Dominant dogs?

ORIGINAL: lostcoyote

What makes a dog dominant?

it's state of mind - it's social status in relation to you, the owner - who runs the house? who goes out the door first and leads you on a simple walk? who puts his or her paw on top of you? these are just some of the hundreds of cues as to who's really in charge.

 
This doesn't entirely make sense to me though.  My dog definitely likes to go out the door first, and does I'd say 50% of the time.  he likes to put his paw on my arm if I'm rubbing his belly while he's sitting, and lately when he joins me on the couch he'll put his paws and head on my legs or arm.  He also pulls often on walks (although we're working on that.) 
 
But I don't think he believes he's dominant at all.  He listens to me almost always.  When I feed him, he sits, I put the bowl down, he looks up at me and waits until I say "OK" then he eats.  He knows that my food is not fair game and doesn't even try it.  Wherever we are, if he's off leash he never strays far and constantly looks back to me (I assume to make sure all is well, and to make sure that the seemingly bottomless source of food does not escape.)  So, despite the fact that he does things that people say tend to signify dominance, I just don't think that they are.  Am I wrong?

ORIGINAL: pbarbato
So, despite the fact that he does things that people say tend to signify dominance, I just don't think that they are.  Am I wrong?

Thinking out loud...

I don't think you're wrong, pbarbato. I don't think dominance is a trait that is black and white. Probably every dog has a certain level of dominance. Even if it's a 1 on a scale from 1-10. And that, coupled with existing alpha structure is how each dog knows its place in the pack.

There may be a 1, a 3, a 5 and a 7 in a pack of 4. That's how I'd grade my dogs. Mia (the 1) will go out the door before me if I let her. She pulls on the leash if I let her. But she doesn't rebel or question me or the other dogs once she's corrected. Actually, Cara (the 5) is the same way with me. Not at all dominant. But she's clearly the alpha with the other dogs. She's the best behaved of my dogs. B'asia (the 7) is dominant, in my opinion, and I believe will eventually be the alpha of the dogs (and may test me from time to time). She's only been here for a few months and is only 6 months old, but her dominant tendencies are so strong, I think she will eventually come up against Cara and Cara will step into 2nd place.

It'll be interesting to see in a few months if my predictions come true.

But if a dog is displaying aggression OR dominance toward the human, using NILIF is the way to let them know, "I am the dominant one, not you." A dog with no behavior problems doesn't need the constant reminder of following you out the door like a more dominant dog would.

Brain fuzz...

What makes a dog dominant?

it's state of mind - it's social status in relation to you, the owner - who runs the house? who goes out the door first and leads you on a simple walk? who puts his or her paw on top of you? these are just some of the hundreds of cues as to who's really in charge. 
 

 
No no no. These are not signs of doggy dominance. A dog who puts his paw on you is a submissive dog-- he's BEGGING for attention. Dominant dogs don't go around asking for attention.  In my household it's the young energetic low-ranking dogs who want to go out the door first. And who "lead" on walks, at least they are physically in front. They check back often to make sure they are "leading" the higher-ranking dogs in the correct direction. 
Ignoring commands isn't a sign of dominance, it's a sign of undertraining. Pulling on leash is a normal dog behavior and has nothing to do with dominance either-- it's mostly related to the fact that humans just move so slowly.
 

When I think of "social status" in humans, I think of wealth, fame or royalty - meaning being born into an environment that allows for a level of freedom. As opposed to having an innate desire to attain leadership or "top dog" status, regardless of social status and regardless how he has to fight to get this status. The first doesn't apply to animals (I don't think). The second does. I'm not sure I'm being clear. ORIGINAL: FourIsCompany

Some dogs are born into an environment that allows more freedom and their behavior reflects this.  The dogs who make up my dogs' social group have been treated well their entire lifes, they also get lots of time out walking off-leash in
parks (one park in particular).  Their behavior reflects this.  They are confident in general and very relaxed in most settings.  In a lot of ways that is what socialstatus is, the ability to be relaxed and confident in familiar settings.  Dogs who have not been "spoiled" like this will not have the confidence to be relaxed in new settings and may act timid or uncertain.

I was able to identify 8 traits that have been with me all my life. And each person's set of traits is different. But what I'm getting around to is that SOME people have "leadership" as one of their traits. They're the ones who always made the rules in the school games - who the other children just naturally looked to for instruction and they grew up to be politicians or CEOs. Natural leader. Dominant trait.

What's even more interesting (to me and those who are still reading [] ) is that when one or more of these traits aren't getting fulfilled, that's when people have problems in life. That's when people "act out", feel depressed, feel "off" or out of balance. That's the theory, anyway. And I've found it to be true in my life. And it's great, because when I'm feeling out of whack, I can go down the list and see what's missing and work on getting it back in my life in a constructive way and I'm back on an even keel.

And I think this relates to dogs, too. If a natural leader isn't able to be the dominant dog in a pack (or at least dominant over SOMEbody in the pack) he's going to be "off", "act out" or otherwise be a pain. And when he comes up against a dog who's desire for leadership is stronger then his, they work it out and everybody's happy.

 
Once again, I think we need to make a distinction between "natural leadership" as in the one who makes the rules in school games which everyone else is happy to follow, and "dominance" as in the one who is willing to use force to make others follow his or her rules.
 
I don't know if a "natural leader" would have a problem with other "natural leaders" if neither was trying to force the issue.
 
I do have to admit that most of my experience has been with retrievers, who are notorious for not being concerned with hierarchy.  But if retrievers can demonstrate a kind of non-coersive leadership and pack structure, it can be done and a more force based dominance is not inevitable.

I think dominance is the dog's level of desire and willingness to use the necessary means to control the interaction with humans.
 
To me dominance and submission are all on a continuum with the dog too afraid to eat with a human in the room on one end of the scale and those with McConnell's hard cold eyes on the other end of the scale. Most of us will do best with dogs within one standard deviation of the center of this continuum in either direction, those with more experience and desire to accept challenges may do quite well with dogs within two standard deviations, and the remaining dogs present a safety problem in all cases.

Since this has gotten into a dog-dog dominance discussion I want to add some simple observations from a sighthound perspective.
 
Sighthounds are very easy to understand, with regards to dominance.  Outside, the dog that is faster, stronger, smarter is dominant.  Age is not always a determinant.  Young dogs seek higher social status by a myriad of subtle activities-that non-sighthounds rarely catch on to.  These activities could include taking and then giving of toys, bones or territory.  Racing.  Provoking another dog to react.  (Sighthounds are possibly the best dogs at this "game")  Engaging another dog in play, and then walking away from said dog as that dog finally gets all worked up.  Ignoring another dog.  Males and females will indulge in marking "wars."  Running and wrestling games. 
 
The taking of social status is often complete well before the higher status dog even knows what is happening.  Within the sighthounds though, these games and activities are fairly well known, and it's quite fun to see two dogs absolutely ignore each other and see which one breaks first.
 
And if humans think that holding eye contact is a sign of dominance, never try to stare down a PH.  They'll hold eye contact with a human all day long, as long as there's no fuzzy critters running around.

No no no. These are not signs of doggy dominance. A dog who puts his paw on you is a submissive dog-- he's BEGGING for attention. Dominant dogs don't go around asking for attention. In my household it's the young energetic low-ranking dogs who want to go out the door first. And who "lead" on walks, at least they are physically in front. They check back often to make sure they are "leading" the higher-ranking dogs in the correct direction.

Yes yes yes.... yes that we will have to agree to disagree here. k? []


having said that - our big girl, mandi does this - and i let her do it too. she has learned that by giving a paw, she's likely to get attention - so who is in control here? it's my opinion that the one in control at a given moment of time is the one who's exhibiting a dominant state of mind at that instant in time.

now here is what is funny with this.... ya know how two kids (A & B) put one hand on top of another hand alternating left A/right B/right A/left B... over and over again? well, if mandi is up on the bed with me and gives me her paw, i will put my arm on top of her paw. then she will pull out and put her paw bavk on top, then i will put my arm back on top.... all the giving her a chest scratch.

but nope, when the dog paws you and you reciprocate with affection, the dog's in control.

Yep, 'dominant' is definitely an overused and misunderstood concept in the human idea of the doggy world. We mean confidence. If we said condifent instead of dominant, we'd be getting a lot closer to understanding our doggy friends and why they misbehave sometimes.

ORIGINAL: lostcoyote

No no no. These are not signs of doggy dominance. A dog who puts his paw on you is a submissive dog-- he's BEGGING for attention. Dominant dogs don't go around asking for attention. In my household it's the young energetic low-ranking dogs who want to go out the door first. And who "lead" on walks, at least they are physically in front. They check back often to make sure they are "leading" the higher-ranking dogs in the correct direction.

Yes yes yes.... yes that we will have to agree to disagree here. k? []


having said that - our big girl, mandi does this - and i let her do it too. she has learned that by giving a paw, she's likely to get attention - so who is in control here? it's my opinion that the one in control at a given moment of time is the one who's exhibiting a dominant state of mind at that instant in time.

now here is what is funny with this.... ya know how two kids (A & B) put one hand on top of another hand alternating left A/right B/right A/left B... over and over again? well, if mandi is up on the bed with me and gives me her paw, i will put my arm on top of her paw. then she will pull out and put her paw bavk on top, then i will put my arm back on top.... all the giving her a chest scratch.

but nope, when the dog paws you and you reciprocate with affection, the dog's in control.

 
why is that control and not just communication?  My dog has learned that he's more likely to get the rubbing he wants if he lays his head on my lap than if he puts his paw on me.  So he does that.  I think it's just his way of saying "hey, you know that petting thing you do, I like it, and would like some of it now."  I think he's asking in the only way he knows how...he's not demanding.  I think it's just his way of talking to me (in the same way that pacing around like crazy and whining is telling me he needs to go to the bathroom IMMEDIATELY.)
 
as far as the paw on top of your hand, I don't think any dogs really like their paws constricted.

is controlling a dog also a form of communication with your dog?
 
body language

I think that what lostcoyote means is this:  Your dog is provoking a reaction. According to Dominance Theory and general pack behavior a dog that provokes the reaction is more dominant.  However this is specific to environment.  If you and your dog are engaged in play then action and reaction is not a sign of dominance, according to this theory.
 
What this theory doesn't take into account is that in  a Wolf Pack, the leader rarely seeks attention from the others.  The others bestow their attention upon the leader without provocation.
 
Another facet of this belief system is the "top dog" scenario.  "He who is highest (or on top) wins.
 
I don't agree with it, but I see where lostcoyote is coming from.

.:.
 
oops

I don't think I can say that a paw placed on the hand is ALWAYS control or ALWAYS "just asking". I think it's more subtle than that. It depends on the DOG whether he's demanding or asking. His intent is involved here. It depends on the relationship. Here I go again, getting all "woo-woo" but if a wag of a dog's tail can mean several different things, then a paw on it's owner can, too.

If a strange dog carefully placed his paw on your knee, would you know his intent?

If I'm petting a dog and another one comes up and smushes in between us, that's clearly demanding. That's trying to control the situation. If he instead comes up and sits and stares at me, he's asking. But the paw thing is too ambiguous to know if it's control or asking, in my opinion, of course.

Is controlling a dog a form of commuication? Yes, but I'm allowed to control him. I'm the top dawg.

ORIGINAL: lostcoyote

is controlling a dog also a form of communication with your dog?

body language

 
Yes.  But I don't think all communication is control.
 
cotton candy