‘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.