BehavioRx Case of the Month
for November 1996
The following case from my files is true; only the names have been changed to protect the privacy of the clients. I have avoided technical behavioral terms and standard clinical data jargon in order to communicate effectively with pet owners generally. If any of my professional colleagues are interested in technical detail or background, they are invited to e-mail me specific questions, which will be answered ASAP.
THE "BETA DOG SYNDROME" IN DOMINANCE AGGRESSION
Statement of the Problem
Aggression toward owners by a dog spanning 20 months. The dog was a 2 year old neutered,
male, German Shepherd/Collie mix.
History
The owners (husband, wife, 12 year old son, 15 year old daughter) obtained the dog at 8
weeks of age through a newspaper ad. It had always been in robust health, requiring only
routine veterinary treatment. In the initial interview the owners described the dog's
puppy behavior as "outgoing, but nippy and stubborn," i.e. the pup persistently
'stole' the owners' shoes, socks, tissues, etc., and refused to give them up. The husband
had taken the lead in disciplining the puppy, using traditional housetraining punishments
of holding the animal's nose to its fecal matter or urine, then slapping it smartly across
the snout and carrying it out to the back yard and leaving it there. The dog was
fastidious in the house at approximately 5 months of age. The husband also used harsh
physical punishment whenever the puppy grabbed personal or household items, which elicit
submissive yips and screams. The puppy stopped stealing when the husband's presence, but
persisted during his absence. Other family members pulled articles from its mouth when
they could catch him. At about 3 months of age the puppy began to growl at the wife, son
and daughter when they attempted to get articles. By 5 months, the wife, son and daughter
gave up retrieving articles when the husband was away because, they said, the dog had
actually bitten them. The skin was not broken, only bruised. However, when the husband was
present, the dog would give up articles to the wife and children. The husband explained
that he had "whipped" the dog severely when he first heard it growling at his
wife, which he "thought would put an end" to the aggression. Growling at the
wife and the children persisted when he was not present. The husband had taken the dog
successfully through a basic obedience program at 6 months.
At approximately 18 months of age the dog began guarding the husband's shoes in the master
bedroom closet when the wife attempted to get her shoes and clothing. By 2 years this
behavior, along with nipping at several visitors, motivated the owners to take the dog to
the veterinarian for examination and guidance.
Physical Examination Findings
The dog had always been submissive and manageable during examination and treatment. The
referring veterinarian found no clinical signs of health problems and the case was
referred for behavioral counseling.
Diagnosis
Dominance aggression was diagnosed. The husband had acquired the equivalent of the canine
alpha though his harsh physical punishment during housetraining and through the juvenile
period to adulthood. The wife and children's passive role in discipline created a
human/dog environmental hierarchy somewhat akin to the wolf, with the dog in the beta,
subordinate male position .(1) However, unlike the well-integrated social structure canine
packs, the human family, wherein the alpha male left the pack for extended periods almost
daily, created a dominance vacuum which was assumed by the beta male. Further, the dog had
only one behavioral model to which to relate allelomimetically when subordinates
challenged its status, that of dominance aggression. I have seen so many such dominance
aggression cases that I have dubbed them the "beta-dog syndrome" (2). It is not
restricted to males. We also see cases involving physically dominant mothers and both
female and male dogs. In many cases the dog is also aggressive to strangers. During our
preliminary interview the dog approached me with hackles raised, barking furiously, even
though I was seated and totally non-threatening.
Treatment
The owners were advised of the etiology of the problem without stimulating defensive
feelings or guilt, especially in the husband. By relating the dog's behavioral development
from a canine social perspective, the family was able to relate the following principles
to both the cause and the correction of the problem: Allelomimetic behavior, i.e. the
husband's punishment; the difference between physical dominance and social leadership (3);
and the dog's need to function, to have a role to play in the group (1).
Initial therapy required all family members to demonstrate to the dog that marked changes
were underway in its social environment. Everyone was instructed to ignore the dog for up
to 4 days. The only attention afforded was to feed and let him and out of the house. All
situations which had in the past stimulated confrontations were to be avoided. A rack was
obtained for the husband's shoes to avoid the dog's lying on them. Even eye contact was to
be avoided. They were to put 'social distance' between themselves and the dog. This
"cold shoulder routine," (2) is familiar to most family members and not
difficult to carry out. For example, when the dog approached and pawed at them, or sat on
the floor beside them as they sat, leaning on their legs, they were to ignore him, get up
and leave the room. As they moved about the house, if the dog rushed to go ahead of them,
they were to reverse their direction without speaking. If, on opening the door to the back
yard, the dog rushed through ahead of them, they were to shut the door and stay inside
until the dog showed signs of wanting to be let into the house. This was to be repeated
until the dog no longer rushed through the door and waited for the owners to proceed. All
of these common canine dominance and leadership behaviors were manifest in this dog. A
definite change in the dog's attitude and behavior was apparent by the 3rd day, when he
started following, rather than leading them around the house; approaching them hesitantly
rather than boldly; and waiting for them waiting at doors. He stopped stealing and
guarding toys by the 6th day. The owners all agreed that this non-confrontational approach
was appealing, since they felt safe from the risk of getting bitten. The second phase of
the program was then integrated.
The dog was then put on the "learn-to-earn praise and petting" program (3,4),
often dubbed "No-free-lunch," and more recently presented as "Nothing in
Life is Free." (5) Family members were to acknowledge the dog's approaches for
attention by telling him pleasantly, "Sam, Sit," a command it new well, and say
"Good dog" as he started into the sit, pet briefly (3-5 seconds) on the throat
and chest while he was sitting, remain still for about 10 seconds, then release the dog by
telling him "OK" with another "Good Dog" following the release. The
length of time for the "Sit" was to be extended until Sam remained for up to 30
seconds. If he refused to sit or broke his position, the owners were instructed not to
press the issue, but to turn away and ignore him, awaiting the next approach. Many dogs
refuse to obey when they become aware of being put in a subordinate position. Sam did not.
This routine was also applied to feedings, getting into and out of the car. All prolonged
petting w
as to be strictly avoided, a habit the husband had acquired during the evenings. The dog
was responding positively and consistently by the third week of program, at which time the
owners were advised to start short (20 minutes, maximum) group obedience sessions in the
house 3 times weekly, practicing Come, Sit, Stay, and OK as a release. The owners rotated
the order in which they handled the dog. By the 5th week Sam was responding almost equally
well to all family members.
During the 6th and final meeting all owners demonstrated and expressed confidence in their
interactions with Sam. They gave the dog formerly 'guarded' chew toys which he dropped
when told to Give. Sam had even 'warmed up' to me by week 4 and fetched a ball, giving it
up willingly for the ensuing toss. He would Sit when I told him and seemed to enjoy being
petted as a reward. The family said they were keeping him indoors when visitors arrived
and that his demeanor was friendly.
Follow-up
6 months post-program the husband reported that Sam was still behaving well.
References
1. Allen, DL. Wolves of Minong, Houghton Mifflin, 1979, p. 263, with associated
references.)
2. Campbell, WE. Behavior Problems in Dogs, 2nd edition. Amer. Vet. Pubs, Goleta, CA 1992.
202-204.
3. Campbell, WE. Modern Vet. Practice, Santa Barbara, CA. Social Attraction, the Ultimate
Tool for Canine Behavior Control, May, 1973. ibid August, 1973, p.60 Behavior at the
University Level, re. Voith,VL.DVM clarification.
4. Ibid. and Behavior Problems in Dogs, 1st edition, MVP, 1975.
5 Voith, VL. AVMA Small Animal Behavior Session, 1992, Boston, MA.
Previous Cases
October 1996
Return to Case of the Month
Return to the BehavioRx Home Page