Canid Studies

Here's one!

In the journal of applied animal welfare science. Hopefully the link works...

A Fresh Look at the Wolf-Pack Theory of Companion-Animal Dog Social Behavior
2004 Vol. 7, no.4 pgs 279-285.

[linkhttp://www.leaonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327604jaws0704_7]http://www.leaonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327604jaws0704_7[/link]

A popular perspective on the social behavior of dogs in multiple-dog households sees the dogs' behavior as reflecting the sociobiological laws of the rigidly structured dominance hierarchy that has been described for wolf packs. This view suggests that aggression problems among dogs are natural expressions of conflict that arise whenever dominance status is in contention. One recommended solution has been for the owner to endorse and enforce a particular dominance hierarchy because, on the wolf pack model, aggression is minimized when the structure of the hierarchy is clear, strong, and stable. This article questions the validity of this perspective on 2 principal grounds. First, because it does not seem to occur in the wild, this article suggests the strong dominance hierarchy that has been described for wolves may be a by-product of captivity. If true, it implies that social behavior—even in wolves—may be a product more of environmental circumstances and contingencies than an instinctive directive. Second, because feral dogs do not exhibit the classic wolf-pack structure, the validity of the canid, social dominance hierarchy again comes into question. This article suggests that behavioral learning theory offers another perspective regarding the behavior of dogs and wolves in the wild or in captivity and offers an effective intervention for aggression problems.

Just realised that one didnt have actual wolves. Here's one that compares attachment in handreared wolves and puppies. I'm not sure how to attach the actual file, but if anyone wants the full article I should be able to e-mail it to them.

Attachment to humans: a comparative study on hand-reared wolves and differently socialized dog puppies,
J Topal, M Gacsi, VZ MiklosiA, E Kubinyi, V Csanyi
in Animal Behaviour 2005, vol 70, p1367

Using the Strange Situation Test originally developed for testing the mother–infant relationship in humans,
we compared the attachment behaviour of extensively socialized (hand-reared) dog, Canis familiaris,
and wolf, Canis lupus, puppies towards their human caregiver with that of pet dog puppies of the same age.
The experiment was designed to study whether (1) dog puppies as young as 16 weeks show attachment to
a human caregiver, (2) extensive socialization by human caregivers affects attachment behaviour of dog
puppies and (3) evolutionary changes (in the form of species-specific differences between wolf and dog
pups) affect the emergence of dog–human attachment. We found a characteristic selective responsiveness
to the owner in young dogs, similar to that observed in adults. This finding supports the view that puppies
show patterns of attachment towards their owners. Extensive socialization had only a minor effect on the
attachment behaviour in dog puppies, as the behaviour of pet dogs and hand-reared dogs was basically
similar. However, we found a significant species-specific difference between wolves and dogs: both extensively
socialized and pet dog puppies were more responsive to the owner than to an unfamiliar human
participant, whereas extensively socialized wolves were not. Behavioural differences could be best explained
by assuming that selective processes took place in the course of domestication (genetic changes)
that are related to the attachment system of the dog

That's an excellent start. It would be interesting to note how they quantified the differences in dog and wolf behavior. As well as the other report, such as the importance of rank and is it a result of captivity. In that case, would it be more important to dogs, or has tameness counteracted in problems with being in captivity? Also what would be neato is how wolves learn. Is it entirely by correction, or is there a motivating or rewarding factor for them in learning?
 
ETA:
 
I've seen some of the documentaries of wolves tracked in the wild. And they do fight. If we are to ignore the rank theory, why then, are they fighting?  We've all seen dogs fight. Why are they fighting, if not about rank? Is it all about resource guarding. DPU maintains that he minimizes resource guarding by ensuring his dogs that everyone will have plenty of food.

I find the domestication timeline interesting in terms of its impact on behavior of present day dogs.  The distance between "in the wild" and "in the living room" is not as certain as once thought:
http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/sn_arc97/6_28_97/bob1.htm

Hm, unfortunately I dont actually have access to the full article, just the abstract, which I've put up Perhaps someone else in the forum might be able to get hold of it?

I just had a quick squiz at the other article, and they dont seem to address any dominance issues- just looking at attachment (or bonding) with humans in hand-reared wolf pups, hand-reared pups (reared by the same people) and pet puppies raised in homes. They then tested attachment by placing the pups in a room with/without a stranger, with or without the owner present and looked at the behaviours the puppies exhibited- exploration, passive behaviour, playing, standing by the door, physical contact with owner/stranger, following owner/stranger, and greeting owner/stranger.
 Basically, what they were looking for was whether these behaviours differed when the owner and stranger were present or absent.

These are a quick summary of the results- I've italicised the ones that seem to indicate differences in attachment between dogs and wolves:

• Overall, wolf puppies explored more than the dog puppies, but there was no (statistically) significant effect of owner/stranger presence
• Hand-reared dog puppies performed more passive behaviours (just sitting or lying down) than pet pups or wolf pups, but once again no significant effect of owner/stranger
• In terms of physical contact, wolf puppies spent more time in close bodily contact with their human partner than hand-reared dog puppies did, while the behaviour of the pet dog group was intermediate.
  
• Overall, more body contact was had with the owner than the stranger.
• Also hand reared pups (wolves and dogs), but not the pet dogs, spent more time in contact with the stranger than the owner.
• Both hand-reared and pet dogs, but not wolf puppies, tended to play more with their owner than with the stranger
• For following, wolves did not discriminate between humans, but both pet and hand-reared dog puppies were more ready to follow the owner than the stranger .
• Pet dogs stood at the door more than hand-reared dogs or wolves
• Hand-reared and pet dogs spent more time standing by the door than wolves when the owner was absent versus
  present.
• Both hand-reared and pet dogs greeted the owner more intensely than the stranger, wolves didnt.
• When the puppies were left alone, all of them (except for 1 wolf and 1 pet dog) followed the person leaving, and spent about half the time either exploring or standing by the door.
  

This is what the researchers concluded:
Based on our results, the most plausible hypothesis is that, besides a destabilizing selection (Belyaev 1979)
that resulted in the fragmentation of the well-organized behaviour repertoire of the wolf, dogs have evolved a capacity
for attachment to humans that is functionally analogous to that present in human infants.

Sorry this post ended up being so long- I thought I'd summarise the findings for those that were interested.

ORIGINAL: ron2
I've seen some of the documentaries of wolves tracked in the wild. And they do fight. If we are to ignore the rank theory, why then, are they fighting?

Part of the problem is research limitations. Researchers have a hard time getting close enough to wild wolves to make useful observations. That's why the work of that wolf guy, on National Geographic, presents interesting, if not unusual, data for scientists to evaluate, albeit those aren't wild wolves. The only other people who have consistent and reliable observation of wild wolf behaviors are the people who live on the land with them, indigenous peoples. But science writes their observations off as "anecdotal," and their data doesn't get serious evaluation.

certainly studying wolf and dog behavior is interesting, but I don't see how it impacts one's approach to dog training. Most of dog training involves teaching the dog to either stop doing normal dog behaviors (peeing on the rug, jumping up in greeting, pulling on leash, guarding food) or start doing abnormal dog behaviors (coming when called, down-stay).
I know my dogs have a loose pack heirarchy, but it doesn't seem to have anything to do with the humans of the household. It involves them and their relationships to each other.

ORIGINAL: mudpuppy
Most of dog training involves teaching the dog to either stop doing normal dog behaviors (peeing on the rug, jumping up in greeting, pulling on leash, guarding food) or start doing abnormal dog behaviors (coming when called, down-stay).

I have been thinking more and more about this lately. Fascinating. We ask them to control their implulses to fit into our lives, and they are agreeable enough to do so.

I do agree with mudpuppy. We wisely deal with what's in front of us and don't worry about whether it's "unnatural" to expect them to conform.

The key is remembering that we ARE asking something of them, and to always be offering something in return. I think that's where the pack structure theorists go wrong. Dogs don't submit (change their behavior from self-pleasing to that which pleases us) because they have a natural impulse to do so. They submit because they are made to do so, or because they were invited to find the right answer in return for something desireable.

Here's my contribution: the American branch of the Russian Silver Fox experiment. Several scholarly peer reviewed works, lots of charts and graphs, and some cool videos. Enjoy! http://cbsu.tc.cornell.edu/ccgr/behaviour/Index.htm

Good responses.
 
To answer Mud Puppy, some feel that training should mimick pack structure of the wolf.
 
Then again, as pointed out by someone else, it's hard to study a pack that is wild. Many studies were done on wolves in captivity, which may very well affect their dynamics. So, then exactly how do wolves interact with each and how does that affect our relationship with the dogs and how we should train them?
 
BIL and his family got a Blue Merle Aussie last winter and she lowers herself and licks up to their older dog, without provocation from the family, who has only done basic obedience training with treats. Why does the young Aussie submit to the old Spaniel? Is it age? Or something else?

ORIGINAL: ron2
Then again, as pointed out by someone else, it's hard to study a pack that is wild. Many studies were done on wolves in captivity, which may very well affect their dynamics.

Can we consider our dogs as living in captivity?

Why does the young Aussie submit to the old Spaniel? Is it age? Or something else?

She may not submit in every circumstance, or submit forever.  And, she might.  When I brought Sequoyah home (10 weeks old), she was met at the door by my then 16 year old Dancer, who promptly gave her a welcoming half-a&&ed snarl, as in "listen, you little squirt, I'm the queen bee here".  Actually, by that time, Dancer had long since been de-throned by Sioux, to whom Sequoyah also "submitted".  Sequoyah eventually became the boss dog among the females, yet she never stopped her deferential behavior with Dancer, until the day Dancer died.  Something about that opening salvo, perhaps...[]

Sequoyah eventually became the boss dog among the females, yet she never stopped her deferential behavior with Dancer, until the day Dancer died. Something about that opening salvo, perhaps...

 
So, there is something to order of rank. Is that sense of a hierarchy a condition of captivity or of domestication. Are wolves in the wild less rank-oriented? If so, how do we know? According to some, most packs are actually families with the parents as leaders and that there's actually little fighting and mostly submission moves, or maybe it's not submission but just play where daddy dog always gets the superior position.
 
I once saw a documentary on wolves in a european mountain range. They did fight and the lead wolf would constantly put in their place anyone who tried to eat out of order. And that involved a fight with a pin, more than once.
 
Or, as Dunbar thinks, is some of that aggressive behavior simply the rough play canids enjoy with each other that they can't express with humans. Or is it a gambit for leadership?
 
Growing up, I was usually a little taller and bigger than my classmates. This fact alone made me a target for fights. Why? Because if they could beat the big guy, they were "top dog," if you will pardon the expression. "King of the Sandbox," whatever. So, I started learning Kenpo Karate in 1977. A couple of instances where I fought back well reduced my being a target. Then it became known that fighting me wasn't really a good idea. Is the alpha thing a human thing? Are we projecting it onto canids or interpreting their behavior in a way that makes sense to us?

Sequoyah eventually became the boss dog among the females, yet she never stopped her deferential behavior with Dancer, until the day Dancer died. Something about that opening salvo, perhaps...

 
I had an interesting experience that was entirely comparable to the one above.  When he was a puppy, Xerxes was a dog park regular and this one GSD greeted Xerxes by mouthing Xerxes entire head.  To this day, though Xerxes will stand up to any challenge, he'll always keep a nice buffer space between himself and Remo, the GSD. 
 
By the same token, my folks have a 17.5yr old Peke who gets treated with alot of respect by X.