Click on the cover above
to go to this book
at Amazon.co.uk
Click on the cover above
to go to this book
at Amazon.co.uk |
Think Dog
Cassell Reference
ISBN 0304361720
Why Does My Dog?
Souvenir Press ISBN 0 285 63481 X
Both 'Think Dog' and 'Why Does My Dog' came out in the early 1990s, and are
a little dated, but they are still wonderful books that should be read by all
dog owners! Why? In what ways are they dated, and why should we bother to read
stuff that is out-of-date?
Fisher's work has been hugely influential among trainers and behaviourists
in the UK. 'Think Dog' represented a move away from an approach to behaviour
and training which was based more on corrections, and towards a more reward-based
approach relying on understanding what dogs appear to be 'hard-wired' to do.
Trainers and authors such as Barbara Woodhouse had stressed showing the dog
who was boss, using what most trainers in the UK today see as unnecessarily
harsh methods. Barbara Woodhouse herself was more humane than many trainers
around at that time - she developed her ideas when children were routinely smacked,
and physical corrections for dogs were seen as normal. Fisher's great gift to
dog owners and trainers was to show how dogs could be trained in a way that
was enjoyable to dogs and owners, and could be more effective than traditional
methods.
Fisher was a practical man, rather than an academic. His lack of a conventional
academic background was a strength, since he was able to 'marry' different academic
disciplines -ethology and behavioural psychology - and blend this with his vast
practical experience of training dogs and dealing with doggie problems, in a
way that would not have been possible had he followed a more conventional career.
Fisher took from ethology the notion that dogs behave in certain ways because
they are pack animals, and from behaviourism the notion that reward-based methods
are more effective than methods based on punishment. This allowed him to develop
a non-confrontational view of training, while still stressing that owners should
ensure that their dogs saw them as the boss. His view was that other problems
would resolve themselves if the human's position as leader was made clear to
the dog, by humans behaving in ways that paralleled the behaviour of alpha wolves,
who are leaders of their packs. In 'Think Dog', owners were told to take precedence
when going through doors, and ensure that they were able to control strategic
points in the house. Dogs were meant to stay on the low ground, the floor, for
example, while humans were meant to occupy the high ground, on the furniture,
for example. Humans were also meant to eat first, if only a token biscuit, and
to sit in the dog's basket, to show they had the right to occupy his den.
Some people who are well up in psychology will grumble that Fisher got his
definitions of positive and negative reinforcement wrong in his early works
like 'Think Dog' and 'Why Does My Dog'. Fisher didn't start out with complex
theories, he tried to find out what worked, and then tried to describe it in
theoretical terms. He was innovative without knowing all the jargon. If you
want to learn theory to pass exams, try 'How Dogs Learn' from Burch and Bailey.
If you want to understand dogs, read 'Think Dog' and 'Why Does My Dog'!
Fisher stressed that punishment, which he tended to call 'negative reinforcement'
could have unpredictable results. For example, if you do something your dog
doesn't like when he lunges and barks at another dog, it may simply convince
your dog that he's right to lunge and bark. He argued that it can be more effective
to reward a dog for good behaviour, like paying attention to you, and doing
a nice sit in the presence of temptations, than to berate him for bad behaviour.
Fisher also stressed safety first, and this meant avoiding confrontations. It's
safer not to allow a dog access to a disputed area in the first place than to
try an alpha roll to show him he has to obey - especially if he is a large rottie
giving a warning growl. The move away from physical corrections in 'Think Dog'
and 'Why Does My Dog' could also help owners tackle aggression problems without
the risk being bitten. Physical corrections used in not-sensible ways, can be
dangerous.
This idea of humans showing dogs they were pack leaders went hand in hand with
the idea that some dogs were naturally 'dominant', so had to learn their place.
Other dogs were classed as submissive, and could be allowed privileges to adjust
their rank upwards, and increase their confidence.
Meanwhile, during the 1990s, ethologists were revising their views of how wolves
related to each other, and how packs worked. The Coppingers' book 'Dogs', and
James Serpell's 'The Domestic Dog' are two key works for people interested in
dog behaviour in that they have helped trainers and behaviourists reassess views
of what it means to be a pack leader, and what is meant by a 'dominant' dog.
Firstly, there has been a reassessment of the model of strict hierarchies in
wolf society, and the usefulness of this as a prescription for dog owners. Wolves
in the wild, as opposed to captive wolves, are now seen as less hierarchical
than was previously thought. The Coppingers also believe that wolves and dogs
may have descended from common ancestors, rather than dogs having descended
from wolves. This is a controversial view, and some dogs (like spitzes) are
obviously more wolf-like than others (like King Charles Cavaliers). Furthermore,
feral dogs have a different sort of pack structure from wolves. This may be
simply because they live in a different environment, or because of inherent
differences between dogs and wolves. Domestic dogs can have very fluid pack
structures, with who defers to whom being very context-specific, especially
if there is a mix of breeds living together in a household. The border collie
may always win when two dogs are competing for a ball, for example, but the
Lab gets to the food first, or the little dog usually wins in competition for
access to the owner's lap, while the big dog gets to be first out of the door.
Whatever the reason, dog society clearly doesn't always follow simplistic fixed
rules, as described in early 1990s descriptions of packs.
Secondly, it's also clear that dogs don't attach the same significance to our
actions that they'd attach to actions performed by another dog. Just as we wouldn't
assume that a dog looking at a newspaper is reading the paper, a dog seeing
us eating a digestive before giving him food doesn't necessarily think 'Ah,
my leader having first bite of the kill'.
Thirdly, much of what was previously seen as 'dominant' behaviour is now more
often regarded as something that dogs tend to do, unless taught otherwise. Most
untrained dogs will playbite, jump up, and try to eat food off their owner's
plate. Many dogs may therefore be diagnosed as 'dominant' when the owner has
simply not trained them, or has rewarded them for bad behaviour. Dogs may also
be 'pushy' in ways that are linked to what breeds are designed to do. Collies
tend to nag their owners for ball games, and they are doing what collies are
hardwired to do. Most collies will also obey an 'all gone' or similar command,
which means 'Go away, I am not going to throw any balls for you'. 'Think Dog'
and 'Why Does My Dog' already stressed the 'hardwired' explanation of many 'behavioural
problems', but tended to put more stress on dominance than Fisher's later work.
Fourthly, 'dominance' describes one side of a relationship, so any particular
dog may be 'dominant' with one particular human, or dog, and submissive with
another. Just describing a dog as 'dominant' then doesn't tell us much about
that particular dog.
John Fisher himself rethought much of his position on dominance and humans
as pack leaders, after meeting Raymond Coppinger, shortly before Fisher died.
This reassessment is evident from 'Diary of a Dotty Dog Doctor', where Fisher
reviews one of his earlier cases. The case involved a boxer that was breast
fed by the wife and growling at the husband! Fisher notes in 'Diary' that 'resource
guarding' is perhaps a more useful explanation for the dog's behaviour than
his earlier view that the dog wanted to be the alpha. Dogs may see owners as
a resource, and want to guard their access to the resource, which helps explain
why some dogs are only aggressive when their owners are present. (One solution
is for owners to absent themselves as soon as the aggression starts, so there
is no resource to guard.) 'Diary of a Dotty Dog Doctor' is very funny, and illuminating,
but is much more a collection of anecdotes, and much less thought out than either
'Think Dog' or 'Why Does My Dog', so it's well worth reading Fisher's early
work for a full understanding of how he saw dogs.
Fisher systematically reviewed his cases of 'canine dominance' after his meeting
with Coppinger, to find out what was happening, and why. Owners had generally
found that 'rank reduction' techniques had some beneficial effect, but not always,
and it was not always the effect that they expected. Sometimes dogs became depressed.
They had expected nice things, like being able to snuggle on the sofa next to
their owners, and had these nice things taken away, which was a form of punishment.
The very detailed prescriptions for dealing with canine behaviour problems were
reassessed, and today it is no longer seen as necessary for owners to eat biscuits
before their dogs, and curl up in the dog's basket! More emphasis is now placed
on being able to 'read' dogs and understand canine body language, to communicate
with them more effectively, and on dealing with issues like resource guarding.
Ideas about 'dominance' are linked to the idea of humans as pack leaders, and
both have changed in meaning as views on dog behaviour have changed. It is clear
that some dogs are 'pushier' than others, both in terms of how obedient they
are, and whether they will give way when there is a dispute over resources.
Some breeds have a disproportionate share of these 'pushy' characters. Spitz
dogs are notorious for doing what they want, and do not have the same desire
to please their owners that, say, collies or retrievers have. Fisher was a spitz
owner, and was well aware of this - and that being obedient doesn't necessarily
mean that a dog is intelligent! There are also dogs that will pick fights because
they see fighting as fun, either through training or disposition. The notion
of 'dominance' can't be thrown out of the window, but today there's more of
an effort to define 'dominance' when the term is used. There is also some recognition
that it's not always a 'bad thing'. A dog who is truly dominant doesn't need
to make threat displays, and can be very tolerant. 'Dominance' doesn't mean
the same as 'aggression', then, and it's not necessarily the dominant animal
that causes problems, it may be the animal that is trying to be dominant, and
uses inappropriate levels of force due to lack of confidence or experience.
This is more likely to be the case with younger dogs moving into adulthood,
and testing their limits.
There's another reason too, why the idea of the human as pack leader is still
useful. Dogs can't survive well without humans. Feral dogs don't live as long
as domestic pets, and if our dogs aren't well supervised and controlled, they
have a high risk of dying young. Furthermore, we don't want them to bite us,
or our children, or try to savage passing dogs. We have no choice but to take
on the role of leader, telling the dog what the rules are.
The view of the human as leader is less rigid today, however, than it once
was. Leaders don't just say 'no', they also protect their followers from harm,
and initiate fun activities, which means working out what motivates individual
dogs. Leaders also try to communicate with their followers, listening as well
as giving orders. This means making an effort to understand canine language,
and what dogs are feeling - far easier with some breeds than others, and much
easier with breeds one knows well, since body language and vocalizations vary
somewhat from one breed to another. John Fisher stressed the importance of communicating
with dogs, in his early works, as well as his later writings. He stressed that
owners should try to see the world from a dog's point of view, and should try
to 'Think Dog' - hence the title of his key work.
John Fisher, then, is well worth reading because he was one of those rare people
able to combine the theoretical and practical, and make his ideas understandable
to ordinary people. He was also open to new ideas, and was constantly developing
and reassessing his views and techniques. His intellectual honesty, humanity,
and sense of humour come through very clearly in all his works. He died before
he could revise 'Think Dog' and 'Why Does My Dog', but even without revisions
they are a very valuable legacy for anyone who cares about dogs.
AL 2003 |
