ResearchIs there a difference? Comparison of golden retrievers and dogs affected by breed-specific legislation regarding aggressive behavior
Introduction
Between July 2000 and July 2002, the Niedersaechsische Gefahrtierverordnung (GefTVO) was in force in Lower Saxony, Germany. At that time the authorities assumed that certain breeds of dogs were especially dangerous without just cause. Therefore, controls regarding keeping and breeding were imposed on these breeds. An exemption from these restrictions was only possible if the dogs passed a standardized temperament test. This test had been developed to detect individuals displaying an indication of disturbed aggressive communication or aggressive behavior in inappropriate situations. It was based on a temperament test by Netto and Planta (1997).
In a previous study (Mittmann, 2002), the results of the temperament tests of 415 dogs belonging to six breeds affected by the legislation were analyzed for: (1) breed predisposition for disturbed aggressive communication or aggressive behavior in inappropriate situations, and (2) differences in behavior between the breeds. In 395 dogs (95.18%) no indication of disturbed aggressive communication or aggressive behavior in inappropriate situations could be found. Nineteen dogs showed aggressive behavior in inappropriate situations, and 1 dog reacted with disturbed aggressive communication (4.82%).
Because a control group was not available at that time, those results referred to a comparison between the six breeds affected by the legislation (American Staffordshire terrier, bullterrier, Doberman, rottweiler, Staffordshire Bullterrier, and dogs of the pit bull-type). However, whether the assumption of a special dangerousness of certain dog breeds is correct or not can only be proven with the use of a control group of dogs that do not belong to the breeds affected by the legislation.
For this reason, in a consecutive study 70 golden retrievers were tested and used as a control group. The results of this study were evaluated for:
- •
Breed disposition for disturbed aggressive communication or aggressive behavior in inappropriate situations in golden retrievers.
- •
Significant differences in the occurrence of aggressive behavior between the dogs affected by the legislation and golden retrievers.
- •
Clues for preferred strategies to solve conflict situations.
Section snippets
Animals
For statistical reasons, all dogs of the control group had to belong to only 1 breed. The golden retriever was not affected by legislation in any German county. It is often regarded as a friendly and peaceable dog and widely represented in the German society. For these reasons, the golden retriever was chosen as breed to make up the control group. The owners attended the temperament test voluntarily.
According to the guidelines of the temperament test, the animals had to be at least 15 months
Dogs
Of 70 golden retrievers tested in this research project, 22 were male (3 of them neutered), and 48 female (6 of them spayed). The dogs were between 15 months and 10 years old with a mean age of 4.1 years.
Thirty-three golden retrievers had previously attended and passed a temperament test of their kennel club, 2 golden retrievers had attended it and failed. Thirty-five golden retrievers had not attended their kennel club's temperament test.
Highest scale reached
Of 70 golden retrievers tested, 41 dogs (58.6%) did not
Discussion
The assessment of the behavior of dogs by observing them is always prone to the subjectivity of the observer. In 1 study, a significant difference between judgments made by experts in more than 50% of observed behaviors was found (Sundgren, 1993). The dogs tested by Mittmann (2002) were all observed by 2 experts. The golden retrievers were assessed by only 1 observer different from the experts in the previous study, and a second expert could always be consulted. However, to minimize the
Results
A significant difference in the occurrence of aggressive behavior in inappropriate situations between the golden retrievers tested in this study and dogs belonging to 6 different breeds affected by the legislation and tested in a previous research project (Mittmann, 2002) could not be detected. For the following reason, this is a striking result. The owners of the golden retrievers participated in this study on a voluntary basis. The results of their dogs' tests did not have to be passed on to
Conclusion
In this research project, no significant differences in the occurrence of aggressive behavior in inappropriate situations were found when comparing golden retrievers and 6 dog breeds affected by legislation. Therefore, assuming that certain dog breeds are especially dangerous and imposing controls on them cannot be ethologically justified. Consequently, legislation in Lower Saxony was changed, and breed lists were withdrawn.
It is striking that the golden retrievers and the dogs tested
References (16)
- et al.
Behavioural testing for aggression in the domestic dog
Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci
(1997) - Althaus, T., 1982. Die Welpenentwicklung beim Siberian Husky. Dissertation, Philosophisch-naturwissenschaftliche...
Verhaltensbeobachtungen an einigen Wildcaniden
Z. Wiss. Zool
(1966)Hundepsychologie. Sozialverhalten und Wesen. Emotionen und Individualität
(2004)- et al.
Ausdrucksverhalten beim Hund
(1995) Socio-infantile and socio-sexual signals in canids: a comparative and ontogenic study
Z. Tierpsychol
(1971)Handbook of applied dog behavior and training
(2000)- NMELF–Niedersaechsisches Ministerium fuer Ernaehrung, Landwirtschaft und Forsten, 2000. Wesenstest fuer Hunde....
Cited by (20)
A possible basis for personality in dogs: Individual differences in affective predispositions
2022, Applied Animal Behaviour ScienceCitation Excerpt :For example, the DMA ‘ghosts’ are dressed such that they may be difficult to interpret as persons and have in addition fake eyes, whereas the approaching person in the BPH may be perceived as a human being to the dog. Persons with distorted appearance and staring persons have been found to elicit threatening behaviour to a higher degree than normally dressed persons (van den Berg et al., 2003; Ott et al., 2008; Haverbeke et al., 2009; van der Borg et al., 2010). Another possible reason for the lower correlation for Aggressiveness is differences in assessment.
Comparing behavioural characteristics of Czechoslovakian Wolfdogs, German shepherds and Labrador retrievers in Italy and the Czech Republic
2021, Applied Animal Behaviour ScienceCitation Excerpt :The great within-breed variability in our C-BARQ scores is in line with other studies (e.g. Duffy et al., 2008; Serpell and Duffy, 2014) and confirms that a dog propensity to exhibit a certain behaviour does not depend just on the breed, but also on individual differences and environmental factors such as proper socialization, the type of training received and the type of dog-owner relationship (Bennett and Rohlf, 2007; Arhant et al., 2010). Ott et al. (2008) compared 6 dog breeds considered as dangerous (e.g. American Staffordshire terriers, Dobermans, Bull terriers) with Golden retrievers and found no significant differences in the occurrence of aggressive behaviour in inappropriate situations; the authors concluded that more attention should be put on training breeders and owners as well as on preventing behaviour problems rather on the breed per se. This statement appears to be relevant also when considering CWDs as possible pets.
Risk factors for aggressive behaviour in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris), as reported by owners in mainland China
2021, Applied Animal Behaviour ScienceCitation Excerpt :It is therefore not appropriate to use a dog’s breed to make assumptions about current or potential displays of aggression (Casey et al., 2007). Indeed Ott et al. (2008) found there was no difference in aggressive behaviour between Golden Retrievers and dogs affected by breed-specific legislation in Germany. Further study is required to differentiate risk factors between different contexts in which aggression is shown as aggressive behaviours of different breeds or breed types also appear to vary in this respect (Duffy et al., 2008).
‘When the dog bites’: What can we learn about health geography from newspaper coverage in a ‘model city’ for dog-bite prevention?
2019, Health and PlaceCitation Excerpt :BSL takes various forms, but always entails banning or imposing restrictions based on the ancestry or appearance of dogs (e.g., pitbulls). This type of policy has been evaluated in several places, with mixed results (Clarke and Fraser, 2013; Cornelissen and Hopster, 2010; MacNeil-Allcock et al., 2011; Ott et al., 2008; Raghavan, 2008; Súilleabháin, 2015). In light of this policy debate, we were interested in the journalistic treatment of breed in the coverage of dog-bite incidents.
Human directed aggression in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris): Occurrence in different contexts and risk factors
2014, Applied Animal Behaviour ScienceCitation Excerpt :Existing studies provide useful insights but many have utilised populations with inherent biases, do not have controls for comparison, or have used multiple univariable analyses with associated risk of Type 1 errors. Previous studies have investigated four population types: hospital recorded bite victims (e.g. De Keuster et al., 2006; Morgan and Palmer, 2007); clinical populations from specialist behaviour clinics (e.g. Bamberger and Houpt, 2006; Fatjo et al., 2007) or general veterinary practices (e.g. Guy et al., 2001a,b,c); temperament screening for particular populations or breeds of dogs (e.g. Ott et al., 2008; Borg et al., 2010), and surveys of dog owners (e.g. O'Sullivan et al., 2008; Hsu and Sun, 2010). Inherent biases are associated with the first three populations, and the latter may be biased depending on recruitment.
Funded by the Gesellschaft der Freunde der Tieraerztlichen Hochschule Hannover (GdF) and the Gesellschaft fuer Tierverhaltenstherapie (GTVT).