Did You Dump the Dominance Theory?

I think you are underestimating the nature of dogs, and how they view a situation they are encountering or being brought into.
Delay in showing a dog who is in charge could prove fatal.

it's like he's just obeying because it's his training, and that's just what a dog is supposed to do--not because of any basic human/dog relationship we've got

That's an interesting point.
In Culture Clash, sorry to mention books again, the author says something like-conditioning changes behavior, behavior changes the attitude, attitude changes relationship (my memory on this book is getting rusty, but that's what I got out of her).

I don't subscribe to the old application of what some trainers (including a former instructor) interpreted and used as the Dominance Theory.

I don't subscribe to the concept that "dominance" always means aggression (often in a frustrated and angry manner) towards a dog with a "show 'em who's boss!" rather than a "follow the leader" attitude...all this does is indicate instability to a dog and/or says "alpha-wanna-be" not leadership.

I do not subscribe to those who misunderstand, misrepresent, or apply "kitten with a whip" emotional imagery to this word to stir up people's emotions (against their competition), in order to "sell" their training packages.

Dominance is just a word, subject to both misunderstanding and misapplication (as well as misinterpretation and misrepresentation). 

Reading through this thread makes this pretty clear.

If  you give a choice to the dog to decide, depending on the dog that could cause trouble, if you are like "hey i'm gonna be the dominant one here, what do you think?" and you have a dominant dog in nature then the dog will choose not to follow you and would rather being him the dominant one; of course with submissive dogs is different, they will rather you being the dominant one but they will feel you are not as good at it as someone that has an attitude like " i AM going to set the boundries, discipline and limitations" (and i am NOT saying that is while you look into his eyes like a bully) if you dont do it that way they will feel you are not confident enough or will protect the pack as someone that steps right up to the plate
 
I am not saying either that the dog is having an evil plan to conquer the household while rubbing his front paws and having a couple horns coming out of his head if you dont show you are dominant one but is in their genes that the most confident member should be the dominant one for the good being of the pack and sometimes thhey could feel they are more confident than you

And..... round and round we go......

Again, not singing off same hymn sheet.  You can emanate an air of confidence and authority which the dog picks up on without having to be in anyway forceful about it.  You can give the dog a choice and if you are confident, calm and consistent the dog will choose to follow you, again with no need for force on the part of the handler.  Ever seen a multi dog household where the littlest, frailest, elderliest little pooch manages to come out top over a bunch of rotties and GSDs, without ever resorting to violence, aggression or force but always appearing to get their own darned way without actually doing anything about it?  Us humans can learn a lot from that little pooch.

ORIGINAL: snownose

I think you are underestimating the nature of dogs, and how they view a situation they are encountering or being brought into.
Delay in showing a dog who is in charge could prove fatal.

I'm not talking about delaying showing a dog who's in charge--I'm talking about the method you use to show the dog who's in charge. Basically I mean it ought to be a method that allows the dog to accept you as leader because he thinks you're a fit leader, not because you forced him to accept you as leader. If anything, coercion takes longer to convince him you're alpha, even though you might get results sooner from an intimidated dog than a trusting one.

I agree with the guy who says we're basically not agreeing on terms... coming at the thing from different angles and not quite understanding each others' arguments. We should have a "dominance" disambiguation page, like they have on Wikipedia.

[edit] Dog training rarely "proves fatal", and there's very few of us who'd still have dogs if it did, right? If your life's in danger, use whatever method you have to. I'm talking about the usual dog situations here, not some psychopathic canine who's out to murder you.

In nature, becoming the pack's leader is not done through force. However, the rules that apply to animals in a wild certainly don't apply to us and our dogs.

Dispersal is one of the ways wolves (and stray dogs) solve their status problems - if two dogs in a pack are too similar and competitive over their status, one would be chased out or would leave voluntarily to from its pack, or a pack splits up. This of course is not possible for us to do.

It's in the dogs' nature to have a leader, or 'a dominant one', or maybe we just need another label to keep everyone happy, since the term is so loaded with negative connotations.

That's why it's important for people to pick the right dogs for them - some are naturally more confident with dogs than others, these people can lead a pack of energetic, alpha wanna-bees. Others, like me, don't have that... or maybe it's something that we can develop?
You can approach a stick from both ends: some trainers say: "Bring out that leader inside of you", others: "Click-and-treat", etc. It's the same result that we all want from our dogs - a well behaved, happy dog.

In any case, it's past applications of the dominance theory that have earned it a bad name.

I agree that 99% of the times you dont need to be forcefull, the other 1% are dominant aggressive dogs even with the owners, if you dont do something about it (like a professional only doing an "alpha roll") will result with the dog PTS
 
But i am sure than the rest only need the right attitude with the right techiques []

Yeah, person-dog matching is important. A person like me--introverted, quiet, intellectual--would be very badly matched with someone like my housemate's GSD-mix, Bear--energetic, impulsive, quick, enthusiastic, and yes, tending to be dominant! But then, someone who'd love Bear would probably totally overwhelm the sort of dog that'd be a good match for me--a laid back, not overly outgoing sort of dog. (Mercy's more "anxious and clingy", but she's cool anyway. She can't help being a pound dog.)

Training techniques and interaction has to change from dog to dog, anyway... I mean, in our household we have Mercy's beagle-nose and Bear's ADDog-ness, and Simon, who is just clueless sometimes.. all of those make the dogs different. Maybe what's needed most in an owner, whatever strategy you use, is a willingness to understand the individual dog, and be flexible to its needs?

I always wonder what the people understand by "force"? what level of "force" is consider bad for the dog?

ORIGINAL: Callista

ORIGINAL: snownose

I think you are underestimating the nature of dogs, and how they view a situation they are encountering or being brought into.
Delay in showing a dog who is in charge could prove fatal.

I'm not talking about delaying showing a dog who's in charge--I'm talking about the method you use to show the dog who's in charge. Basically I mean it ought to be a method that allows the dog to accept you as leader because he thinks you're a fit leader, not because you forced him to accept you as leader. If anything, coercion takes longer to convince him you're alpha, even though you might get results sooner from an intimidated dog than a trusting one.

 
Wonderfully put

 

ORIGINAL: Callista

[edit] Dog training rarely "proves fatal", and there's very few of us who'd still have dogs if it did, right? If your life's in danger, use whatever method you have to. I'm talking about the usual dog situations here, not some psychopathic canine who's out to murder you.

 
Very good point

ORIGINAL: espencer

I agree that 99% of the times you dont need to be forcefull, the other 1% are dominant aggressive dogs even with the owners, if you dont do something about it (like a professional only doing an "alpha roll") will result with the dog PTS

But i am sure than the rest only need the right attitude with the right techiques []

Disagree.  That one percent needs a handler more skilled at displaying "leadership" as in my post above.  To anyone that thinks force is OK:  Personally, I think that if you feel you need to resort to using force, you have failed in a very fundamental way, even if the dog falls into line.  To anyone who uses force as a matter of course and believes it the best way forward rather than a last resort and unpreferable....well then if there is such a thing as reincarnation I hope like heck I am not reincarnated as one of your dogs.

In addition the theory behind the alpha roll is outdated and flawed.  I believe it is never necessary and no one should use it.

Right there with you, Chuffy. I think using force leads to losing tempers/losing control and after having been through an experience where my own dog was injured by a trainer, I know it's not for me.

I'm not talking about delaying showing a dog who's in charge--I'm talking about the method you use to show the dog who's in charge. Basically I mean it ought to be a method that allows the dog to accept you as leader because he thinks you're a fit leader, not because you forced him to accept you as leader. If anything, coercion takes longer to convince him you're alpha, even though you might get results sooner from an intimidated dog than a trusting one.

I agree with the guy who says we're basically not agreeing on terms... coming at the thing from different angles and not quite understanding each others' arguments. We should have a "dominance" disambiguation page, like they have on Wikipedia.

[edit] Dog training rarely "proves fatal", and there's very few of us who'd still have dogs if it did, right? If your life's in danger, use whatever method you have to. I'm talking about the usual dog situations here, not some psychopathic canine who's out to murder you.

 
 
I think you misunderstood.
I was referring to bringing a dog into a household. I am in charge of all things, food, water, in general their dog world without force, I said this many times.
I rescue on top of owning dogs, I wasn't talking about me getting attacked, I was referring to the rescue being attacked, a clicker or a treat will not stop a full blown attack between fighting males.
I have to resonate enough leadership that my dogs understand not to try anything funny.

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

Disagree.  That one percent needs a handler more skilled at displaying "leadership" as in my post above.  To anyone that thinks force is OK:  Personally, I think that if you feel you need to resort to using force, you have failed in a very fundamental way, even if the dog falls into line.  To anyone who uses force as a matter of course and believes it the best way forward rather than a last resort and unpreferable....well then if there is such a thing as reincarnation I hope like heck I am not reincarnated as one of your dogs.

In addition the theory behind the alpha roll is outdated and flawed.  I believe it is never necessary and no one should use it.

Dont worry if you re encarnate as one of my dogs i would not cause any pain to you, for sure i wont apply any "alpha rolling" since i would know how to handle you from the neginning to avoid getting to that point []

Now "alpha rolling" is the absolutlely last resort ever for a dog that might attack his owner, and yes, to get to that point is because like you said the owner failed in a fundamental way, thats for owners that had any idea or read any book ever about how to interact with a dog, they called a professional and of course thay dont have time of trying something else because the dog could attack in any minute

Again, to be clear:

Alpha roll = l-a-s-t  resort, it is that or put the dog to sleep

Chuffy,
 I've read several of your posts I'm curious, yes off topic, I'll appologize in advance. Please can you tell me what breed of dog you own and what expericence you have with dog aggressive or same sex dog aggressive dogs and how you would handle them in relationship to the "Dominance issue"