Flight versus fight

Chuffy

You are assuming that a growl is a hateful thing

Wrong, dogs dont hate, "or else" does not always mans hate (if ever), is also a warning (just like a growl)

Chuffy

So espence, let's assume you are correct and the dog know he is being punished for the "whole behaviour", not just the growl.  What is the point in punishing the dog for being afraid?  What doe sthat achieve?

That achieves that my dog does not end up in a fight with a dog or biting an annoyed kid, regardless, my dog should not be afraid of nothing because i want to think that he is been socialized enough to know that there is nothing to be afraid of, why? that can be answered in a few moments

Chuffy

Now I'm scared of spiders.  Say I make an open display of my fear (screaming) and I get "corrected" for it.  It's sure not going to change my feelings on spiders.... the fear will simply manifest itself some other way.   The growl is the dog's open display of fear.... get rid of it and the fear will manifest itself some other way.  In some cases this could be an all out attack to make the thing the dog is scared of go away.

Chuffy

espencer

NOW the correct example using human analogy would be, IF my kid is like "i'm going to punch you right on the face right now for pinching me!!"

If it has got to that point, you have already failed!  The child is bound to have given you MANY signals that he was extremely uncomfortable prior to that point, and losing his ability to cope.  You should have stepped in BEFORE that happened and diffused the situation.  Now, with children, a lecture can be given on how violence does not solve anything, and what the child should have done INSTEAD of threatening to punch the bully.

Thats exactly my point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If a dog gets aggressive or growls because of fear, etc. you have already failed!! You should have stepped in BEFORE that happened and diffused the situation. Thats EXACTLY what you have to do with dogs, step in for prevention. It all comes down to my ideology of pack leader, my dog is not afraid because he knows i'm there to protect him, my dog is not aggressive because he knows i will take care of the situation myself

If my dog is afraid then he does not trust me, he does not think that i have his back and he needs to take care of it himself. If you want to put it this way i am my dog's "bodyguard"; as his lader, dad, benevolent owner, whatever you want to call it, i'm there to diffuse the situation so he does not have to, and he does not have to be stressed

The whole "i dont want my dog to be bullied in the future and therefore he needs to take care of himself" ideology is applying human psychology to a dog all over again, the dog self esteem wont go down because he is not doing it himself just like a human could feel, other dogs wont call him "sissy" because he does not step up, he wont be afraid either and "hide" behind me like saying "dady please protect me", no, only a human mind thinks that way

Chuffy

A correction is completely inappropriate in this kind of "fight or flight" scenario, not least because you are punishing a dog who is already scared.

If i could work with a dog that its not mine and is scared i will still do it, if a dog starts growling to something which he is afraid of i will also redirect him, he is going from being afraid to fear aggression, the redirection will bring him down from the aggressive level, and then we can work on his fear, you cant work on it when he is aggressive at the same time; when you redirect the aggression you are just taking care of it, you are not touching the fear part of it, why? because when the dog is only fearful without being aggressive and you dont correct THEN the dog gets the point; you dont treat fear with corrections, for some people this is too complicated to understand because human anticipation, human fears, "what ifs" and "if i was in that position" assumptions, but dogs get it right away.

The common mistake is not to apply dog psychology to a dog and just think how would you feel as human if you were in that situation, dog psychology does NOT mean to treat dogs like beasts either

espencer

Thats exactly my point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If a dog gets aggressive or growls because of fear, etc. you have already failed!! You should have stepped in BEFORE that happened and diffused the situation. Thats EXACTLY what you have to do with dogs, step in for prevention. It all comes down to my ideology of pack leader, my dog is not afraid because he knows i'm there to protect him, my dog is not aggressive because he knows i will take care of the situation myself

Because of fear or retaliatory reasons the dog is reaching its threshold at which point the dog mayl engage in a fight.  I stated in the original post that current training and behavior changing techniques can change the threshold and that is what all seem to want to discuss.  The question was "So how do you think the dog owner should help the dog understand that flight, or walking away is the best resolve?"  So once the dog reaches its threshold, can we change the fight response to the flight response and if so, how?

DPU

So once the dog reaches its threshold, can we change the fight response to the flight response and if so, how?

I don't see the purpose.  To me, the dog biting out of fear and running away out of fear are the same thing, as far as the dog is concerned.  Just because running away appears better to the human does not mean the experience is any less scary for the dog.  I would work on moving back the threshold through slow desensitization and/or making the "scary" thing become a neutral or positive thing, not trying to have the dog use one scared response in place of another.  The goal is for the dog NOT to be scared, not for the dog to run away in fear rather than bite.

The goal is for the dog NOT to be scared, not for the dog to run away in fear rather than bite. 

My goal is to teach the dog to work through its own fear - ie, be able to pause and think through the situation rather than react.  Sometimes that pause lets me help the dog, while other times the pause might mean the fear stimulus passes without harming the dog.  If you watch a really stable dog process something startling, then you see what I have as my goal for the more reactive dogs I work with.

This happens different ways for different dogs.  One dog needs a behavior conditioned to stop a reactive behavior, another might need its confidence raised through desensitization and increasing independence.  Each dog needs slightly different approaches. 

You are not addressing the question.  As I said it is a given that a dog's threshold can be changed with current training and behavior changes techniques.  But there is a possibility the dog will one day and under a certain circumstance, reach its threshold.  When it does and since you say it makes no difference to the dog whether its flight or fight, the emotion is the same, can the dog be persuaded to use flight as a preference.   

DPU

You are not addressing the question.  As I said it is a given that a dog's threshold can be changed with current training and behavior changes techniques.  But there is a possibility the dog will one day and under a certain circumstance, reach its threshold.  When it does and since you say it makes no difference to the dog whether its flight or fight, the emotion is the same, can the dog be persuaded to use flight as a preference.   

Probably not.  If the owner is aware that the dog is fearful, this should never be allowed to happen.  If it does, either way the dog is very scared, scared enough to run for it's life OR bite.  

"it is a given that a dog's threshold can be changed with current training"....then why does the dog's reaction need to be changed?

When I got Kenya she was pretty fearful of certain people.  She would run away.  It was horrible to watch.  It's not any better to have a dog running away than a fear biter, IMO.  We did a ton of work and now the threshold has changed.  Maybe there is still a threshold, I'm not sure since I don't think it's a good idea to test the dog or force it into situations where it will be challenged to flee for it's life or attack.  All I know is I can take her into pretty much any situation I can think of (dog park, pet store, competing in dog shows, temperament test, bitework demonstration, family vacations, crowded dog events....) and she does fine.  I don't see the value in pushing her beyond that, into a terrifying situation I will not allow to happen.  Now I can't say for sure that some masked murderer won't break into my home and challenge my dogs, but of all the ways to train and socialize a dog, I don't think going for such extremes is valuable or practical.

It seems as though in your line of questioning you are saying that fleeing is an OK alternative.  I argue that it's not.  It's still stressful for the dog and difficult for an owner to watch and deal with.  Having seen dogs that do this (especially abused ones at the shelter), I would never advocate for training a dog to be scared and run away. 

 I definitely agree that encouraging fearful behavior of any kind is a tremendously bad idea.  Dogs tend to ascribe to the "less is good, more is better" theory, especially when in a new situation.  So praising or otherwise reinforcing fearful behaviors will usually result in an increase in those behaviors.

But I think we are dealing with a semantic difference here.  Liesje has in mind what I've described above, which is what is implied in the title "flight or fight" which is a technical term referring to an instinctive lower brain response.  Ie, a dog doesn't choose one behavior over the other because the behavior emanates from a lower brain function.

It seems the OP is actually wishing for the dogs to learn to exhibit socially appropriate, appeasement/defusing behavior rather than jumping into the fray every time, or starting fights when threatened. 

I had a dog I had to teach to "look away" rather than fight when afraid, as mentioned in my post above, allowing me to take care of the threat from the other dog myself.  This built trust on her part and increased her tolerance for scary situations.

DPU

As I said it is a given that a dog's threshold can be changed with current training and behavior changes techniques.  But there is a possibility the dog will one day and under a certain circumstance, reach its threshold.  When it does and since you say it makes no difference to the dog whether its flight or fight, the emotion is the same, can the dog be persuaded to use flight as a preference.   

My answer is no because flight or fight is a response that a) I don't want to see enough to try to influence in the first place and b) because I suspect you can't because that's such a deep and fast response that I don't believe it is ever thought about. When my hare goes into that mode, you can see the moment he stops thinking. Over the years he has developed tolerance to things that used to set him off, but when he snaps it's the same thing every time. He stops thinking and just does. He runs into things and I've seen him inflict nasty injuries to himself in the flight that he doesn't even notice until he has calmed down. I have seen him fight instead, and it's when he can't flee. I think a hare is far less likely to go for fight over flight because of its nature, but perhaps there is something to be learnt from him. If he can't flee he fights, so perhaps if you don't want the dog to fight, you should make sure he can flee. IME, once the animal is at the flight or fight response, they don't hear you and the only thing they can learn is what made them lose control. I suspect that response no matter which way it takes an animal or what the ultimate outcome is is a very traumatic one. Kit doesn't care if his flight was successful, he only cares about what made him flee in the first place.

As for growls... I don't think that they are necessarily aggressive. There are times when I fix some obnoxious kid with a hard stare and tell them through clenched teeth to shape up. That is in my mind equivalent to a growl. A growl is a threat and a signal that you really don't like something. I can make threats and tell people I don't like something without being overtly aggressive, so why can't a dog? Penny growls when she doesn't intend to fight, interestingly. When she is going to go that far, she snarls. Pyry, on the other hand, growls and doesn't often snarl. It's the difference between dog personalities. Pyry growls before attacking because he has decided to forgo warnings and is simply making noise as he comes on to make his approach scary. Penny has growls and grumbles. She grumbles when she doesn't like something but isn't going to do anything about it, and she growls when she's telling me she senses potential danger from someone. I think it's silly to stop those noises as they don't mean she's going to pick a fight. They tell me and others how she's feeling. And it wouldn't make any difference with Pyry because by the time he's growling, it's really a roar as he's already charging. If I were to stop snarls, then how would Penny tell other dogs that she's going to have them if they don't quit that? I think it's important that she's able to do that and take care of herself without needing to depend on me. I love that my dog is confident and able to handle other dogs without my intervention.

brookcove

But I think we are dealing with a semantic difference here.  Liesje has in mind what I've described above, which is what is implied in the title "flight or fight" which is a technical term referring to an instinctive lower brain response.  Ie, a dog doesn't choose one behavior over the other because the behavior emanates from a lower brain function.

It seems the OP is actually wishing for the dogs to learn to exhibit socially appropriate, appeasement/defusing behavior rather than jumping into the fray every time, or starting fights when threatened. 

I had a dog I had to teach to "look away" rather than fight when afraid, as mentioned in my post above, allowing me to take care of the threat from the other dog myself.  This built trust on her part and increased her tolerance for scary situations.

Becca, we are on the same page, I believe.   I've bolded your last statement.  This is what I was trying to get at.  To train a dog to turn away or be indifferent is NOT the same as a dog "flighting" vs. "fighting" b/c in the former situation, the dog is not really afraid.  Often at the club or the dog parks, dogs do things that Kenya thinks is immature or annoying and instead of constantly bullying them or starting fights, she turns away and ignores them.  But that doesn't really count as a "flight" response b/c Kenya is not fearful of other dogs.  It sounds like the OP is referring more to a socialization/reactivity issue than a real "fight or flight" response from a dog that is terrified.

At what point do you say this particular dog doesn't stand for any crap and that's who they are and just manage? We had a dog once that never really started fights, but she was ALWAYS game and she always finished anything another dog foolishly started. Wouldn't teaching her to ignore or look away be sort of like changing who she is? Penny seems to hate it when dogs bark at her furiously and intensely from their yards when she is walking by minding her own business. She doesn't mind if they just have a bark and then leave off, but if they roar down and holler at her, she gets snarky and if given the chance, will go and pick a fight through the fence with them. I think that's not a great idea as fence fights can get pretty nasty with nothing to grab but faces, but at the same time, what's the point in trying to train her to behave differently? Doesn't she have a right to hate that behaviour and express her feelings about it if that's her thing and she's not hurting or annoying anyone? My mantra of late has been just because you can train it doesn't mean you should. Sometimes it might irritate me when Penny wants to go start something silly, but really, she's my pal and that's the way she is. I'm sure I annoy her sometimes too, but tolerance and compromises are the hallmarks of any good relationship. If I can tolerate it and it's not harming or annoying anyone else, then I'll tolerate it rather than seek to change it. 

corvus

At what point do you say this particular dog doesn't stand for any crap and that's who they are and just manage? We had a dog once that never really started fights, but she was ALWAYS game and she always finished anything another dog foolishly started. Wouldn't teaching her to ignore or look away be sort of like changing who she is? Penny seems to hate it when dogs bark at her furiously and intensely from their yards when she is walking by minding her own business. She doesn't mind if they just have a bark and then leave off, but if they roar down and holler at her, she gets snarky and if given the chance, will go and pick a fight through the fence with them. I think that's not a great idea as fence fights can get pretty nasty with nothing to grab but faces, but at the same time, what's the point in trying to train her to behave differently? Doesn't she have a right to hate that behaviour and express her feelings about it if that's her thing and she's not hurting or annoying anyone? My mantra of late has been just because you can train it doesn't mean you should. Sometimes it might irritate me when Penny wants to go start something silly, but really, she's my pal and that's the way she is. I'm sure I annoy her sometimes too, but tolerance and compromises are the hallmarks of any good relationship. If I can tolerate it and it's not harming or annoying anyone else, then I'll tolerate it rather than seek to change it. 

To me this is different, more of a reactivity/barrier aggression issue than the dog being in sheer terror and either biting or running away.  I don't think the "fight or flight" applies.

corvus

At what point do you say this particular dog doesn't stand for any crap and that's who they are and just manage? We had a dog once that never really started fights, but she was ALWAYS game and she always finished anything another dog foolishly started. Wouldn't teaching her to ignore or look away be sort of like changing who she is?

No, a dog's identity is not contiguous with the behavior he or she exhibits.  At least I hope not, or I'm out of a job!  What you describe here is what we call a dog with a "KICK ME" sign.  If you watch such a dog carefully, they are like the kid in class that is pegged as being a geek or the 94 pound weakling that got sand thrown on him (does that date me?).  They are just a teeny bit "off" and that often triggers the "kill it" instinct in dogs.  When a fight starts involving such a dog, it's not playtime.  As you mentioned, once these dogs get involved, they don't know when to stop. 

The way to ameliorate the potential for such dogs to get into trouble is to keep them busy when in public, and never go where there's loose dogs running around.  It's a high management situation depending on how big and flashy that dog's KICK ME sign actually is.

Penny seems to hate it when dogs bark at her furiously and intensely from their yards when she is walking by minding her own business. She doesn't mind if they just have a bark and then leave off, but if they roar down and holler at her, she gets snarky and if given the chance, will go and pick a fight through the fence with them.

This is different - it's perfectly warranted behavior (ie, it's "normal" and predictable). 

I think that's not a great idea as fence fights can get pretty nasty with nothing to grab but faces, but at the same time, what's the point in trying to train her to behave differently?

The first part of your sentence answers the second part.  If the dog's safety or health is at risk, it's a no-brainer in my thinking.

Doesn't she have a right to hate that behaviour and express her feelings about it if that's her thing and she's not hurting or annoying anyone? My mantra of late has been just because you can train it doesn't mean you should. Sometimes it might irritate me when Penny wants to go start something silly, but really, she's my pal and that's the way she is.

Well, that's up to you of course.  But, I also don't see anything wrong with training a dog out of something that just plain annoys me.  Jumping up and bopping me in the gut makes Lynn really happy, but causes me excruciating pain.  I'm sure as heck gonna stop it from happening, even though my pain is in reality a temporary thing (at least I hope so!).  It's just silly and undesirable.  She likes chasing cars down the fenceline too but that's one of my showstoppers.  You bet I'm working on that with her, and I'm not using a clicker! 

I'm sure I annoy her sometimes too, but tolerance and compromises are the hallmarks of any good relationship. If I can tolerate it and it's not harming or annoying anyone else, then I'll tolerate it rather than seek to change it.

I would say, on the contrary, that trust is the hallmark of a good relationship.  Tolerance and compromise makes me think more of random roommates sharing an assigned dorm room, or opposing political party  members hashing out legislation.    Going back to the OP, trust defuses the whole fight or flight sequence and puts a dog back into a state where the higher cerebral function is in charge, ie, cognition.

Defined boundaries ---> handler demonstrates trust in dog ----> increased freedom ----> tested boundaries ----> dog demonstrates trust in handler through compliance

The more this cycle is exercised, the more confidence the dog will have in untested situations. 

corvus

My answer is no because flight or fight is a response that a) I don't want to see enough to try to influence in the first place and b) because I suspect you can't because that's such a deep and fast response that I don't believe it is ever thought about.

Thank you for that direct answer to the question being asked!

"When an animal is threatened or frightened, it goes into fight or flight, or it freezes to the spot. Physiologically, the animal experiences a massive sympathetic nervous system outpouring of adrenaline. Different species fight like lions, fly off like a bird, or freeze like a rabbit in the headlights. And in dogs at least, testosterone encourages fighting, neutered pets are less aggressive."

In my home situation I have residence dogs and I have dogs coming and going.  So I see enough of these conflicts that yes, I want to influence the action, if not the first time then definitely the second time.  My residence dogs heed the other dog's warning signs and turn away and in the opposite situation they give warnings, escalate the warnings and if the dog is not responsive, they walk away and give in.  Fosters will engage in fight even though there is an escape.  They fight because they are afraid of the dog from somewhat similar past memoreis, exhibiting certain behavior, resources guarding, sex, and anger.  In my simple view the fight or flight response boils down to two emotions, fear and anger.  In home situations, I think anger is the most likely scenario.  I don't think that it is always the same response, a non thinking response, and that its part of the the dog's wiring.  I want to believe that the choice is part of a decision process that takes into consideration the value or degree of the source (slight pain vs intense pain, roast beef vs a grape), the physical statue of the dog, the temperament, and other relationship within the pack....I am sure there are many more.  If this is true, then me inadvertently introducing fear while the dogs are engaging, introduces another very strong element for the dog to consider before choosing the fight option. 

So when a dog loses the fight is the flight versus fight option influenced?

DPU

I want to believe that the choice is part of a decision process that takes into consideration the value or degree of the source (slight pain vs intense pain, roast beef vs a grape), the physical statue of the dog, the temperament, and other relationship within the pack....I am sure there are many more.  If this is true, then me inadvertently introducing fear while the dogs are engaging, introduces another very strong element for the dog to consider before choosing the fight option. 

So when a dog loses the fight is the flight versus fight option influenced?

But see your questions appear to be misinformed.  Becca has already explained how "fight or flight" is a physiological response coming from a specific area of the brain, not a choice.  So you keep discussing this as if it's a choice the dog is making, part of a thinking process, when in fact it is not.  There is no "degree", there is simple a threshold whereby the dog is so threatened and fearful that it's body reacts with a fight or flight response.  Anything below that is not "fight or flight".