Party of Five

By Tim Hyland
http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/current/research/030509.html

Cesar Millan is one of the superstars of the canine world.

As the host of the National Geographic Channel show, “Dog Whisperer,” Millan has rocketed to fame based on his ability to reform and save misbehaving, over-aggressive dogs. It’s something he accomplishes through “firm” discipline—a “firm correction, a firm grab on the neck, which is what dogs do to each other,” as he says on his web site.

Millan’s show attests to his success, and he’s earned millions of loyal followers.

But according to a new study from Penn’s School of Veterinary Science, Millan’s approach may not be quite so effective as he makes it out to be. In fact, the study suggests “firm” discipline—and so-called “aversive” discipline techniques, in which dogs are corrected using aggressive measures—may actually backfire, making dogs more likely to lash out at other dogs, people and even their owners.

According to the study, published in the journal Applied Animal Behavior Science, 25 percent of dogs trained with “aversive” techniques react to their training with an aggressive response of their own. Dogs trained in a more positive, encouraging manner, by contrast, showed almost no aggressive behavior.

“It’s really the first study of its kind—it’s a kind of pilot study,” says Meghan Herron, a Penn Vet resident and the lead author of the study. “But it’s just the start of the science that needs to happen.”

Herron says the idea for the study came from her experience at Penn Vet, where aggressive behavior is far and away the No. 1 reason why people seek the help of behavioral veterinarians.

To attempt to understand the roots of this aggression, Herron and her colleagues—Frances S. Shofer and Ilana R. Reisner, both from the Department of Clinical Studies—wrote up a 30-question survey for dog owners who visited the hospital. The survey asked the owners what kind of techniques they used to control their dogs’ aggression and what kind of results they had seen. The owners were also asked where they had learned about the training techniques they used.

In total, 140 surveys were collected. The researchers found that the most commonly used methods of training included such aggressive techniques as hitting the dog (43 percent), growling at the dog (41 percent) and physically forcing the dog onto its back (31 percent). This, despite the fact that these techniques showed the tendency to produce the direct opposite response owners sought. A quarter of the dogs trained with aversive techniques showed aggressive behavior in response.

Herron says these techniques can fail because, rather than helping owners exert “dominance” over their pets, they instead make dogs fearful. That fear, then, manifests itself in aggression.

Even still, the aversive methods persist, simply because they’ve been around so long. The popularity of “Dog Whisperer” doesn’t help matters.
“It’s a very popular [school of thought],” she says. “If you look in the old textbooks, they basically say if your dog is aggressive you need to assert your dominance. This idea has been around for a long time.”

That’s why Herron says it will likely take years of work to begin to convince owners of the potential flaws in aversive training. That work will most likely take the form of studies like hers, as others in her field work to produce evidence supporting an idea that she and her colleagues already believe in: That positive training is more effective than negative training.

“In the behavioral field, they’re cheering [about this paper],” she says. “But we’ve been on this page for years. It’s the public … and the vets that we want to reach.”