# Latest scientific discovery about dogs.



## Butch Cappel (Aug 12, 2007)

As much as I like to poke a little at the scientists of the world, I'll be the first to admit that without their definitive, and accurate descriptions, we would be a lot less capable in this world today, yes! Even in the dog world.

Here is the latest dog discovery as detailed by the University of Austria.

Dogs get Jealous! I know, I know, a lot of you are saying "And? What? Somebody didn't know that?" But when things get confirmed scientifically every one has to listen.

So how did they figure this out and what can it do for our training in the future? using an assortment of dogs, Border Collies, terriers, and Mutts, they taught them all to "Give a paw" what we call "shake" for a treat, after each 'Paw' give. After the dogs exhibited a willingness to repeat this action many, many times in a row they were paired up.

At first each dog was given a treat (bread) after each shake. Then only one dog was given the treat. After repeated shakes without a treat while their partner still got a treat, the dog being denied eventually stopped "Giving a Paw" altogether.

Some dogs would go so far as to look away from the humans giving the command to avoid any inclination to follow through. Some when told to "Give me a paw" would instead flip the scientist a Dewclaw!!!

Some dogs before shutting down would perform other tricks when their partner was rewarded in hopes of getting a treat back. But all eventually went into avoidance when they heard the "Paw" command.

So what can we learn from this? Well for one thing if you are an E-collar enthusiast don't let your dog watch dogs doing clicker training too long. 

For another I believe this shows that over harsh corrections or corrections given in a confusing manner may lead to ultimate avoidance by the dog over time. If you have a multiple dog household the implications are obvious. think of all those "Dog Trainers" that decide by one year of age their highly bred whatever breed, just doesn't have it genetically maybe it's ust dog justice?.

The main things is that dogs, like us have an inborn sense of fair and just. If that fairness is breached often enough it will lead to a loss of that human/canine bond.


----------



## Lyn Chen (Jun 19, 2006)

Dogs failing to respond to poor training techniques is not jealousy.


----------



## Jerry Lyda (Apr 4, 2006)

Where did you get this????????Could you post a link????

I agree with Lyn, this is not jealousy. It's just simple learned behavior. The best correction is no reward and if he's not getting a reward then to him it's a correction, the correction will then eliminate the hehavior. Gees


----------



## Christen Adkins (Nov 27, 2006)

Good posts, Jerry and Lyn. 

I believe this is one link to the study: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081208/ap_on_sc/sci_no_fair_5


----------



## Jerry Lyda (Apr 4, 2006)

I wonder who paid these people for this study? Why didn't they just ask dog trainers? Do they think they have just had an amazing break through?


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Any behavior that is reinforced is more likely to occur again.
Any behavior that is ignored is more likely to go away. (Caveat; unless the dog finds the behavior self-rewarding). 

They must have had a grant to do the research.

DFrost


----------



## ann schnerre (Aug 24, 2006)

some grad student got a grant, their major professor's approval to do the research leading to a dissertation in order to obtain a Ph.D. (aka "Pile it Higher and Deeper"). it's one of my pet peeves, the crap research that passes for "adding to the sum of human knowledge"--and outrages me that university staff allow it. JMO


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

That's pretty weak compared to what my SIL did for her PhD. She's an immunologist.

I mean seriously?! How does that fly. Really.



> For another I believe this shows that over harsh corrections or corrections given in a confusing manner may lead to ultimate avoidance by the dog over time.


Actually, confusing the dog and requiring it to discern differences that are impossible for the dog to understand causes neurosis (think the dog "snaps" or "turns"). Read up on the later studies of Pavlov! OMG. Crazy stuff. He was able to prove that you can drive a dog insane without physical correction.



> Some dogs would go so far as to look away from the humans giving the command to avoid any inclination to follow through. Some when told to "Give me a paw" would instead flip the scientist a Dewclaw!!!
> 
> Some dogs before shutting down would perform other tricks when their partner was rewarded in hopes of getting a treat back. But all eventually went into avoidance when they heard the "Paw" command.


Sounds like confusion resulting in an extincted behavior and learned helplessness/stress on cue. And why again did this need to be studied??!! Dang - I'm GOOD at getting a dog to shut down. :lol: Maybe I need to write a paper on it and get published. 

I gotta stop here. I'm getting pissed off.


----------



## Erica Boling (Jun 17, 2008)

Jerry Lyda said:


> Where did you get this????????Could you post a link????
> 
> I agree with Lyn, this is not jealousy. It's just simple learned behavior. The best correction is no reward and if he's not getting a reward then to him it's a correction, the correction will then eliminate the hehavior. Gees


 
These were exactly my thoughts when I first read the article... I'm an educational researcher and am amazed at some of the things that get published through the general news media. What's sad is that so many people believe this kind of stuff... If "reasearch says....," then they believe... I've noticed that Yahoo News is especially bad about publishing this kind of stuff. You get it right on the front page of Yahoo.


----------



## Jerry Lyda (Apr 4, 2006)

Anne I totally agree with you. Why does it take a PHD to figure this out??? And then it becomes the truth, because they said it. WOW


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

If you stop feeding your dog altogether it will die of a broken heart cause you don't love it anymore!


----------



## jay lyda (Apr 10, 2006)

Quote form Jerry: I agree with Lyn, this is not jealousy. It's just simple learned behavior. The best correction is no reward and if he's not getting a reward then to him it's a correction, the correction will then eliminate the hehavior. Gees


Damn!! I knew I was in the wrong profession. My 6 and 7 year olds have already learned this, they could have just sent the money to them and I could have wrote the article for them and had it published. What a bunch of PhD idiots, as well as anyone who actually thought that this was some kind of great break through. We all learned that back in dog training 101.


----------



## jay lyda (Apr 10, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> If you stop feeding your dog altogether it will die of a broken heart cause you don't love it anymore!






















































That was probably somewhere in that article too Bob!!


----------



## Jaana Aadamsoo (Dec 5, 2008)

jay lyda said:


> That was probably somewhere in that article too Bob!!


And if it wasn´t then there is a good idea for the next stupid that needs a topic!


----------



## jay lyda (Apr 10, 2006)

Yep. The scary part is that someone has probably already done it.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

I can remember one paper I read about a study conducted on drinking water. It seems they did a study in 1862 on the effects of drinking water. After extensive review in 2004, it was concluded that drinking water was 100% fatal. All participants are now dead. 

DFrost


----------



## ann schnerre (Aug 24, 2006)

well, here's another one: took my daughter to the dentist today, the tech did a thorough cleaning,ie, cait hurt b/c it'd been 2 yrs since last, and i asked both the tech (after her reccomendation) and the dentist: "why does a warm salt-water rinse/gargle promote gum-healing and sore-thoat relief?"

neither one could give me a definitive answer. the doc referred me to "webmd.com", but to his credit said he'd research it also (after i made a comment about how i could maybe get a Ph. D. out of the question/research/answer). i think i spooked both of them a little; they thought i was stupid til i started asking questions. haha on them


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I like George Carlin's line
"Swallowing saliva in minute amounts is hazardous to your health"!

I've done it all my life. I suspect I only have another 25-30 yrs to live! :-o


----------



## Lyn Chen (Jun 19, 2006)

ann freier said:


> "why does a warm salt-water rinse/gargle promote gum-healing and sore-thoat relief?"


Think it's something to do with the salt being a natural antiseptic of sorts.

I use salt water frequently to disinfect wounds. Great for infections. When I was a kid old people would say go to the ocean to get rid of mosquito-scratch wounds.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

David Frost said:


> I can remember one paper I read about a study conducted on drinking water. It seems they did a study in 1862 on the effects of drinking water. After extensive review in 2004, it was concluded that drinking water was 100% fatal. All participants are now dead.
> 
> DFrost


Ahh yes. The hazards of dihydrogen oxide.


----------



## jay lyda (Apr 10, 2006)

Alright, heres the data from the latest research. My wife asked my two sons a simple question. Here it goes, she said to subject X "if you kept putting a quarter in a gumball machine and kept getting gum each time would you continue to put quarters in" subject X replied Yes. To subject Y she asked "if you kept putting quarters in a gumball machine thats beside subject X's machine and did not get any gumballs each time would you keep putting quarters in?" Funny enough subject Y is only 6 years old, he said NO. His response was NOT because he was jealous but that he was NOT getting any gum so why keep doing it. Rocket science huh??


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

jay lyda said:


> Alright, heres the data from the latest research. My wife asked my two sons a simple question. Here it goes, she said to subject X "if you kept putting a quarter in a gumball machine and kept getting gum each time would you continue to put quarters in" subject X replied Yes. To subject Y she asked "if you kept putting quarters in a gumball machine thats beside subject X's machine and did not get any gumballs each time would you keep putting quarters in?" Funny enough subject Y is only 6 years old, he said NO. His response was NOT because he was jealous but that he was NOT getting any gum so why keep doing it. Rocket science huh??


 
Further results of the Lyda research;
Any six yr old worth his salt will use the disfunctional gumball machine to coldcock the operator of the payoff machine and get his reward indirectly. 
It's also a scientific fact that the % of this happening will go up substantially if the two boys are brothers. :-o 
Lets put the FUN back in disFUNctional!     ;-) \\/ =P~


----------



## Jerry Lyda (Apr 4, 2006)

Damn Bob I didn't know that you knew them younger Lyda boys.


----------



## Jerry Lyda (Apr 4, 2006)

On second thought, I believe the younger (6 year old) would have figured a way to keep his coins and talk the older one out of his or at least half of his. The older would have done it. 

The older came with Jay to my house to help me do some work. I gave him two bucks ( cheap I know ). He asked if he should give one to his brother.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Jerry Lyda said:


> Damn Bob I didn't know that you knew them younger Lyda boys.


 
Shucks Jerry! My best black eyes and bloody noses came from my brother Pat. 18 months apart. I was always taller. Pat was always heavier. 
Even enough that nobody ever wanted to say uncle! :lol: 
Then there was my oldest sister Becky! :-o :-o :lol:

Sounds like Jay has a banker and a minister in the works there!


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

I finally found this one: http://www.pnas.org/content/106/1/340.full.pdf+html

And paid to read the fine print


----------

