Last week I wrote about that ever-so-controversial word, “dominance,” and how it might or might not relate to dog behavior and dog training. To refresh: In animal behavior, dominance refers only to “priority access to a limited resource,” has little to do with controlling the actions of another in any other context, is highly dependent on context and the distribution of resources and is maintained by species-specific displays that act to avoid conflict rather than create it.
In decades past, it was assumed that classic dominance hierarchies existed in domestic dogs. After all, drop a pork chop between two hungry dogs and in short order, one of them is going to get it more often than not. Dogs greet one other in classic “dominance/submission” displays of ears up/tail up versus ears flat/tail tucked. “Submissive” dogs greet others with the same appeasement behavior of puppies, ears flat, body low, tail tucked, foreleg cocked, licking another’s muzzle with a submissive grin, even urinating in some cases.
In addition, dogs are not only derived from wolves, they are so close genetically they are now considered sub-species of Canis lupus. And wolves used to be the story book species of dominance/submission social relationships. We were told that only the alpha male and female mate, that extremely strict social hierarchies existed between each member of the pack, and woe unto an omega wolf who tried to usurp power from a dominant member of the same sex.
Ah, but that was then, and this is now. First off, as we learn more, it is clear that social relationships in wolves are a tad more complicated than previously believed. We’ve learned from following packs in Yellowstone National Park that, in some packs, several females have litters. Nor does the hierarchy seem to be as strict in wild packs as it does in captive ones. And several authors have questioned the concept of dominance in domestic dogs: To name just a few: the Coppingers in the book Dogs said they saw little sign of it in the free-ranging dogs that they observed around the world; Bradshaw et. al. wrote in the J. of Veterinary Behavior (2009, Vol 4, 135-144) that learning and ‘subjective resource value’ are better explanations for agonistic behavior than ‘dominance.’
And so, is the concept of a social hierarchy and dominance even relevant in domestic dogs? I think yes, but then, I think no. Here’s the beginning of this potentially profoundly unsatisfying answer:
DISPLAYS: There’s no getting around it. Dogs are the poster children of visual displays that have historically been used to describe signals of social hierarchy. What are we to make of two dogs greeting, one with her tail flagged forward, the other with tail tucked? We can call lip-licking and flattened ears appeasement displays, but what do we call the opposite? Dogs who are flagging their tails, and giving hard direct stares over a favorite toy should be described how? Well…. there are other terms. We could describe them as “on offense” or “threatening” or “confident.” We can label the opposite postures as “insecure” or
“appeasing” or “on defense.” I should mention here, however, that I’ve seen a gazillion dogs with extreme versions of what are usually called ‘submissive displays’ who appear to be full of confidence around other dogs. File this away for a moment, and continue pondering:
PRIORITY ACCESS TO RESOURCES: There also seem to be a plethora of examples of multi-dog households in which one dog is “more equal than others.” (Remember the famous quote from the book Animal Farm?: “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.”) The resource may vary, from access to their human, to access to the great outdoors to access to the pig’s ear, but there are a gazillion examples of groups of dogs in which one dog appears to priority access to what it wants. But, of course, (of course!) there are complications:
What of the issue about “wanting something equally?” Several of you have asked in your comments about how one can determine if two individuals desire a resource equally. Could all “wins” simply be an example of an individual who wants something more than any other? It IS a complication, and is yet another reason why the concept of “dominance” can be a tricky one. However, I don’t think it’s always impossible to make this judgment. Luke would let any dog take food out of his bowl, because he just didn’t care much about his dinner. Figuring that out was trivial, because sometimes I had to encourage him to eat. But he never, ever let another dog pick up a tennis ball that was between the two of them. His intensity around tennis balls was best illustrated when he was an adolescent and first became interested in fetching. I threw the ball and little Misty, a tiny, fox-faced BC of mine, got to the ball first. As she ran toward me with it in her mouth, Luke rushed up behind her, grabbed her tail in his mouth and flicked his head to the side. Misty, being attached to her own tail, flew threw the air and landed so hard the ball popped out and dribbled through the grass. Luke snatched it up and proudly brought it over to me (at least, until I, coming out of my shock, said WHAT ARE YOU DOING? and body blocked him backward about 10 feet. FYI, that is all I did, and he never did it again.)
Possession is the law: The concept of “priority access” is often confounded by a lack of understanding of what it means. It is often said that “possession is the law” in wolf society, and I have found it often true in dogs. If a dog who normally behaves submissively/appeasingly (etc etc) has a hold of a bone, a dog who would be called “dominant” by many does NOT have priority access. Often, he who has the bone gets the bone. “Dominance” was originally used to described two individuals who do not have possession of a resource. Given that scenario, when two individuals do NOT have possession of something yet, who gets it? That’s partly why Luke was being such a jerk in the example above. As an adolescent, he hadn’t read that memo, and was breaking all the laws of canine custom, as well as just p….’g me off.
Resources Vary: In biology, the word “resource” can refer to a wide range of things. Common zebra males compete for females, as the limited factor in passing on their genes. Grevy’s zebra males compete for good waterholes, an indirect way of competing for females who are attracted to the resources necessary to provide for their young. Cavity nesting birds compete for territories with old, dead trees that can provide good nest sites. Etc. Etc. Dogs can compete for a favorite toy, or access to outside or sitting next to their favorite human.
Resource Distribution Varies: Did you notice from my descriptions above that social hierarchies seem to be less strict in wild than captive wolves? And that observers watching free-ranging dogs see less evidence of “dominance” displays than others have reported in other contexts? Ah, I wish more people had taken Ecology, because here’s what all ecologists know: social systems, in the same species, vary tremendously, dependent upon the distribution of resources. “High quality, clumped resources” tend to create stricter social hierarchies, while “Low quality, evenly disbursed resources” tend to create looser social organizations. Hmmm. Which would describe house dogs?
PERSONALITY MATTERS: Besides an interest in status, the personality (that’s temperament + life experience) of each dog surely makes a huge difference in their behavior around other dogs. There are dogs out there who are what I call “alpha wanna-bees” — status seeking, controlling BUT insecure and nervous. They turn into the bullies of the world, the canine equivalent of a boss from hell who wants to control all the resources but doesn’t have the chops to do much of anything with confidence. Other dogs, my Luke was one, are what some people call “natural alpha’s.” Luke was an intact male, he met hundreds if not thousands of other dogs, some of whom were dog-dog aggressive. He never got into a fight, not even a skirmish. Not once. Luke was accepted by all dogs who met him as being . . . dare I say it? A leader? He greeted other dogs with his tail flagged and his entire body elevated, but he also broadcast a benevolent, Gandhi-esque-like aura that appeared to calm all who met him. Granted, there were a few client’s dogs that I did not let him meet, so I’m not saying that Luke was magical in any way. Dogs who were still seriously dog-dog aggressive did not get a chance to interact with Luke, but Luke was the vehicle for curing hundreds of aggressive dogs, in part because he seemed to make everyone, dogs and people alike, feel better standing next to him.
In reality, there is no such thing as a “dominant personality”. Dominance is a relationship between individuals, not a description of a temperament. However I DO think (and I know some will disagree) that one component of personality in dogs is whether or not they are “status seeking.” I use “social status” to describe the general phenomenon that some animals are more equal than others. This is as true in our society as it might be in dogs. The actress gets the best table at the restaurant because she is famous and fame in our culture gives one social status. In my opinion, some people care deeply about social status, while others don’t seem to care at all. Status simply means ones position relative to that of others, and surely it is an obvious feature of human interactions.
But some dogs just don’t seem to care about social status either, do they? And here is perhaps one of the reasons why this issue can become so confused and confusing. I suspect that dogs vary tremendously in how important social status is to them. This makes sense: dogs are neotonized wolves, meaning that there’s been selection for a regulator gene that basically keeps them in eternal adolescence. This interference with development also creates ideal conditions for tremendous variability–not just in size or coat color, but also in behavior. Perhaps you’ve known some dogs who just couldn’t care less about who’s who in the social register, and others who are obsessed with being king or queen of the mountain? And then there are others, the equivalent of a gold digger who is always looking for power–and who may or may not get it, depending on a myriad of other factors.
SOCIAL STATUS IS JUST ONE WAY to get what you want. Here’s another problem I have with the way the concept of “dominance” is used. Somehow, if an individual is “dominant” it is presumed to be able to get everything it wants every time it wants it. But that’s just not the way complicated societies work. You might get a better table at the restaurant because you are more famous that I am, but what if I slip the Maitre D a hundred bucks? What if he’d seen your movie and hated it? My super submissive/appeasing BC Pippy Tay got a chew bone out of Queen Tulip’s mouth one night by lip-licking and tail thumping so relentlessly that Tulip finally got up and walked away. Pip was brilliant, and yet, I assure you: Tulip would’ve gotten a pork chop lying between them every time, but I’d bet the farm that Pip wanted it more than Tulip did. Pip never, ever would’ve ‘won’ a piece of yummy food off the floor if Tulip was around, unless she’d had 15 minutes to work her magic as she groveled her way toward Tulip, grinning, licking and tail thumping like a fool. And no pork chop was going to last in Tulip’s mouth for 15 minutes. Take my word for it. “Priority access” may mean that a higher status dog has gets the goody more often than not, but it is NOT the only way to get what you want in a social group.
Just to confuse things (or to clarify?): There’s one other phrase used by a wolf ethologist (Zimen) that I really like: Dominance simply means whoever has the most social freedom. Is that the same as priority access to a preferred resource? Hmmmm. More food for thought.
THUS, MY ANSWER IS YES AND NO: Here’s what I meant by “YES, the concept of “dominance” is relevant to dogs, and NO I don’t think it is relevant”. I think the concept is relevant IF AND ONLY IF it is understood that it is merely a way of describing one aspect of the relationship between social individuals. And I think NO, because once you use the word “dominance” all other aspects of personality, context, and the complexity of social interaction seem to fly out the window. I could write on and on, but this is becoming something of a book, and I need to get something else done today and you are probably getting sick of reading . . . I’ll take this topic up again soon, because it deserves it, and so do you, dear reader. In it I’ll address some of your very thoughtful (and considerate!) comments.
Meanwhile, back on the farm: Busy weekend. One new set of twins, but still nothing from Dorothy, now 9 days late. Best guess is that she didn’t get bred the first round, and will deliver lambs from the next cycle, 8 days from now. The lambs, all 9 of them now, are doing wonderfully, fat-bellied and playful. Even better, Will got to run free for the first time on Saturday. I even let him work sheep for about 6 seconds! What a joy for us both. So far, so good. Cross your paws.
Yesterday we visited a friend with a litter of 4 week old Border Collies. Puppy rapture on all counts:
Heavenly rain on Friday, sunny and cool Saturday and Sunday; grass and flowers lifting upward toward the blue sky. Good golly I love spring.
Liz says
The puppy picture is wonderful. It just made my whole afternoon end on a smile. The blog posts on dominance have been educational and fascinating. In my household the greyhound and the borzoi are kept in line and sometimes terrorized by the cat. She was a stray prior to our adopting her and is fearless. Plus she was with us first so she feels entitled. Thanks again for such a wonderful picture and discussion.
Jana says
Ah, yeah, the alpha wanna-bees! Cute that you call them that too. Our Jasmine really doesn’t like those!
I have seen some really extreme cases in the park. A dog trying to dominate but goes running and literally screaming when he meets with any resistance.
Jasmine however, who could be called dominant, is quite happy around truly confident dogs. She used to meet a female sheppard. While Jasmine normally acts very confident, she was all submissive around the sheppard and happy as she could be.
She is extremely kind to shy dogs. But she always rules the house, regardless of the number of dogs who end up being here (up to 4). Plus all dogs were always happy to be here.
She did have a minor clash with our late male rescue. He was also happy to be here, never picked an argument with her, but also never really respected her or even liked her for that matter. And she didn’t like him either, from the first day. However she took it like a lady and put up with it even though there was nothing in it for her.
With her new boy it is different. The two are a real team. The care about one another, do things together and he is looking to her for guidance.
Of course there is nothing better than a happy-go-lucky dog who cares about nothing other than enjoying their life. We chose Jasmine’s dog very carefully for this quality. Worked out quite well. Thought he to can show ambition around some other male dogs, he is just happy-go-lucky in his pack.
However, his is more likely to ‘demand’ what he wants, while Jasmine will choose a sneaky way of getting her own way. Her approach is to make everybody to WANT TO give it to her.
I did read your book btw, just loving it and loving the tactics Pip is using.
Kat says
Gorgeous pictures and fascinating discussion.
I describe Ranger as being a highly dominant dog because I don’t have a better way to describe it. If there’s something that he wants he almost always gets it. When we’re at the park the other dogs greet him with submissive displays of licking and groveling. He manages the energy in the park and keeps things on an even keel. I’ve watched him calmly and confidently face down dogs that are pushing him to give way. As I think about it perhaps I’d be better served to describe him as a high status dog that other dogs want to follow.
Actually, your description of Luke sounds a lot like Ranger. People and other dogs and even other creatures are simply attracted to him. More than once stray dogs in the neighborhood that no one has been able to get close to have followed him home from a walk. It’s always amusing that these dogs who won’t come even close to me will follow him as he walks with me.And it isn’t just dogs, I was startled to discover him one day playing a game of peek-a-boo with a squirrel in the woodpile. There’s really no other way to describe it, they were playing together; his body posture was relaxed and his tail in a neutral position. The squirrel could have easily left the game at any point but did not. And people can’t resist him; we’ve gotten used to the fact that people will stop their cars so that they can come and pet him.
I don’t get the sense that Ranger cares about having status but rather that because he is a dog that attracts others and that other dogs respect and follow he naturally has status. Does that make sense? He “dominates” by being who he is.
On one occasion he was playing with his pal Rusty. Rusty found a highly desirable stick and Ranger wanted it. Ranger took a wimpy twig and resource guarded it like it was the most precious thing in the world. Eventually, Rusty dropped his stick to try to get the twig. Ranger gave up the twig and snatched the desirable stick. He then ran a distance away and deliberately chewed the stick in half keeping one half for himself and leaving the other for Rusty. He controlled the stick resource but didn’t keep it all for himself. That’s the kind of “dominant” that describes Ranger.
Thank you for this discussion. I’m learning a lot.
Karen says
What is happening with Dorothy? What did the Vet say?
Em says
People often describe my female as “dominant” (she marks like a male, puts her chin over other dogs shoulders and will put her paws on there back end) but she definitly is more “status seeking” and a desperate and insecure alpha-wannabe. She is hardly ever submissive (I have never seen her go belly up to another dog and she rarely shows any other appeasement gestures) and tries to take advantage of weaker/submissive dogs but demonstrating appeasement gestures to dogs who exude true leadership (like Luke).
An interesting description of a dog “controlling” resources in a non-aggresive manner. Last year we lived with a male dog..at first glance my female looked like the boss…she was constantly putting her head over his sholder and placing her paws on his back. I also had to watch her as she would snark at him if he bumped against her at the front door when they came to greet us. She was also constantly trying to get him to play…body slamming him etc. He took it all in a stride..yawning as she tried to mount him and ignoring her badgering to play 90% of the time. They played when he decided he felt like it and ended when he was done. They shared bones and there was never any aggresion but if he wanted a particular item he always got it..never by force. Sometimes he would playbow and she would leave her bone excited to play..he would then run and get the bone and disapear with it. If he wanted something in particular he ALWAYS got it.
So while my insecure female demonstrated a lot more outright threat displays and posturing for status the male controlled the majority of there interactions and resources. Quietly and calmly. I don’t think he gave a care about status so all of my girl’s actions left him unphased.
I also like the distinction between “Dominance” in dog-humane vs dog-dog relationship. While my dog is not submissive with other dogs she is submissive with humans. Does anyone have any thoughts on how this is correlated? For example, do dogs who display some dominant behaviour with other dogs often display this with humans? (and vice versa…dogs who are submissive with dogs but illustrate some dominant characteristics with humans)? I work at a shelter and have seen instances of correlation between the two in some cases but not in others. I have had a few people comment (after seeing her trying to mount another dog) that she “must be the boss” at home too….wrong on both counts..
Pamela says
Two thought-provoking posts on the “D” word. And yet, so nuanced, that I wouldn’t count on it bumping Cesar Millan off the air anytime soon. : )
While I too get exasperated with a simplistic view of dominance issues being touted as the cause of every doggie behavior problem, I think I
Jennifer Hamilton says
So…what do we call dogs like Luke? My sense is you would not call him “status seeking”, since he seemed to just have “it” whatever “it” is…no seeking required. But “leader” doesn’t seem right either as it seems odd to suggest that dogs like this are intending to lead anything. In the wild, would dogs with status lead a hunt…maybe. But I can’t say I’ve seen these types of dogs really “lead” anything. Some may have calming influences, but most of the time I observe other dogs simply saying, “I get it, I know you’ve got it”…whatever that “it” is. To me it seems that these are classic “Alpha” dogs…they know it and everyone else knows it. There is nothing to prove. But if this is nott he correct term, then what do we use to descibe these dogs that we all recognize as soon as they encounter a group of dogs?
Chelle says
Regarding the
Meganwf says
Hmmm….4 wk old puppies you say? And there was mention of perhaps a new addition in May? Very interesting!!
Pike says
What an adorably rosy puppy!! Happily resting on YOUR legs?
Back to the other topic:
I find it very interesting to see that the words dominant and submissive appear to be much more acceptable here in this thread when describing canine-canine interactions than they were in the previous thread that focused on human-canine interactions.
Maybe, it is not so much the words dominance and submission that cause all the stir – but the association of these words with training styles or views that appear either too simplistic or connected to corrections?
Like JJ in the last thread, I believe that the common definition of dominant – ruling, commanding, controlling – is here to stay for the general public (and therefore for most people who are training dogs). At least my middle aged brain is too inflexible to add a different meaning to a word that I commonly use otherwise. Way too confusing!
Also, I don’t have a problem with using the d-word. Living in an urban setting, of course, I am controlling, ruling (dominating) my dogs in a great many areas. They are dependents of mine rather than equal partners.
Not because I am obsessed with hierarchy or domination for domination’s sake – but because my pups wouldn’t live until the end of the day, if I would just open the front door and let them do as they please. Or maybe Ronja (being a little more street smart than Sparky) would still be alive – but she would have been picked up by animal control for harassing other dogs and little children.
So, yes, I am controlling them in many ways – but there is nothing simplistic about our interactions. Just the opposite! While I find the canine-canine interactions endlessly fascinating, the human-canine interactions are way more complicated than I like and the path to a well behaved dog about as straightforward and clear as the meaning of dominance!
Alexandra W says
One of the things I love about my little beagle, Romeo, is that he doesn’t seem to care about his position in the social hierarchy of dogs. He’s an only dog, but he’s a dog park regular and has a number of friends there whom he regularly seeks out for play, even during busy days. When he’s greeted by an unfamiliar and exuberant/confident dog, he’ll perform some submissive displays – ears back, low, quick tail wagging, the occasional tongue flick – but as soon as possible he’ll finish the greeting routine and find someone who’ll box with him (he loves pit bulls, I’ve discovered!). He’s never scared, at least to my eye; I had a good chance to compare his “scared” face to his “appeasing” face today, because I took him to the vet this morning (for regular check-up and heartworm preventative meds) and the park this afternoon.
At the vet, he whimpered, tucked his tail between his legs and sat, his ears were way back, and his commisure (learned that term just yesterday after buying your book!) was pulled way back. He was his usual sweet self – licking the vet techs even as they gave him a shot – but he was obviously unhappy and eager to leave.
At the dog park, of course, his face is almost always in that big happy dog grin they get after running about like mad things; even during greetings, his face is usually quite relaxed.
The only times I’ve ever seen him start to get uncomfortable (and I’ve always intervened) have been with younger dogs with no manners – an 80 lb lab puppy, for instance, that kept bowling him over and taking him down by the back legs got a snap at the face, as did a very rude Bernese Mountain Dog more than usually insistent on mounting behaviors.
Oh, also: how would you describe the status-seeking vs. confidence/insecurity personality of “hall monitor” or “fun police” dogs? There’s one dog at the park, a regular, who always barks like a mad thing if Romeo starts playing with a bigger dog, and only stops if Romeo isn’t playing with anyone. It’s deafening, ineffective, and annoying (is it fair that I dislike this dog because I dislike the dog’s owner? Poor old Calypso.). If I were to guess, it’s a behavior deriving from insecurity, but I figured I’d ask the expert!
carla says
Interesting discussion, gives alot to think about.
Love the puppy picture!
Greta says
Mellie Border Collie is confident with dogs, reads them well. Has been in a few spats, mostly with other girls she spends time with. She sometimes greets tail up, head up. And sometimes flops over on her back and wiggles at the greet-ee, who is almost always an overexcited, insecure male dog (who has no idea that, if given the opportunity, in ten minutes she would be playing them like a piano). She is not status-seeking, but sometimes cannot give up on obtaining a resource, by kamikaze dive-bomb attacks across the room (hard not to laugh) or standing sullenly *very close* to the resource in another dog’s possession. It’s complicated, situation-specific, changeable. She knows exactly how to manipulate most dogs to her advantage, and when to stay well out of their way. FWIW, I would overall put her second in status in my household.
Anyway, I am SO GLAD you think this is as hard to put together as I do.
Debra says
That puppy is so adorable – I don’t think it is possible to see one and not want one. (Is there really such a thing as going to “look” at a puppy?).
I’m reading this with such interest and relief. Many of your comments I have observed myself and didn’t think the “dominance” description everyone uses could possibly be right or that simple. My younger dog is definitely more interested in chews, toys, access to me, etc. but my observation is as you described – my other dog just doesn’t seem to care that much. Once in a while when he decides he is interested (access to me, a particular chew, etc.) boy can he be “passively” determined and just somehow ends up with what he wants with very little fuss. I think it’s kind of amusing – I have observed similiar behavior in my sons – never ceases to amaze me how some things about humans and dogs are so much the same.
By the way, this weekend on my walk with my dogs, we were taking a pause on some rocks on the side of the trail. Someone stopped to comment on how neat they looked, but then asked if the one on the higher rock was more dominant that the other one, and was it okay that I let them sit higher than me on the rocks or would that make them take advantage of me. I started to launch into a description of your last post, and then caught myself – way to much information for such a casual remark! I ended up saying that I tended to think about it being more like parenting and that I tried to earn their respect and rewarded their good behavior.
Cindy says
Oh, daffodils! We’re in melting snow and mud season here in Interior Alaska–all brown and gray and waiting for the ice to go out on the Nenana River.
Good discussion. I’ve heard my 2-year-old Standard Poodle, Jeter, called “play aggressive” by a friend. Is that a term? In this discussion, he fits with the confident dogs, but, for him, the resource he most craves is contact with other dogs–leading to abrupt run-offs from our yard (one minute he’s chasing after toys, the next he off up the hill to check out the neighbor dog) and leash tangles with other dogs on walks. I’ve seen him try to mount other dogs (he’s neutered), but back off and give them space when they object. He’s the same way with our new rescue kitty–eager to interact with her, but keeping at least six inches of space between them. In both situations, he play bows with his tail up and wagging.
I spend time reviewing the basic obedience we learned in puppy class with him (sit, watch me, stay, come, heel, wait) and he is making lots of progress–but sometimes he can barely contain his joy at seeing another dog.
Anne says
I’m so glad you put so eloquently in to words what others of us have been thinking. The sequel I hope to see is your thoughts on how humans have misused what they think they know about the concept of dominance, and the ramifications of that on dogs in general.
Trish McMillan Loehr says
Thank you so much for addressing this issue so eloquently! The D word is the most misunderstood and misused concept in the field of dog behavior, and many dogs suffer because of humans’ lack of clarity on this concept.
My favorite example of the fluidity of “priority access to resources” is a group of dogs I had a few years ago. The senior dog, an arthritic Dalmatian, would always get the best resting spot – the sunny place by the window, the prime spot at the foot of the bed, – no one challenged her. The next oldest, a Doberman, would win any contest for food – it was no mystery who’d get a dropped pork chop in my kitchen! My teeny toy poodle, 1/10th the size of the Doberman, was nevertheless the king of the lap – the other dogs would automatically walk a wide loop around him if he was ensconced in his favorite place (not that any of the others could even fit in a lap!) My Malinois mix won every contest over toys, both the throwing and chewing kinds. The puppy, a Lab mix foster dog, lost every contest over everything, though he didn’t seem too distressed by it. If he had a toy or chewy between his paws though, the other dogs were polite enough not to take it away. So who was my “alpha dog?”
Martina says
Interesting Blog.
For me, “dominance just is not relevant, and I don’t really care, if it is relavant for dogs.
Whatever the “dominant”, “alpha-wannebee”, or “subordinate” dog does, it is just behaviour. If I like it, I reinforce it, if I don’t, I’ll try to change it with training.
I don’t waste time trying to find out, if that behaviour does or does not fits with any dominance-theories.
Frances says
Very, very interesting discussion. My two tinies are still hardly more than puppies – I had read very widely before I got them, and decided to ignore the whole dominance thing unless problems developed between the two dogs, and to concentrate on good parenting, and reward based education. Sophy is now 17 months old, Poppy is 10 months old – Sophy is confident with other dogs and people, giving out strong friendly signals from a distance, and then recognising when a dog or person is responding with friendly signs, and when they would clearly prefer to be left alone, and acting accordingly. Poppy is still occasionally nervous of big dogs, having been bounced by a few over-enthusiastic adolescents – she seems to still be learning the best way of communicating friendly intentions, but not wanting to play rough. The only “dominance” issues between them are that Sophy strongly dislikes being trodden on, and makes her displeasure very clear if Poppy breaks this rule, and Sophy also reinforces many of my rules (dogs settle down safely in the car, don’t get out until asked, and don’t snatch when offered treats; cats do not scratch the furniture!). I suspect it has more to do with being the eldest, and having learned some human social rules that are also “fair” in dog terms, than any strange wish to take over the world, however.
rheather says
The story of Misty and Luke made me realize that my Rufus dog is RUDE! He takes Phoebe’s toys away-by yanking-just so she will want what he has. And if they’re both playing, he’ll drop his to take hers. I’m sort of okay to play with but he really want Phoebe to play and she’s tired of his roughness and doesn’ t play with him much anymore.
So now I’ve got to figure out how to change this around. And then reread the post because after the shock of having a RUDE dog happened I think my eyes were moving but my brain wasn’t working. Except about Dorothy-good thing she’s just not going to pop.
Melissa says
This was awesome — thanks!! May I request one more post? Now let’s talk about the roll of dominance in dog-human groups, because I think that is where most of the damage is being done.
Denise says
Interesting topic and possibly the most reasonable discussion of “dominance” I’ve ever seen so far. Could be that Martina has the most useful response but the topic has so much impact on so many dogs’ lives , largely due to it’s misuse, it needs to be addressed as thoughtfully as possible. For me, the conclusion that “it depends” is most helpful. My reactive Eskie may be an “alpha wanna-bee” but I’m not quite sure about that. He is both desperately interested in playing with other dogs and desperately afraid they’ll hurt him. When he was much younger he did seem to have a tendency to bully other dogs who were very soft but I wonder if there was an element of fear there rather than a true effort to be dominant. Sort of an “I need to put you in your place or you might do something bad to me.” thought process, rather than a need to be “top dog.” Does that make sense? My cat slaps him around at will – partly because she’s like that (She slaps me around too. How’s that for gratitude from a rescue? LOL) and partly because he seems content to let her call the shots. Despite the appearance of being a alpha wanna-bee sometimes, I’m not at all sure he is trying to be dominant so much as safe and he just doesn’t have the confidence or social skills to do it better.
Karissa says
I found your tail thumping comments particularly interesting. I have never really experienced this act of submission in the past, but I now have a young female Border Collie who is a tail thumping fool! I’ve never quite understood it, but your post did give a bit of light to it. She is in love with my oldest dog, Luke, who really doesn’t want much to do with her — Secret often approaches Luke with her tail thumping madly and tries to lick his face.
The behavior that I find more odd, however, is when we are in bed and her tail starts thumping. It’s generally right before she really “wakes up.” What is that about? I’ve never had a dog that does this.
I found the entire post to be quite interesting. I’ve always struggled to come up with a clear answer when people ask me which of me three dogs is “in charge” in my house. Ultimately, I’ve always figured that *I* am the one in charge and they all fall in line somewhere below me, depending on the situation.
Luke is the oldest and the biggest, at 80 lbs, and tends to get what he wants by virtue of his size. He was raised alone and doesn’t tend to think of himself as much of a dog, but there is never much fuss when he meets new dogs and they always tend to defer to him. You would think this marks him as a “dominant” dog, but he certainly doesn’t feel the need to be aggressive about it.
My middle dog is also my smallest dog, at 15 lbs. He is also my only intact dog. I often think that he feels he has something to prove to the world. He wants to dominate every dog he meets, generally by trying to stand over them (comical when he tries this with big dogs!). That said, he will back down to a dog who calmly lets him know that isn’t allowed behavior. And often, I think he seems happier when he doesn’t have to be the one in charge.
My young female is the hardest one for me to peg. She’s my first girl and it’s a whole new world for me. I definitely understand why they are called bitches. But she’s also frustratingly passive and will roll over and show her belly at the drop of a hat to dogs she likes — other dogs get a face full of snarking from her until she decides they are okay to be around, then she goes to rolling over for them, too. At home she tends to pester my boys (barking, tail thumping, licking) until they give in and let her have what she wants. She is incredibly manipulative. Most people would never call her dominant, but I think she’s about as passive-aggressive as they come.
Alexandra says
When push comes to shove, my cat bosses my dogs around too! Cats just seem to have a presence much bigger than their physical size.
What I think of when I hear about dogs like Luke and Ranger is “charisma.” Charisma in people can make you successful in all manner of endeavors because it’s a talent that somehow encourages people to like and trust you. But, you don’t necessairily become a “leader” unless you also go into politics which requires you to have charisma AND ambition. I think some dogs are charismatic.
Amy says
Great threads! I am *loving* the recent D-word posts and the comments. This has become my preferred reading during down-time.
I have never conceptualized the terms “dominance” and “submissive” with such detail. It seems that these terms have become intermingled with both dog trainining and with understanding canine social hierarchies. While they aren’t mutually exclusive, they don’t seem to be mutually inclusive, either.
For me, I definitely do not apply dominance theory into training and living with my Aussies. However, when I am out with my dogs, I think I keep the dominance theory in mind (probably my control issues!) I am vigilant about alpha-wannabe types who are pushy or overbearing as they overwhelm my dog(s). If it looks like my dog(s) needs help, I step in and shoo or bodyblock the transgressor away. I try to do this before my Aussies growl/snap/bite/bark at the other dog because I don’t want any new behavioral patterns to emerge during dog-dog encounters. Fortunately, there have been no problems. My Aussies have never been in a dog scuffle.
Thanks again for the illuminating discussion. I look forward to reading more. What a cute puppy! Awwwwwww. Puppy rapture indeed. Is she is a keeper? 😉
Tina says
great discussion, I am learning so much!
I would love a definition for body block or better yet, does someone have a good video to share? I am definitely a remedial student when it comes to dog training.
I keep working with my dog and love and live for those ‘ah-ha’ moments when we both get it.
Dan says
rheather talked about her dog being RUDE. I have to say my Newfoundland is as well.
We adopted her at 7 months of age. Her previous life consisted of being in a backyard with a littermate and another puppy 4 months older than her. She tends to bully my golden retriever. Taking toys away, tackling her when she has a toy to instigate a game of chase.
My Newf tends to flag her tail and posture when meeting new dogs, and eager to play with any dog that gives way, but if there is a confrontation she still pushes back. However I can take her back to a dog she may have had a small confrontation with 5 minutes later and she’s ready to play. Even though she acts confident around other dogs, she’s very timid around new objects and experiences. The lack of socializing has hampered her greatly and it’s a struggle but she gets better every day.
It’s funny how dogs do manipulate one another. You wrote about Pip appeasing Tulip to get something. If my golden is on the couch and our newf wants it. Our newf will go get a ball and start playing with it until the golden jumps down to play. Then the newf gives up the ball and lays down on the couch.
Amy W. says
You should expand this topic into a seminar or video. I will no doubt have to read this blog in conjunction with the first dominance posting several more times, so that everything you wrote sinks in.
The puppy picture is wonderful!
Diana says
I have two standard poodles. Elly is what I call a “gamma” dog–she could care less about her status. When everyone else at the dog park is busy sniffing each other, she wanders off and checks out the people to see who will give her a shoulder rub. Dancer, however, will always let someone else run the show, but still somehow gets what she wants. Recently I gave both dogs bones. After lots of chewing, Dancer ran to the window to bark (there was nothing there, really). So did Elly. When Elly stopped barking and went back to her bone, it wasn’t where she’d left it–Dancer now had both bones. Elly wandered over to the couch, climbed on it, and fell asleep.
Pike says
I second what Martina said so very precisely!
Also, the clicker training introduction on your website is by far the briefest and the best that I have seen since reading up on that training method.
diana says
since we can’t ever really know what any particular dog is really thinking (despite how well we think we ‘know’ our dogs), why can’t we just describe the behavior? if we really need to, we could say the dog/s that are being most appropriate in any given situation (yes, that includes ‘telling off’ another creature, be it dog, human, or whatever, if that’s what the other creature’s behavior calls for) are the socially skilled ones. these are the dogs that are the best teachers for both puppies and socially unskilled adult dogs.
i personally don’t find it meaningful, except in an academic sense, to even try to define what dominance means and when it applies (whether that is dog/dog interactions or dog/human). i still haven’t read any convincing reason why it matters. and as long as we keep using words such as dominance and alpha, status-seeking and social hierarchies (in any context), we continue to give credibility to those who mis-use the words (example: as a volunteer, i assist in teaching puppy socialization classes at my local shelter. a well-meaning staff member who helps with class told a patron that her 4 month old female puppy’s attempted mounting and humping of a 4 month old male puppy was ‘dominant’ behavior. really? it wasn’t surprising for me to hear this, but it must have been very confusing to the patron. this puppy was over-stimulated and trying out many different behaviors on this other puppy.).
*normal*, appropriate dogs do what they have to do to keep the peace. why do we care about describing that dog’s behavior as dominant or submissive, alpha or omega? i don’t know much, but i imagine the dogs themselves don’t care – except when they suffer the retributions of their humans as a result of being labeled dominant or alpha/’alpha wanna-be’. the appropriate dogs are reading each other’s signals and responding appropriately. the others need our help (along with help from socially skilled dogs) to learn how to be more appropriate.
martina nailed it when she said we need to focus on modifying behavior (if it actually calls for change), not worrying about what to call it.
thank you for an extremely interesting discussion.
Liz F. says
Cheers Martina!
I do think that learning about these theories gives us a better background for conversations with people of different points of view, regardless of whether or not the theories find any place in everyday life.
To me, talking with someone who strictly adheres to the dominant-hierarchy-based training can be almost as unpleasant as getting a molar pulled. Very unpleasant, but sometimes necessary. The more I know about dominance, the better the conversation will be. Knowledge can help control emotion.
For those interested in reading more, there was a good, lively discussion on dominance on Retrieverman
JJ says
I take a different view than the view of “dominance whether real or not just doesn’t matter to me”. My view is: If the scientific concept of dominance is relevant to dog behavior, then I care about it, because I care about understanding my dog. I desire to understand my dog, not just controlling his behavior. I find that understanding the reasons behind Duke’s behavior helps me appreciate and bond with him. Such understanding gives me insight into his world. That matters to me a great deal. Plus, I find it interesting on an intellectual level as well as revealing about human behavior, also something I care about.
Also, I believe that the better I understand the reasons for Duke’s behavior, the easier time I will have for managing (reinforcing, limiting and changing) behavior when I want to. So, if the scientific (rather than English dictionary definition) of dominance helps me understand my dog better and to train him better, then I want to understand the concept better. The concept is worth spending some time on. It is relevant.
Where I agree somewhat with commenters above (and what Trisha already said) is that you don’t want to get so hung-up on the concept that it becomes the only filter through which you look at and understand your dog. It is just one element of understanding dog behavior and a complex one at that. If someone’s main issues are getting her dog to sit on cue and never bite the mail carrier and she has had success meeting those goals, then maybe the concept of dominance is really is not all that relevant.
I still feel strongly that a different word needs to be used if we are ever going to get past the problems that the current word, “dominance” give us. Unfortunately, I don
Sophie says
We’ve got four dogs, all mixed-breed mutts of various types, and I don’t think ANY of them are “dominant” in any regard. I am very glad we have no bullies and no wimps; they all take turns being “winner” over toys, chewies and bedspace. Although our retriever/husky/shepherd Rufus is a total whiner if someone else has what he wants and he’s devious enough to distract them with a “Oh come here quick!” bark from outside, whereupon he runs back inside for the abandoned toy or whatever.
Greta says
To Martina and others… the idea of rewarding the behavior you like and not worrying about dominance works great. Until it doesn’t. Every once in a while, I meet a dog who appears to be so concerned about status that it’s pretty close to impossible to control the reinforcers adequately for safety. It doesn’t happen often, but when it does happen, it can be bone chilling. (I realize we are separating status from dominance, but there is a relationship.)
I had a client who chose to euthanize a dog a few months ago. I can’t call his behavior anything other than status-related, or dominance-related. He was threatening and biting family members, and appeared completely impassive and unstressed. The family were already doing a magnificent job of rewarding the behavior they liked, which he would offer. Right up until he decided to bite. They were magnificently consistent. He was not. I had a long talk with the client about what this might be “called,” but I find the discussions of aggression arising out of status issues with humans, or what appears to be that, nothing else making sense, so confusing.
Most trainers could make the same living not knowing much about the issue because cases like this are so rare that you could, if you wanted, just refer to someone who was willing to work with it. It wouldn’t dent your income. 🙂 I don’t like to turn away cases based on lack of knowledge, but I really struggled with that one (and was prepared to refer to a vet behaviorist when the owner decided to euthanize).
In any case, with this dog, rewarding desired behavior, and ignoring undesired behavior would not have made him safe. Period. I am not sure what, if anything, could have made him safe. But there was so clearly some internal attitude going into the picture. He was a huge dog. It was frightening.
Melissa says
I’ve been thinking for a while that confidence is the “it” we talk about when there’s a dog that just seems to get everything and provoke adoration. It’s the same with people. Everyone wants to be with the confident person. It makes sense when you think about it. If they are confident then they must know how to handle all of life’s uncertainties that make us anxious. There’s someone who is most likely very good at getting good things, and good at managing unexpected problems, and gives us the impression that they are in control.
Control is a big one, I reckon. I’ve seen a lot of dogs that I am convinced act like bullies because it’s the only way they know to predictably influence what goes on in their lives. And control is security. If you can control something you are in a very good position. No nasty surprises. To me, a dog constantly seeking to control other dogs is not so much status seeking as seeking security. Then again, I know a few that aren’t interested in controlling other dogs, but are very much concerned with getting whatever they want. I quite liked the idea of gaining social freedom for them. Is it the same as social status? I’m not sure. If they are defending their right to do what they please when they please it definitely seems like social freedom, but for it to be social status, would they need to be concerned with status of other dogs in the group? Would they be more concerned if some dogs trod on their toes than others? I know a dog that would come down on one dog like a ton of bricks for a trangression but meet the same transgression with nothing more than a lot of noise if it was a different dog.
My big fluffy teddy bear of a dog is what I call confidently submissive. He confidently approaches any dog or person, but does so shouting “I’m no threat!” with as many appeasement gestures as he can do at once. Most dogs relax around him very quickly. Insecure dogs adore him. Despite being a lover rather than a fighter, if any fights break out around him he’s over there in an instant standing over the dogs arguing. He does, I think, have a calming effect on them. I have seen him casually insert himself between dogs that have just had an argument so they can’t see each other very well anymore. How does he know to do that? Why would he put himself in the middle of an aggressive encounter when he cries if someone is aggressive towards him?
Bandb says
One of my dogs will use the trick Diana describes Dancer using to claim an extra treat for himself. He will also pretend to initiate play so that he can grab the now-ungaurded resource. They both adhere to the “between paws” rule and will not attempt to take things in that situation. Beth has clear rules about beds and she will not share sleeping places. Barney has rules about going through doors before her.
They have never fought and he self-handicaps when playing. If during a playbout one of them is hurt accidentally , they stop play, sniff noses then resume, or in the case of the littler female being hurt she has 3 free telling off bites , Barney stands still and takes his ritualized punishment then they start to play once more.
Barney I would describe as a worrier who can no longer interact reliably with other dogs in the outside world. He began life as a very confident dog, excellent and poplular with all dogs but around the time of his neutering he lost confidence and is constantly status-seeking now I guess?
Kerry L. says
I’m enjoying this discussion because I have so many questions regarding the topic. Being relatively new to the dog owner world, I want to understand the behavior of my dogs. Alice, an ACD mix and my first dog, was well mannered but liked order in her world. When other dogs were added to the household (I live with 2 other adults), she let them know right away that she was in charge and she was never challenged until I got Walter. By then she was 11 years old, he was 2, and all she had to do was hang her head over his back and Walter would react by attacking. I could only guess that he was seeking to elevate his status and have more access to the desired resource, me. I soon learned to monitor their interactions intensely and that helped keep the peace. Walter has no issues with any of the other dogs in the household (Alice is gone now, but there are 3 other dogs) or dogs at the park. In the household, all dogs are equal and there have been NO spats between any of them over food, toys, chews . . . or with the cat. At the dog park Walter is bossy. I’ve read that can sometimes be a trait of herding dogs (Walter is a PWC), he likes to give orders (he’s the loud barking, annoying dog in the park) and he like rough and tumble play, but he’s never been aggressive, seems to have appropriate dog manners and can be called away when I’m concerned there will be a problem. I would guess that having more experience and confidence myself, in observing dog behavior and controlling the resources, diminishes my reliance on terms like ‘dominance’ and ‘submission’. Professsionally, I come from a psychology background and understand that humans with sociopathic personalities can behave appropriately in most circumstances yet be very dangerous. Is it a possibility that animals of other species might have a ‘sociopath’ or two among them?
Jeff Line says
I picked up the concept of dominance as amount of social freedom from my friends at Wolf Park. I shall be more careful in the future to attribute it to Dr. Zimen. I believe that if you observe any group of wild or domesticated wolves, you will observe animals which have greater and lesser degrees of social freedom. So while I don’t think the topic of dominance is worth the obsession so many have with it, I think that in observing animal behavior it is useful to have it in your quiver as something to consider.
What I would really like to hear your thoughts on is whether or not dominance deserves any consideration in evaluating inter-species behavior. Just at random say as between canids and primates. I once heard a wise woman comment on how remarkable the relationship between those two carnivores was, so perhaps it is not a factor anywhere else in nature. I don’t think anyone talks about the interactions of wolves and bears in Yello0wstone as dominance struggles. I tend to think that the concept of a dog dominating me and my thumbs, can opener and car keys is patently absurd. A dog can be aggressive toward me, or compete for resources, or, my favorite, agree to comply with my requests, but a dog can’t dominate me because we are not in the same social hierarchy.
Jennifer says
Regarding visual displays that have historically been seen as dominance/submission, what if the historical interpretation is wrong, and that’s not what the dogs are communicating at all? Especially given the observation of many “dogs with extreme versions of what are usually called
Jackie Cassada says
First — the puppy picture is precious! Such bliss only babies can know!
Second – This is a lovely, well balanced look at a highly controversial topic, one which I am often in the midst of and at odds with many who probably post here. I just wanted to comment that in a household of 5 cats and one Plott Hound — all of them rescues and the “Eve and the Cat Pack” of my blog — one cat stands out as something that can only be described as “dominant.” Our vet, in fact, diagnosed Mu Mu (or Moody) as suffering from “dominance issues” and “feline aggression” — and prescribed amitryptaline (or Elavil) to help smooth out his behavior. It sort of worked. Sort of.
When we rescued our Plott Hound, after she recovered from being emaciated and near death, we had to convince her that the cats were not “prey” and that she shouldn’t tree them on the furniture and then bay at them. We succeeded with a combination of techniques — including five-pointed help from the cats themselves and managed to shape the 6 animals into a mostly cohesive group — the Eve and the Cat Pack, again.
We have narrow doors in our mobile home, but ample room inside. Nevertheless, I was trying for awhile to be the “leader” in going through the doors — mainly to help reinforce in Eve the fact that she and the cats were mostly equals.
Enter Mu Mu.
I start through the narrow door, Eve right behind me, nose practically in the back of my knee. Mu Mu pushes, shoves and shoulders his way past Eve and past me to stick his tail up and proudly march through the door ahead of both of us! sigh.
Which brings me to the one rule that I fall back on, no matter what else or who else I emulate: Anything you try can be undone by a sufficiently strong-minded cat!
Thank you for a thoughtful article — and for your beautiful photos.
Angela Demeuse says
Hi there,
I follow your blog consistently and am your biggest fan here in madison WI. I just wanted to mention that puppy resting on your legs is darn cute. I think you should get another one:) if it’s a boy, I think you should name him Timmy after your precious Lassie!! Thanks for your wonderful blog! You make us laugh and cry and inspire us to embrace the true meaning of being a dog lover!!!
Nan says
I’m loving this discussion (and the lambs and puppies are an added joy). I’ve been thinking about status issues in the last few months because of a shift in the household. My dogs are both pretty relaxed about other animals and the only true bully in the house is one of the cats but I’d say until a few months ago the dogs were pretty even in social status and respectful of each other in an easy going way. Then the lab became blind suddenly (retinal detachment post cataract surgery) and simultaneously was esconced in a big plastic e collar so she is a mobile sightless battering ram. The collie has always had a stronger sense of personal space and has become cranky both at the bashings and over his perception that she is getting more touching and treats (because of the many meds she is on). We all went through an uncomfortable stretch during which several old line trainer acquaintances said “he knows she is maimed and he is taking over”. Their advice was accept that and facilitate his “dominence” and all will be well. That wasn’t my perception but it was clear that the dogs had lost their ease with each other and it had the potential to become a problem. We then started versions of what you did with Will. The lab has learned a wait command which I use to protect the collie’s space when I see an imminent collision; she is also getting better at navigating. The collie has learned a “make space” command (he steps aside to let her forward) and a “place” command which means go to a designated spot while she is being medicated and wonderful things will happen. The other thing I’ve had to institute is that with her blindness the collie stopped respecting the between the paws rules they had previously lived by. The first time I took the toy back and gave it to the lab–he took it again. I then wised up and when he did that the toys disappeared into my magic closet. Very quickly the between the paws rule was back in full force. With these strategies in place I’m seeing the two dogs back at the same level of easy coexistence they had before. It strikes me that often with these “mid range” dogs they are simply looking for the easiest access to the good resources. A lot of what then goes wrong or right is our reaction–if the technique is undesirable but we let it work that escalates–if we move them to a desirable (but less intuitive technique) and reinforce it then we get that albeit more slowly.
Nan says
I should add that with both dogs I’ve increased the amount of mini training sessions which I find grounds everyone (myself included) during a period of transition.
Anne J says
My 7 month old pup is quite rude. I think it is partly her age, but also her personality. She seems to think the world is hers and everyone better stay out of her way. I am working on “that’s enough” a lot with her to stop her from harassing the other dogs, plus doing a lot of patience exercises with her- wait at doors, wait to eat, stay while the other dogs are running around. I’d say she tends to want to be dominant or status seeking also. She has snapped at my oldest dog while I’m dishing out dog food a few times and gotten trounced for that. The old girl still doesn’t take stuff from a pup. So now pup has to back up and sit at feeding time and gets a treat for that instead of rushing in and trying to upset the bowls. The clever little girl had early on figured out if she leaped and knocked the bowls there would be treats all over!
Dan says
I’m eager to read the next blog post so I’ll read the rest of the comments later. However, I wanted to comment on Greta’s post. Biology plays a big part in how our animals act. Sometimes you can curb some behaviors, sometimes biology overrides all our efforts.
The documentation on the Silver Fox research in Siberia shows this quite well. Aggression can be genetic and even though we try hard to train desired behaviors you may not win out.
Aggression and dominance do not go hand and hand.
Greta says
Responding to Dan, thank you for your thoughts. I didn’t want to take up space for a nine-page, single spaced essay on the dog I mentioned. It is absolutely true that aggression and dominance do not go hand in hand. I do not generally use the D-word in describing client dogs; if the client brings it up, I usually try to reframe what the client is seeing. (Pushy; insecure; scared; whatever.) I see many, many aggressive dogs. I am not sure where you are going with your point that aggression can be genetic. Lots of behaviors are influenced by genetics and I am acutely aware of, e.g. breed differences, inherited temperament features, etc. How does that change anything about what I wrote? (I truly don’t see.)
The client in this case did NOT bring up the D-word. The dog was very self-controlled; for example, when I was at there house for three hours, I saw three small aggressive gestures toward me: He wrinkled his lips; he growled; and he lightly muzzle-punched me on the side of the head. These were each a half-hour apart. The wrinkled muzzle happened when I was clicking him for nose-touching my hand. On about the tenth click, I moved my hand an inch or two, and he snarled. He was not scared; zero fear body language. He was not movement-reactive; we had been walking around plenty, moving hands around his head plenty, etc., and his history of aggression didn’t consistently have anything to do with movement. This was not a startle; he could see what I was doing and I wasn’t doing anything abrupt or new. The very clear read I got was that he was tired of playing my stupid game and wanted me to knock it off. And instead of walking away, or just not responding, he decided to snarl a threat at me. He was *choosing* to use threat to get me to stop. And it was extremely carefully modulated threat.
This dog was under two years old, had been socialized carefully and well, had been trained using almost exclusively positive reinforcement, was well-cared for, lived in a well-regulated household, had not been forced to do things he didn’t want to do an excessive amount, and so on. No doubt something genetic was going on, but what? For all the world, I am unable to come up with a motivation for this dog other than “how dare you try to control me with your stupid clicker/food/whatever.” Do we know, will we ever know? No. But the *fact* is that he used aggression to control his people, and the *appearance* is that there was some kind of social-status-related character to his decision to use these aggressive behaviors.
Just because aggression and dominance don’t go hand in hand doesn’t mean they don’t sometimes go together. Just because aggression can be genetic doesn’t mean it can’t be related to social status issues.
Most dogs negotiate. This dog did not negotiate. He just threatened until he got what he want. He is one of the only dogs I’ve ever seen who scared me. I don’t consider him normal.
Pat Blocker says
Thank you for this discussion. It is so helpful in deconstructing the “D” word myths existing in today’s dog training environment. You are right, the general public wants a quick, simple answer to dog behavior and the dominance theory is, indeed, seductive. This has helped me, as a trainer, to put the concept into a more palatable package for humans and consequently for dogs.
ron from Texas says
Interesting case, Greta. And certainly, since the dog is not normal, the example has limited, if any, use in how to train most dogs. That is, I agree with what I think the gist of your statement is. Yes, one can find dogs that interact through intimidation. But that doesn’t make them the norm or the model for all dog behavior. And, I would think, left alone to interact with other dogs, even feral, such a non-negotiator would find himself alone or beseiged by a group that had enough of his tactics. Still, from what you mentioned of the dog, he didn’t go for a full-on bite. He was angling for what he wanted through bluffing or psychological warfare. And I’m sure there are dogs that won’t spend the time even trying to intimidate. They just go for the bite because it worked before and they expect it to work, now. And such dogs are not for John or Jane Q. Public. Is such a dog socially dominant? From an initial appearance, it would seem so. But not really. For beings that interact through physical threat are bullies, despots, dictators, and are deposed when the “subjugated” have had enough (American Revolution, French Revolution, Honduran Revolution.) And it does help to remember the law of the “wild.” Kill and be killed. If wolves, to whom dogs are often erroneously compared, displayed this kind of behavior, they would die out as a species. For they must work together (negotiate) to survive as a group and individual, if for nothing else than successful hunting.
I also get some understanding from the nonlinear dog theory. A “leader” is leading because others follow. Organization is often from the ground up. We certainly have an example of that in the republic that is America. Governors by consent of the governed. In group or social animals, such as humans and canids, this is often seen.
I also see bad things if one was trying to “dominate” the dog in your example. This is a dog that may not “respect” your stronger use of force and may simply escalate to bite as a response to physical intervention. The dog may not have read about pack models and “alpha” theory. And, since this is not the normal behavior for a dog, or even canids, in general, I think that is what causes some to wonder if the cause is ideopathic, genetic or not.
vin chiu says
So what are your thoughts on speaking with trainers and breeders who insist that after 30 years of watching their own dogs or packs of dogs as it were, that dogs exist in a constant state of seeking dominance over one another; that everything they do is a calculated move to achieve a higher status and it is upon that observation that we must base our own actions towards dogs in order to truly understand them and gain respect. How do you respond to trainers who insist that those who do not seek to gain a dominant status, (RESPECT)over their dogs, (usually through control and force,) are ignorantly infantilizing them? I have a very difficult time with this sort of person who has already made up their mind, hears nothing else and is handling countless dogs each year.
Laurie says
I am very worried that my little 4-month rescue pup may be an alpha wanna-bee. He is incredibly friendly to humans and submissive to bigger or stronger dogs, yet doesn’t hesitate to dominate those who are smaller or weaker by pinning, mounting, or pushing ahead. We have been working overtime to teach good manners using positive reinforcement and he happily obeys all human instructions (even those given by children). How do I prevent him from dominating smaller and weaker animals (including my 15-year-old cat)?
simon fellows says
Dr. McC Hi There Hows it going ?
Thanks all your work and writing.
Measured and accessible.
Really super.
Thankyou indeed.
We’ve rescued a terrier poodle 1 year of age.We know nothing of her first year aside from her having had fleas, her shots and she seems to be ok with all things nail clipping aside.
So am filing her nails which she seems to not mind.
She throws herself on her back when she sees peoples but seems super socialized with dogs and animals and generally a very happy little girl.
Should we try and have her not be so submissive when she meets others please ?
I look at it as her dominance strategy as it were.
She also seems to adore her tummy being tickled, but then again whom amongst us doesn’t ?
Any links to things you’ve written would be deeply appreciated.
Ploughing through your book at present.
Again a big debt of gratitude from dog lovers everywhere.
Sinc.
Simon
Trisha says
Thanks Simon, and let your dog do what she is doing! No need to change anything. I’d put it “on cue” and turn it into
a cute trick.
Trisha says
Thanks Simon, and I wouldn’t change a thing about your dog’s behavior. She’s simply coping with greetings in the best way she know show (being appeasing) and there’s nothing wrong with that. I’d put the behavior on cue and turn it into a cute trick!