Dogs Read Human Faces Like Humans Do?

January 5, 2011 By

Hopefully you saw my recent post on Dog Star Daily about how poorly people read dogs. So how well do they do with us?

When we humans read faces, we tend to look to the left (I.E. the right side of the face we are viewing, or the "left hemiface"). It has been shown in several studies that humans tend to favor the information gained from the left hemiface when evaluating facial expression, age, and sex in other people, even when the left and right sides present conflicting information. (Validity and temporal stability of the chimeric face technique for studying hemispheric processing asymmetries, Perceiver bias in the processing of deliberately asymmetric emotional expressions, and Perceptual Asymmetries In Judgements Of Facial Attractiveness.)

In order to help determine why humans have this preference, (Is it evolved? Is it learned? Is it more prevelant in people that learn to read left-to-right?) researchers broadened the research to both rhesus monkeys and domestic dogs and compared it to adult and 6 month old humans.

Before I go over the results: left gaze bias (LGB) is defined by two primary characteristics: which side of the face the eyes travel to first and which side of the face the eyes stay fixed on for the longest period of time.

The results in a nutshell:

  • 6 month old infants demonstrated a tendency for left gaze preference towards objects and faces of different species and orientation (upside down and rightside up.)
  • Adult only demonstrated LGB for human faces.
  • Rhesus monkeys showed LGB toward upright human and monkey faces, but not toward inverted faces or objects.
  • Dogs only demonstrated a left gaze bias toward human faces, not toward monkeys, dogs, or inanimate objects.

The dogs were seventeen pet dogs recruited from university staff.

The methodology seemed pretty solid. The monkeys had gear surgically implanted, which reduced the sample size, and the dogs were (non-surgically, of course) fitted with hardware that tracked their eye and head movements. If you watch the Nova "Dogs Decoded" program you can briefly see the research being performed.

Dogs treat human faces differently from any other. While human infants seem to be favoring the left for almost everything, and monkeys seems to be trying to treat monkey and human faces the same way, dogs appear to be treating humans in a very specific manner. As a matter of fact, dogs maintained the left bias even when the human faces were inverted something that was only observed in adult humans.

The researchers state:
All dogs in this study were well socialised to both people and other dogs. We therefore argue that the bias towards human faces alone cannot be explained simply in terms of lack of exposure to conspecifics, but that it may have a more fundamental phylogenetic origin. The ability to extract information from human faces and respond appropriately could have had a selective advantage during the process of domestication, especially as the emotional content of these faces may be of immediate adaptive behavioural significance.

Which is a fancy way of saying that it is possible that domestic dogs evolved this ability to read our faces because it was a useful ability to have.

More and more we see evidence that dogs are able to understand us, probably better than most of us understand them. As a result, it’s also becoming more and more apparent that trying to treat them like wolves or worse, by trying to pretend you are a canid, is not a sound approach.

Photo credit: Mickie Quick

Guest Post: Clever Hans by Dino Dogan

September 13, 2010 By

You know by now that I love reading and writing about science almost as much as I like playing the sceptic. Dino Dogan of Dogan Dogs Video Blogs has generously written an excellent guest post about an early case of animal behavior communication and woo-busting that teaches us an important lesson about the messages we send to our dogs — whether we intend to or not.

Few people realize that Albert Einstein almost lost his distinction as the “Person” of the Century to a horse. A very clever horse.

smart horse reading newspaper

Wilhelm von Osten was a retired school teacher who in 1891 claimed that his stallion whom he called Clever Hans could answer questions about current events, mathematics and a host of other topics by tapping the ground with his hooved foreleg.

For instance, when Osten would ask Clever Hans to add 3 + 5, the horse would wait till his master would finish asking the question, tap 8 times, and then stop.

Sometimes instead of asking a question, Osten would write it on a card and hold it up for Clever Hans to read. And the horse seemed to understand written language every bit as well as he understood speech.

Clever Hans displays his knowledge
Clever Hans didn’t get every question right of course, but he did much better than some of his footed counterparts, and certainly better than anyone else with hooves.

His public performances were so impressive that he soon became the toast of Berlin.

But in 1904, the Director of the Berlin Psychological Institute sent his student Oskar Pfungst to look into the matter more carefully.

Pfungst noticed that Clever Hans was much more likely to give the wrong answer when Osten was standing behind Clever Hans. Or when Osten himself didn’t know the answer to the question the horse had been asked.

In a series of clever experiments, Clever Pfungst was able to show that Clever Hans COULD indeed read. But that what he could read was Osten’s body language.

When Osten bent slightly Hans would start tapping. And when Osten straightened-up, or tilted his head a bit, or faintly raised an eye brow, Clever Hans would stop.

In other words, Osten was signaling Clever Hans to start and stop tapping at just the right moment to create the illusion of “horse sense”.

Clever Hans was no genius, but Osten was no fraud.

Indeed, Osten had spend years patiently talking to his horse about mathematics, the world affairs, and he was genuinely shocked and dismayed to learn that he’d been fooling himself as well as everyone else.

This section was liberally pilfered from the most excellent work on human cognition written by Daniel Gilbert in his book Stumbling on Happiness (Amazon Affiliate link) A MUST READ!!!

What does it have to do with dog training?

It serves to show that we are always communicating volumes without realizing it.

Osten didn’t realize his body language was instructing Clever Hans when to start and stop tapping, and we often don’t realize what signals we send to our canines, friends, bosses, coworkers, kids, parents, and the rest of the universe.

Now, the rest of the universe may not care to read your signals, but there is at least one person who is carefully studying your every move at all times. Your dog.

What signals are you sending without realizing?

On-Leash Aggression: What is Over Threshold?

June 16, 2010 By

This morning I was running late. It was one of those things that, if you show up late, you run a good chance of being told by a bureaucrat you’ll have to start over from scratch and wait another four months for chance to be on time.

I was stuck in traffic and not pleased. Why was the guy in front of me going so slow? Why was the guy behind me in such a hurry? Who programs these stupid traffic lights? Do they even pave these roads? Why does the Takeaway bother to book interviews if Hockenberry is never going to let them get a word in?

Of course, none of this made sense. None of the people or things I was raging at really deserved it. (Except maybe Hockenberry.) My anxiety and fear about being late had developed into an angry response. This was a pretty trivial situation. If I had been late it might have lead to a major inconvenience, but it was no life and death situation. However I somehow still ended up angry and not thinking clearly.

This happens to us humans a lot, we read and hear about (and probably witness) aggressive driving very often. Most often perpetrated by people that are not thinking clearly over pretty trivial things: late for work, late for an “important” appointment, late for a late movie.

And we’re supposed to be the smart species.

So picture what’s going on inside a dog that is responding aggressively to a situation on leash. Fearful and anxious feelings eventually becoming frustrated and angry feelings. A dog that, if one allows that dogs “think,” is not thinking clearly. We’ve learned a lot about the cognitive abilities of dogs the past few years, but introspection and self-awareness are not on the feature list yet. Why should we expect them to be able to deal with a situation that so many of us fail to handle?

We call this “over threshold.” An emotional state that is intense and overwhelming enough that learning just isn’t going to happen. When someone is stuck in traffic, angry and frustrated, a passenger explaining to them that it’s not worth getting so upset over probably doesn’t help. When a dog is in a full aggressive display during an on-leash encounter, a human offering food or delivering a reprimand doesn’t help either.

It’s probably possible to cause enough discomfort for both individuals that the aggressive display stops, and it may even be possible to cause enough discomfort that they will be afraid to enter that state in that situation again — but I am assuming that you don’t want to do that.

Last week I referred to the systematic counter-conditioning and desensitization process that is used to address leash aggression. When we gradually introduce other dogs at a distance, and then close that distance, we are making sure that the dog never reaches this over-threshold state. The goal, and it’s not always easy, is to find a level where the dog is aware of the other dog(s), but is still in an emotional state where learning can take place.

Happy motoring.

Dog Whisperer Commentary: Baby Girl

December 14, 2009 By

iStock_000011044804XSmallBefore getting into the second Dog Whisperer commentary, I’d like to respond to a couple of comments from the first.

I read that if I want to prove Cesar wrong I should film myself working with dogs that have the same problems. Passing over the obvious logistical and production issues, my real answer is this: I don’t have anything to prove. I’m not the one questioning behavioral science. I’m watching the show, providing commentary, and explaining what many other trainers would do in these situations. (In addition to pointing out the things I do like.) Filming me working dogs would make it small-time trainer from Jersey vs. big-time Hollywood trainer.

If you doubt the methods I propose, feel free to do your own research. But keep in mind, watching more of the reality show with a dog trainer in it isn’t really research. And please, tell me where I am wrong in the comments. Unlike some, I am willing to publicly confront criticism and learn from it.

There was another criticism, one that made me literally laugh out loud. A week or so after the first commentary, I came across a blog with the standard “trainers who condemn Cesar are close-minded and should consider his methods more closely” complaint. I commented, explaining that I had considered his methods and provided a link to the commentary. Part of his response to my comment were words to the effect that it was strange that I spent so much time scrutinizing the show. (I wish I hadn’t lost the link, if you’re reading this, please put it in the comments.)

Isn’t that priceless? We should consider Cesar’s methods…but not spend too much time actually looking at them. Too sciencey I guess.

Two more housekeeping bits:

Rather than go with the latest show, I am going to stick to relatively recent shows that can be watched on nationalgeographic.com Hopefully they will stay live long enough that most people can watch the show when they read the post. The Cesar Millan “channel” is here. I can’t embed the videos. They offer the code, but the embeds do not work.

Also, I’m still tweaking the format. Trying to follow the flow of the show is very difficult. The last post is 2834 words, edited down from over 6000. In addition to taking a long time to write, most people just won’t read that much. I’m going to try to take a “big picture” view this time. I may leave things out. If you feel that I left something important out, please leave a comment.

“Baby Girl” is another episode that only covers a single dog. I selected it because it deals with fearfulness, an area where Cesar takes a lot of heat from his critics. Baby Girl (BG) is a doberman mix that Suzie brought home from a rescue. From the very first day BG displayed extreme fear for any new sights or sounds. She would refuse to enter the kitchen if a cabinet door was open or a drawer was ajar. Suzie lives near Disneyland, and the nightly (?) fireworks are always traumatic for BG. While it was not stated explicitly, I’d wager that travel outside of the home was equally stressful for BG.

Unfortunately, this is not an uncommon situation for rescue dogs. Fearfulness can have a few causes, but one of the more common is a lack of socialization during early puppyhood. This socialization is so critical that the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior has issued a position statement explaining that they consider lack of socialization more of threat to dogs than infectious disease. As you might imagine, many unwanted and stray dogs do not get the socialization they need as puppies.

Another important factor is genetics. Extreme sensitivity can manifest from birth, especially in certain breeds such as some herding breeds and the “sighthounds,” including greyhounds. As we’ll see, Baby Girl seems to have some greyhound in her.

For some great information on how to live with and train fearful dogs, check out fearfuldogs.com.

During the initial interview Suzie mentions another fearful dog that Cesar handled in an earlier show. I haven’t seen this episode. In the flashback we see a “virtual reality” rig which includes a treadmill and a lot of loud noise. More on this in a bit.

There is no discussion of any methods that Suzie has tried before and no mention of a vet visit to check for physiological problems.

Cesar decides that he can best address BG’s needs back at his compound, so he takes her there. The first step is to introduce her to some of the dogs on the compound or, as Cesar says.

…let’s see what the pack feels about it, you know, what energy they feel she is.

Sigh. We’re back in the mysterious energy zone.

In case it wasn’t obvious enough last time, I’m not into the woo. Lots of dog people are. Many of my friends and people I have learned from are, but I’m just not a woo person. Sorry.

Cesar starts out with BG in an adjacent area (which is a good idea). BG seems much more interested in (and overwhelmed by) her new surroundings than the other dogs. She seems to be looking for an escape route at one point.

When she is first let in with the other dogs, she moves around a lot and is clearly trying to avoid being surrounded by the other dogs. As he is shifting and dodging, her tail comes up from between her legs, maybe because of the motion, maybe because she is so focused on her surrounding that those muscles actually relax. Cesar sees this and says “Look at the tail, verry happy!” (Here is a clip, at least until it is taken down. I feel that 57 seconds falls under fair use.)

Sigh. Dog Body Language 101: never just look at one body part. Her tail may have come out from between her legs, but she is actively avoiding the other dogs!

When one dog tries to mount her, she issues a very well controlled and appropriate correction. The other dogs give her some distance, in what I feel is a great display of control. Cesar says: …obviously her energy is not good.”

I don’t want to overdo the “sigh” thing, but sigh.

Cesar waits a few days to get her integrated in the “pack.” This is a good thing. While many trainers that do a board-and-train probably don’t have the luxury of time that Cesar has, letting a fearful dog get acclimated to a new environment is a good idea.

But I can’t say that about the next part of BG’s “treatment.” Cesar takes her to a treadmill that is installed in a trailer and surrounded by a big screen and what seems to be a pretty impressive sound system. He has prepared tapes of things that BG is afraid of, along with a tape of Suzie to “calm her.” He uses this to force her to walk the treadmill while “dealing with” the things that she fears. On the treadmill her head is down low, her posture is low and her tail alternates between low and tucked against her abdomen. She looks miserable, even when Cesar plays the recording of Suzie.

This is called flooding. Flooding is a technique where a subject is forced to face his fears until he loses the fearful response. For example, if you are afraid if spiders or snakes, I could lock you in a room full of them and not let you out until you no longer seem afraid. This is, needless to say, a controversial technique. Some say it doesn’t work, others (including me) say that while it may work, it’s not humane and that there are better alternatives.

One of the better methods, which I may as well discuss here, are counter-conditioning and desensitization.

Desensitization gradually reduces the intensity of a response to an undesirable (to the subject) stimulus. This is done by gradually exposing the subject to low levels of the stimulus. For example, since BG is afraid of balloons, she could be exposed to them at a distance until she no longer responds, and then the distance could be shortened.

This process is almost always paired with counter conditioning, which is an application of classical or pavlovian conditioning. BG already has an association – balloons and fear. This association could be gradually changed, or countered, by pairing the desensitization with something good, such as very yummy treats.

When implementing these methods one also needs to be aware of the threshold model. When individuals react to stimuli that elicit intense fear (or aggression, BTW) there is a threshold beyond which learning is severely (if not completely) impaired. Where this threshold is varies from dog to dog, and that’s really where there is no substitute for experience when it comes to implementing behavior modification.

Of course if you lack the knowledge, experience doesn’t really matter.

These concepts are firmly rooted in behavioral science and apply to many different species. Poke around the Internet or your neighborhood library for more information on them. For further information on how they relate to dogs, check out How Dogs Learn (which has a short section on it) and/or Excel-Erated Learning (which has much more information.)

Counter-conditioning and Desensitization (CC & DS) are very simple concepts that can be very difficult to implement. For one thing, it usually takes a very, very long time. This leads to people giving up. It’s easy to screw up, by either proceeding too slowly or crossing the threshold too often, which leads to no results and again, people giving up. It also leads to crappy TV, because let’s face it, the interesting bits only happen when you can see exactly what you should not: an intense response.

Back at the “virtual reality trailer,” Cesar introduces new sounds and BG is startled every time. Eventually Cesar has some assistants bring in a large string of balloons. BG is so startled she falls off the treadmill. Cesar puts her back on and is shown  saying:

“If I do baby steps, I’m just going to make her more and more fearful.”

Sigh. Cesar obviously disagrees with CC & DS. He doesn’t bother to explain the logic behind this assertion at all. It has the sound and feel of common sense, unfortunately that’s not enough to make it right.

I don’t have much more to say about the treadmill. It is revisited several times during the episode. Whether it works or not, I think it is too stressful and arguably inhumane.

When we cut away to the next commercial break, we see Baby Girl happily running alongside Cesar. She does seem to trust him and like him.

Next, Cesar takes BG to a greyhound rescue. This is a really nice idea. She very quickly warms up to the greyhounds, and seems to enjoy running and playing with them. Dogs of similar breeds do tend to play the same way. It makes sense: greyhounds are literally bred to run and chase so running and chasing each other would tend to come naturally.

Cesar tends to take a “whole dog” approach to his behavior programs, and this little slice of greyhound life is a part of that. I like this “whole dog” view of Cesar’s a lot. It’s just some of the connections he makes that concern me.

For the next month or so, Cesar takes BG everywhere with him. We see them walking and we see her on a behavior consult with him. While some of my colleagues might disagree, I have to say I think this may not be a bad idea. While the consult, with the other dog displaying aggressive behavior toward BG, looks very risky and is a bad example, getting BG out and about after being confined to Suzie’s house might just be a big part of what she needs. There is, of course, a risk of her getting over threshold too often, but I can see some merit in exposing her to natural situations on a regular basis, in a controlled and safe fashion.

Cesar has an interesting solution to the tucked tail issue.

Interesting. Does the mind follow the body in this case? It’s not necessarily a harmful thing, but I would feel funny suggesting it. Cesar speaks very definitively about it, as if he knows that this works.

Half way into the show, we find that Baby Girl has not been eating and has lost weight throughout her stay. At first it’s not clear when this started, but later on we find that BG has always been an unenthusiastic eater. Cesar puts a lot of effort into getting her to eat, including consulting a vet (finally!) and trying a variety of foods. He shows some great flexibility and a willingness to adjust his normally rigid rules to work with BG. At the end of the episode Suzie shows him how she handles it. The drama portrayed within this subplot seems a little contrived to me – I find it hard to believe that in the 92 days that Baby Girl stayed at Cesar’s he never spoke to Suzie about her reluctance to eat.

Cesar takes Baby Girl to a pool next. She cannot tuck her tail while under water. Cesar thinks this can help with the fear. No, I’m not kidding.

This is taking shaping the mind with the body a bit too far. Also, as he effectively forces her into the pool, he reads small changes in tail carriage tail as significant changes in state of mind, even while she struggles against being pulled into the pool!

And what exactly does “the brain in a forward state” mean?

Cesar is ready to return BG to Suzie now. We see her playing outside, and clearly she is a different dog. However, there is a thunderstorm and BG has a severe reaction.

Thunderphobia can be a very serious issue. At a seminar I attended given by veterinary behaviorist Dr. Nicholas Dodman, fear of thunder storms rated it’s own hour long presentation. There is also some peer-reviewed literature on the topic.

Some of the recommendations I found in a quick search are:

  • Desensitization to storm sounds. This is considered very difficult.
  • Create a “safe haven” for your dog during storms. Try to diminish the sound and view of lightning there and create a positive association with this place.
  • Medication. See you vet, I will not recommend, or even list, any medicine here.
  • Jackets, such as the ThunderShirt. (I have had some success with this with one of my dogs.)

At the seminar, Dr. Dodman specifically called out flooding as risky and not recommended for thunderphobia and other fear problems.

Cesar finally does return Baby Girl home, and we see a 7 month follow up. Baby Girl is very much improved, and there’s really little doubt that Cesar helped her. (I still don’t think she looks at all happy on treadmill though.)

I can’t say whether or not the treadmill helped or hindered Baby Girl’s progress. But I will say this again: it’s not something I would use. I feel that the socialization Cesar provided by taking her with him around the city, and the time she spent with other dogs helped her a lot.

Here’s a thought: is it possible that the “virtual reality trailer” was just included to keep the show interesting? The real work, 90+ days of socialization, was probably pretty boring and would not have made good TV.

So that’s the second commentary, and it’s still over 2500 words. I left quite a bit out, but I think it is a pretty good description of what happened.

What do you think? Please leave a comment below!

What are the risks to confrontational dog training methods?

December 6, 2009 By

iStock_000007289816XSmallI have published a new post at Dog Star Daily about some research regarding confrontational dog training methods. The researchers polled families on what training methods they had tried and what the outcomes were.

Take a look and let me know what you think.

The Dog Whisperer Commentary: Bella

November 22, 2009 By

American bulldog on the grass

My first Dog Whisperer commentary is on “Bella”, from season 8. (Episode 9 according to Hulu.) This episode was first shown in August of 2009. It is the newest complete episode on Hulu, so I am starting with that. In order to avoid charges of “taking things out of context” (another frequent Cesar Millan defense,) I will only provide commentary on complete episodes.

Here is a link to the episode. It appears that NGC has disabled embedding, even though they offer the code to do it.

This episode only covers one dog, which is a pretty good starting point. We see Cesar work in depth (relatively speaking) on one case.

Bella is a 4 1/2 year old American Bulldog. She belongs to Nate, a rehabilitated alcoholic who adopted Bella during a pretty chaotic time in his life. It appears that during Nate’s time partying she was teased and maybe even abused.

Bella displays very serious food guarding. Footage is shown of Nate trying to get to her bowl and she reacts very aggressively. She also displays very serious aggression toward other dogs when walking on leash.

After showing us (very dramatically) Bella’s issues, we see an interview between Nate and Cesar. Cesar immediately gloms onto the Bella’s terrible behavior on leash:

“I think that’s the first thing you have to learn. If you can’t walk a dog, you can’t tell her anything.”

Um. Why? For Cesar, walking the dog seems to be some sort of ritual for establishing dominance over the dog. We’ve coexisted with dogs for at least 10,000 years according to most anthropologists. When did we start walking them on leash? 100 years ago? Maybe 200? How did people handle them before that?

Nate also says that he feels guilty about the current situation with Bella. Cesar seems dismayed by Nate’s admission:

The more you live in that…guilt…or whatever other energy, the more weak you appear to her. So if you are soft energy, she have to take the dominant position.”

So here we are, about 8 minutes into 45 minutes of TV, and already in a struggle for dominance with Bella. This is my fundamental problem with Cesar. All of our dealings with our dogs are phrased in terms of a battle for control. It shapes everything he does, as we see in this episode.

Nate’s behavior toward Bella displays a lot of stress. He shouts a lot. He struggles for control over the leash. His body language has a lot of “big” movements that undoubtedly contribute to Bella’s behavior. In this way, his stress is visible to Bella and most likely makes things worse. But why “weak?” Why must it be positioned as an opening for Bella to “take over?” Is she hoping to get him to change his will? Relinquish the remote control? Finally let her drive the car?

Next, Cesar “evaluates” Bella by approaching her where she is tied up in the yard. His reading of her body language is pretty good, but it is a terrible situation and sets Bella to become stressed and fail. Being tied up is very stressful for most dogs, and having a strange person (not to mention a camera crew) approach her only makes things worse. Evaluating her in this circumstance is not going to provide Cesar with any useful information.

Bella reacts with barking and lunging so, of course, Cesar declares that he is going to “defeat” her psychologically. Here again, we are in a struggle. We’re not trying address her aggressive issues or help her deal with her problem. We are in a battle of wills!

After a short time Bella stops reacting to Cesar and lies down. This is great! Bella is able to adjust to Cesar very rapidly. Cesar’s technique, standing still and not reacting to her, is effective and helps her with settling down, although the idea that this is a “defeat” for Bella is anthropomorphic. Even though I would never put a dog in this particular position, if I somehow got there I would take her ability to relax so quickly as a good sign.

Cesar then says something that completely baffles me. Dogs with short noses like American Bulldogs don’t “really” use their noses. What?? He tries an experiment with some vanilla scented spray to get her to “use her nose.” This is an interesting idea – attempting to redirect her attention with a strong scent, but I find his assertion about brachycephalic breeds bewildering. While their short noses make their sense of smell weaker than other breeds, it still dominates their perception of the world and they use their noses just as much as any other dog.

After some more experimenting, Cesar decides the Bella is too stressed and calls it quits. Excellent. Cesar makes the right call. Bella does appear to be very stressed and pushing her any more would have accomplished nothing good.

I would have handled our first meeting very differently. Cesar explicitly mentions that he did not want Nate there so he could “send her into a different emotional state.” (Whatever…) I would have wanted him him there. He is part of the package, and how Bella reacts when he is not there really isn’t the point. I also wouldn’t have made my first approach with her tied to a tree. It would have been either in her house or outside, with Nate holding her leash (loosely) in either scenario.

Back on the show, Cesar jumps from saying that Bella is too stressed to immediately throwing her into an even more stressful situation. He has Nate do a couple of “walk-bys” with Bella on leash to see how she reacts to another dog. Why? If she’s too stressed, she’s too stressed. I would have called it a day.

However, when Cesar sees Bella straining at the end of her leash on a prong collar, he decides to remove it. Good call! While I dislike a choker, in this situation it is a far better call than a prong. The pinching of the prong, as Cesar says, is probably contributing to, if not triggering, Bella’s violent reaction to other dogs while on leash.

Cesar places an improvised choker high on her neck and walks Bella past the other dog with the leash very, very, tight. He corrects her if she looks at the other dog. He points out that she is now “calm.” To me she looks very stressed and almost afraid to move. “Calm” and “still” are not the same thing. Her tail is tucked, she is licking her lips, and she tries to steal a few nervous looks at other dog. I would have used a flat collar or a head halter and a lot more distance for this exercise. I would not have used corrections for looking around. I want a calm dog, not a stiff robot.

Cesar takes Bella to a “ranch” that is run by one of his students. He puts a muzzle on her and has her on a long lead. He lets her roam with a group of dogs. This is risky, but not necessarily a bad idea. Bella is much more relaxed than she is on leash, which is not a surprise – many dogs that display aggressive behavior on leash are perfectly fine off leash.

However, a dog scratching at the ground gets Bella’s attention and she lunges toward him. Cesar immediately grabs Bella, pushes her into a sit, and then pushes her to the ground and pins her. When she relaxes, he lets her up. Grabbing Bella and pulling her away from the other dog is a risky move. Not because Cesar might get bit – she’s wearing a muzzle, remember – but because it runs the risk of creating yet another negative association with being near other dogs. Approach another dog, get manhandled by a human. Likewise with pinning her to ground. Pinning her to ground may have “put her into another emotional state” as Cesar would say, but what did she learn from it? What was taught in that situation?

What Cesar tried to do, teach Bella that it’s OK to be near other dogs, is a viable strategy for helping her, but I would have done weeks, maybe months, of foundation work beforehand. I would have done some desensitization to both the muzzle (to reduce the stress of wearing it) and to other dogs, starting from a distance. I would have trained Bella to respond to her name and basic obedience commands, even in the face of distractions. I would have included Nate in the exercises because, as I said above, he’s part of the package and how she acts with him and his ability to what I would have been hired to address. I know I can handle dogs, it’s Nate that needs help.

Cesar then removes the muzzle and has Bella on leash in front of other dogs while they are in their pens. This takes setting Bella up to fail to an entirely new level, as she now has at least a half dozen opportunities to engage in fence fighting. She takes advantage of one of the opportunities. This exercise is completely pointless and places unnecessary stress on her.

After a while, Bella stops fence fighting. It’s not clear how much time has passed. Either she finally gave up, or something happened that we missed. Cesar drops the lead and lets her explore while the dogs behind the fences are barking. She starts to sniff the perimeter. Cesar says he likes that she is “using her nose”…but he doesn’t like it because it makes the other dogs nervous. Good point…but I guess stopping her isn’t an option? Cesar approaches Bella with a hand up while she is sniffing a dog and his pen. She walks up to him with her tail wagging. She looks at him and then looks away. Cesar smacks her on the side of her head.

Cesar explains that she looked at another dog and “gave him an energy that I didn’t agree with.” (Whatever…) Cesar then waited for her to be distracted (his words) before hitting her to “catch her by surprise” and then “followed through with the energy.” (How many whatevers are too many for one paragraph?)

If you are having problems following that, you are not alone. I’m not sure what Cesar is talking about when he refers to energy. Sometimes it seems like an abstraction. Sometimes it seems like more of the new age-y woo-woo bullshit that TV and the Internet is full of.

I can say that the smack was far too removed from anything Cesar accused Bella of doing wrong to be considered a valid correction.

Sometime after the smack, the dogs become quiet. Cesar then takes credit for the dogs getting tired of barking.

I don’t see the point of this exercise and can’t really tell you what I would do different. I just wouldn’t do it.

Next, Cesar does some work with Bella on her food guarding.

We briefly see Cesar exercising Bella on a treadmill to burn off some energy. Then, he gets her agitated by pointing a scrub brush on a stick at her. And then he kicks her.

Sorry, watching this stuff gets to me. Let me explain.

Cesar presents Bella with a bowl of food, and then uses a scrub brush on a 4 foot pole to get between her and the food. Cesar seems to be saying that by using the brush as both a shield and a taunt, baiting Bella into attacking it, and then refusing to back away he is demonstrating to her that aggression won’t work. The kick was to deliberately set her off and then prove to her that he won’t back down.

In other words this is a battle and if Cesar can win, Bella will stop guarding her food.

Before I go any further, let’s hear a word from our sponsor, real behavioral science. Food aggression is a manifestation of “resource guarding.” It is a “hard wired” behavior that dogs and wolves share. Many dogs never display it. Some display it in only very specific circumstances. For others, it is always apparent. It is not learned, and the fact that Nate mentions early in the show that Bella drew blood over a piece of dropped shrimp when she was a very small puppy reinforces that.

Punishment is not the way to go with this behavior. With food guarding, hand-feeding is sometimes an option. It’s also good to train a “give” command, starting out with low value items and working your way up to very valuable items. I would also train a release and use it to tell Bella when it is OK to approach the food bowl. It’s a tough problem to deal with and I don’t want to make an already too-long post longer.

Cesar gives up on the scrub brush and moves to a “vibration” e-collar. He goes through great lengths to demonstrate how mild it is. I see electrodes, but I am going to take his word for it that it only vibrates. When he places it on Bella and triggers it, she jumps off the bowl and looks cowed and miserable.

Even if the collar is not shocking her, it’s obvious that Bella finds the collar very aversive. Cesar has “fixed” the issue by finding a punishment that is severe enough to override the resource guarding. I don’t trust this as a “fix.” I believe that there is a very high risk for unintended consequences, and I am not sure that someday Bella won’t find something valuable enough to guard again. I also dislike punishing a dog this severely. As I said above, there are more humane alternatives.

The show gives us a update on progress. According to the narrator, Cesar has worked with Bella for a total of two hours. Two hours to “fix” leash aggression and food guarding is insane. The video shows Bella reacting violently to another dog on leash with the prong as compared to off leash. Apples and oranges.

Cesar brings Nate back. He arranges some walk bys with a large number of dogs. He has fit Bella with a Gentle Leader head harness, which I like a lot as a solution! Bella responds very well to the head collar. However, after a minute or two I see Cesar coaching Nate on jerking the leash to pull Bella away from another dog. This is dangerous with a Gentle Leader, and I have never seen an experienced trainer recommend leash corrections with a head collar. By jerking a dog’s neck very violently there is a real risk of injury. Again, with some foundation work Nate could instead call Bella’s name and reward her for responding.

Otherwise, I like the “walk by” drills for working on her leash aggression. The process does seem completely rushed, but it is most likely for the camera. Cesar’s coaching of Nate is very good. Cesar is great at praising people. If he was more willing to tell dogs what to do, he would be a lot easier to watch. I liked the positive finish with a side-by-side walk of the dogs.

We return to the food guarding and a utterly pointless seven minute standoff with the scrub brush. After the seven minutes Bella gives up and it is presented as some kind of victory. To my mind, Bella deserves the credit for figuring out how silly the whole thing was.

Cesar returns to the e-collar, and uses it in conjunction with the scrub brush. Bella again reacts very fearfully to the collar and moves away from the bowl. She looks very unhappy. Cesar then pets her with the brush to show her that it’s OK. (Whatever….) He then demonstrates that she will leave the bowl when the brush approaches.

As I said above, whether the collar is actually shocking her or not, Bella obviously finds the collar to be extremely aversive. It’s not clear that there will be no side effects to this form of punishment.

Six and a half weeks later we see that Nate has been working with Cesar’s student on Bella’s training. Bella seems to be doing fine, but there is a big difference. Bella is now responding to cues: “take it,” “off.” and a “go to place.” Cesar did not train these cues; at no point did he discuss the idea of training a dog to do something rather than punishing her until she stops doing something. It looks to me like Cesar’s student is a bit of a better trainer than he is.

This episode was a mixed bag for me. While Cesar frequently teeters on the edge of showing a great understanding of both dogs and their people, he almost always falls back to an adversarial model and a heavy reliance on punishment. He is adept at reading dogs, but fills his readings with anthropomorphic motives and jumps to very bold conclusions about what is going on. His explanations for what he is doing are almost always completely baffling.

Five Common Myths About Dogs

November 18, 2009 By

iStock_000010376822XSmall
Dogs are receiving a tremendous amount of attention of late. New TV shows, new products, and new books spring up all the time. It’s been a pleasure to watch as the collective consciousness has risen over the past few years. But a few myths and misunderstandings are still very persistent. Here’s a short list with some myth-busting (I hope) facts.

  1. A wagging tail means a dog is friendly. This is a very common misconception. Probably the best explanation I’ve ever heard for a wagging tail is “willingness to interact.” That statement leaves a lot of room for different intentions on the part of the dog. The fact is, trying to read a dog’s feelings or intent on any one body part is a mistake. You need to look at the entire dog.
  2. Growling is always unacceptable. Less common, but something I do run into quite often. Dogs have a very limited vocal range, and like reading body language, making a judgement based on a single indicator like a growl is a bad idea. Growling during play, such as a game of tug, is perfectly fine. Moreover, as Erica at Dog Star Daily points out, a growl can be a huge favor.
  3. “He tried to bite me.” No he didn’t. He snapped at you. Dogs are faster than you, and if they want to place their teeth on you, they will. He warned you and was probably being very patient. Think about that for a while.
  4. “She knows she did something wrong. She looks guilty.” No she doesn’t and no she does not. Dogs don’t have guilty looks. Recent research indicates that what we frequently interpret as guilty looks are really responses to our behavior.
  5. Feeding a dog “people food” will make her beg for more. No, feeding a dog from the table, will make her beg. What do you think would happen if you fed her her kibble from the table? Food is food as far as dogs are concerned, and if they are successful in getting some in a given situation, they will try if that situation surfaces again. People food is fine for trying, and is usually healthier than most of the stuff sold as dog treats.

Do you know any other myths that I have missed?

Dog Owner Survey from Whole Dog Camp

October 15, 2009 By

raise_pawJenny Yasi at Whole Dog Camp has put together an interesting survey for dog owners on the training methods they have used and the results they received. After a few days she is going to publish the results. I think it’s a great survey and am looking forward to the result.

It’s only 12 questions and should only take you a few minutes to take. Please do! You can find it here.

My Dog is Afraid. What Can I Do?

September 28, 2009 By

spiderLast week I posted a video of Caffeine getting her ears cleaned. When we are trying to change a dog’s behavior our can can be broadly classified into two types of activities: training and behavior modification.

Training is concerned with what dogs do. We can train a dog to do something he already knows how to do, such as sitting on cue. We can train a dog to do something new, such as come when called. We can also train a dog to stop doing something we don’t want, such as jump on visitors.

Behavior modification deals with how dogs react to situations, places, people or other dogs. With behavior modification we change emotional responses.

Of course, this division may look neat “on paper” (or it may not) but in reality the two activities have a lot of overlap. Many unwanted behaviors are the result of emotional responses and changing emotional responses frequently requires training new behaviors, but a complete awareness of the two approaches is key to solving many problems.

Negative emotional responses are frequently the result of inadequate or improper socialization. There is a lot of information about the need for proper puppy socialization available on the Internet. Liz Catalano has some great information here. Dr. Ian Dunbar discusses it extensively in his books and here. I mentioned it a few weeks ago here.

They can also be the result of unpleasant experiences. Dogs, like us, are constantly creating associations. A bout of car sickness can create fear and anxiety around cars. Being attacked by another dog can create a fear of dogs. Being abused by a person can create problems with people. How general or specific depends largely on the individual dogs. For some dogs a bad experience with a brown dog results in a problem with brown dogs. For others the association might be with all dogs.

While knowing the “why” behind our dog’s negative emotional responses can be very satisfying, it’s not nearly as useful as knowing the “what.” Behavior modification consists of identifying the stimulus that elicits the emotional responses and then pairing that stimulus, which is presented in gradually increasing intensity, with something pleasant. It literally changes the dog’s opinion about the situation.

An important aspect of this process is the gradually increasing intensity. When discussing behavior modification, behavior people frequently use the term “over threshold.” When a dog is “over threshold” she is displaying the intense fearful or aggressive behavior we want to change. When this state is reached learning has ceased. It’s time to stop the process, remove the dog from the situation, and either start over or quit for the day.

For example, consider a dog that reacts negatively to having her nails clipped. She reacts badly as soon as she sees the clippers. This may be because she had them cut too short once or just because she doesn’t like have her feet handled. It doesn’t matter

Here’s a condensed procedure:

  1. Take out the clippers. Give dog a yummy treat.
  2. Repeat for a few days.
  3. Take out clippers. Place them on coffee table. Give dog a yummy treat.
  4. Repeat for a few days.
  5. Take out clippers. Place them on coffee table. Pick up. Move slightly toward dog. Give dog a yummy treat.
  6. Repeat for a few days.
  7. Take out clippers. Place them on coffee table. Pick up. Move slightly toward dog. Touch one paw. Give dog a yummy treat.
  8. Repeat for a few days.
  9. Take out clippers. Place them on coffee table. Pick up. Move slightly toward dog. Place clipper on nail. Give dog a yummy treat.
  10. Repeat for a few days.
  11. Take out clippers. Place them on coffee table. Pick up. Move slightly toward dog. Clip one nail. Give dog a yummy treat.
  12. Repeat for a few days.

And so forth. if at any point the dog reacted badly, it would be time to back up a step or two and continue until the response is completely gone again.

Does this sound like a long process? Good. It is. There are no 30 minute fixes, and punishment works on emotional responses about as effectively as hitting someone who is afraid of spiders until she agrees to kiss a tarantula.

Look here more training tips and tutorials. Click here if you are interested in home or group class training.

Help! My Dog is Crazy! Part 2: Play

September 21, 2009 By

Funny catchingIs your dog crazy? Is your dog making you crazy? Are you getting nipped? Jumped on? Are you seeing destructive chewing? Chances are at least part of your problem is excess energy.

Play is a wonderful tool for burning off some of that energy. Done right, play requires your dog to think and gives him a chance to exercise some of his built-in behaviors such as fetching, tracking and tugging. This is much more effective than a walk. Walks are not bad, and a chance to check out new or at least different places is good for your dog, but they are rarely enough exercise. Mixing in some play can do wonders to “take the edge off.”

I put together a video of some play with my three dogs. It’s on the long side, but I think it’s worth watching all the way through. Watch for:

  • My throws are high and usually in the bushes. The extra work of finding the ball is part of the game!
  • I mix in some obedience, but I’m trying to have fun too and cut them some slack.
  • Each dog is different. I adjust the play to their style and their level.




Buddha wants to be chased and would rather drop the ball in front of me. (A year ago he wouldn’t play with a ball…we’re getting there.) Gage can’t run too much because of his arthritis and thinks that me walking circles around him is the best game in the world. Caffeine wants to do everything (at once if possible.)

Look here more training tips and tutorials. Click here if you are interested in home or group class training.