We got into a discussion over at KC Dog Blog yesterday about antisocial behaviour in dogs. 

Initially, discussion arose around the commonly held (but unsupported) belief that animal-directed aggression, specifically dog-to-dog aggression, differs significantly from dog-to-human aggression.  This is a popular mantra with self-advertised pro-dog people but when you do some research, you find it isn't reinforced by findings to date.

In some cases, the game seems to be about who can make the most stuff up and get it to stick, which is not the way public policy should be formulated.

As noted by the AVMA Task Force on dog bite prevention, there is a  correlation between canine aggression towards dogs and aggression towards humans.  Other researchers have reached similar conclusions but obviously, this area needs more scrutiny because it could be important.

Since antisocial aggression (as opposed to the good kinds which promote survival) has been shown to be a result of owner mismanagement or anxiety about physical safety or competition for resources (including females in oestrus food or territory), it only makes sense that one intruder or another, in a dog's mind, would pose the same threat.

Here's the snip from the AVMA finding, along with a link to the full report which is available at no cost:

http://www.avma.org/public_health/dogbite/dogbite.pdf

A number of data elements should be captured on a report form such that it is comprehensive in scope without placing unnecessary burdens on reporting agencies (Appendix 3). Fatal and severe dog attacks on humans have been associated with prior or concurrent attacks on pets or livestock, so it is important that communities also track those incidents

Here are a couple of other abstracts which are available online.  I haven't decided whether I feel like paying $31.50 for the papers themselves but will probably cave, as usual, and buy them.   This is some fascinating stuff!

Canine Aggression Toward Unfamiliar People and Dogs

Lore I. Haugnext term DVM

aSouth Texas Veterinary Behavior Services, 2627 Cordes Drive, Sugar Land, TX 77479, USA

Available online 29 July 2008.

Aggression toward unfamiliar dogs and people is a common problem arising most commonly from fear and territoriality. A number of factors contribute to its development, including socialization deficits, hormones, and genetic and neurophysiologic components. These factors are discussed in this article, as are management and behavior modification approaches for controlling aggression.

---

1: Inj Prev. 2007 Oct;13(5):348-51. Behavioral assessment of child-directed canine aggression.

Reisner IR, Shofer FS, Nance ML

Department of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6010, USA. reisner@vet.upenn.edu

OBJECTIVE: To characterize behavioral circumstances of bites to children by dogs presented to a veterinary behavior clinic. METHODS: Retrospective case series examining medical records of dogs presenting by referral to a university veterinary hospital for aggression and which had bitten a child <18 years old. Behavioral data included age of victim, familiarity with dog, and circumstances of bites. RESULTS: Records of bites to 111 children were examined. Children <6 years old were most commonly bitten in association with resource guarding (44%), whereas older children were most commonly bitten in association with territory guarding (23%). Similarly, food guarding was the most common circumstance for bites to familiar children (42%) and territory guarding for bites to unfamiliar children (53%). Behavioral screening of the 103 dogs examined revealed resource guarding (61%) and discipline measures (59%) as the most common stimuli for aggression. Anxiety screens revealed abnormalities in 77% of dogs. Potential contributory medical conditions were identified/suspected in 50% of dogs. When history before presentation was known, 66% of dogs had never previously bitten a child, and 19% had never bitten any human. Most dogs (93%) were neutered, and 66% of owners had taken their dogs to obedience training classes. CONCLUSIONS: Most children were bitten by dogs with no history of biting children. There is a high rate of behavioral abnormalities (aggression and anxiety) in this canine population. Common calming measures (neutering, training) were not routinely effective deterrents.

 

The discussion at KC's place then morphed into whether own-species aggression is a heritable quality and whether it only appears in certain dog breeds.

I don't accept this oft-repeated belief and not just because I'm a rebel at heart but because the science to date doesn't support it.

In one study from 1999, 99 cases of aggression between dogs were reviewed retrospectively.  The findings were that dog-directed aggression is more likely to occur when certain factors are present - same sex intact status, aggression initiated by a younger dog towards an older one and owner failure to address the situation correctly.

Here's a link to the abstract and here's a snip:

Characteristics, treatment, and outcome of 99 cases of aggression between dogs

Cynthia Kagarise Shermana, Corresponding Author Contact Information, Ilana R. Reisnerb, Lecreca A. Taliaferroc and Katherine A. Houptb

a 42 Sparrow Crest, Ithaca, NY 14850, USA b Animal Behavior Clinic, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA c 36 Regents Park, Bedford, TX 76022, UK

Available online 8 March 1999.

Abstract

Cases of aggression between dogs (n = 99) treated at the Animal Behavior Clinic, Cornell University (1983–1993) were analyzed retrospectively. Data were obtained from case histories; follow-up information was collected by telephone interviews and mailed questionnaires. Aggression occurred in two contexts. The primary complaint was conflict between dogs in the household in 73 cases, and aggression directed at non-household dogs in 26 cases. Dogs that started fights were pure-bred in 70 cases (71%); German Shepherd Dogs were most numerous of 38 breeds represented

<continued at link>

Here's a recent study out of Germany, comparing the temperament test results of breeds affected by legislation with a control group of Golden Retrievers.  Note they tested for various types of antisocial aggression, including dog-directed aggression, and found there was no substantial difference between the two groups:

Is there a difference? Comparison of golden retrievers and dogs affected by breed-specific legislation regarding aggressive behavior

Stefanie A. Ott DVMCorresponding Author Contact Information, a, E-mail The Corresponding Author, Esther Schalke DVMa, Amelie M. von Gaertner DVMa and Hansjoachim Hackbarth DVM, PhDa

aInstitute for Animal Welfare and Behaviour, University of Veterinary Medicine Hanover, Hanover, Germany

Available online 25 June 2008.

Abstract

Between 2000 and 2002, legislation in Lower Saxony insinuated a special dangerousness of certain dog breeds, and controls were imposed on them. Exemption was only possible if the dogs passed a standardized temperament test. In a previous study, test results of 415 dogs belonging to breeds affected by the legislation were analyzed. Ninety-five percent of the dogs showed no indication of disturbed aggressive communication or aggressive behavior in inappropriate situations. Because a control group was not available at that time, these results referred to a comparison between the affected breeds. In this study, golden retrievers were tested and used as control group. Seventy golden retrievers were tested in the temperament test. The order of testing was: veterinary examination, learning test, situations of dog–human-, dog–environment-, and dog–dog-contact, and obedience. Levels of escalation in aggressive behavior were scored using a scale of 1–7. A total of 58.57% of the dogs did not show aggressive behavior (Scale 1). Forty percent displayed aggressive behavior referring to Scale 2, and 1.43% showed aggressive behavior referring to Scale 5. A total of 98.57% of the dogs reacted appropriately, and 1.43% displayed aggressive behavior in inappropriate situations. In the previous study, 95% of the animals reacted appropriately, whereas 5% displayed excessive aggressive communication or aggressive behavior in inappropriate situations. Comparing the results of golden retrievers and breeds affected by the legislation, no significant difference was found. A scientific basis for breed specific lists does not exist. Therefore, legislation in Lower Saxony was changed, and breed lists were withdrawn.

Here's another abstract from the same research group.

I wish that instead of blindly repeating the popular folklore about how dog-directed aggression is not the same as human-directed aggression, we could stick to the current science until new information comes along.

Instead of insisting in the face of evidence to the contrary that dogs can be 'bred' for aggressive behaviour, including own-species aggressive behaviour, and that only certain loosely defined 'breeds' carry this suicide gene which has not yet been discovered, why don't we take a look at what we know and work on solutions based on the available evidence?

Sometimes, it's disappointing to see that the pro- (insert media-hyped 'breed' here) people are working at cross purposes and in many cases can be as much of a problem as those who not only hate dogs, but often hate the people who own them even more.

Let's leave the repetitiion of unfounded myths, personal anecdotes and  fabricated 'facts' to the twits and get on with our uphill battle, people.

We are in this to win, aren't we?  Fair and square?