It's Not Your Fault: Why the Problem Might be Your Reactive Dog's Brain

Insane in the membrane. Insane in the brain.

So often, I talk with dedicated dog owners who have tried to do everything right, but have ended up with a reactive (or anxious, or aggressive, or other behavior-problem-label of your choice) dog anyway. Heck, it’s happened to me twice. Unfortunately, many of these people blame themselves. They think they must have done something wrong, because why else would their dog have so many problems? While there are certainly things that humans can and do to create issues in their dogs, the fact that most dogs are so incredibly well-adjusted despite everything is a testament to the fact that dogs are pretty resilient creatures… and that the occasional mistake is nothing to fret about.

But still, some dogs just aren’t right. From reactivity to anxiety to aggression, there are dogs who just don’t function well despite training classes and socialization and good intentions. Sometimes this is because the dog’s brain just isn’t wired right. Now, I’m no neuroscientist, but I do play one on the internet. And today, I want to share how stress can affect a developing brain, and why doing everything right may not matter if your dog came from a less-than-ideal background.

Science is pretty clear that stress in young mammals influences both brain development and physical growth. Stress can come in many forms. In children, there’s the obvious abuse and neglect, but then there’s the less obvious: poverty, housing instability, witnessing violence, growing up in bad neighborhoods, malnutrition, and so on. These chronic adverse events that the child and/or his caretakers have no control over changes the way the brain grows.

For dogs, such toxic stress during the early developmental period can happen in a number of ways. Puppy mills – and other deprived environments – are an obvious example of a stressful environment, but growing up in a shelter or a rescue can disrupt the growing brain, too. Sudden separations from human or canine caretakers, frequent change, environments characterized by sensory overload, and long periods of confinement are stressful. And even dogs from good breeders can be subjected to stress in the wrong circumstances: too much handling by a child, being harassed by another resident animal, or chronic medical problems on the part of the pup or the mother.

This does not mean that every dog from a puppy mill or rescue is going to have behavior problems. Indeed, if that were the case, people would stop getting dogs from these places. Some dogs have genes that are “turned on” by stressful events more readily than other dogs, making them more susceptible to the effects of stress. We see this in human children too; for some, stress creates a resilient brain, while in others, it creates a brain vulnerable to a host of behavioral problems.

So, just how does stress affect the developing brain?

First, it’s important to understand that stress is a normal part of functioning, and that overcoming a challenge creates a stronger brain and a sense of mastery. It is therefore important that children and dogs experience occasional frustration in doses they can overcome so that they develop the neuronal connections needed for a healthy brain. Not only is it impossible to shield your young mammal from stress, it’s inadvisable.

When a mammal experiences stress, the brain releases chemicals like cortisol and adrenaline. These prime the brain to be able to respond to potential danger. Once the stressful event is over, the chemicals dissipate, and the brain returns to its normal state of functioning. However, when stress is either prolonged or recurrent, the brain never fully gets rid of the stress hormones. This changes the way the brain develops.

Recent research has shown that there are notable differences in the amounts of gray matter vs. white matter in the brains of overly stressed children as opposed to those who experience normal amounts of stress. Basically, gray matter is responsible for higher functions like thinking and decision-making, while white matter is what connects the various brain structures. Chronic stress seems to create more white matter, which naturally results in less gray matter. In turn, this reduces the volume of brain structures that allow for rational thought in the face of potentially threatening events. At the same time, that increased white matter basically creates a short circuit in the brain. Even when there isn’t a stressor present, the brain may continue to respond as if there is. This tends to cause overreactions to things that aren’t actually dangerous.

Not only are the connections stronger between the lower brain structures that control emotional responses, but some brain structures become overdeveloped. The amygdala and other associated limbic system structures – which are associated with stress responses – are often enlarged, while the hippocampus and other higher brain structures – responsible for problem solving and rational thought – are smaller.

The end result is a brain that idles on high. It is more easily hijacked by stress, and will respond with more frequency and intensity to smaller stressors. The circuitry activates longer, and the recovery time takes longer.

In other words: your reactive dog’s brain? Is not like your normal dog’s brain. And as a result, his ability to process things that happen to him and respond to the world around him is going to be impaired. It’s not only unfair to expect him deal with the world without additional support, it’s probably impossible.

That’s not to say that your dog can’t improve. Science has shown that the brain is incredibly plastic – it can rewire itself and become more functional – but this takes a lot of time and effort. And even with the best interventions, we don’t know yet if all the scars left on the brain by stress can be erased. Sometimes adjusting the expectations we have for our reactive dogs is the kindest thing we can do.

Sources:

http://www.bbbgeorgia.org/stressEffects.php

http://www.livescience.com/20820-stress-alters-brain-kids.html

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-athletes-way/201402/chronic-stress-can-damage-brain-structure-and-connectivity

http://developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/reports_and_working_papers/working_papers/wp3/

http://www.child-encyclopedia.com/documents/Gunnar-Herrera-HostinarANGxp.pdf

Shedd Animal Training Seminar: Turner and Tompkin’s Rules on Aggression Reduction

In my last Shedd post, I shared some general rules on aggression. Today, we’re going to look at the rules of aggression reduction. These were originally formulated by Turner and Tompkins, and Ken expanded on them. Hopefully I’ve attributed everything correctly! Also, just as a side-note, I have changed the presentation order slightly.

First, and possibly most importantly: stop aggression before it starts. It’s much harder to stop aggression than to prevent it because the animal has practiced the behavior. Ken told us that aggression can also be highly reinforcing to animals, making it a behavior that is easily learned. For example, if your dog is afraid of men, he might bark and lunge at them. If the men then go away, your dog may come to see barking and lunging as a strategy that worked to reduce his fear.

Aggression is possible: multiple animals and a baby in the area.

Next, understand which scenarios might lead to aggression. This allows you to be prepared for potentially dangerous situations instead of being caught off guard. Ken shared a number of examples from his work: when an animal has a hard time separating from the group it lives with, frustration resulting from numerous incorrect responses to a cue, when only one animal in a group is being fed, the use of punishment/aversive control resulting in displaced or redirected aggression, a change in what causes an animal to get reinforced, the disruption of sexual activity (especially when the animal is in season/in heat), and pushing an animal too far or too long during training. Keep in mind that the scenarios leading to potential aggression will vary not only by species, but by individual as well. Know your animal!

Now you need to learn to recognize the precursors to aggression. Every animal will warn you before they are aggressive. If yours doesn’t, either you don’t know what to look for or the precursors have been punished. Each species will show these precursors differently. For example, birds tend to have dilated pupils. Dolphins have wide eyes prior to aggressing. Cats hiss and dogs growl. Dolphins will make a chuffing noise. Elephants will flap their ears. In addition, each individual will be unique in the precursors they tend to display. If there are multiple people working with an animal (such as in a family or a shelter), making a list so that everyone knows each animal’s precursors can be very helpful.

Both Turner and Tompkins as well as Ken agree that using DRO or DRI (or another appropriate technique if these fail) is a great technique for reducing aggression. DRO stands for Differential Reinforcement of Other behavior, while DRI stands for Differential Reinforcement of Incompatible behavior. These techniques are basically very sophisticated ways of redirecting an animal. Although Ken acknowledged that they may reinforce the precursors, he feels that aggression is too serious and too dangerous to not interrupt. In addition, in his experience, it is very rare to reinforce precursors to the point that they significantly increase; precursors tend to be more reflexive than consciously chosen behaviors. But even if you do increase them, it’s still better than allowing the aggression to occur.

Finally, it is highly recommended that you keep records. Doing so gives you something to fall back on if the aggression re-emerges. It will help you remember what worked and what didn’t so you don’t repeat ineffective interventions. This is especially important in zoological facilities since staff turnover means that knowledge will be lost, but it can be helpful for pet owners whose memories tend to fade over time.

There are other options, of course. Although DRO is the most commonly used method in the zoological world, the right technique really depends on many factors, including the specific animal, the trainer (and her skill level), and the specific situation.

The bottom line is that something needs to be changed, and there are only four ways to do that (Ken attributed this list to Jean Donaldson). You can change the consequences for the animal’s aggression (operant conditioning). You can change the association an animal has with whatever it is acting aggressively towards (classical conditioning). You can change the animal’s access to the thing eliciting aggression (management). Or, you can change the animal’s brain chemistry (medication).

For more information on Ken’s thoughts about treating aggression in dogs, please see this post from 2011: http://reactivechampion.blogspot.com/2011/03/clicker-expo-2011-chicago-ken-ramirez-29.html

Shedd Animal Training Seminar: General Rules About Aggression

Ken spent some time discussing aggression in animals, which he defines as “any unwanted agonistic behavior.” There is a bit of a grey area here, I think; while most people would not consider a cat catching and killing a mouse to be aggressive, to the mouse, it most definitely is. Still, there are some general rules about aggression that seem to hold up regardless of who is discussing it. Where applicable, I have cited the researcher (and year of their published work) whom Ken credited for the rule.

First, most (if not all) animals have some degree of aggression in their repertoire (Lorenz). It’s just normal for animals to be aggressive in order to protect themselves (for example, if they are ill) or their young. Aggression may also be used to determine social hierarchies or who gets access to food or mates. However, Ken was quick to tell us that this does not mean that we shouldn’t take aggression seriously, nor that we shouldn’t try to modify it.

Animals who have the opportunity to aggress will do so more often (Johnson, 1972). Ken told us that most zoo keepers would never even consider engaging in free-contact with lions (no barriers between them) because lions who have the opportunity to be aggressive often are.

An animal who has been food deprived will aggress more readily than an animal who has adequate provisions (Staddon, 1977). This is part of the reason that Ken is so adamant that all animals under his care gets its full rations regardless of whether or not they perform well in training.

The use of punishment or aversive control will cause aggression (Kazdin, 1984). Not only can frustration yield aggression, but it’s also important to note that pain can cause an instinctive aggressive response.

Aggression can also be shaped by accidental reinforcement (Skinner, 1963). It is easy to understand how this might come about; if a dog growls at another dog because he is too close, and that dog goes away, the aggression was successful. Aggression can also be shaped deliberately.

Finally, animals respond more favorably to a consistent environment, so trainers should use caution to condition changes slowly and positively (Turner, 1999). I think this last point is especially important to remember; although we often want quick fixes and miracle cures, the results are ultimately better and longer-lasting when we are patient.

Ken cautioned us that this list is not meant to be all-inclusive. There are likely other general rules about aggression that were either not covered or that scientists are in the process of discovering even as I write this. Although I do not have any references to cite, I would say that in my experience, once an aggressive action enters an animal’s repertoire, it’s always there. The animal may not use that response as the first, second, or third choice, but it can always crop up again. This is why I’m so careful with Maisy, even though she’s basically normal these days.

What about you? Are there general rules you’d add to this list?  

We Can't Save Them All

What I’m about to write is not going to be popular. It will probably make some people mad. I may even lose a few readers. But it’s something that needs to be said.

We can’t save them all.

A Facebook friend linked to a story about 800 war dogs in Britain who were euthanized. Her thoughts echoed many of the comments on the story: this was an awful thing. Which it is. The prevailing belief was that surely these dogs could be rehabilitated. Which they probably could have been. But who was going to do it? And at what cost?

In this blog, I have documented Maisy’s journey from reactive and anxious to functional and basically normal. I absolutely believe that the combination of training, management, and appropriate medical care can help dogs live more normal lives. However, it takes a significant investment.

Don’t get me wrong- it’s been worth it- but it’s taken a lot of time. I worked with Maisy diligently for several years, and the sum total has been hundreds of hours of work. This also came with a cost; trainers, veterinary behaviorists, supplements, medications, books, seminars- it’s all expensive. I’ve spent thousands of dollars in my quest to help my dog. And it has taken its toll emotionally, as well. It is not easy to have a “crazy” dog.

What’s more, Maisy wasn’t that crazy. She was reactive, yes. She was anxious, yes. But she was not aggressive, and she does not have a bite history. We’ve had some close calls, but thankfully she’s never made physical contact with another dog or a person. She also responded beautifully to training and medication, something that does not happen for every dog. Taken together, Maisy has been a relatively easy dog for one with issues.

And it still took years. And lots of money. And a fair amount of heartache along the way. I love Maisy, and if I’d known then what I know now... well, if I'm honest, I’d do it again. She is worth it. But I would also think twice before purposely adopting another dog with issues like hers, and I can’t imagine choosing to take on a dog with even more severe behavioral concerns.

Yes, some of those dogs in the article probably could have been saved. But by whom? How do you find 800 homes that have the skills, the time, the money, the patience, and the desire to rehabilitate them? Especially when there are thousands of physically and behaviorally healthy dogs dying in shelters every day?

I’m not saying that we shouldn’t work with dogs with issues. I believe that when we take on responsibility for a dog, we owe him our time and money and patience. But we don’t all have the skills, time, or money to “fix” them. For those who fit this description, there is no shame in finding a better situation for that dog. Unfortunately, while some of these dogs can be rehomed, some cannot. In my state, if a person rehomes a dog with a bite history and the dog bites again, the original owner can be sued, even if they disclosed this information to the new owner, and even if the new owner takes on full responsibility for the dog.

The decision to euthanize a dog is not easy. One of my friends had to put his beloved dog to sleep when it began to aggress towards the new baby in the home. This man spent a ton of money on excellent trainers and veterinary behaviorists- the same ones, in fact, that helped Maisy and I. He put in the time and effort. And yet the dog- who was wonderful in many ways- still posed too great of a risk. My friend ultimately did the most responsible and loving thing he could: he gave the dog one last wonderful day, and then let him go peacefully, surrounded by people who loved him. And it broke my friend’s heart that he couldn’t save his best friend.

As for the dogs in the article? I don’t know their story. I don’t know what was tried, and what wasn’t. I don’t know why the government chose to euthanize those dogs instead of place them in new homes. Although I truly hope they tried- after all, if humans choose to use dogs for work, there should be a long-term plan for them after they’ve completed their service- there simply aren’t enough details to form an opinion.

The truth is, rescues are often in a tough spot. They have limited resources. If they’re lucky, they have a trainer who volunteers to try and help the dogs in their care. Many dogs have minor but workable behavior problems that can be resolved prior to (or even after) adoption. But some problems pose a huge liability. Should one of those dogs bite a person in their new home, it can reflect poorly on the specific rescue, and damage the reputation of rescue dogs in general.

So while the story my friend linked to was indeed awful and made me sad, I have a hard time getting worked up about it. While it’s a terrible thing to kill dogs, I also recognize that some dogs are just too far gone. For whatever reason, their behavior is too unpredictable, and their futures too uncertain.

In the end, all I know is this: We can’t save them all. And that sucks.

Patricia McConnell Seminar: Behaviors with a Genetic Influence

The Labrador’s desire to retrieve. The Great Pyrenees and his devotion to his flock. The Border Collie’s infamous eye. There is no doubt that each breed of dog shares more than physical similarities: they also share behavioral tendencies, a fact which clearly demonstrates that a dog’s genetics contributes to the way he acts.

But beyond breed-related predispositions, what other behaviors can be inherited? Patricia identified five, although she freely admitted that two of them are based on personal speculation alone. The other three have some science that show they tend to be pretty stable over time.

The first, and possibly the most researched, is shyness. Shyness is not the same as docility. It has nothing to do with submission. And it doesn’t really tell you how the dog will act. Shyness, scientifically speaking, has to do with fear of the unfamiliar.

This behavioral trait is actually a continuum, with shyness at one end and boldness at the other. It is influenced by the level of cortisol, the HPA axis, and the activity of the amygdala. A study by Goldsmith and Lemery demonstrated that it is surprisingly stable through an individual’s life. They discovered a correlation between a child’s cortisol baseline and his mother’s, and found that the baseline level taken one and a half years before a child started school could predict a teacher’s evaluation of inhibition at age seven.

In other words, shyness is strongly linked to genes, and is incredibly easy to pass on. This makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint: the child (or monkey or rat or cat- all have been studied) who runs from something new and unfamiliar stands a better chance of surviving than the one who boldly investigates strange and potentially dangerous things. It also makes sense then that shyness is expressed early in an individual’s development. Patricia shared that Margaret Seary Young found it was the only trait reliably predicted on puppy tests.

Reactivity is “mediated by physiology,” Patricia told us, and it is therefore logical that it would be influenced by genetics. Reactivity here does not refer to the bark-growl-lunge type of behavior problem that we dog people usually define it as. In this case, it simply has to do with how quickly and how much a dog responds to its environment.

Reactivity can be desirable in certain contexts- a herding dog that doesn’t have a short reaction time probably won’t be very good at his job. On the other hand, there are times where you need a “bomb-proof” dog who doesn’t really notice, much less respond to, what’s going on around him.

It’s also important to know that reactivity is separate from the shy/bold continuum. A very bold dog might notice and respond quickly to his environment, although he will probably do it in very different ways than the shy dog does.

Another behavioral trait that seems to have a genetic influence is frustration tolerance because it is mediated, in part, by the amygdala. However, there also appears to be a strong environmental component to frustration tolerance as well. Who can’t relate to being more irritable when tired, hungry, or in pain?

A dog who is having difficulty tolerating frustration is more likely to act out aggressively. Interestingly, aggressive dogs typically show lower amounts of serotonin and higher concentrations of cortisol, which also suggests there's a link to genes.

The last two behaviors are the ones that don’t (yet) have any scientific research to back up: predisposition to use mouth and status seeking. Both of these traits are things that Patricia has observed enough to believe they are genetically inherited. For the first, she says it just makes sense. Australian Cattle Dogs, for example, would need to use their mouths in order to herd cows. As for status seeking, Patricia said there seem to be puppies that are interested in controlling resources at a very early age… but more on that soon.

It’s clear that there are a number of behavioral traits that have at least some genetic influence. They go beyond just breed-related tendencies, and help explain why two dogs of the same breed can act quite different from one another. Of course, we already know that the environment is an important factor, too. In my next entry on the seminar, I’ll tell you about some of those factors, including in utero experiences, early stimulation, and socialization.

If You Want to Know More

• Linking temperamental fearfulness and anxiety symptoms: a behavior-genetic perspective, an article by Goldsmith and Lemery
• The genetic contribution to canine personality, by Saetre et al This study found that shyness/boldness has a strong genetic component.
• Shyness-boldness predicts performance in working dogs, by Svartberg
• Blood concentrations of serotonin, cortisol and dehydroepiandrosterone in aggressive dogs, a study by Rosado et al
• Breed Differences in Canine Aggression, a surprising article by Duffy, Hsu, and Serpell
• Behavior Problems in Dogs, by William Campbell, the book which introduced the concepts of “passive defense reflex” and “active defense reflex.”

Good Dogs Bite, Too: Why You Need to Understand the Bite Threshold Model

There is a strange belief in our culture that says only bad dogs bite. Of course, most people believe that their dogs are “good,” and therefore, that must mean that their dog won't bite. While I really do believe that most dogs are good, I also believe that all dogs are capable of biting. It's just that it takes a lot to push most dogs to the point where they might bite.

In her book The Culture Clash, author Jean Donaldson introduces something called the Bite Threshold Model to help explain why a “good dog” might bite. This model states that each dog has a threshold at which he will bite. It looks something like this:

 Each line indicates how much stress a dog can endure before he displays silent stress signals (like freezing, licking his lips, tucking his tail, etc.), before he growls, before he snaps, and ultimately, before he bites. Of course, each dog is different, so the lines on each dog's graph will be at a different height. For example, as a reactive dog, Maisy's growl threshold is pretty low in general, and especially if we were to compare her to a more stable dog. Interestingly, Maisy's snap threshold is quite high (it takes a lot of stress before she will snap at someone), and while I've drawn a line for where I think Maisy's bite threshold might be, I honestly don't know where it actually is since she's never bitten anyone.

Donaldson also says that each dog has “risk factors” that will cause the dog to feel uncomfortable or stressed. These risk factors, taken individually, may or may not cause the dog to display any symptoms. The so-called “good dogs” will usually have risk factors that are quite low- they may not even reach the first line. Others do, but whether the owner notices that their dog is feeling uncomfortable is another matter. The symptoms are so subtle that they are often easy to miss. Here's Maisy's graph, with some of her risk factors added:

As you can see, while crowds of strangers might make her feel uncomfortable, she probably won't show any signs to indicate that. Meanwhile, she will definitely display stress if her head is touched, and the presence of children pushes her right up against her growl threshold- she doesn't always growl at them, but she might.

Most dogs- like most people- don't really want to hurt others. But given the right situation, any dog- and any person- is capable of defending himself or his loved ones. That situation happens when multiple “risk factors” converge into one single incident.

This recently happened with Maisy. Although she's quick to display stress, and even quick to growl, she very rarely snaps. Still, it happens when her triggers “stack” into one unfortunate situation. In this case, I had taken her to a group gathering. What I didn't know was that she wasn't feeling so hot (she had a bit of an ear infection starting), nor did I know that there would be a child there. So when the little one reached out to pet Maisy's head...

Yup, she snapped at the little girl. It all happened so fast that I didn't get a chance to stop the child that had approached. I felt horrible, of course. I'm always sad when I can't protect Maisy, and I hate that others saw her as a “bad dog” that night. I also want to be a good dog owner and keep others safe, and while the child (and her parents) weren't upset by the incident, I felt bad that the girl had a bad experience with my dog.

It's important to note that while the graph presents a logical, orderly progression of behaviors, that's not always the way things play out in real life. Although Maisy did stiffen briefly as the child reached for her, she did not growl. There wasn't time; the triggers stacked too quickly. Behavior also isn't linear. Our dogs are individuals, and so is the way they respond. Not only are each of their thresholds at different levels, but sometimes they will be missing a threshold entirely. For example, people sometimes punish growling, which can result in the loss of that particular line. That means that a dog could go from freezing slightly to biting without ever growling- the so-called bite without provocation.

Perhaps Maisy isn't the best example- although she's never bitten anyone, I'm not entirely sure that others would call her a “good dog.” (I, of course, think she's amazing.) The point remains, though: a series of relatively small things can stack up to the point that even the best of dogs will bite. In fact, sometimes I think these “good dogs” are the most dangerous. Because Maisy has been “bad” so frequently, I have a pretty good idea where her thresholds are, and so I can pretty accurately predict when she's more likely to snap or bite. People with “good dogs” don't have this advantage, and if and when things stack up in just the right way, they will be surprised by their dog's behavior.

If you have a good dog, I urge you to think about situations where your dog's behavior has surprised you. Think about how high each of his thresholds might be, and what types of things are likely to push him to each one. Do thunderstorms unnerve him? What about someone reaching for his rawhide or food bowl? How does he feel about children, other dogs, or men in hats? Pay attention to the times he stiffens up, freezes, tucks his tail, ducks his head, or licks his lips. These are all signs that he is feeling uncomfortable, and that situation should be put on your graph.

I hope that your dog never encounters a situation where all of those risk factors pile up into one big, scary stack, but if he does, the bite threshold model will help you understand why your good dog ended up biting. If you want to avoid such an incident- and who wouldn't?- I encourage you to be proactive. Being aware of your dog's stressors is a great start. If you see things beginning to stack,  avoid a possible incident by simply putting your dog somewhere safe, like in a crate or another room.

More ambitious dog owners might consult with an experienced dog trainer or undertake a counter-conditioning program in order to help reduce each stressor. If you lower the height of each risk factor, then when they begin to stack, the overall effect will be lower as well. Perhaps the dog will only snap instead of bite. And while a snap is still scary and something I take seriously, it is far preferable to having your dog bite.

So don't believe the cultural lie that good dogs don't bite. As the bite threshold model demonstrates, it's not bad dogs that bite, it's stressed ones... and good dogs get stressed, too.

Clicker Expo 2011 (Chicago): Ken Ramirez- Aggression Treatment and Context, Part 2

In part one of my summary on Ken Ramirez's talk on aggression, we discussed aggression in general. Today, I'll tell you what he said about treating aggression, starting with generalities, and moving on to specific treatments.

Ken said that you can organize all of the various techniques by placing each one into one of three categories: broad scientific approaches to learning, scientific principles, and practical procedures.

The first category, broad scientific approaches, refers to the twin concepts of learning theory: classical conditioning, and operant conditioning. I call them “twin” because, as Ken pointed out, while we can choose to focus on just one of these two approaches, “all animals learn both ways all the time.” As the old saying goes, you have Skinner on one shoulder and Pavlov on the other.

The second category is made up of the various scientific principles which have been developed in the experimental lab. Each one generally falls under either classical conditioning or operant conditioning. Under classical conditioning, we have things such as habituation, flooding, and counter-conditioning. Under operant conditioning, we have both methods that provide consequences to behavior (punishment and reinforcement), as well as redirection techniques (the Differential Reinforcement of Alternative behaviors).

Finally, our third category is made up of the practical applications and strategies borne out of one or more of these scientific approaches. Each of these techniques is “a way that a skilled and talented trainer has operationalized the science to deal with aggression.” They typically have components of both classical and operant conditioning.

Okay, let's dive into some of the specific approaches out there. This is not meant to be an all-inclusive list, but it does include some of the more common ways people respond to and deal with aggression.

Positive Punishment
Using pain or fear to “correct” aggression is a method that people often think of instinctively, probably because it's how parents, teachers, coaches, and yes, by dog trainers have responded for centuries. Done correctly, punishment works, however there are risks, challenges, and fallout to using punishment... including aggression. Seeing as how we were at Clicker Expo, Ken did not discuss punishment in depth, other than to say that trainers should understand how and when to use it. Although trainers should not throw punishment out of the toolbox altogether, they should allow that toolbox to remain on the top shelf, collecting dust.

Classical Conditioning
Falling in the category of broad scientific approaches, and having no real specialized names or operational procedures, classical conditioning is often one of the first tools skilled trainers use. Ironically, it is also the one that inexperienced ones often overlook. This is a mistake; classical conditioning, that is, changing the dog's associations to his triggers, is powerful even if it seems simplistic. Seems is the key word here; in practice, classical conditioning requires thoughtful implementation since you need to keep the dog below his threshold. Though simple, it is easy to screw up if you don't understand the science.

Look at That (LAT)
This technique was developed by Leslie McDevitt and described in her book, Control Unleashed. LAT uses a cue to tell the dog to look at a trigger in order to get rewarded. This changes the dog's associations with his trigger, and is thus largely a classical procedure, albeit one with a strong operant component. It is useful prior to a dog having a reaction to a trigger, and is quite versatile as it can be used in many situations. However, it must be trained in advance so that it can be used sub-threshold. It is not a complete strategy in itself and must be used in conjunction with other tools.

Constructional Aggression Treatment (CAT)
CAT was developed by Jesus Rosales-Ruiz and Kellie Snider. It is a negative reinforcement procedure which rewards the dog for appropriate behavior by having the trigger (human or canine) leave. It tends to work incredibly fast because it treats the root source of the problem- the dog's desire for distance. It is also highly controversial because it exposes the dog to his trigger for long periods of time. Still, Ken feels it's a useful technique when exposure to the trigger is unavoidable on a regular basis. It requires a very skilled trainer who can set up the situation correctly and direct the trigger to leave at precisely the right moment. It is also not right for every dog as it will only work when you have a thorough understanding of both the specific trigger and context in which aggression occurs. It won't work for a dog whose triggers “stack.”

Click to Calm
Emma Parson's book Click to Calm lays out an easy-to-follow program that relies primarily on redirection techniques such as the differential reinforcement of incompatible behaviors, other behaviors, or lower intensity behaviors, but also capitalizes on classical conditioning. What all that scientific mumbo-jumbo means is that the trainer shapes the absence of aggression by clicking the dog when the dog's aggressive display lessens even slightly. This is a highly useful approach because, unlike other techniques, it can be used when the dog is over threshold. However, this does mean that you are clicking the dog for acting aggressively, even if it is for a reduction in aggression. It is also time-consuming and can be difficult for the unskilled trainer. Still, done well, Ken believes it can be a permanent fix.

Training an Incompatible Behavior
This encompasses a broad group of behaviors, including such techniques as “watch me” (where the dog looks at the handler instead of the trigger), U-turns (where the dog is cued to turn and go in the opposite direction away from a trigger), and recalls or whiplash turns (where the dog immediately returns to the handler). Although the behavior itself is different in each case, the goal is the same: to teach the dog something to do instead of being aggressive. If it's trained well, the dog will respond automatically, giving the trainer a chance to intervene and prevent aggression. Unfortunately, it doesn't change the underlying cause, and thus won't cure aggression. It should be followed up by other methods. 

Abandonment Training
Popularized by Trish King, abandonment training is a very specialized tool useful only for dogs whose aggression revolves around their owners. In abandonment training, the dog is on both a leash and a long line. The owner walks holding the leash, and a secondary handler holds on to the long line for safety considerations. When the dog behaves inappropriately, the owner drops the leash and leaves. In scientific terms, this is negative punishment- bad behavior makes the owner go away. Although effective, as noted, it's only effective for a small handful of dogs.

Behavior Adjustment Training (BAT)
Created by Grisha Stewart, BAT has taken the positive training world by storm. Ken really glossed over it since he isn't terribly familiar with it (he's tried at least some version of all the other techniques presented, but hasn't tried BAT yet). All he really said is that it's a negative reinforcement technique that he feels is effective.


These are not all of the ways to deal with aggression, but it is representative of the types of approaches out there. Ken said there isn't any one technique that is the answer to every aggression problem or every situation, which is why new methods are being created all the time. If you are trying to decide if a particular technique would be useful for your dog, you should learn everything you can about it first. Understand the science so you can recognize how it works and compare it to other approaches. Then, decide if it's a good fit with your dog's training history, type of trigger (is it predictable? Controllable?), specific circumstances which provoke the response, the level of risk or danger to all involved, your own experience level (and remember, Ken thinks aggression should be treated by professionals, not the average pet owner), and your own personal ethics.

Personally, I've used Look at That a lot, as well as general counter-conditioning. I've done some work with incompatible behaviors, and although that won't cure the problem, it does allow me to interrupt Maisy before things get out of hand. Maisy is not a candidate for CAT (her triggers stack too much), and her veterinary behaviorist did not think BAT would be a good fit for her, either. Likewise, Click to Calm and Abandonment Training really aren't suited to Maisy, and my ethics do not allow for punishment.

Okay, it's your turn: if you have a reactive or aggressive dog, which approaches have you tried? Did they work? If not, why do you think that was?

Clicker Expo 2011 (Chicago): Ken Ramirez- Aggression Treatment and Context, Part 1

I knew from the moment I saw the course schedule that I wanted to attend this session. Not only has my life with Maisy sparked an interest in behavior modification by sheer necessity, but I was also interested in it because it was taught by Ken Ramirez, the senior vice-president of the Shedd Aquarium in Chicago. Friends who have attended his seminars in the past have raved about him, so the combination of “I want to see that speaker” and “I want to learn more about that topic” made this session a no-brainer for me.

I wasn’t disappointed. A review of the various treatments for aggression could have been dull and dry, but Ken made it fascinating. He’s an energetic, engaging speaker, and he peppered his talk with interesting anecdotes and illustrative video clips. Not only was I so engrossed in his presentation that the time just flew by, but it was also packed with great information. In fact, it was so good that there’s just no way that I can summarize it in just one post. Today’s post will discuss aggression in general, and the next one will focus on his assessment of specific treatments.

For the purposes of his talk, Ken defined aggression as a broad category of behaviors that includes any type of unwanted agonistic behavior. Some examples of this include reactivity (barking, growling, lunging), resource guarding, possessive or protective behavior, and biting. Further, Ken said that all dogs (all animals) have aggressive repertoires. Aggression serves a vital purpose in animal culture: sick dogs will behave aggressively out of self-defense, while mothers will do so to defend their young. It's an evolutionary strategy, a coping mechanism, and therefore, all dogs are capable of being aggressive.

So why do some dogs act aggressively and others don't? Ken identified three main reasons. First, we have the dogs who are reacting to a bad circumstance- they're trapped and have no choice. Second, we have dogs who are genetically predisposed to aggression. And third, some dogs actually learn to be aggressive. Either they accidentally got reinforced for growling or biting, or it was purposefully taught to them. Often, aggression occurs through single-event learning: they try it as a strategy, and either found it highly rewarding or it failed miserably, thus determining whether or not they do it again.

All of this means that every one, every single dog owner, should have an aggression reduction strategy in place in advance of a possible issues. I've spent a lot of time thinking about what I'll do if Maisy growls or lunges so that I'm prepared to react appropriately; I'm sure all of you with reactive or aggressive dogs have. But... what about those of you with the so-called normal dogs? Do you have an aggression reduction strategy in place? You should. Since all dogs have an aggressive repertoire to draw upon, it's those of you with the low-key dogs that will be most surprised if and when it eventually comes out. Since aggression can be learned in a single trial, your reaction in that unexpected moment matters.

With that in mind, let's talk about the five rules of aggression reduction.

1.  Understand the scenarios. All dog owners should know when a situation might be uncomfortable for their dog, and thus could potentially result in aggression.
2. Be able to recognize the precursors to aggression. Know how both your species (that is, dogs in general), and your individual animal reacts when he's upset. Learn his body language and his vocalizations, such as growling, and do not punish your dog for giving a warning.
3. Use redirection or apply the appropriate training strategy when needed.We'll cover some of these in the next post.
4. Stop or avoid it before it starts. Absolutely do not allow a dog to practice the bad behavior. The old saying is right: practice makes perfect. Do not allow your dog to learn that aggression works.
5. Finally, keep good records. You'll need them to help you track progress as well as to evaluate if you're on the right track. If the records show little improvement, you may need to try another approach.

I would argue that there is actually a sixth rule, and that is: Don't try this at home! You see, Ken feels very strongly that aggression should be treated by advanced trainers only. This is partially because he believes that trainers should have a thorough understanding of their chosen technique and the science behind it, and partially because it simply requires a tremendous amount of skill to do well. Failure to meet either of these criteria will likely result in the poor implementation of any treatment, and with it, an undesired result. What’s more, this often results in unfounded criticism or senseless controversy over a perfectly valid approach.

Therefore, a beginner- the general pet owner with an aggressive dog- should not be doing this on their own. They need a professional who can diagnose the aggression, its cause, and the triggers. This is important because not all treatments are equal, and the treatment used should be tailored to the specific dog. This isn't to say that you need to send the dog off to boot camp- on the contrary, I would never do that. It simply means that you should have a qualified professional coaching you.

I have to admit, Ken's adamant stance really made me question some of the stuff I've written on my blog. I know that many people simply can't afford to hire a professional, so I've tried to create some free resources for people who struggle with dogs like my own. But Ken made me question if I should be doing this. Since he said that no one technique is right for all dogs, should I be writing about this method or that method without making it clear which dogs it's suited for? For that matter, do I even know which dogs are well suited to certain techniques? Having heard Ken speak, I guess I have a better idea now, but even so, without having seen the dog in question, how can I possibly recommend a particular approach?

I can’t, of course, but I still believe that it’s important to share information whenever possible, with the caution that one should always consult with a professional. Some people are going to do it themselves no matter what, and if so, it’s better if they have scientifically-sound and dog-friendly methods available to them.

Still, even though I often encourage people to hire a professional, Ken's seminar has inspired me to explain why a professional is a good thing. There are so many different ways to work with aggression, and each technique is better suited to different types of aggression than others. I'll talk about this in my next entry, but in the meantime, I'd love to hear your thoughts. How do you respond to people on email lists or dog forums? Do you give advice? Refer them to a book? Have you thought about whether or not that information is appropriate for that particular dog, or are you simply sharing what's worked for you? Let me know!

Positive Training: More Than Just Ignoring the Bad

One of the greatest misconceptions of positive reinforcement/clicker training (R+ for short) is that it is permissive. Often, R+ training is described as “rewarding the good behaviors and ignoring the bad,” which leads non-R+ trainers to believe that we simply turn a blind eye when our dogs misbehave. While many will concede that this might work for relatively minor infractions, they claim it will never work for dogs who ____. This blank is filled in with a variety of behaviors, but the one I see most commonly is aggression.

You can’t ignore aggression, they say. It’s too dangerous. These are dogs are going to hurt someone, and we need to prevent that. You can’t just coo at Fluffy, telling him his behavior is okay while he’s snarling at someone. It’s not. Fluffy needs to learn that his behavior is unacceptable.

And you know what? They’re right. We can’t ignore aggression. It’s too dangerous. Thankfully, it’s not necessary to hurt or scare our dogs in order to prevent them from hurting others.

An R+ approach to working with aggressive dogs is radically different from more traditional approaches. Instead of waiting for or provoking an aggressive response so that it can be punished with a collar correction or alpha roll, R+ trainers work to prevent the dog from acting aggressively in the first place so that they can teach the dog appropriate behaviors.

The first step to doing this is management. At all costs, we need to prevent the dog from practicing the undesirable behavior. Every time they do, they get better at it, and worse yet, they learn that it works. Whether it’s because whatever they’re barking and growling at goes away, or because it releases endorphins and they feel better, or something else entirely, they find the aggressive display reinforcing. We need to stop that immediately.

Instead, the R+ trainer will watch her dog’s body language. She’ll learn to predict outbursts and preemptively move away. She’ll learn her dog’s triggers, and at what point he reacts to them- something also known as a threshold. She’ll keep him far enough away to prevent him from crossing that threshold and acting aggressively.

Next, she’ll work hard to change his perceptions. This process, called counter-conditioning, teaches the dog that his trigger predicts good things, typically by allowing the aggressive dog to see his trigger and then giving him something very tasty to eat. The R+ trainer will be very careful to remain sub-threshold so that she isn’t accidentally reinforcing the aggressive behavior. If the dog begins to act aggressively, she knows that she’s pushed him too far, and will adjust her approach. As the dog becomes more comfortable, she’ll slowly increase the dog’s exposure to his trigger, usually by bringing him closer.

Finally, she will teach her dog the appropriate behaviors that he should engage in. She can choose basically any behavior she’d like, but generally, R+ trainers will teach the dog to either make eye contact with her, or to perform a calming signal. This can be done in a variety of ways, from simply cuing the behavior to following a more systematic approach such as BAT (behavior adjustment training).

This may take longer than suppressing an aggressive response with punishment, but I think of it as the difference between putting a bandage on a wound versus actually treating it. As a bonus, the dog is far less likely to suffer negative side effects, such as physical injury or inadvertent associations that make the aggression worse.

Incidentally, this basic approach of management and teaching alternate responses can- and should- be used for any problem behavior. It is often not enough to simply ignore the dog when he jumps up, knocks over the garbage can, or runs away. The wise trainer will find a way to prevent the dog from practicing the undesirable action while also working to teach the dog what he ought to do instead.

R+ training isn’t terribly dramatic, at least, not in the sense that it’s exciting to watch the systematic desensitization of a dog to his triggers. In fact, to the outside observer, it’s probably rather boring and dry. There’s no conflict, no power struggle. However, R+ training is dramatic in the sense that it works, and you can achieve some amazing results. The dog and the trainer are on the same side, working towards a common goal, and I can tell you from personal experience: that feels amazing.

Ian Dunbar Seminar: Aggression

Ian Dunbar does not like to call a dog aggressive. As a label, he doesn’t find it very useful, and moreover, he finds it unfair. I think he has a good point: people tend to say that any dog that bites is aggressive, even if the dog bites only once during its life, and even if it was the result of extreme circumstances. Part of the reason people are so quick to label dogs aggressive is because bites are so rare- comparatively speaking, more children are killed every year by their own parents than by dogs.

Instead of asking, “is this dog aggressive?” Ian thinks we should ask, “is this dog dangerous?” He points out that simply having a bite history does not mean that a dog is dangerous. Dogs bite for many reasons, and the damage they do varies widely. In fact, Ian uses the damage done as the ultimate indicator of whether a dog is safe or dangerous. After all, every dog has the potential to bite, and until he does, you’ll have no way of telling how dangerous the dog might someday be.

In order to help determine if a dog is dangerous, Ian created a bite scale. This objectively analyzes a dog-to-human biting incident based on injuries sustained.

Level 1: The dog growls, snaps or lunges at a person. The teeth never touch skin.
Level 2: While the dog’s teeth make contact with skin, there are no punctures. There may be some indents or bruising.
Level 3: There is a single bite that punctures the skin no more than half the length of the dog’s canine tooth. Typically the entry wounds are circular or teardrop shaped. If there are slashes, they only occur in one direction because the person pulled away, not because the dog shook his head. Bruising is expected.
Level 4: There is a single bite that punctures the skin more than half the length of the dog’s canine tooth. The dog bit down and held, or shook his head. Slashes occur in both directions and bruising is significant.
Level 5: Multiple bites.
Level 6: The dog consumed flesh or killed the victim.

Ian says that the vast majority of bites happen at level 1 or 2. These dogs have excellent bite inhibition, and are not dangerous. However, these dogs do have a problem, and the problem must be solved as soon as possible to prevent someone from becoming injured.

Dogs that inflict a level 3 bite are probably dangerous, and people working with these dogs should be very careful to ensure they have the expertise needed to treat them.

Level 4 biters should be treated like a loaded gun. There needs to be fail safes in place to prevent accidental exposure to people. They should not leave the house expect to go to the vet, and then they should be muzzled. They need to be locked up when people are over. Ian will not work with level 4 cases. Although it may be possible to help these dogs, he has found that it is too difficult to get owner compliance. People simply do not do the level of management needed to keep the dogs from biting again.

Ian recommends that level 5 and 6 dogs be instantly euthanized.

Astute readers will connect this information with my previous seminar post on socialization and bite inhibition. Without a doubt, Ian used the information on aggression to underscore the importance of both socialization and bite inhibition. Obviously, a well-socialized dog is less likely to bite in the first place, but it is impossible to socialize a puppy to every possible scenario. Teaching our puppies good bite inhibition is the back-up plan. It’s what keeps people safe when socialization fails.

Treating an aggressive dog is not easy work. Ian says that it’s on par with sticking your finger in a dike that’s leaking. It works, but it’s not pretty, and it will never be as good as if the dog had been socialized properly in the first place. Ian discussed three methods for treatment.

First, there’s the obvious stand-by of classical counter-conditioning. I’ve written about this before, so I won’t spend time on it now. However, Ian did say that counter-conditioning should never stop. If you have a dog with a bite history, you should always have a handful of treats in your pocket when you’re out, just in case.

Next, for dogs who bite when touched in certain areas, Ian recommends doing progressive desensitization. To do this, you start touching the dog far away from the problem area, and gradually move closer, pairing each subsequent touch with a tastier treat. If the dog shows and signs of discomfort, start over, both with where you touch, and with lower-value treats. Soon, your dog should want you to move closer to the problem area because it means he gets yummier rewards.

Finally, for dogs who won’t let you near them, he recommended a method called Retreat and Treat. That article has the full details, but basically, this is where you throw kibble over the dog’s head, behind him, so that he retreats away from you. Then, as you move away, drop some liver or other high value reward. The dog will likely come close to you to get the liver, and then you start the cycle over again by tossing kibble over his head. Again, the ultimate goal is for the dog to want you nearby.

Thankfully, Ian acknowledged that this was just scratching the surface of how to treat aggressive dogs. He said he’d need another three days to do the subject justice. Still, I was glad that he spent the time to give us a bit of detail.

Ian Dunbar Seminar: Problems in the Adult Dog

Ian’s message on Friday was simple: you can predict puppy problems, and if you start young enough, you can prevent them, too. Ian believes that after 12 weeks of age, it becomes much, much more difficult, and once a dog reaches adolescence at roughly 18 weeks, it’s almost impossible. Despite this focus on preventing problems, he did talk a bit about problems adult dogs have, and gave a very brief overview on working with those issues.

One of the most interesting things was that he categorized dog problems in two categories: behavior problems, and temperament problems. Behavior problems are things that the dogs do, and include house soiling, chewing on inappropriate items, digging, and barking excessively. Temperament problems are things the dogs have, and include fear, aggression, hyperactivity and shyness. Ian says that even though behavior problems are far easier to fix through training, people are far more likely to surrender these dogs. Conversely, despite the fact that temperament problems are incredibly difficult to change, people are far more willing to live with dogs that have them.

Although I was intrigued by this distinction, I’m not sure how I feel about it. On one hand, I agree that many behavior problems are due to a simple lack of training. On the other, it seems difficult to parse out which category a dog fits in, especially since temperament problems must be expressed through behavior. While Ian acknowledged that temperament may affect a dog’s behavior, a focus on behavior alone seems to oversimplify what could be a complex issue.

For example, Ian believes that separation anxiety is more likely to be an owner-absent problem instead of true anxiety. He explained that owner-absent problems happen because of excessive punishment for naughty-but-fun behaviors like barking a lot or chewing on things without instructing the dog what he ought to do instead. Since dogs are smart and want to avoid punishment, they wait to have fun until after their owner leaves, which leads the owner to believe that the problem is separation anxiety.

It does seem like people throw the term “separation anxiety” around pretty casually, and I’ve certainly run across people attributing anxiety to a dog that simply doesn’t know what is expected of him. Even so, that doesn’t negate the fact that there are dogs who are truly anxious, and I felt like Ian minimized this.

I had a similar reaction when he discussed compulsivity and hyperactivity in dogs. Ian said that he thinks that true OCDs or ADHDs are extremely rare in dogs, and that people use these terms to label their dogs as an excuse not to train them. He made treatment sound very simple by recommending that people reward the cessation of the unwanted behavior. The dog will then choose to disengage from the obsessive or hyper behavior in order to receive the reward, and the duration will reduce as a result.

I cannot agree with this. Maisy has some obsessive tendencies, and I do not believe it is possible for her to disengage from light-chasing behavior unless the stimulus is removed. For example, even though Maisy hates swimming, I once saw her jump off a dock to chase the light glinting on the lake’s waves. I very much had the impression that she wasn’t thinking: her entire demeanor changed before she jumped. She became frantic and seemed out of control. I don’t think she chose to jump. I think her brain forced her to.

Ian also recommended redirecting obsessive behaviors to more acceptable behaviors, such as repetitively licking or chewing on a Kong. He said this not only reinforces lying down quietly, but that it also allows the dog to engage in a more appropriate behavior while still getting the endorphin release that comes with compulsive behaviors. But I don’t see how this solves the problem. An obsessive behavior is a problem because it interferes with the dog’s ability to engage in normal life activities. Redirecting the focus of the obsessive behavior does not change this.

And then, there’s the topic of aggression. Ian actually said quite a bit about aggression, so I’ll cover it in more depth another day, but basically, he said there’s absolutely no excuse for fear-based aggression or dog-to-human aggression, with the implication that it is due to a lack of socialization in puppyhood. He acknowledged that there may be an excuse for dog-dog aggression, and I assume he meant that it may be genetic.

I’m mostly okay with this, but I became concerned when he talked about treatment. He said that he can jump start the process by doing “a bit of flooding” in a growl class. I’m not sure what he meant by flooding, but that statement set off alarm bells for me. He went on to say that most of the time he can have dogs off-leash and interacting in a growl class within 45 minutes! While I understand that leashes can contribute to the problem, he made it sound like it’s much easier to fix than it really is. I also have to wonder if the “bit of flooding” resulted in shut down dogs, which is why he was able to get them off leash so easily.

All of this is really captures the problems I had with the seminar as a whole. Ian’s clearly a very smart man, has had a great deal of experience, and has lots to offer dog owners. I respect him a great deal, and think he’s done a lot for the field of dog training. Despite that, his way of lecturing utilized stories and examples that, while engaging, resulted in gross oversimplifications and even seeming contradictions. For example, later on, in order to prove his point that it’s better to spend the time socializing puppies, he said that rehabbing an aggressive dog takes a very long time. This seems to be at odds with the idea that he can have dogs off-leash so quickly in his growl classes.

I know that his focus is the average pet owner, and as a result, he speaks simply in order to reach them. Even so, I would have greatly preferred more a more in-depth and critical analysis of the issues he brought up, especially since I think he had a lot of very good, valid points to make. Unfortunately, he made them so simply that I’m afraid he undermined his own message.

Pat Miller Seminar: Two Ways of Treating Aggression (and Reactivity)

My last entry on the seminar was quite awhile ago, but I really did want to say more about it! Since this blog is about reactive dogs, I wanted to share what Pat said about them.

Pat says that almost all aggression and/or reactivity is based on some sort of stress, whether it’s because someone is threatening the dog’s territory or resource, or because the dog is scared or unsure. Since it’s based in emotions, most people choose to treat it classically, but in recent years, some people are adding operant components to the treatment. Let’s analyze the two, shall we?

Classical Conditioning
Since aggression is based on stress, it makes sense to treat that underlying emotion. If, for example, the dog displays aggressive behaviors when he sees a big scary dog, we need to teach him that bog scary dogs actually aren’t scary. In fact, they’re awesome! We do this by pairing something awesome (usually high value treats) with the sight of the big scary dog.

In order to do this effectively, we must keep the dog calm enough that he can see the trigger and eat the tasty treat. If he displays aggressive behaviors, we need to reduce the stimulus (usually by moving further away) and increasing the value of the treat. Pat recommends working with a single stimulus, at the same intensity, for 20 minutes or longer before switching to a new trigger or a new level of intensity. This helps the dog learn that seeing a big scary dog is actually a predictor of good things.

Sometimes, detractors will say that this is foolish, as we are simply bribing our dogs. Done correctly, this is not the case. We aren’t trying to prevent a reaction or distract the dog. We aren’t holding the treat out as a lure. Instead, we are allowing the dog to form a new association.

Operant Conditioning
Over the past ten years or so, various trainers have been coming up with ways to treat aggression in an operant, yet still “positive” manner. Pat talked about one of the first of these methods: CAT, short for Constructional Aggression Treatment, and showed a video of her doing CAT with a dog named Juni. I’d seen the video before, at the last seminar I saw with Pat, and I have to admit: I didn’t like the procedure then.

To do CAT, you stand with your dog (or you tether him), and bring a trigger to his threshold. You don’t go over the threshold, you simply bring him to the point of noticing, but not reacting. When the dog offers a socially appropriate behavior, or when the dog reduces the intensity of his aggressive behavior, the trigger retreats. Basically, you’re shaping calmer behavior, with the ultimate goal of “switch over,” which means the dog begins to offer affiliative behavior.

The reason I objected to CAT before was because it upset me when the dog did go over-threshold (and anyone working with a reactive dog knows that despite your best efforts, it happens). I didn’t like that the handler ignored her dog while he was upset, either. I also thought it looked like it could be flooding. On seeing the video a second time, though, I concluded that it probably wasn’t. To truly be considered flooding, the dog must be exposed to the stimulus at full intensity, and that exposure must remain until learned helplessness occurs. In other words, the dog would have to shut down emotionally. However, this is not what happens in CAT; it’s a highly regulated level of intensity, and the dog’s behavior controls whether the stimulus remains or not.

CAT is not without its critics, and there are even offshoots of the procedure attempting to make it more positive. Still, I’m no longer opposed to it like it was. Although I don’t think it should be the starting place for treating aggression, it is a useful tool for some dogs.

That, and… during the seminar, I found myself wondering: is this what I did with Maisy? I know that my plan wasn’t exactly CAT, as I did counter classical conditioning along with it, but when I did misjudge a threshold and she went over, I simply ignored it, and waited for a moderate duration (ten to twenty seconds) of calm, appropriate behavior before I rewarded her with attention or treats.

It worked, and it worked quite quickly. It did cause some stress and confusion in the short run, so I suppose that it was part of that 1% of the time where I’m not strictly “positive,” but Maisy quickly reached “switch over,” and has been pretty amazing ever since then. She seems far less stressed and much more interested in social interactions.

Anyway, I really enjoyed hearing Pat speak about aggression again. It’s amazing how much a year’s worth of reading and experience and, well, growth, allows you to take new things away from familiar ground.

24 Hours Later...

So, I thought I'd give everyone a quick update on how the first 24 hours after the unfortunate incident went.

First, yes, I called animal control first thing this morning. The gentleman that answered the phone was very nice. I explained what happened. He told me that since Maisy didn't have any puncture wounds, they couldn't investigate it as an aggression case, but that they'd investigate and likely cite the owners for the loose dog violation. I did tell him that I kicked the other dog, and he was very understanding. He said that I was within my rights to do whatever I needed to do to protect my dog, and while he understood that it doesn't feel good, he would have done the same thing.

Speaking of which, people have kicked -no pun intended- around some ideas here in the comments and over on facebook about what to do about loose dogs. There's no easy answer, of course. Usually I try to body block the other dog, and I'm usually pretty successful at this. I've been teaching Maisy to "switch sides" to make this easier. But this particular dog was on top of her before I even saw it coming, so I didn't have the option to body block or "switch" anyone.

Grabbing the other dog by the legs and swinging was mentioned, although I have to admit, I'm not sure I have the coordination for that. In the right situation, though, it could be a great idea.

Someone else suggested throwing treats at the oncoming dog, which is a great suggestion, and one I've heard from Patricia McConnell, among others. In fact, I did have a pocketful of kibble with me, but in the stress of the moment, I didn't even think of throwing it. I do have some reservations about this, though, as Maisy has a tendency to resource guard me when she knows I'm packing treats. In a situation like this, I'm not sure if throwing treats would be a good distraction, or if it would just create a bigger problem.

Citronella was also discussed, but I dismissed it completely, figuring that the spray would also punish or repel Maisy, making the whole experience even worse for her. Then my brilliant friend Sara suggested buying two cans: one for potential attackers and one to use in advance to counter-condition Maisy so that she associates the citronella spray with treats. I think I'm a good trainer, and one who understands the concepts behind training, but I don't think I would have ever thought of that. Seriously, remember her name, because she's going to do amazing things some day.

Anyway, the most important part is that Maisy seems to be doing well. She was completely normal at home last night and this morning. We also went for a walk again this afternoon as I didn't want to change up the routine too much. I brought a dog-less friend along so that I would have a distraction that would help keep me from being stressed and weird. (And it doesn't hurt that Maisy adores this particular friend.) We also chose not to walk down the street with the offending dog, and we probably won't for a long time, which helped me stay more relaxed, too.

As proof of her ability to bounce back, she seemed emotionally fine on the walk. We walked by barking dogs without a problem. No freezing like yesterday, and nice loose, relaxed body language for the duration of the walk. I was much more liberal with the cookies than I usually am, and will continue to do that for a few days.

Of course, I don't know is what kind of fallout I'll see with Maisy's reaction to dogs in closer proximity. We won't push it this weekend because I want to give the stress hormones and the other chemicals in her brain time to recede. Even so, class next week is liable to be interesting. I'll have to remember to keep my criteria low and my rate of reinforcement high. I know Maisy and I can work through this, I just need to let the past remain in the past.

I am slightly concerned about her physical condition, though. Maisy got stiff halfway through the walk and began limping on the rear leg again. She even asked me to carry her part of the time. Clearly, I'll need to keep walks shorter for the next few days, and if it doesn't clear up, we'll make an appointment for next week.

Anyway, I'll try to return to our regularly scheduled program this weekend. Maisy has clearly moved on from this incident, and I need to do the same. There's no use in dwelling on it, and in fact, that might only make matters worse. Of course, I'll let you know if anything interesting happens, but from now on, I'm not going to worry about it.

Attack!

This is not at all the post I was planning to write tonight. For one thing, I have several more Suzanne Clothier seminar recaps left to go, and for another, I had already started drafting one about the importance of routines for our reactive dogs. However, life has intervened, and I simply must talk about it.

When I got home from work today, I took Maisy for our usual afternoon walk. We generally follow the same path, and today was no exception. I headed up the same street we always take. The only real difference is that today I didn't have my iPod on. (Is it geeky to listen to dog training podcasts while I'm walking the dog?) I'm glad, too, because as we began to walk by a particular house, a large, dark grey dog came out of nowhere and bowled Maisy over. I didn't even see the dog coming- it was just all of a sudden there.

So, Maisy's on the ground, yelping, I'm holding on to her leash, which is inadvertantly jerking her around as she tries to escape, and there's this huge dog trying to do who-knows-what to her. I've got about a million thoughts running through my head: Should I drop the leash? How do I get this dog off? Is Maisy okay? How can I keep her safe? Does she know I'm trying to protect her?

In the end, I held on to the leash, though after an emergency call to one of my trainers, I decided that next time I'll drop the leash. She probably could have gotten away, and she has a darn decent recall; she would have come back. Getting jerked around on the leash only prevented her from protecting herself, probably hurt and/or scared her, and was probably not very helpful.

I also did something I feel awful about: I kicked the other dog. Hard. I'm really not one to use punishment, and I was pretty angry at the presumed owner for doing so just moments later... But it was a knee-jerk reaction, and it worked; the kick stunned the dog long enough that Maisy and I were able to get away. The probable owner then grabbed the other dog by its choke chain and briefly hung it off the ground. I wanted to tell him that wasn't going to help, but what could I say? I had just kicked his dog.

Did that help the situation? Or was I at risk of redirected aggression? Will that make the other dog worse in the future? What could I have done instead? Why haven't I bought that citronella spray yet, and even if I had it, would it have helped, or would it have stressed Maisy out even more? Did Maisy see my action as protecting or defending her, or did she see it as evidence that I might be a wee bit unstable? And, what else could I have done to help her feel like I had her back?

So far as the most important question, that of "Is Maisy okay?", well, only time will tell. She seems physically okay. She was limping slightly on her left rear, but she had a chiro visit yesterday with orders to take it easy for a week due to some issues we found, which means that that slight limp could have been unrelated to this incident. But I have no idea how she is emotionally. Her immediate response was pretty good; she bounced back quickly, and we walked away eating treats without too much stress. However, later in the walk, she froze and looked worried when she heard another dog bark. What kind of fall out will I see, and when?

And... was it really an attack at all? I'm not sure. It all happened so fast, and I'm just not that good at reading dog body language. Was it simply a very over-enthusiastic greeter? I suspect so, because if the dog had really wanted to do damage, he could have.

So, if it was just a dog being a dog, albeit a poorly mannered one, should I report this to animal control? The dog was off leash, and my city has pretty strict leash laws, at least on the books. But was he dangerous? If I report this, will his owners punish him again, or worse? Will they retaliate at me because I kicked their dog? At least they live several blocks away... I'll have to see if I can report anonymously, or at least have my name withheld.

As you can see, I have many, many questions, and very few answers.

So, what is reactivity, anyway?

In my previous entry, I told you that Maisy is “reactive.” What I didn’t tell you is what I mean by that. The short answer is that a reactive dog is one who overreacts to stimuli, usually by barking, growling or lunging. To a dog geek like me, though, the long answer is much more interesting…

When a dog is confronted by an experience, whether it’s something the dog has seen a million times before, like other dogs, or whether it’s a novel stimulus, such as the sudden appearance of a man carrying helium balloons, the dog must decide how it’s going to react.

Some dogs, the so-called normal ones, are relatively unconcerned by the stimulus. They may or may not be interested in whatever it is, but either way, their internal process can be described as, “Oh, another dog. I’ve seen those before. No big deal.”

Another dog might be momentarily unsure, especially if it’s a new experience, or a sudden change in the environment, but will recover quickly and go about his business. “Woah! What’s that? Oh, it’s a guy carrying balloons. Well, that’s a bit odd, but I guess it’s okay.” These dogs are also what we might call normal.

Reactive dogs, though, are the ones that overreact. “Holy crap!” they shout, “I’ve never seen that before. I think it’s going to eat me!!” Of course, dogs don’t actually shout, so what you and I see is a dog who is growling, barking and lunging.

"But wait!" I can hear some of you thinking. "Isn’t that a sign of an aggressive dog?"

It can be. If you encounter a strange dog who is growling, barking and lunging at you, it can definitely look aggressive. But where the aggressive dog actually means you harm, the reactive dog typically just wants you to go away. The aggressive dog is probably reacting from a place of confidence, or acting offensively, while a reactive dog is usually reacting from a place of insecurity or fear, and thus acting defensively. 

Author's update, April 2011: In the two years since I originally wrote this post, I've come to believe that reactivity and aggression are more like a continuum or a spectrum. Most experts I've spoken with don't use the term "reactivity," and instead call it "fear aggression." Indeed, much of what I've read since posting this suggests that the vast majority of dog bites are due to fear, not confidence. As a result, I no longer differentiate the terms based on the dog's emotions.

This shouldn’t be surprising. Dogs, like most animals, including humans, have a fight or flight response. The aggressive dog chooses to fight. The fearful one would rather pick the flight option. Unfortunately, our dogs so often don’t get to make such choices. Stuck behind fences or on leashes, they get backed into metaphorical corners. Since they cannot escape the scary situation, they may try to intimidate whatever they’re scared of, in essence saying, “See? I’m big and scary. You should be afraid of ME instead. Go away!” It’s an act of bravado; last thing the reactive dog generally wants to do is actually fight. (Don’t think this means the reactive dog is safe, though. If he feels threatened enough, he may bite.)

Not all reactivity comes out of a place of fear, though. Some dogs, especially young ones, get very excited when they see other people or dogs. When this happens, they may rush forward, eager to greet a potential new friend. When they find they can’t, either because they’re on leash or behind a fence, they often become frustrated and bark. “I want to come see you, but I can’t!” they say. What you’re seeing is a lack of impulse control on the dog’s part. Reactive dogs almost universally have issues with self-control.

Of course, we owners don’t like this behavior. If we perceive it as the dog misbehaving- after all, he knows better than to pull when on the leash- we might discipline him by yelling or giving a leash correction. And while some dogs understand that their person is telling them, no, don’t pull and rush toward that other dog, others get the message all mixed up. “Wow, I tried to be friendly to that other dog, and my neck ended up hurting. I don’t like that dog.” The dog may decide that other dogs are a Bad Thing to encounter, and will begin to bark and growl the next time they see another out of anxiety and fear that it will happen again.

On the other hand, if we are simply embarrassed by the dog’s over-exuberant and rude behavior, we might become worried, tense, and tighten up on the leash in our attempts to control or contain him. Dogs are very sensitive, and can discern even the smallest change in our body language, and may begin to wonder if they misunderstood the situation. “Wow, my person really doesn’t like that other dog. Maybe I shouldn’t, either.” Again, the dog might begin to overreact in anticipation of our response.

Thus, we can see that reactivity can be both an emotional reaction and a misdirected frustration response or lack of impulse control. No matter why the reactivity started, though, the dog continues the behavior because it worked. Maybe they got the scary thing to go away. Maybe you loosened your leash and released the pressure. Maybe it was something else that we can’t figure out, but the bottom line is: behavior only continues when it has been rewarded. It then becomes a pattern, an almost-instinctual way to respond. This habit is reactivity.

Genetics and early experiences (called socialization), greatly affect whether a dog is one of those normal ones or not. The way we react, or don’t react, also influences the dog’s responses.

In future entries, I’ll tell you about Maisy, what her reactivity looks like, and how it affects our lives. I’ll tell you what I did right, and perhaps more interestingly, what I did wrong so that you can learn from my mistakes. I’ll tell you what I’ve done to help Maisy overcome her fear, and how I manage her environment so that her fear doesn’t get the best of her.

Until then, enjoy your dogs!