This is really interesting!
  • 0
  • I will apologize if this is old news to many, but I had not seen it before. Really interesting experiment that shows major differences in the reaction of different breeds ( basenji, beagle, wire hair terrier, and sheltie)towards different approaches in raising puppies. I had seen the original work done with these breeds, but this is something different. The reaction of the Basenjis I think would be expected by most owners, also that of the Shelties, but the Beagles really surprised me. In any case, an interesting read.

    "Constitutional and Environmental Interactions in Rearing of Four Breeds of Dogs"

    http://www.indiana.edu/~p1013447/dictionary/hxe.htm

  • 0
  • Very interesting. I found early on that punishment doesn't work with my P/B - neither does indulgence - she pretty much agrees with what I suggest or doesn't, depending on her mood of the moment, while my Basenji/sheltie mix shies away if punished (which consists only of a strong "NO") and immediately stops her actions. A gentle "no" will stop her next time she goes to do what she should not. "Leave it" sometimes works with the B, and she will come when called unless she is intent on a distraction. When her mind is consumed by prey or some other distraction, she hears nothing we say.

  • 0
  • That was interesting! Any idea when the research was done?

  • 0
  • I'd be surprised if punishment 'really' works with any breed. Or any living thing, for that matter.

  • 0
  • s@Quercus:

    That was interesting! Any idea when the research was done?

    Is it not part of the Bar Harbor (Fuller and Scott) study? Which would be, what? 60's?

  • 0
  • @agilebasenji:

    s

    Is it not part of the Bar Harbor (Fuller and Scott) study? Which would be, what? 60's?

    I don't believe it is. They used I think 5 different breeds and did a lot more work with them, testing intelligence among other things. Must have a look, I think I have some of that study somewhere. It is very interesting the way genetics seem to play a part, however.

    @Kipawa:

    I'd be surprised if punishment 'really' works with any breed. Or any living thing, for that matter.

    Actually it does, and is clinically proven to work. Positive punishment to deter behavior…...applied with sufficient severity and the right timing......is extremely effective at extinguishing undesired behaviour. The problem is that in the real world it is very hard to get the timing right, and the severity for an effective correction is beyond what most people want to use with their pets. A good discussion of operant conditioning here:

    http://www.wagntrain.com/OC/Part2.htm

    Whether or not you agree with using it, the facts are not in doubt. The application is the problem, and the reason why most of us don't employ it very often, or at all. I do, but with discretion. e.g. you can't beat electric fence for keeping horses where they belong and deterring them from destroying page wire fences by leaning on them!

  • 0
  • actually the bar harbor study used basenjis, shelties, am ****er span, wire fox and beagles. they then found the spaniels and basenjis were the most different from each other and used those two breeds for more studies. It also looked like something they would study, but credit for this study is given to D Levy, so maybe not. however, interesting that they picked the same breeds as the bar harbor study, so there may be some relation even if it is not the exact same people. (for those wondering about what I'm talking about, check out Genetics and the Social Behavior of the Dog by Fuller and Scott. Reads like a text book, but lots of interesting info about the nature/nurture debate. available at amazon or dogwise.com and some local libraries)

    Re +punishment - okay, I never touched a hot stove again, but I know of several dogs who repeat the skunk/porcupine encounters. So, while I won't debate +P works, it's very hard to get it right.

  • 0
  • @agilebasenji:

    Re +punishment - okay, I never touched a hot stove again, but I know of several dogs who repeat the skunk/porcupine encounters. So, while I won't debate +P works, it's very hard to get it right.

    I'm laughing because one of my friends had a dog that routinely went after porcupines every chance he got! She figures she put the Vet's kids through University because of that dog. The problem was, he invariably killed the porcupine, so I guess the positive result was worth it for him. I concur, difficult to get it right. That's the nice thing about the electric fence. It doesn't make timing mistakes.

    I found something else of interest, with the help of Google. It pulls information from a number of studies. Definitely worth the read, especially for breeders, I would think…..

    http://www.nwk9.com/dehasse_pupdev.htm

    I wonder why Basenjis so often get used in research? Because they are different…..and an ancient breed? Quote from above link, emphasis mine:

    _At 12 weeks a puppy is easily frightened. Confinement and hand feeding enable it to accept contact with its laboratory handler(s) but not with strangers, and it still prefers the presence of dogs to that of humans (Scott and Fuller, 1965).

    This fearful reaction has been found in all breeds tested. When put on the defensive a ****er's bite is "softer" than that of other breeds tested (basenji, terrier, beagle, sheltie).

    According to Fuller (1961), puppies raised in isolation in a laboratory develop adequate socialization to humans if they receive two 20-minute periods of human contact per week. This short contact, however, is not enough for basenji puppies; this variability is thus truly linked to breed (genetics) (Scott and Fuller, 1965)._

  • 0
  • This train of thought sent me off on some research, and I discovered something I hadn't seen before. Not really new…..2007.....and not directly about Basenjis, (although it does reference the Scott & Fuller work) but perhaps something that will affect us as owners in the future. With the ready availability of DNA testing now, and more genes being discovered all the time, I find the implications of the conclusion very disturbing.

    "Although we have not yet identified the gene or genes responsible for canine aggression,
    that should occur within the next year. At that point, the ethical problem arises of what to do
    with dogs that carry the aggressive genes. Certainly none of those dogs should reproduce,
    so should be neutered, no matter how beautiful they are. Should these dogs be euthanized
    before they seriously injure a person at worst or, at best, frighten and worry their owners
    who will not be able to enjoy the dog as a pet? That is a question all of us interested in
    public safety, the human animal bond, and in veterinary animal behavior should ponder."

    http://actavet.vfu.cz/pdf/200776030431.pdf

    Oh, and it explains where the original topic of the thread came from. Freedman 1958.

  • 0
  • D Levy did experiments back in the 1930s and 40s predominately. The study too small to tell if valid. Furthermore, I'd be curious what type of "punishment" they used to correct the dogs over food. Somehow, I am not surprised that the softer dogs indulged and then punished came to not trust humans. Children with the push/pull (love/abuse) type parents also fare worse in some research stats than those with cold/abuse.

    I cannot locate the original article, but I did find there are several. I am not sure what agnostic means in this context lol: (this actually was 1968):
    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dev.420010211/abstract

  • 11
    Posts
  • 2351
    Views
  • Log in to reply