book “How To Be Your Dog’s Best Friend” by the Monks of New Skete, popularized the notion that wolves use force to dominate each other, as well as establish and maintain pack order. The Monks’ premise was based on 1940s studies, supported by limited observations of wolves. Those early studies promulgated substantial misinterpretation of wolf behavior.

Nevertheless, the idea of a force-based hierarchical order among wolves took on the mythic proportion of gospel. Projecting the myth a step farther, the Monks and their followers proclaimed that humans must use force to establish dominance over dogs.

In fact, more recent and extensive studies (see Mech, 1999) show that wolves rarely use violence to establish dominance or to maintain their status within the pack. During conflicts, the submissive wolf acquiesces and displays submission in response to other wolves’ dominant social status and posturing. Rank or hierarchy disputes among wolves are usually resolved through ritualized aggression, without injury to either the wolf who emerges as the victor or the one who submits.

People who force dogs into a submissive posture behave toward dogs in a manner that neither wolves nor dogs ordinarily behave toward each other. Furthermore, alpha rolls are a form of punishment. Even the Monks of New Skete, in the 2002 revised edition of their book, disavowed their original theories about the appropriateness of ‘wolf alpha rolls’ as a form of discipline in the context of human-dog relationships. They wrote:

These alpha roll interactions include both dominance displays and passive submission. Neither the dogs above nor the wolves to the right use physical force as a tactic in these interactions. (Photo: Barbara Handelman)

These alpha roll interactions include both dominance displays and passive submission. Neither the dogs above nor the wolves to the right use physical force as a tactic in these interactions.(Photo: Monty Sloan)

We no longer recommend this technique and strongly discourage its use to our clients. Though it can be argued that it has a natural basis in pack life, in a dog human context it is potentially very dangerous and can set up the owner for a serious bite in the face (or worse), particularly with a dominant dog. The conditions in which it might be used effectively are simply too risky and demanding for the average dog owner; there are other ways of dealing with problem behavior that are much safer and, in the long run, just as effective.

The American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (AVSAB) states the following in its position statement regarding punishment.

... punishment (e.g. choke chains, pinch collars, and electronic collars) should not be used as a first-line or early-use treatment for behavior problems. This is due to the potential adverse effects, which include, but are not limited to: inhibition of learning increased fear-related and aggressive behaviors, and injury to animals and people interacting with animals.

Adverse Effects of Punishment
AVSAB recommends that training should focus on reinforcing desired behaviors, removing the reinforcer for inappropriate behaviors, and addressing the emotional state and environmental conditions driving the undesirable behavior.  This approach promotes a better understanding of the pet’s behavior and better awareness of how humans may have inadvertently contributed to the development of the undesirable behavior.

Current dog training practices that adhere to the science of Canine Learning Theory and the tenets of Operant Conditioning, promote positive reward-based training methods, and discourage the use of force-based corrections or other aversives.  Wolves are not dogs and dogs are not wolves. That dogs do share a common language with their canid cousins is a source of great fascination to this author – which hopefully the readers will share. In many instances, photographs of wolves or other canids were chosen to illustrate behavioral terminology for the very fact that the heightened amplitude of wolf displays makes the behavioral attributes vivid. Thus, the behaviors may be more easily identified by a novice observer. It is hoped that novice observers will then apply their new knowledge to the more subtle displays offered by domestic dogs.

What is Behavior?

Behavior is the way an animal reacts to or interacts with its immediate environment. Some behaviors are voluntary, while others are involuntary physiological responses to environmental stimuli or stressors. To be considered “behavior,” an action must be both observable and measurable.

“Language is behaviour in as much as it communicates intention, emotion and affects others’ behaviours” According to Ken Ramirez, behavior is “any activity of animals or men which is directly observable and where it is possible for two or more observers to agree on what they saw or heard” (Ramirez, 1999, p. 536).

Observing Behavior Without Making Judgments About Intention

To best understand behavior, the observer must distinguish between empirical descriptions such as: tail up, head high, ears erect, body forward in greeting posture; and functional patterns such as: dominance or status-seeking behavior. The observer cannot accurately jump from behavioral descriptions of a single interaction to a conclusion about the canid’s intentions.  Dominance seeking is a functional pattern that occurs mostly within established canine social groups. By lumping together the behaviors described above, and calling them “dominance seeking” the observer makes a huge leap. Calling the collective behaviors an “aroused posture” would be more accurate and not dependent on an assumption about intention. When viewing a display of fear, the observer is apt to see the animal’s head lower than his body, his ears flattened, and while snarling, the mouth may be partially open with relatively retracted lips. These are empirical descriptions of postures and expressions in a specific context. It would be inaccurate to conclude that a single submissive response signifies the canid’s subordinate status within the group’s social structure.

Observers can clearly describe a fearful animal. Fearful behavior and subordinate status are not synonymous – neither is confident or aroused behavior synonymous with dominant status.

Empirical behaviors are observable, and can be described in the same terms by anyone witnessing the behavior. Aroused, confident, or fearful behaviors in a single, specific context should not be used to label a dog as having a “dominant” or “submissive” personality type.

Three frightened wolves, on the left: tails tucked, ears back, gaze lowered, backs rounded. Their weight is shifted back and movement portrays avoidance and retreat. Piloerection apparent on fearful wolf on the far left and ambivalent wolf who is most forward among the three aggressive wolves on the right. Their aggression is apparent in more upright postures, forward movement, ear positions and forward commissures of the lips. (Photo: Monty Sloan)

The English Setter on the left is fearful. She cautiously approaches the stuffed dog. Note: piloerector reflex evident especial ly over her shoulders and rump. Everything about her posture is angled backwards, away from the object that has caused her fear. (Photo: Barbara Handelman)