Kathy Sdao ‘Could training be a process which animates and gives life to our dogs instead of a process full of correction, behaviour suppression and constantly enforced deference?’
Experts are often free to publish ideas and the pursuit of recognition and the desire to conform to prevailing ideas can overshadow the objective evaluation of evidence. Repetition effect (the tendency to believe in information we repeatedly encounter) and confirmation bias (the tendency to favour information that confirms one's pre-existing beliefs or hypotheses) plays a significant role in the dissemination of knowledge. Moreover, the human inclination towards cognitive efficiency (minimum inconvenience/maximum productivity) often leads us to adopt beliefs and behaviors that require minimal cognitive effort, even if they are not entirely supported by evidence. This can perpetuate misconceptions and hinder progress in understanding complexphenomena[JG1] . [1]
What does all this mean for dogs? Dave Mech is an American biologist specializing in the study of wolves. He is a senior research scientist for the U.S. Geological Survey and an adjunct professor at the University of Minnesota. He has researched wolves since 1958 in locations including northern Minnesota, Isle Royale, Alaska, Yellowstone National Park, Ellesmere Island, and Italy.[2]
Now, here is an expert!
In 1970, Mech published “The Wolf: The Ecology and Behavior of an Endangered Species.” The book assembled an enormous amount of research on wolves, covering wolf habits and society, and became a best-seller, a foundational text, read by scientists and laypeople alike. However, Mech became unsure about his book’s ongoing success; since its publication a lot more was learned about wolves and he requested that the book no longer be published, but his requests were ignored. What bothers him most is the section he wrote on pack order. I can understand why: the understanding of wolves based on Mech's observations was extended to their canine descendants and this led to the adoption of training methods that misalign with the true nature of dogs[JG2] .
Dogs have been misunderstood and unfairly treated through unscientific training methods which made humans look at best silly at worst cruel.
In Plenty in Life is Free, Kathy Sdao offers an alternative view of the human-dog relationship which reflects onto more science based and effective coaching methods, in addition to a more reciprocally enriching bond.
Sdao offers a new concept of leadership, based more on education and mentorship[JG3] : humans are no longer the sole authority figures dictating every move; they can instead adopt a more facilitative role, guiding and supporting dogs as they navigate their own paths, empowering dogs to take ownership of their learning journey. By setting up a conducive environment (antecedents), and providing cleverly chosen, frequently, precisely, and intentionally offered reinforcers (postcedent/consequences), humans can help their dogs flourish by nurturing their intrinsic motivation and encouraging them to freely explore and engage.
By reinforcing those freely offered behaviors who happen to coincide with those we intended to encourage, we can help dogs to continue their efforts autonomously, all the while fostering a sense of agency, self-belief, and confidence, which are crucial for navigating life in a balanced manner.[3]
Ultimately, this approach emphasizes collaboration, mutual respect, and trust between the leader and the learner, creating a dynamic and enriching learning experience for everyone involved. The answer is Yes! Training could be a process which animates and gives life to dogs and owners alike[JG4] .
Of course, postcedent could also be punishments, a subtype of operant conditioning in which the probability of a response decreases because it is followed by an aversive event (at worst a positive punishment – +P, the presentation of something felt as aversive by the dog reducing the likelihood of reoccurrence of the behaviour unwanted by the human[4], at best a negative punishment – -P, the removal of a stimulus perceived as pleasant by the dog to discourage the repetition of an unwanted behaviour [5]). But punishment comes with side effects that can have wider than expected consequences: fear, reduced interest, impairment of attention, learned helplessness, aggression. [6] Not to mention that human error is also always probable: if you inadvertently rewarded the wrong behaviour not much harm is done; if you erroneously punished the right behaviour, confusion and loss of trust is to be expected[JG5] .
Even within the positive reinforcement camp, there are those who encourage the NILF approach: Nothing in life is free, where the dog’s every need is used as leverage to form behaviours. Sdao rightly points out that some good things should always be free, such as love, air, water, safety, freedom from pain, terror etc; whilst food, play and attention should not always be dependent on the dog’s correct response to a cue, but can be offered even when the dog is not perfect but just ok. Play and attention in particular can greatly enhance the bond and overall well-being of both parties: they can engage in these interactions when they're in the mood, and they should also have the freedom to decline if they're not feeling up to it. This mutual understanding and respect contribute to a healthy and enjoyable relationship between human and canine companions[JG6] .
Veterinary behaviourist Tom Mitchell[7] explains how to teach dogs general principles (concepts) that can be utilised in different situations. General concepts such as optimism, flexibility, frustration tolerance, calm, focus are achieved first and foremost through management (rehearsal and rehearsal avoidance of behaviours) and games that help shape behaviours through the carefully chosen and applied reinforcement strategy. Both Mitchell and Sdao emphasise the importance of free choice: coercion takes choice away; positive reinforcement shows which choice works[JG7] ; ‘I dare you to do that’ instead of ‘don’t you dare’! Mitchell, being involved in the sport of dog agility, equates choices to tunnels: the tunnel you are going to reinforce the most will be the one the dog favours the most; Sdao refers to the powerful Cherokee metaphor of the bad and the good wolf depicting the internal struggle we all face between our positive and negative inclinations. It underscores the importance of conscious choice in shaping emotions and actions. By consciously choosing to cultivate positive qualities and behaviors, we can tilt the balance in favour of the "good wolf".
[1] Brown, K. (2024) It’s Not A Bloody Trend: Understanding Life as an ADHD Adult. Robinson.
[2] Galchen, R. (2023) The myth of the alpha wolf, The New Yorker. Available at: https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/the-myth-of-the-alpha-wolf.
[3] Sdao, Kathy. Plenty In Life Is Free: Reflections on Dogs, Training and Finding Grace (p. 100). Dogwise Publishing. Kindle Edition.
[4] Typical and extreme example is the electric shock to stop unwanted behaviours as soon as they are performed.
[5] Even something as mild as the retention of positive reinforcements is a form of negative punishment that must be used skilfully not to create frustration, for example, in shaping behaviours.
[6] Lieberman, D.A. (1990) ‘7, Punishment and Extinction’, in Learning, Behaviour and Cognition. 3rd edn. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, pp. 287–325.
[7] Mitchell, T. (2017) How to be a concept trainer: Shaping your dog’s personality through games. Zeals, Warminster: First Stone Publishing.
Bibliography
Brown, K. (2024) It’s Not a Bloody Trend: Understanding Life as an ADHD Adult. Robinson.
Galchen, R. (2023) The myth of the alpha wolf, The New Yorker. Available at: https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/the-myth-of-the-alpha-wolf.
Lieberman, D.A. (1990) ‘7, Punishment and Extinction’, in Learning, Behaviour and Cognition. 3rd edn. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Mitchell, T. (2017) How to be a concept trainer: Shaping your dog’s personality through games. Zeals, Warminster: First Stone Publishing.
Sdao, Kathy. Plenty In Life Is Free: Reflections on Dogs, Training and Finding Grace. Dogwise Publishing. Kindle Edition.
‘Parenting styles influence the bond between dogs and humans.’
The hardest challenge as a behaviourist is to shift the human perspective towards non-human animals[JG1] .
Watching animals in their natural environment is fascinating; their evolutionary journey is intriguing: most people understand and are empathetic towards the struggle for survival of individuals and species; non-human animal behaviours often mirror our own, because they are fuelled by the same emotions. Who is not moved by the desperate cries of a baby seal, trapped in the fishermen’s nets which separate her from her mother? Who is indifferent to the mother and baby’s jubilation when they are reunited?
The debate around anthropomorphism is a longstanding and complex one within the field of animal behavior and ethology. Reconciling the scientific study of animal behavior with our instinctive empathy and tendency to see reflections of ourselves in other species can be challenging, but, I believe, essential to shape our parenting style towards dogs and pets in general[JG2] .
Ethologists and animal behaviourists have long cautioned against anthropomorphism because it can lead to misinterpretations of animal behavior. The scientific method demands objectivity and evidence-based conclusions and attributing human emotions to animals without empirical evidence can lead to misunderstandings about their behavior, needs, and welfare.
However, the field of animal cognition and emotion has evolved significantly[JG3] , with growing evidence suggesting that animals, particularly mammals, experience emotions that are comparable, if not identical, to ours. Studies have shown that animals like elephants, dogs, and primates exhibit behaviors indicative of complex emotions such as joy, grief, empathy, and even altruism[1].
Empathy towards animals plays a crucial role in conservation efforts, animal welfare, and in fostering a deeper connection between humans and the natural world.
Parenting styles depend on and are shaped by the human perspective of the natural world and have an enormous impact on the bond between pets and their humans. Acknowledging the emotional and behavioural complexities of dogs is a crucial part of understanding them and fostering a deeper connection with them.
‘The physical and emotional well-being of our dogs is shaped by the choices we make for them. And the well-being of our dogs in turn impacts us. That leash is a two-way street. For centuries, humans and canines have enjoyed a symbiotic bond, with each affecting and enriching the life of the other’.[2] This excerpt from The Forever Dog underscores a profound message about the interdependent relationship between humans and their canine companions[JG4] . The authors highlight the importance of making informed and thoughtful choices regarding the health and well-being of our dogs, recognizing that these decisions have a significant impact not only on our pets but also on our own lives. Dogs provide us with companionship, emotional support, and even health benefits, such as reduced stress and increased physical activity. In return, it's our responsibility to ensure their physical and emotional well-being through proper care, nutrition, physical and mental exercise, and medical attention.
The evolution of dog training reflects a profound shift in our understanding of canine behavior and our relationship with our dogs and the parenting style we adopt towards them. Historically, training methods were heavily influenced by military practices, emphasizing dominance and control. Figures like Conrad Most and William "Bill" Koehler played significant roles in developing these early training techniques, which were often punitive and relied on negative reinforcement and punishment. Most, for instance, was known for his work in Germany training police dogs and was an early proponent of using commands and corrections to shape dog behavior, while Koehler's methods included the use of choke chains and throw chains to correct unwanted behaviors.
However, the field of animal behavior and training began to change fundamentally in the 20th century with the work of scientists like Ivan Pavlov, B.F. Skinner, and later, Karen Pryor. Pavlov's discovery of classical conditioning and Skinner's development of operant conditioning laid the scientific groundwork for understanding how animals learn, leading to more humane and effective training methods based on positive reinforcement. Karen Pryor, with her book "Don’t Shoot the Dog" and promotion of clicker training, was instrumental in popularizing force-free, reward-based training methods that focus on building a positive relationship between dog and handler.[3]
These modern training philosophies acknowledge the complex emotional and cognitive capacities of dogs, moving away from the outdated view of dogs as creatures needing domination. [JG5] Instead, they are seen as partners capable of learning and thriving through positive reinforcement, understanding, and mutual respect. This transition not only reflects a more humane approach to dog training but also aligns with a broader shift in society's treatment of animals, recognizing their right to kindness and empathy.
The adoption of force-free, reward-based training has been bolstered by the contributions of various behaviourists and trainers who have shown that kindness and positive reinforcement are not only more ethical but often more effective in training dogs. This approach fosters a stronger and more harmonious human-canine bond, reflecting the evolution of our relationship with dogs from one of control and dominance to one of partnership and mutual respect.
In essence, the history of dog training is a testament to our growing understanding of canine psychology and a reflection of the changing dynamics in human-animal relationships. It underscores a collective movement towards more compassionate, science-based approaches to training, which benefit both dogs and their human companions by enhancing the well-being of both.
The transition in dog training philosophy from an "army general" approach to an "empathetic loving protector" recognizes that behaviors often labelled as problematic are natural for dogs, reflecting their instincts and responses to an environment that is not always suited to their innate needs[JG6] . By understanding and respecting these natural behaviors, humans can create a more harmonious living situation that acknowledges the dog's nature while also meeting their own needs for a well-adjusted pet.
A good parenting style is one that exercises anthropomorphism properly. Laurel Braitman's perspective in "Animal Madness" suggests a nuanced view of anthropomorphism, proposing it as a means to recognize and appreciate the shared traits between humans and animals.[4] This approach shifts from viewing anthropomorphism as a mere projection to an acknowledgment of the commonalities that bind us with other species. This perspective fosters empathy and deeper connections with animals by seeing reflections of our own experiences in theirs, and vice versa, enhancing our appreciation of animal behavior as meaningful and relatable. Darwin’s theory was that humans are just another kind of animal, and that similar emotional experiences of humans and other animals were a further proof that we share a common ancestor.[5] Braitman notes that all human contemplation of animals inherently involves anthropomorphism, as humans are the ones engaging in this thought process. The challenge lies in practicing anthropomorphism responsibly[JG7] . Diana Reiss, a psychologist and cognitive researcher with extensive experience in dolphin cognition, suggests avoiding anthropocentrism— the belief in human superiority and the uniqueness of human intelligence. This perspective encourages a more balanced and respectful approach to recognizing intelligence and emotional capacities across species.[6] According to Marc Bekoff anthropomorphism is a valuable linguistic tool that bridges the gap between human understanding and the experiences of other animals.[7] By applying human perspectives or emotions to animals, we make their thoughts and feelings more comprehensible to us, enhancing empathy and connection with the non-human world. This approach can deepen our appreciation and respect for the inner lives of animals. This perspective encourages a more nuanced understanding of animal behaviors[JG8] , acknowledging the evolutionary connections and shared biological foundations that influence human and non-human animal behaviors.[8]
In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, dogs experienced more freedom, roaming and pursuing their interests. Nowadays, as fully captive animals, especially in the western world, they face enormous challenges, when their environment often starkly contrasts with their natural habitats. This mismatch can lead to a lack of stimulation and meaningful activity, resulting in hours of emptiness and potential psychological distress. The key issue is the significant difference between an animal's chosen living conditions and the artificial settings provided in captivity, underscoring the importance of enriching environments that cater to their natural behaviors and needs. Adopting an old-fashioned parenting style that seeks to control a dog by removing his freedom of choice can exacerbate the above mismatch.
Ineke R van Herwijnen and colleagues conducted research to explore the existence of parenting styles in the owner-dog relationship, analogous to the parent-child dynamic. They utilized an adapted version of the Parenting Styles and Dimensions Questionnaire for dog owners. The study, involving 518 Dutch dog-owning parents, identified dog-directed parenting styles, including an authoritarian-correction orientated style and two authoritative styles: intrinsic value orientated, and training orientated. Interestingly, they did not find a permissive or uninvolved style, which might be due to the study's focus on devoted dog owners. This research provides a foundation for understanding the impact of dog-directed parenting styles on various aspects of a dog's life.[9]
Parenting styles are analysed based on criteria such as demandingness (which involves monitoring and practicing high levels of confrontive control. This approach is aimed at teaching good behavior by discouraging disruptive actions and enforcing rules), and responsiveness (which emphasizes emotional warmth and supportive actions, acknowledging and addressing the dog’s emotions). High levels of demandingness and low level of responsiveness are present in the authoritarian approach, whilst the reverse is true for the authoritative approach which usually fosters richer and more positive relationships between the parts, based on understanding and mutual respect.[JG9] Along similar lines, Vieira de Castro’s article "Does training method matter? Evidence for the negative impact of aversive-based methods on companion dog welfare" published in PLOS ONE discusses a study that compares the effects of aversive- and reward-based training methods on the welfare of companion dogs. It finds that aversive-based methods are linked to increased stress behaviors, higher cortisol levels, and more 'pessimistic' judgments in cognitive bias tasks, indicating compromised welfare both during and outside training sessions.[10]
This discussion on parenting styles allows us to touch upon important aspects of the relationship dynamics between dogs and their owners. Adopting a style, which ideally balances demandingness and responsiveness can help owners to be more sensitive towards the dog's individuality[JG10] . It's crucial for owners to balance structure with encouragement of independence to maintain their dog's problem-solving abilities and joyfulness. On the other hand, an authoritarian approach might project an image of control and strength but can indeed reflect a lack of deeper understanding and skill in nurturing a dog's full potential, leading to a relationship that appears one-sided rather than a partnership. Each dog is unique, and so the most effective training and relationship-building approach will vary[JG11] , always aiming to foster a healthy, happy, and mutually respectful bond.
If you had to bet all your possessions on the outcome of a competition, which team leader would you put your money on: 1) one who exudes an aura of dominance, who demands loyalty and obedience, who towers over others, who seeks to overshadow anyone who dares to challenge their authority or deviate from their leadership, who expects unwavering submission from those around them? Or 2) an inspiring leader who radiates charisma and confidence, who draws people in with their vision and passion; someone who is approachable and empathetic, who makes others feel valued and understood; who not only motivates but also empowers, encouraging collaboration and innovation among his followers; someone whom people are eager to support and work alongside, driven by a shared sense of purpose; someone who fosters strong, inclusive relationships where individuals are inspired to grow, contribute, and achieve collective goals[JG12] ?
While a domineering leader might secure short-term obedience, an inspiring leader fosters loyalty, creativity, and a shared sense of purpose that can drive a team to excel beyond expectations. It seems obvious to me which one would be a safe bet.
[1] Braitman, Laurel. Animal Madness (p. 23). Scribe Publications Pty Ltd. Kindle Edition
[2] Habib, R., Becker, K.S. and Loberg, K. (2021) The forever dog: Surprising new science to help your canine companion live younger, healthier, and longer. New York, NY: Harper Wave, an imprint of Harper Collins Publishers, location 295.
[3] Mary R. Burch, P. (2022) The evolution of modern-day dog training: Dog savvy, Dog Savvy Los Angeles. Available at: https://www.dogsavvylosangeles.com/blog/2022/8/13/the-evolution-of-modern-day-dog-training (Accessed: 05 March 2024).
[4] Braitman, Laurel. Animal Madness (p. 4). Scribe Publications Pty Ltd. Kindle Edition.
[5] Ibid, p11.
[6] Ibid,p.36.
[7] Ibid, p.39.
[8] Ibid, p.59.
[9] van Herwijnen, I.R. (2018) Dog-directed parenting styles: The role of parenting styles in the owner-dog relationship [Preprint]. doi:10.18174/521648.
[10] Vieira de Castro, A.C. et al. (2020) ‘Does training method matter? evidence for the negative impact of aversive-based methods on Companion Dog Welfare’, PLOS ONE, 15(12). Doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0225023.
Bibliography
Braitman, Laurel. Animal Madness. Scribe Publications Pty Ltd. Kindle Edition
Habib, R., Becker, K.S. and Loberg, K. (2021) The forever dog: Surprising new science to help your canine companion live younger, healthier, and longer. New York, NY: Harper Wave, an imprint of Harper Collins Publishers.
Mary R. Burch, P. (2022) The evolution of modern-day dog training: Dog savvy, Dog Savvy Los Angeles. Available at: https://www.dogsavvylosangeles.com/blog/2022/8/13/the-evolution-of-modern-day-dog-training
van Herwijnen, I.R. (2018) Dog-directed parenting styles: The role of parenting styles in the owner-dog relationship [Preprint]. doi:10.18174/521648
Vieira de Castro, A.C. et al. (2020) ‘Does training method matter? evidence for the negative impact of aversive-based methods on Companion Dog Welfare’, PLOS ONE, 15(12). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0225023.
Panksepp's theories of emotions and how these could be applied in dog behaviour terms. Classification of neuroanatomy and physiology
Biologically, all mammalian brains share a common blueprint. Affective (emotional) circuits primarily located in the subcortical regions far beneath the highly developed neocortical "thinking cap" determine our mental life and behaviour. These ancestral brain networks generate the primal ways we can feel emotionally, good, or bad. Interestingly, this similarity also extends to some bird species, which have separation-distress PANIC networks, often called the GRIEF system (a main source of emotional pain).[1] Affective systems have been studied in other animals and have helped understand human nature[JG1] .
Panksepp identified 7 emotional systems: SEEKING (expectancy), FEAR (anxiety), RAGE (anger), LUST (sexual excitement), CARE (nurturance), PANIC/GRIEF (sadness), and PLAY (social joy). According to his research, each system determines distinct behaviours in conjunction with specific physiological changes, although many of these changes overlap across systems. If we electrically stimulate neural paths (simulating what life events would normally activate), all mammals experience intense emotions and perform instinctual behaviours.[2] Panksepp believed tangible and distinct networks for various emotions are in:
i) the midbrain
ii) the hypothalamus connected to
iii) the limbic system, whose key components are the amygdala, the hippocampus, the hypothalamus and the thalamus and is essential for emotional regulation (processing fear, pleasure, anger, sadness etc), memory formation, motivation and reward.
Current knowledge indicates that the neural paths and brain chemicals that regulate primal emotional systems are strikingly similar across all mammals. The implication is that these systems must have evolved long ago and that all mammals experience similar emotions when these systems are activated. We cannot say they are identical since evolutions always creates diversity, but the general principles are shared[JG2] .[3] Humans have a more developed neocortical brain expansion which allows for reflection on our emotions leading to highly subtle feelings. Nevertheless, our higher mind is still very much rooted in this ancestral past. This means that, fundamentally, we are well-positioned to understand our dogs by drawing meaningful analogies. In fact, it is exactly by studying the mind of other mammals that we have been able to understand our own.
A book called "The Archaeology of Mind" by Jaak Panksepp and Lucy Biven talks about a way to study emotions called the triangulation approach. This approach looks at emotions from three different angles:
What People Feel (Humans): This involves trying to understand how people experience emotions themselves. Researchers often ask people directly through surveys, interviews, or by having them think about their own feelings.
What Happens in the Brain (Animals): Since we can't directly study human brains while they experience emotions, scientists look at animal brains. They use techniques like electrical stimulation, observing brain damage effects, and brain scans to see which parts of the brain are active during different emotions in animals. (There are still debates about whether it's ethical to study emotions this way in animals.)
Natural Behaviors (Mammals): This involves observing how mammals naturally behave when they feel different emotions. For example, researchers might look at behaviors like playing, searching for something, fear, caring for others, and forming social bonds.
The triangulation approach is important for understanding emotions because it helps scientists connect the dots between what people feel inside (subjective experiences), what's happening in their brains, and how they act (observable behaviors[JG3] ).
Whilst philosophers and other scientists saw emotions mainly as ideas or thoughts, Panksepp believed they are physical processes in the brain. He focused on understanding basic emotions first and believed that they are the foundation for more complex ones, and all the while they keep exercising a strong influence on our automatic behaviors (like jumping when scared), on how we learn, and how we make decisions.
As animal behaviourists and trainers, we guide animal behavior and support their learning by shaping the environment and utilizing their unconditioned stimuli and responses, as well as the processes of habituation, sensitization, classical and operant conditioning. Both these automatic and operant brain processes have an affective base and can be described as affective tools which help animals live and learn at primary level, enabling adaptation and thriving in specific environmental niches.[4]
For dogs and animals in general, Panksepp comes in handy: unlike pure behaviourist neuroscientist who just focus on the observable behaviour and purposely neglect the experiential aspect (claiming its inappropriateness on ground of anthropomorphism), Panksepp acknowledges primal affective states in other animals, and claims that these raw affective experiences are essential for higher forms of consciousness.[5]
Neurons assess, process, and integrate various stimuli and past experiences to produce a response. In this process, the limbic system interprets the emotional significance of each stimulus, generating an emotional response which can significantly influence the decision-making processes before the cerebral cortex even gets involved; with our dogs, we must consider this aspect if we want to help them modulate the reaction initiated by their limbic system and engage them in a more complex degree of reasoning at canine level[JG4] .
Recognizing that a dog's initial response to stimuli is emotionally driven by the limbic system can help us, for example:
o approach behavior management with empathy. For example, a dog's sudden fearful reaction to loud noises or new environments is rooted in this primal emotional processing.
o use positive reinforcement to effectively create more desirable behavioural outcomes. Rewarding a dog for calm or desired behaviors in response to specific stimuli can strengthen neural pathways that promote those behaviors, essentially training the limbic system to associate positive feelings with those stimuli.
o help dogs modulate their reactions through gradual exposure to stimuli (desensitization) combined with positive reinforcement (counterconditioning). This approach slowly introduces the stimulus at a level that doesn't trigger a high-stress response and gradually increases the stimulus's intensity, allowing the dog's limbic system to adjust and manage its reactions better.
Our dogs’ learning involves a combination of the limbic system for emotional responses and other brain areas that handle associative learning: behaviors that lead to desirable outcomes tend to strengthen the neural pathways associated with those behaviors. This strengthening occurs through a process known as synaptic plasticity[6], where the connections between neurons (synapses) become more efficient at transmitting signals. This is often described as "neurons that fire together, wire together"[JG5] .
Conversely, neural pathways that lead to undesirable outcomes are less likely to be activated over time and can weaken. We can use this to our advantage in establishing behaviours we like and extinguishing those we do not.
To understand how neural pathways are formed it is useful to imagine neurons like tiny messengers in our brain. They talk to each other using special electrical messages called action potentials. This electrical spark travels down the long, thin part of the neuron called the axon. When the spark reaches the end of the axon, called the presynaptic ending, it gets prepped to send a message to the next neuron: it travels through the synaptic cleft, a tiny gap between the two neurons, and it reaches the postsynaptic ending, the part of the second neuron waiting for a message. The spark can trigger the release of chemicals or neurotransmitters (at chemical synapses) or directly cause an electrical current (at electrical synapses) across the gap.
These chemicals or electrical signals are then picked up by the postsynaptic ending, which can be another spark or a change in the second neuron's electrical charge.
So, synapses are like tiny communication stations where neurons use action potentials to send messages, either with special chemicals or a quick electrical jolt![7]
To conclude, I would like to highlight the importance of nuances in interpreting emotions, both in humans and animals, as highlighted by Darwin in The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (EEMA): a) expectations and context significantly influence how we perceive facial expressions (canine body language in our context); b) there is variability within the same emotion category (the same emotion can have different expressions) and similarities among different ones (different emotion categories can be expressed in similar ways); This should remind us that emotional expressions (behaviours) can be
ü multifaceted and context-dependent
ü dependant on unique personalities and experiences
ü fuelled by different affective systems concurrently
Therefore, it is important to avoid assumptions and quick judgments, particularly because animals cannot verbally express their feelings and intentions. Taking the time to observe, understand context, and consider individual differences is key to interpret their behaviors and ensure responsible and empathetic care. This approach benefits not only the animals but also strengthens our relationship with them.
Good work here on Panksepp and his work on emotions. You do a great job of linking the essay topic to an exploration of neurological anatomy and physiology, showing a very good understanding of the structures involved in processing of emotion. 91%
[1] Panksepp, Jaak; Biven, Lucy. The Archaeology of Mind: Neuroevolutionary Origins of Human Emotions (Norton Series on Interpersonal Neurobiology) (p. 1). W. W. Norton & Company. Kindle Edition.
[2] Panksepp, p.2
[3] Panksepp, p.4
[4] In The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (EEMA) (1872), Charles Darwin explored how emotions and their expressions were shaped by natural selection and served practical functions for evolutionary advantages, helping survival and reproduction.
[5] Panksepp, J. (2010) ‘A Synopsis of Affective Neuroscience — Naturalizing the Mammalian Mind’, Psychology Today.
[6]10-minute neuroscience: Neurons (2023) YouTube. Available at: https://youtu.be/5p9ucgRDie8?si=JUmNilVh6K1Xlqfm
10-minute neuroscience: Synapses (2023) YouTube. Available at: https://youtu.be/k5RafiYXieo?si=-6GvgzSaKRlA8ohk
[7] Vandergriendt, C. (2022) An easy guide to neuron diagrams and types, Healthline. Available at: https://www.healthline.com/health/neurons.
Bibliography
Andics, A. et al. (2014) ‘Voice-sensitive regions in the dog and human brain are revealed by comparative fmri’, Current Biology, 24(5), pp. 574–578.
Barrett, L.F. (2017) How emotions are made: The secret life of the brain. Pan Macmillan.
Bekoff, M. (2008) The emotional lives of animals: Marc Bekoff. Novato: New world library.
Beth Finkeopens in a new tabWebsite (no date) Dog vision: What colors do dogs see? The Wildest RSS. Available at: https://www.thewildest.com/dog-lifestyle/what-colors-do-dogs-see
Know your brain: Limbic system (no date) @neurochallenged. Available at: https://neuroscientificallychallenged.com/posts/know-your-brain-limbic-system
Lolliot, S. et al. (2021) Emotion, Introduction to Psychology A critical approach
Panksepp, J. (2010) ‘A Synopsis of Affective Neuroscience — Naturalizing the Mammalian Mind’, Psychology Today.
Panksepp, Jaak; Biven, Lucy. The Archaeology of Mind: Neuroevolutionary Origins of Human Emotions (Norton Series on Interpersonal Neurobiology) W. W. Norton & Company. Kindle Edition.
The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness. Available at
https://fcmconference.org/img/CambridgeDeclarationOnConsciousness.pdf
Vandergriendt, C. (2022) An easy guide to neuron diagrams and types, Healthline. Available at: https://www.healthline.com/health/neurons.
10-minute neuroscience: Neurons (2023) YouTube. Available at: https://youtu.be/5p9ucgRDie8?si=JUmNilVh6K1Xlqfm.
10-minute neuroscience: Synapses (2023) YouTube. Available at: https://youtu.be/k5RafiYXieo?si=-6GvgzSaKRlA8ohk).
https://www.thewildest.com/dog-lifestyle/what-colors-do-dogs-see
The Cambridge Declaration On Consciousness. Available at https://fcmconference.org/img/CambridgeDeclarationOnConsciousness.pdf
Lazarus, Canon-Bard, James-Lange, and Schacter-Singer theories of emotion; Canine senses and how they relate to canine emotion.
Throughout our day, we experience feelings, both strong and subtle. We refer to these internal reactions, triggered by things happening around us or within ourselves, as our emotions, which are made up of several key parts:
a) physiological arousal linked to events within the autonomic nervous system (ANS) in response to various stimuli; the ANS is responsible for controlling involuntary bodily functions, and it consists of the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) linked to the "fight or flight" response during stressful or threatening situations, and the parasympathetic nervous system (PNS) for relaxation and the recovery of standard levels of activity after the threat has passed.
Physiological arousal has a plus or minus value:
· Increased/decreased heart rate and blood pressure
· Rapid breathing or hyperventilation/slow breathing
· Sweating/no sweating
· Pupil dilation/pupil constriction
· Muscle tension/muscle relaxation
· Dry mouth/normal salivation
These reactions are linked to negative stimuli and stress, but also positive excitement, and physical exercise. How people feel emotionally and how they think and interprets the world around them will have an impact on their emotional state which in turn will affect their cognitive functions, their decision-making ability, their memory and attention.
b) psychological appraisal which is the process by which we evaluate and interpret an event or situation and determine how it affects us: is it irrelevant, benign-positive, threatening, or challenging? Our appraisal influences our emotional response, and it determines how we cope with the object of our appraisal.
Our initial emotional response often involves a quick judgment: is this situation a threat, a challenge, or a source of harm or loss? This is known as primary appraisal. However, our emotions don't stop there. We then enter a secondary appraisal, where we take stock of our resources and coping mechanisms to figure out how best to deal with the potential stressor.
c) subjective experience[JG1] .
Darwin saw emotions as social bonds and adaptation aids, shared among all mammals.
In The Descent of Man by Charles Darwin, we read that “the difference in mind between man and the higher animals, great as it is, is certainly one of degree and not of kind.” (Darwin, 1871, vol. 1, p. 105). Recent scientific research went as far as suggesting that animals possess self-awareness and complex emotions, which traditionally has been considered unconceivable. The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness (2012) signed by prominent neuroscientists, including Panksepp, acknowledges the possibility of non-human animals having conscious experiences. In it we read that“The absence of a neocortex does not appear to preclude an organism from experiencing affective states. Convergent evidence indicates that non-human animals have the neuroanatomical, neurochemical, and neurophysiological substrates of conscious states along with the capacity to exhibit intentional behaviors. Consequently, the weight of evidence indicates that humans are not unique in possessing the neurological substrates that generate consciousness. Non-human animals, including all mammals and birds, and many other creatures, including octopuses†, also possess these neurological substrates.”.[1]
In the 60s, American physician and neuroscientist MacLean's triune brain theory delineated three brain components: the reptilian, limbic, and neocortical brains, found across various species, each with distinct functions. Primary emotions, inherent and instinctual, like fear and joy, are associated with the evolutionarily ancient limbic system, particularly the amygdala, where rapid, instinctual responses to stimuli, without the need for conscious thought are orchestrated.[2] In contrast, more complex secondary emotions, like regret or jealousy, involve higher cerebral cortex processing and are not automatic[JG2] .[3]
There are different ideas about how emotions work. Here are the main ones:
Physiological theories/ Body First: our body reacts first, then we feel the emotion
Neurological theories/ Brain First: the brain is in charge, sees the event and tells our body to react emotionally
Cognitive theories/ Thought Matter: assessing an event cognitively plays an essential role in forming emotions.
Within these three main categories, there are even more specific theories scientists have come up for how emotions work. Some of the most famous ones include:
Evolutionary Theory: This idea, proposed by Charles Darwin, says emotions helped our ancestors survive and reproduce. Just as physical traits, emotions like fear (avoiding danger) or happiness (seeking rewards) became more common because they were helpful for the survival and reproductive success of species. [4]
James-Lange Theory, Cannon-Bard Theory, Schachter-Singer Theory, Lazarus Cognitive Appraisal Theory:These are more specific ideas about how the three components of emotions, (body, brain, and thoughts) work together to create them[JG3] .
James-Lange Theory
This is a physiological theory. Psychologist William James and physiologist Carl Lange thought that emotions originate from the physiological reaction of our body to a stimulus; if a dog sees his owner holding his leash, his heart rate and breathing rate increases, his tail starts wagging and these body arousals create the feeling of excitement.
So, according to this theory, there is an equation between the dog's emotion of excitement and his physiological response. Although this theory starts to suggest a link between what our body does and how we feel, of course identical physiological responses can be linked to similar or even opposite emotions, for example fear or excitement both link to increased heart rate.[5]
The Cannon-Bard
Another physiological explanation of emotion was developed by Walter Cannon and Philip Bard. According to them, there isn’t a ‘body first - emotion second’ sequence. The two occur simultaneously. When a dog meets a new person, he simultaneously feels fear and shows physiological signs of fear (like growling, piloerection, or cowering).[6]
Schachter-Singer Theory
Also called the two-factor theory of emotion, this theory sees cognitive interpretation of arousal and physiological arousal as ingredients for emotions. Essentially, to have an emotional experience we need to feel arousal but also interpret and label it based on the context we find ourselves in. Physical arousal alone would not be enough on its own and specific emotions spring from our cognitive interpretations of the arousal.
A dog hears a knock at the door and starts barking. According to Schachter-Singer, whether the dog feels fear or excitement will depend on his interpretation of the knock, which could be influenced by several variables: past experiences (it is that time of the day when his favourite dog trainer comes to pick him up), the presence of the owner, or other contextual cues. A racing heart can correspond to fear or excitement, but our brain scans the environment in search of cues and in so doing, it helps us decide why the physiological arousal is happening.
And upon this interpretation it will determine whether the dog will feel fear or excitement.[7]
The Lazarus theory (1991) of emotion also speaks of physiological response and cognitive appraisal, but it emphasizes the importance of the latter in determining what type of emotion we experience. First, we asses a situation cognitively, then we feel an emotion which will cause our physiological response to occur. For instance, if a situation is interpreted as a threat, we may experience fear or anxiety and our heart rate will increase; if we see it as a challenge, we may feel motivation or excitement, but also in this scenario there will be an increase in heart rate. This theory tells us that not only different emotions can cause the same physiological response, but also that each one of us appraise the world around us often differently, based on our experience and personality etc. So there seem to be four ingredients that need to be present in the following set sequence: a stimulus (internal or external), the cognitive appraisal of that stimulus, the emotional response that springs from this appraisal and then the physiological response that goes with that emotion.[8]
The dog owner approaches his house, the dog hears the noise and based on his experience (his body clock) and other environmental cues (smell), he recognises the signs of a positive event about to take place, he will feel excitement and happiness and as a result there will be tail wagging, jumping and barking. Highlighting the importance of cognitive appraisal in shaping our emotions and ultimately our behaviours is very interesting because it allows focus on the fundamental elements of cognitive appraisal itself such, as experience, personality, mood, age, health and it acknowledges their crucial role in the emotion-behaviour circuit.
A bouncy energetic fly-happily-in-your-face spaniel may look harmless, but he might be cognitively appraised negatively by a dog, regardless of size, who needs space and more time to process new introductions based on previous bad experiences or a more cautious personality: dog sees spaniel bouncing at speed towards him + he interprets this event as negative based on experience/personality/mood/age/health conditions, he feels fear, he externalises his fear by displaying distance increasing signals that vary in type and intensity. Recognising that every dog has its own unique background and way of seeing the world, which shapes their reactions, should encourage us to be more empathetic and careful when deciding how to interact with and introduce dogs to each other, for example[JG4] .
Below is an illustration summarising the four approaches in understanding how emotions originate[JG5] . [9]
Whilst the Cannon-Bard and James-Lange theories can explain the more immediate reactions, the Lazarus and Schacter-Singer theories help us with more complex responses. They can all help in our interpretations of animal behavior, even if we stay away from over-attributing human-like emotions to non-human animals.
Behavior is what we can observe of a complex process through which we register and interpret both external sensory input, and emotional and physiological factors. This process takes place internally within and thanks to the complex mechanisms of the nervous system, and it is important to acknowledge that there are a lot of similarities between the anatomy and the functional areas of the human brain and that of dogs. Both species share a part of the brain called limbic system, which is involved in behavioural and emotional responses, and is made of common structures: the thalamus and the hypothalamus which produce essential hormones that regulate thirst, hunger, mood etc; basal ganglia involved in reward processing, the formation of habits, movement and learning; the hippocampus essential for memory formation and long-term memory storage, for associations and for special orientation, for neurogenesis and therefore brain plasticity; the amygdala which is central to the processing of emotional responses such as fear, anxiety, anger and pleasure.[10]
When it comes to comparing human and canine senses, it is crucial to highlight similarities but also distinctions, which aids us in comprehending how dogs perceive their surroundings, often quite differently from us[JG6] .
Unlike humans, dogs don't perceive the complete spectrum of colours; instead, they excel at detecting motion from afar rather than stationary objects up close. Dogs see the world in a similar way to someone with red-green colour blindness. This means reds might appear muted, like gray or brown. Yellows, oranges, and greens would all look like different shades of yellow to them. Additionally, violets wouldn't be distinct and would appear more like a shade of blue.This should guide our choice of colour in toys or surfaces with which the dog must interact; we should also think of contrasting colours: yellow on green will not be detected easily, strange that in agility yellow contact areas on grass are considered acceptable.
A dog’s eye can process shapes, but this does not mean knowing what the shape is; hence the importance of familiarisation in general; [11]
Their distinctive ear shapes and control over the pinna allow them to sense triggers before we're even aware of them. Breeds with erect ears tend to be better ad localisation and hearing in the distance than floppy ear breeds.
Still in relation to the canine auditory system, a study supported by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences found that both dogs and humans use similar parts of their brains to understand emotions in voices. This suggests that both species pay attention to the same sound qualities in voices that tell us how someone is feeling.[12]
Although taste is the first sense to develop in puppyhood, a dog’s taste sensitivity is not as refined as humans'—allowing them to consume a variety of unimaginable items! They have only 1700 taste buds compared to the 9000 in humans, but they do possess a keener ability to taste water, sometimes leading them to abstain from drinking.
And, of course, we are all familiar with dogs' remarkable sense of smell: 300 million olfactory receptors compared to only 5 million in humans; and the additional vomeronasal organ positioned on the roof of their mouth which is specialised in detecting pheromones… an additional tool to help them read emotions[JG7] .
[1] "Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness" (2012)
[2] Lisa Feldman Barrett's ground-breaking theories challenge conventional wisdom by proposing a new perspective on emotion generation and the amygdala's role. Feldmann Barrett suggests that emotions are not solely hardwired into specific brain regions but are instead dynamically constructed by the brain based on context, past experiences, and learning. For a long time, scientists have believed that the amygdala is essential for experiencing and perceiving fear. Research conducted in the 1990s on a patient with a rare amygdala condition initially supported this view. However, Feldman Barrett thinks the function of the amygdala is more intricate and its role is to alert the rest of the brain to information that is crucial for allostasis -- the brain's method of predicting and fulfilling the body's needs before they occur. Whether the information is threatening, rewarding, or new, it aids the brain in better anticipating future events., L.F. (2017) How emotions are made: The secret life of the brain. Pan Macmillan.
[3] Bekoff, M. (2008) The emotional lives of animals: Marc Bekoff. Novato: New world library.
[4] Innes Lecture 2023 - ‘Darwin and the evolution of emotions’ with dr Paul White (2023a) YouTube. Available
at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFSN8C3fDvI (Accessed: 28 May 2024).
Minutes: 17:57 - 18:30 / 45 - 48 / 55:20 - 56:20
[5]Theories of emotion explained (2019) YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDYz32srgsU (Accessed: 28 May 2024). Minutes 0:41 - 1:44
Lolliot, S. et al. (2021a) Emotion, Introduction to Psychology A critical approach.
Available at: https://pressbooks.cuny.edu/jsevitt/chapter/emotion
[6] Ibid, Minutes 0:42 – 2:35.
[7] Ibid, Minutes 2:36 – 3:33
[8] Ibid, Minutes 3:34 – 4:35
[9] Lolliot, S. et al. (2021a) Emotion, Introduction to Psychology A critical approach.
Available at: https://pressbooks.cuny.edu/jsevitt/chapter/emotion
[10] The limbic system (2023) Queensland Brain Institute - University of Queensland.
Available at: https://qbi.uq.edu.au/brain/brain-anatomy/limbic-system
[11] https://www.thewildest.com/dog-lifestyle/what-colors-do-dogs-see
[12] Andics, A. et al. (2014) ‘Voice-sensitive regions in the dog and human brain are revealed by comparative fmri’, Current Biology, 24(5), pp. 574–578. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2014.01.058.
Different breeds, different signals
Dogs of differing breeds may have different facial and body signals when communicating.
Explain this in context of both dog-to-dog communication and dog-to-human communication.
Analyse and explain common body language signals.
The ultimate objective of all creatures is to pass on our genes to the next generation. To achieve this goal, acquiring/using energy and reproduction are necessary. To succeed in this endeavour, we can do it alone or we can cooperate. The larger the group, the more complex the communication signals: from the simple dichotomy of fear and aggression (fight or flight) typical of the solitary predator to the more sophisticated systems of communication of pack hunters: for them, social self-awareness helps to fulfil the individual’s needs without killing/harming those who are necessary for his own survival and possibly his offspring.[1] Animals have learnt to communicate via their body parts, their posture and size, their hormones, their vocalisations; the aim mostly cooperation/distance decreasing or conflict avoidance/distance increasing.
Dogs can signal confidence, alertness, or threat by making themselves bigger (pushing their body weight forward, tensing their muscles, piloerection etc) or they could communicate a lack of fighting intention by making themselves smaller (flattening back their ears, cowering, and lowering their tale). The tail’s position and its stiffness or looseness degree can communicate confidence, arousal (either provocation or playing intention) or fear and anxiety. It has been suggested that dogs expressing positive emotions when looking at a stimulus will move their tail more towards the right side; a more pronounced movement towards the left indicates negative emotions.[2]
Emotions are conveyed through the movement of all body parts (facial expressions, gaze, ears, mouth position, eyes, etc); of course, body parts cannot be read in isolation, but rather as a whole and in relation to context. Considering that emotions tend to fluctuate very rapidly, the body movements will reflect this and often will express contrasting emotions: the use of a video-camera could be very helpful in catching and studying the dog’s emotional journey especially when replayed in slow-motion. [3]
Artificial breeding has at times negatively impacted successful canine intraspecies communication, in particular amongst dogs that are meant for companionship and those that are bred for working; on the one side humans seek extreme docility but often cross over to insecurity and a more fearful disposition, whilst on the other they look for self-confidence and determination which sometimes crosses over to a more aggressive disposition; I find that when these two very different conspecifics meet, the result can often be one that reverts back to the simpler fear/aggression dichotomy which is not typical of canine natural behaviour seen for example in street dogs. It is important to remind ourselves that information can be intentionally or unintentionally communicated. Some signals are beyond our control. For example, when anxious our bodies involuntarily release body odours which will elicit a response in those around us.[4] In my experience, often this can translate int aggression from the confident dog towards the more timid one.
Portuguese ethologist Roger Abrantes gives us pictures illustrating canine social and agonistic behaviour to be read in conjunction with a clever ethogram. Of course, behaviour is dynamic (not static). Therefore, all interpretations are only approximate, as pictures allow, and context related.[5]
Different breeds have specific accents linked to their morphology and anatomy and the function/job they have been genetically artificially bred to perform. Therefore, in some circumstances some of these breeds will encounter an inability to express and communicate behaviour due to their facial morphology (brachycephalic dogs, dogs with no tail or whose ears have been cut to maintain a, normally pointy, shape). In some instances, the dog has been engineered to look like a different animal entirely. This could be the case of shepherd dogs whose colour and morphology are intended to trick wolves into mistaking them as sheep.
It is widely recognized that dogs have a remarkable ability to communicate with humans and are skilled at understanding human intentions and emotions. Their evolution alongside humans for thousands of years has likely contributed to the development of their social intelligence and ability to interpret human cues: they can read body language, facial expressions, tone of voice, and gestures. They can often anticipate human actions or responses based on these cues. Their bond with humans plays a crucial role in their ability to understand and respond to human emotions like happiness, sadness, fear, or anger. Based on their intelligence and adaptability, they can be trained to perform various tasks and follow instructions effectively.
Dogs have also learned how to elicit specific responses from humans, often through whining, barking styles, or using expressive facial expressions like puppy eyes (the “inner brow raiser, a communication signal developed solely as a signal directed at humans, rather than conspecifics). These behaviors can trigger human nurturing and attention, reinforcing the dog's attempt to communicate.
While all dogs, regardless of breed, share a common ancestry and ability to communicate with humans, some breeds might have certain traits that make them better at reading and responding to human cues. For example, certain breeds were historically selected for their ability to work closely with humans, like herding or hunting dogs, which might have enhanced their social intelligence. The top of the class breed that springs to mind is obviously the Border Collie, who is excellent at picking up on human cues and responding to them with precision. This is particularly important in dog agility, where communication and its timing are crucial for success. Waiting for the dog to commit to an obstacle before indicating what comes next is a great example of understanding the Border Collie's unique communication style: a fraction of a second too early and the dog will miss the obstacle originally intended in an effort to follow the handler’s move for what comes next. Kay Lawrence is a wealth of information with regards to Border Collies’ communication and learning style. [6]
Through domestication dogs have also developed new forms of vocalisations (compared to wolves) aimed at facilitating their communication with humans. It is interesting that breeds that are closer to their wolf ancestry (Shar-pei, Chow Chow, Basenji) rarely bark (very much like wolves, who vocalise in a narrower variety of social contexts).
Of course, different breeds will have various styles of communicating amongst conspecifics and with their humans. Personality, not just breed, will play an important role. In my experience, I have observed my 6-year-old working Golden Retriever developing a new greeting sound which he uses in the morning when I come downstairs after a brief separation. It is a high pitch modulated long lasting whine with short and sharp interruptions which to me suggest an intention to solicit affiliation and a slight rage for me having overslept.
Tactile communication is equally important. It is used during agonistic interactions to impress an opponent or to maintain social bonds. Humans are a very tactile species, and they tend to assume that all dogs will appreciate being petted. Of course, the familiarity of the human to the dog will have a massive impact on the success of this petting, but generally dogs’ love for petting is overestimated; dogs tend to prefer touch in certain areas (chest or under the chin) rather than the top of the head (which is humans instinctive go to area).
Again, from personal experience, my youngest Golden Retriever is much more tactile than my older one. How can I tell? Apart from clearly enjoying being touched all over and constantly (if he could), he relishes the weekend when he is allowed upstairs on the bed and he will spend the first few minutes repeatedly dive-bombing on my poor body, with the final touch being the reinforcement for repeating the behaviour.
[1] Abrantes, Roger. Dog Language - An Encyclopaedia of Canine Behavior (pp.13 -15). Dogwise. Kindle Edition.
[2] Siniscalchi, M. et al. (2018) ‘Communication in dogs’, Animals, 8(8).
[3] Emotions are not static; they fluctuate rapidly and can be measured in micro to nanoseconds. For example, in evaluating a problem behaviour, we plot the animal’s emotions on the Emotional Assessment chart, with the aim to establish what the animal is feeling shortly before, during and after the problem behaviour is seen (the ‘after’ forms part of the Reinforcement Assessment).
Pienaar, Karin. Mood Matters: MHERA: An Innovative Assessment Approach to Animal Emotionality in the Treatment of Behaviour Problems (p. 37). Dogwise Publishing. Kindle Edition.
[4] Siniscalchi.
[5] https://rogerabrantes.wordpress.com/2012/06/29/canine-ethogram-social-and-agonistic-behavior/
[6] Laurence, K. (2023) Which brain?, Vimeo. Available at: https://vimeo.com/852081965?fbclid=IwAR1EWxtK_egk2SLnpdo-piPfpJJ84LrJNGXcbxf-ltt8wvWbpci6gUv2eIE
In this presentation, Lawrence underline the importance of truly understanding the nature of each breed and avoid the human tendency to label behaviours through a human lens.
Bibliography
Abrantes, Roger. Dog Language - An Encyclopaedia of Canine Behavior. Dogwise. Kindle Edition.
Dogueshop et al. (2012) Canine ethogram-social and agonistic behavior, Roger Abrantes. Available at: https://rogerabrantes.wordpress.com/2012/06/29/canine-ethogram-social-and-agonistic-behavior/
Laurence, K.(2023) Which brain? Vimeo. Available at: https://vimeo.com/852081965?fbclid=IwAR1EWxtK_egk2SLnpdo-piPfpJJ84LrJNGXcbxf-ltt8wvWbpci6gUv2eIE
Pienaar, K. (2023) Mood matters: Mehra: An innovative assessment approach to animal emotionality in the treatment of behaviour problems. Wenatchee, WA, USA: Dogwise Publishing, a Division of Direct Book Service, Inc.
Siniscalchi, M. et al. (2018) ‘Communication in dogs’, Animals, 8(8).
Bibliography
Abrantes, Roger. Dog Language - An Encyclopaedia of Canine Behavior. Dogwise. Kindle Edition.
Dogueshop et al. (2012) Canine ethogram-social and agonistic behavior, Roger Abrantes. Available at: https://rogerabrantes.wordpress.com/2012/06/29/canine-ethogram-social-and-agonistic-behavior/
Laurence, K.(2023) Which brain? Vimeo. Available at: https://vimeo.com/852081965?fbclid=IwAR1EWxtK_egk2SLnpdo-piPfpJJ84LrJNGXcbxf-ltt8wvWbpci6gUv2eIE
Pienaar, K. (2023) Mood matters: Mehra: An innovative assessment approach to animal emotionality in the treatment of behaviour problems. Wenatchee, WA, USA: Dogwise Publishing, a Division of Direct Book Service, Inc.
Siniscalchi, M. et al. (2018) ‘Communication in dogs’, Animals, 8(8).
[1] Abrantes, Roger. Dog Language - An Encyclopaedia of Canine Behavior (pp.13 -15). Dogwise. Kindle Edition.
[2] Siniscalchi, M. et al. (2018) ‘Communication in dogs’, Animals, 8(8).
[3] Emotions are not static; they fluctuate rapidly and can be measured in micro to nanoseconds. For example, in evaluating a problem behaviour, we plot the animal’s emotions on the Emotional Assessment chart, with the aim to establish what the animal is feeling shortly before, during and after the problem behaviour is seen (the ‘after’ forms part of the Reinforcement Assessment).
Pienaar, Karin. Mood Matters: MHERA: An Innovative Assessment Approach to Animal Emotionality in the Treatment of Behaviour Problems (p. 37). Dogwise Publishing. Kindle Edition.
[4] Siniscalchi.
[5] https://rogerabrantes.wordpress.com/2012/06/29/canine-ethogram-social-and-agonistic-behavior/
[6] Laurence, K. (2023) Which brain?, Vimeo. Available at: https://vimeo.com/852081965?fbclid=IwAR1EWxtK_egk2SLnpdo-piPfpJJ84LrJNGXcbxf-ltt8wvWbpci6gUv2eIE
In this presentation, Lawrence underline the importance of truly understanding the nature of each breed and avoid the human tendency to label behaviours through a human lens.
Communication methods
How has the communication methods of dogs changed due to domestication and their close relationship with humans?
Social behaviour is a complex topic that encompasses a range of behaviours including cooperation, competition, aggression, altruism etc; at the core of it, there is always a cost/benefit equation which will determine the choice of living solo, in groups or a mixture of the two.
Social behaviour happens through biocommunication, which refers to the different ways that living organisms communicate with each other, either intra-species or inter-species. A variety of signals are involved, including chemical, tactile, visual, and auditory. They may be used for a multitude of purposes, such as to attract a mate, warn of danger, mark territory, signal food sources etc.
Chemical signals are the most common form of communication in biocommunication. Molecules are released into the environment and detected by other organisms. For example, pheromones are chemical signals that are used to attract mates or signal territory in many animal species. Chemical communication looks invisible, but its effects are obvious: through emotions, they impact on the energy that a living organism gives off, which in turn can affect the energy of others in the environment. This means that no one is truly separate from anyone else; for example, in the interspecies case of humans and dogs, if either are experiencing fear, their emotion will have a reciprocal energetic impact on the body and cells of the other, causing a transfer of energy. This energy creates an electromagnetic field around the canine and the human body, which can be felt by others in the environment. (1)
This concept is important when working with fearful or reactive dogs, as understanding the energetic impact of emotions can help handlers manage them better. By promoting emotional and energetic balance, it may be possible to help dogs feel calmer and more relaxed in stressful situations, leading to more positive interactions with their environment and other animals. Visual and auditory signals are also important in biocommunication. For example, birds may use complex songs to attract mates or establish territory. Similarly, many animals use visual signals, such as coloration or body posture to communicate with each other. Overall, biocommunication is a fascinating and complex area of study that involves understanding the different ways that living organisms communicate and interact with each other. At its base, there are signs and their interpretations: a living system produce signs which are things that refer to ‘something else’ and provoke another receptive living system (human or nonhuman) to form an interpretant (a movement or a brain activity) in relation to this ‘something else’. Living systems engage in biosemiotic interactions which are interpretative processes. Mammals generally have more semiotic freedom (ability to produce signs) than their reptilian ancestor, and fishes are more semiotically sophisticated than invertebrates. This means that the production of meaning is an essential survival parameter, and it is more complex in the later stages of evolution. [2]
The concept of a semiotic niche emphasizes the importance of signals and signs in the survival and adaptation of a species. A semiotic niche is defined as the set of signals that prevail in the ecological niche of a species. To survive, a population must master and utilize the set of visual, acoustic, olfactory, tactile, or chemical signs that are relevant to its semiotic niche. Different species with different semiotic niches can coexist and cooperate. This is the case of men and dogs, but of course co-operation does not equal full understanding! To this effect, the term ‘signal sensitivity’ is used by Scandinavian behaviourists to describe how dogs can misinterpret human facial and body language: a smile may be perceived as an aggressive threat because it resembles the display of teeth in dog language. This situation is normally linked to a lack of human imprinting and socialisation.[3] The opposite of course is true: domestication and a close relationship with humans has increased the canine signal repertoire in relation to dog-human communication. Researchers at Linköping University in Sweden have identified a link between 5 genes and dogs’ social ability; this suggests that there may be a genetic basis for this trait. The fact that four of the identified genes show similarities to certain conditions in humans (for example, autism) is also intriguing and this may suggest that there could be some overlap between the genetic basis of social behaviour in dogs and certain aspects of human behaviour.
Through the process of domestication, dogs have evolved into animals that can form strong emotional bonds with their humans and understand and respond to human communication cues and emotions: they can pick up on subtle cues, tone of voice, facial expressions and respond accordingly. The suggestion is that dogs have a strong trait to seek human company and that this is gene related, as opposed to their distant cousins (wolves) and other species.[4] With reference to the ability to understand and communicate with humans in ways that other animals cannot, Brian Hare, an evolutionary anthropologist who has studied the cognitive abilities of dogs, has called this ability the "genius of dogs" and has seen it as unique to dogs. [5] On the contrary, Clive Wynne argued and proved that any animal that has been reared with people from an early age may develop similar abilities and suggests that it is only the close relationships that humans formed with dogs through domestication and breeding for thousands of years that has made dogs particularly attuned to human social cues and communication.[6] What is more interesting and what could form the basis of dogs ‘tendency to follow humans’ gestures and seek human proximity is the predisposition towards help-seeking from humans when faced with difficult problem-solving tasks,[7] something that wild animals and other domesticated animals do not have or have in a lesser degree. I am inclined to think that even this trait may be the result of living in close proximity to human for thousands of years.
Domestication has had its effects on anatomical features and behaviours of dogs. For example, Dr Juliane Kaminski from the psychology department at the University of Portsmouth suggests that, during the process of domestication, dogs have developed a unique facial muscle anatomy to facilitate communication with humans. Specifically, dogs, unlike wolves, uniformly have a muscle (the levator anguli oculi medialis) that raises their inner eyebrow. The study found that dogs produce the eyebrow movement more frequently and with greater intensity than wolves. This muscle allows dogs to produce an eyebrow movement that resembles a human expression of sadness, which may trigger a nurturing response in humans. Dogs capable of producing ‘puppy dog eyes’ would have had a selective advantage because humans preferred more expressive and communicative dogs. Click on this link (https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1820653116) to see the videos at the end of the article which show the differences in LAOM movement between wolves and dogs.[8]
There are suggestions that domestication has influenced canine communication specifically to address communication towards humans. When communicating with humans, dog may use the same signals they use when communicating with dog, but some signals may take on a different meaning when directed towards humans. [9]In human-dog communication, eye contact is an important component.[10]Dogs pay attention to human gaze and its direction. They rely on eye contact to determine when communication is relevant and directed at them; pointing gestures are less salient than human gaze, but more salient than verbal cues. This is clearly visible in the sport of dog agility: pointing at an obstacle whilst looking elsewhere will result in the dog missing the obstacle whilst going straight to where the handler’s gaze is directed. Verbally cueing an obstacle whilst pointing away from it will also result in the dog missing the obstacle. [11]
Through domestication and life in proximity with humans, dogs have also developed specific acoustic expressions. Feral and stray dogs, who do not rely on human help, do not show this variety of auditory signals.
Both domestic dogs and wolves bark as an aggressive signal towards intruders, signalling the willingness to defend themselves and this function of the bark may well have been what made protodogs appealing to early hominids. Contrary to wolves and through selective pressure though, adult dogs use barking also in positive circumstances including play.[12]Because different breeds show a strong variability in barking, this could be due to domestication and selective pressure for different behavioural roles: exaggerated barking and growling in the guarding breeds where the protective instinct is selected for; frequent barking in the Terriers or Scent Hounds whose barking is useful to alert hunters to their location whist in pursue of the pray.[13]Basenjis are known for their unique vocalizations, often described as a "yodel". These sounds are quite distinct and different from the typical barks or howls produced by other dog breeds. So, dog breeds can have unique traits, including variations in their vocalization abilities and anatomical structures. Basenjis' unique vocalizations are just one example of this rich diversity. [14]
The same domestication influence can be noticed in other auditory signals, for example growling. Wolves and dogs growl for close-range communication to establish rank, to warn off and to pre-empt an actual attack. Both also use growling in playful situations, but the difference is that wolves will only ever do that in their juvenile phase, whilst dogs continue to play growl also in adulthood. [15]
On our part, to communicate with dogs, we use our voices (with high pitch vocals proving more enticing, whilst lower ones more distant increasing), body movement (running away tends to generate chasing – useful for recall), body posture (a lower and less direct body posture tends to make dogs more comfortable), facial expressions, gaze (can be useful to indicate directions). I firmly believe that, as dog owners, we should educate ourselves on all aspects of animal welfare and wellbeing, of which communication methods is an essential contributor. We should see ourselves as keepers of a highly enriched captive environment, where learning each other’s language and methods of communication are a vital element for the health of the central nervous system of our pets or working dogs, inducing increased cortical thickness and synaptic activity. This, in turn, will impact positively on the physical and psychological wellbeing of all animals. [16]
[1] Gutteridge, Sally. Inspiring Resilience in Fearful and Reactive Dogs (pp. 116-117). Kindle Edition.
[2] Hoffmeyer, J. (2010) “A biosemiotic approach to the question of meaning,” Zygon®, 45(2), pp. 367–390.
[3] Abrantes, Roger. Dog Language - An Encyclopaedia of Canine Behavior (pp. 219, 226). Dogwise. Kindle Edition
[4] Persson, M.E. et al. (2016) “Genomic regions associated with interspecies communication in dogs contain genes related to human social disorders,” Scientific Reports, 6(1).
[5] Hare, B. and Woods, V. (2013) The genius of dogs: Discovering the unique intelligence of man’s best friend. London: Oneworld.
[6] L., W.C.D. (2020) “5,” in Dog is love: Why and how your dog loves you. London: Quercus. pp. 37-49.
[7] Persson, M.E. et al. (2016) “Genomic regions associated with interspecies communication in dogs contain genes related to human social disorders,” Scientific Reports, 6(1).
[8] Kaminski, J. et al. (2019) ‘Evolution of facial muscle anatomy in dogs’, Proceedings of the National Academy Of Sciences, 116(29), pp. 14677–14681. The study also found that the retractor anguli oculi lateralis muscle (RAOL), responsible for pulling the lateral corners of the eyelids toward the ears, was typically more developed in domestic dogs than in gray wolves..
[9] Siniscalchi, M. et al. (2018) “Communication in dogs,” Animals, 8(8), p. 131.
[10] Dogs use eye contact in a different way when communicating with humans compared to when communicating with other dogs. In dog-to-dog communication, direct eye contact is threatening, and may escalate into aggressive behavior. However, when dogs make eye contact with familiar humans, it can be a sign of affection, trust, or an attempt to communicate. Dogs can also use eye contact to gain attention or to request something from their human companion. A very particular look is used to ask for help when injured. This ability to use eye contact in a different way with humans must be the result of the domestication process, as dogs evolved to live and work alongside humans.
[11] Timing of agility cues: Lisa Frick and Hoss (2012) YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WMfCg5v3MM (Accessed: 14 August 2023).
ta minute 2.41 you can see that Lisa had to turn her gaze towards the dog for the dog to move in her direction; had she maintained a straight gaze ahead, the dog would have bypassed the jump and continue on the path parallel to her.
[12] Kaminski, Juliane; Marshall-Pescini, Sarah. The Social Dog (p. 135). Elsevier Science. Kindle Edition.
[13] Ibid, p.141
[14] Ibid, p.142
[15] Ibid, p.138
[16] Jacobs, B. et al. (2021) ‘Putative neural consequences of captivity for elephants and cetaceans’, Reviews in the Neurosciences, 33(4), pp. 439–465.
Bibliography
Abrantes, Roger. Dog Language - An Encyclopaedia of Canine Behavior. Dogwise. Kindle Edition
Gutteridge, Sally. Inspiring Resilience in Fearful and Reactive Dogs. Kindle Edition
Hare, B. and Woods, V. (2013) The genius of dogs: Discovering the unique intelligence of man’s best friend. London: Oneworld.
Hoffmeyer, J. (2010) “A biosemiotic approach to the question of meaning,” Zygon®, 45(2).
Jacobs, B. et al. (2021) ‘Putative neural consequences of captivity for elephants and cetaceans’, Reviews in the Neurosciences, 33(4), pp. 439–465.
Kaminski, J. et al. (2019a) ‘Evolution of facial muscle anatomy in dogs’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(29), pp. 14677–14681.
L., W.C.D. (2020) “5,” in Dog is love: Why and how your dog loves you. London: Quercus.
Persson, M.E. et al. (2016) “Genomic regions associated with interspecies communication in dogs contain genes related to human social disorders,” Scientific Reports, 6(1).
Siniscalchi, M. et al. (2018) “Communication in dogs,” Animals, 8(8).
Timing of agility cues: Lisa Frick and Hoss (2012) YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WMfCg5v3MM
Canine Evolution and Domestication
‘It’s just a dog’: what an infuriating, non-sensical utterance about dogs. In fact, what is a dog?
By studying evolution and domestication, we deepen our understanding of the common ancestry and interconnectedness of all living beings on earth, their adaptation and diversification over time to occupy different niches and habitats. We see the complex web of relationships between species, the mechanisms that drive genetic mutations to respond to environmental changes, and how new species arise.
Through domestication, species have altered their genetic makeup and behavior. Through natural relaxed selection and later artificial selection wild ancestors have developed into domesticated forms that are more useful to humans and can coexist with them without fear. This process of domestication has played a crucial role in human history, providing us with food and companionship.
By recognizing this shared ancestry and interconnectedness, we can develop a more respectful and empathetic relationship with the natural world and strive for a more harmonious coexistence with other species.
Before Darwin, the prevailing view was that all living organisms were created by God in their present forms and that they remained unchanged throughout history. Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection challenged this idea by proposing that species change over time through the process of natural selection, by which individuals with traits that are better suited to their environment are more likely to survive and reproduce, passing on their advantageous traits to their offspring. Over time, this process can lead to the emergence of new species.
What was even more ground-breaking about Darwin's theory was the idea that all living organisms share a common ancestor. Life on Earth likely originated in water; English comparative anatomist of the 19th century Sir Richard Owen discovered that many creatures with limbs share a similar bone pattern known as the "tetrapod limb" and consists of one bone (the humerus in the upper arm), two bones (the radius and ulna in the lower arm), lots of blobs (the carpals in the wrist), and five digits (the metacarpals and phalanges in the hand).[1] This basic structure is seen in all tetrapods (Amphibians, reptiles (including dinosaurs and birds) and mammals and is thought to have evolved in a common ancestor.
Evolution means adaptation for survival: in a world where creatures are arranged in a prey/predator pyramid structure, to survive you either got bigger or faster, you either camouflaged or left altogether. So, gradually we went from fish with fins that had no similarities with limbs, to fish that could do ‘push-ups’ like Tiktaalik[2], to amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals, including us. We have a similar number of genes, our embryos at conception are nearly undistinguishable; the timing and intensity by which key genes turn on or off will determine who gets paws or hands![3]
Darwin understood that creatures evolved but could not tell us how. The study of DNA, present in all living creatures, got us there. This long molecule spiralling along a double Helix works as a code that can be arranged in infinite sequences, each one determining how living creatures appear and live. Diversification over time happens through DNA changes at conception (embryos’ DNA is the mix of the father’s and mother’s DNA), via mutations (as DNA copies itself when cells divide, mutations occur causing minute changes) and through epigenetics[4]. Creatures whose mutations favour survival in a certain environment live and pass on their useful genes. Those whose mutations prove unhelpful, die out.
Based on this common ancestry, behaviourists and trainers’ initial concern should be to prepare the human client for a perspective of respectful, equal playing field. Over the millennia animals’ autonomic nervous system developed following the same design to regulate organs and body functions (breathing, digestion, blood pressure etc), to store and release energy to allow movement. The autonomic nervous system, through a subconscious surveillance system called neuroception, scans for signs of safety and danger; if danger is detected it moves us either into a dorsal vagal collapse or shutdown (a branch of the parasympathetic nervous system)[5] or into a fight or flight response (sympathetic nervous system).[6] Around 200 million years ago, mammals developed the ventral vagus (the second branch of the parasympathetic system) allowing us to feel safe and connected. As each new system emerged, it joined the older system rather than replacing it.[7] The way we perceive the world through neuroception will determine how we feel and ultimately how we behave. We will be able to either connect, move away (into either fight, flight), or shut down.[8] In addressing dogs’ behaviour through this lens, we look for the emotions that drive it. We can see how we share the same circuitries of motivation, emotion, and learning.
When we speak of domestication we distinguish between:
long-term domestication (the evolution from a far ancestor to which the dog is as far removed as we are from ours – possibly Grey wolf for the dog and Sahelanthropus tchadensis for humans).[9] A commonly accepted theory about the domestication of dogs is that as humans transitioned from a hunter-gatherer lifestyle to one based on agriculture, they began to live in permanent settlements and generate large amounts of food waste. This waste attracted wolves, who began to scavenge in and around the settlements. Over time, in a process of relaxed natural selection (scavenging was less dangerous than hunting) some wolves became less fearful of humans and more willing to live near them. Wolves that were less fearful and more cooperative with humans were more likely to receive food and protection, leading to increased survival and reproduction (a process known as relaxed natural selection). [10]
short-term domestication (As the relationship between humans and wolves evolved, humans began to selectively breed dogs for certain traits, such as herding, hunting, or guarding. This artificial selection process led to the development of the many different dog breeds we see today).
individual domestication (related to the personal history and journey of the individual dog).
Applied ethologist Kim Brophey [11] has created a beautiful image that incorporates all three forms of domestications which must be considered when analysing canine behaviour:
The antecedent in the operant conditioning three-term ABC contingency cannot be reduced to the immediate event but must extend to four further elements: Learning (phylogeny and ontogeny), Environment (changing habitats and niches and their impact on dogs’ lives, choices or lack thereof), Genetics (DNA through evolution, long/short and individual domestication) and Self (biological state of the individual animal, individual traits, personality, personal likes and dislikes etc).
Most dogs are captive animals, whose every aspect of life is dependent on their carers’ choices. It would be important to educate owners on the 5 freedoms of animal welfare (freedom from hunger and thirst, from discomfort, from pain/injury/disease, to express normal behaviour and from fear and distress), and how they are strictly linked to the mental wellbeing of animals. Should their mental state be negatively affected, this could result in physical changes, such as through a physiological stress response (increase in heart rate, blood pressure, and cortisol levels). These changes can have a negative impact on the animal's physical health. Top of the agenda would be to strive for a healthy coexistence and a strong relationship based on mutual trust, love, empathy, and compassion.[JG8] Especially in relation to the need to express normal biological behaviour, I would also question whether the fact that these behaviours may make the owner’s life difficult is a good enough reason to change them. In many cases, we end up pathologizing perfectly normal behaviours that respond to an instinctive need of the animal: here, rather than working on behavioural change, I would concentrate on behavioural management and finding acceptable outlets for that behaviour. The preventative step would be to help perspective owners to choose dogs that most fits their lifestyle and environment.
Explaining canine body language would help client read the emotions that drives their dogs’ behaviours. Dogs are very good at observing us (their life depends on it), we must do the same in reverse. Reading the subtleness of canine communication expressed through all body parts working together (not just singling out individual ones) will help not only in interspecies but also intraspecies[12] communication.
Finally, owners would benefit from exposure to evolution and domestication concepts as it will steer them away from old fashioned, scientifically debunked theories[13] that are at the base of punishment-based training techniques. [14]Today, we know that we can achieve much better results whilst empowering dogs to try things out without fear of failing or punishment. More and more trainers use force-free, positive, LIMA (Least Intrusive Minimal Aversive) teaching methods based on proven learning mechanisms that apply to all life forms (classical conditioning, operant conditioning), and use positive reinforcement and personalised motivation to maximise the learning outcome.
To conclude, an outline of a case I am working on with initial suggestions:
Footnotes
[1] The differences between creatures lie in the differences in the shapes and sizes of the bones and the numbers of blobs, fingers, and toes. Shubin, N. (2009) in Your inner fish: The amazing discovery of our 375-million-year-old ancestor. London: Penguin, p. 31.
[2] Tiktaalik had a shoulder, elbow, and wrist composed of the same bones as an upper arm, forearm, and wrist in a human. Shubin, p39.
[3] What Darwin Never Knew - Embryos (2016) YouTube. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4a_vdzYU69U
[4] Whilst DNA is set at birth and cannot be changed or affected by the environment, the epigenome can switch genomes on or off depending on which ones are best for the animal in a set environment. A genetic trait could fade away over generations if the genome related to it is not switched on for long enough. Gutteridge, S. (2018) in Inspiring resilience in fearful and Reactive Dogs. Independently published, p. 22.
[5] 500 million years ago a prehistoric fish called placoderm used the branch of the parasympathetic system we know as dorsal vagal. Dana, D. (2021) in Anchored: How to befriend your nervous system using polyvagal theory. Boulder, CO: Sounds True, p. 26.
[6] Around 400 million years ago, the sympathetic nervous system emerged in another now extinct fish called an acanthodian. Dana, p.27.
[7] Dana, p.27.
[8] Dana, p21-22.
[9] Sahelanthropus tchadensis (2022) The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program. Available at: https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/sahelanthropus-tchadensis
[10] Gutteridge, p.18
[11] Brophey, K. (2018) Meet your dog: The game-changing guide for understanding your dog's behavior. San Francisco: Chronicle Books.
[12] I think there are similarities between the living conditions of those unrelated captive wolves forced to live together for studying purposes and those of our modern captive dogs in crowded urban environments. Post pandemic there has been a massive increase in dog ownership; dogs are forced to share crowded spaces and often face a lack of choice (first and foremost the choice to not interact). This can lead to increased stress and anxiety for dogs, which can manifest in aggressive responses. It's important for owners to be mindful of this and recognize that dogs are individuals and may not always want to interact with other dogs, even if they are friendly and well-socialized. Dogs' boundaries should be respected. If all owners managed their dogs as if they were so called ‘reactive’, it would easier to avoid forced interactions among unfamiliar dogs. This could prevent confrontations and reduce stress for all dogs.
[13] In 1947, animal behaviourist Rudolf Shenkel carried out observational studies on captive wolves that were not family related and therefore not reflective of the natural dynamic of a wolf pack in the wild. The wolves in captivity naturally showed tension amongst each other, and their antagonistic behaviours were taken as normal in the species and then transferred onto dogs, as wolves’ descendants. Gutteridge, p.16
[14] These were based on concepts of dominance and constant struggle for the alpha role in the pack. Around the 80’s, American biologist David Mech conducted other studies that highlighted the flaws of earlier theories. Wolves pack showed to be much more like human families, where naturally only father and mother would breed (rather than fighting their offspring for the alpha role), whilst other family members would cooperate to maximise the chance of survival.
Bibliography
Brophey, K. (2018) Meet your dog: The game-changing guide for understanding your dog's behavior. San Francisco: Chronicle Books.
Dana, D. (2021) in Anchored: How to befriend your nervous system using polyvagal theory. Boulder, CO: Sounds True.
Gutteridge, S. (2018) in Inspiring resilience in fearful and Reactive Dogs. Independently published.
Sahelanthropus tchadensis (2022) The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program. Available at: https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/sahelanthropus-tchadensis
Shubin, N. (2009) in Your inner fish: The amazing discovery of our 375-million-year-old ancestor. London: Penguin
What Darwin Never Knew - Embryos (2016) YouTube. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4a_vdzYU69U
Canine Evolution and Domestication
Canine Evolution and Domestication
Comprehending domestication as the process of adaptation from a life in the wild to a life in close association with humans is ethically essential to understand, work and live respectfully with those animals that have undergone this process. In the case of dogs, there are various theories to explain their origins and evolution; some identify the wolf as the dog’s ancestor, others, like Ray Coppinger, see wolves, jackals, coyotes, and dogs (all sexually interfertile[1]) as changing adaptations of the same species to different ecological niches. Ever changing planet conditions, founder effects or postzygotic culling by humans would have created selective pressures which caused genetic variations and gave us canids of different shapes and sizes. What many agree on is that some wild canids adapted to the new human agricultural niche and traded hunting for scavenging around human settlements and became less fearful of humans; those that were sufficiently tolerant of humans self-selected to be the ancestors of domestic dogs, by breeding in the proximity of humans; those that could not, re-joined the wild population. These early canines became physically smaller with weaker jaws and teeth; they would have vocalised their fear when other predators approached the camp thus becoming useful lookouts for humans. Dmitri Belyaev’s farm-fox experiment just shows us how quickly this loss of fear towards humans could take to develop.
According to Clive Wynne these early canids were not as fierce as wolves, nor were they amazing independent hunters having chosen the easier option of scavenging; during the end of the last ice age, the warming of the planet gave rise to dense forests that were more difficult to navigate compared to the ice age tundra, where massive beasts like mammoths were easily spotted and hunted. Humans and ancient canines, possibly by accident, both discovered how useful they could be to each other: Whilst these canines were fast enough to chase and corner a pray, they were not strong enough to complete the hunt on their own (unlike wolves). Canine vocalisations directed humans towards the cornered pray, who would get dispatched and shared among hunting partners. This hunting ritual, fuelled by strong emotions, would have enabled the genetic mutations which sparked the beginning of the special bond we know today. [2] This predisposition to tameness would have been an evolutionary advantage for survival compared to the more aloof individuals. The pups with the friendliest genes would eventually have had a better chance of survival due to being favoured by humans and would have become the norm .[3]
Domestication (through the gradual approach of human settlements, the serendipitous partnership in hunting, and the evolutionary advantage of the friendliest) caused a change in three genes: WBSCR17, GTF21 and GTF21RD1[4], where a different level in their variation corresponds to a more or less pronounced level of affiliation, contact seeking and sociability; the diversity in the level of change of these genes is reflected nowadays in the friendliness or aloofness of different breeds and their presence in dogs or absence in wolves and other wild canids is what diversify the former from the latter.[5]
According to Wynne, what makes dogs special domestic animals is this inclination to trust humans and seek their company. There is a caveat though! Society has been falsely led to believe that dogs are all naturally tame and loving, in addition to thinking that ‘real’ dogs are the so-called purebred, as opposed to the more dangerous, less reliable street dogs; on the contrary, ‘real’ dogs are street and village dogs that live totally or semi-independently (around 850 million of them). Purebred dogs were artificially selected by humans for traits they considered useful in various activities (herding, guarding etc). Although the previously mentioned genetic mutation that favoured affiliation has happened in all dogs, it is on its own no guarantee for tameness. Dogs that do not receive the initial human imprinting can be weary of humans, and although not as scared of humans as a wild animals would be [6], they would not naturally seek and love human company. In conclusion, tameness and trust in humans is not innate in dogs, even though their genes make it possible .[7]
The subject of tameness and friendliness is close to my heart because it seems to be the one aspect that is most misunderstood by humans. We tend to fantasise on dogs’ nature and assume that these domestic animals should instinctively know, feel, and apply human social values whilst forsaking the biological natural response that we all share in the animal kingdom: the fight or flight response linked to the amygdala in mammals. James Nestor in Breath [8] speaks of an experiment where monkeys’ amygdalae (two almond-size nodes at the centre of the temporal lobes) were clipped. These nodes help monkeys, humans, and other mammals remember, make decisions, and process emotions. They also work as the alarm circuit of fear, signalling threats and initiating a reaction to fight or run away. Without the amygdalae, in the experiment, all the monkeys ‘appeared retarded in their ability to foresee and avoid dangerous confrontations.’ Survival is impossible or extremely precarious without fear. In dogs, fear can cause flight or fight, the latter being normally signalled by body language that gradually increases in antagonism, each step meant to forewarn and avoid the ultimate most costly engagement. On our part, we seem to understand/accept that mishandling of other domestic animals (cats, bulls!), would have unpleasant if not serious consequences! On the other hand, we demand that dogs not only love us but also give up any form of communication that could indicate any emotional discomfort: in the name of tameness, we expect them to accept any form of human handling and interaction (pleasant or unpleasant). In the name of tameness, we also want our dogs to behave ‘sensibly and respectfully’ towards other animal species, irrespective of their imprinting, thus forsaking their natural hunting instinct wherever it happens to be either artificially selected for or randomly resurfacing in various degrees due to their historical ancestry .[9]
I believe there is a need for educating people with regards to the meaning of tameness and what is considered its antithesis: aggressiveness; irrespective of antecedents (as in Kim Brophey’s L.E.G.S model – Learning. Environment. Genetics. Self)[10] wherever an aggressive response is seen, a dog is labelled as aggressive, hence problematic, and often euthanised. All four elements of L.E.G.S are essential to understand the life of every individual, including humans. We humans play God with dogs’ genes and do not pay enough attention to the ever-changing environmental pressures of our world, expecting dogs to fit in no matter what. From free canids with full agency, we have turned them into captive animals with lack of choice; whenever they do not fit the mould, we speak of behavioural issues! Dogs deserve better.
Footnotes
[1] Behavioural ecologists try to keep wolves from breeding with dogs. Sterilization of local dogs is carried out to keep them from breeding with the Ethiopian wolf: Coppinger, R., Coppinger, L. and Beck, A.M. (2016) in What is a dog? foreword by Alan M. Beck. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, p. 202.
[2] This still happens in Nicaragua for the Mayangna people, whose dogs are not the typical scavenging animal leading a solitary existence but are actively involved in the hunt. Wynne, Clive. Dog is Love: Why and How Your Dog Loves You (p. 198). Quercus. Kindle Edition.
[3] L., W.C.D. (2020) “5,” in Dog is love: Why and how your dog loves you. London: Quercus.
[4] These three genes are linked to the Williams syndrome in humans, who show hyper-sociability, extreme gregariousness, a desire to form close and warm relationships, to love and be loved.
[5] L., W.C.D. (2019) “6,”.
[6] Both street dogs and wolves would be capable of scavenging around human settlements, but dogs would be able to do it in daylight, not only at night.
[7] Experimental imprinting of wolves sees the window of opportunity for a successful outcome closing at 3 weeks from birth and human contact must be constant, 24/7. With dogs, imprinting is much easier and does not require full immersion. Taming dogs is so simple that we don’t even realise we are doing it. At the same time, experiments where dogs had no human contact for the first 14 weeks of their life saw dogs behave as ‘little wild animals’. L., W.C.D. (2019) location 192 of 272.
[8] Nestor, J. (2020) “Pp166,167,” in Breath: The lost art and science of our most misunderstood function. London: Penguin Books.
[9] https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/qcs-dog-savages-beloved-local-thames-seal-z0fd38zh6
[10] Brophey, K. (2018) “1,” in Meet your dog: The game-changing behavior guide for the modern dog lover. San Francisco: Chronicle Books.
Bibliography
Brophey, K. (2018), Meet your dog: The game-changing behavior guide for the modern dog lover. San Francisco: Chronicle Books.
Coppinger, R., Coppinger, L. and Beck, A.M. (2016) in What is a dog? foreword by Alan M. Beck. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
L., W.C.D. (2020), Dog is love: Why and how your dog loves you. London: Quercus.
Nestor, J. (2020), Breath: The lost art and science of our most misunderstood function. London: Penguin Books.