I'm not implying purely positive reinforcement. If my pup knows out, can demonstrate 100% of the time in all manner of places with a tennis ball without a bribe but refuses to out from a tug even with a hot dog in his nose then perhaps I should think about reinforcing the command with some positive punishment (leash correction).

 Quote: benjamin colbert

... It has become stagnant dogma in my opinion. The idea that a dog wants to be leader so it can have the title is fairly anthropomorphic. Dogs sense a vacuum in leadership in the way of inconsistent or non existent reinforcement and therefore take advantage of that in accordance with their own motivations.

It's not like the dog wants a shiny badge that says "Official Pack Leader." They just want to feel comfortable.

 Quote: randy allen

Yuko,
Cats are mostly solitary creatures aren't they.
What would account for packs like lions? They're the only cats I can think of that 'pack'. Know of any others?

Randy

Pack drive is a genetic trait, which means that it would most likely quickly be lost unless there was selection for it.

Solitary cats have no selective pressure to evolve & maintain pack drive so they wouldn't have any.

Lions do live and hunt as prides, so yes, they would have a certain genetic pack drive. A solitary lion would not last very long in the wild so any loss of the drive is unlikely to be kept in the species' gene pool.

The only other cat that I can think of that displays higher than usual (for felines) pack drive is cheetahs.

For the most part they are individual hunters etc. but you can observe cooperative hunting efforts from a female and her adolescent offspring.
Brothers (from the same litter) will also tend to stick together and subsequently establish territory, secure females and hunt together. This cooperation gives them a HUGE advantage over solitary males. A pack of 3 or 4 cheetah brothers will be able to hang onto prime territory (with it comes more females & more access to prey) far longer than a single cheetah or even two cheetahs.

I don't remember whether or not there is actual rank within these groups of brothers, so I can't comment on the presence of rank drive. There certainly is a genetic trait to stick together and to hunt cooperatively though.
Even though the hunting techniques etc. are learned from cubs observing their mother, the instinct to hunt together is unique to lions (and to a certain extent to cheetahs) among other cat species. You can imprint and condition all you want but you won't be seeing that kind of cooperative effort among leopards (for example) any time soon

So yes, GENETIC TRAIT!!!

Okay Bejamin,
You're willing to concede that 'packing' is instinctive for the dog.
Now, who gets to decide what? Think they vote on it?

Call the vet, I need prozac.
Randy

I don't remember conceding that Randy. Packing is instinctual for wolves in that the form a family group. But remember that mature wolves leave the pack and form their own.

I would argue that a leader tends to be some combination of the dog with the most weapons(bigger teeth etc.), most quickly to use aggression to get its way, most self confident, and maybe a few other features.

 Quote: Benjamin Colbert

I don't remember conceding that Randy. Packing is instinctual for wolves in that the form a family group. But remember that mature wolves leave the pack and form their own.

I would argue that a leader tends to be some combination of the dog with the most weapons(bigger teeth etc.), most quickly to use aggression to get its way, most self confident, and maybe a few other features.

Well, yes.

I don't remember anyone arguing that a weaker animal would be leader, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make exactly...

Benjamin,

I know where you're coming from.

I'm going to speculate on a semantic problem here.

Given
-a dog who knows command X,
-a handler who proficiently conditions it,
-and a second person who attempts and FAILS to ilicit the desired behavior in response to commanding X....

Some say the dog isn't respecting that person.

You count that new person as a "situation" under which the dog simply hasn't been reinforced.

That's not too terribly wierd. It's breaking pack/respect down to the INCREMENTS which ultimately yield a totatility...AKA the bond/relationship...what have you.

Am I close, Ben?

If so, it's not a tremendous leap to cede the nifty way in which dogs just kinda operate on the same wave length and lend themselves to wanting to be conditioned.

Pigeons can be operantly conditioned...but do chicks follow you around and solicit play and affection? Nevermind the whole imprinting stage.

 Quote: benjamin colbert

Dogs sense a vacuum in leadership in the way of inconsistent or non existent reinforcement and therefore take advantage of that in accordance with their own motivations.

Higher rank and leadership...these are not the same things as alpha rolling a dog when he doesn't heel properly. Establishing rank with a dog is actually a way of living with a dog in a way that the dog understands and respects.

You may see people poorly educated in dog training who have heard that they need to be "alpha" with their dog and smack the crap out of them for every minor offense. That's not the same thing as being a "pack leader." It is a matter of attitude: I have seen some tiny women in total charge of their dominant and ballsy 80+lb dogs: Attitude, confidence, fairness and consistancy. It always knocks me out--it's so cool to see!

And most dogs DON'T want to be the end-all-be-all alpha. Those dogs are rare (if they were more common, there would be more fighting within wolf packs and it would be bad for the pack AND for the species).

But there is no shortage of bad leadership (or lack of mutual communication)in human-dog relationships and so the dog will fill the void and take over. But MOST dogs feel more comfortable playing the follower rather than the leader. The same is true for most people.

Does anybody know Jennifer M.s phone #? She's got to know the names of the wolf studies right for the top of her head. Jeez the animals have been studied over and over in the wild. Most lately I think in Yellow Stone Park with the reintroduction of their species.
For crying out loud, pack structure is the only reason dogs can live with the likes of humans.

I know I've got that vet # somewhere here.
Randy

 Quote: benjamin colbert

Out is a training issue. If your dog isn't outing it isn't because he doesn't know who's boss its because either he doesn't know what you're asking in that particular circumstance or because because he hasn't been properly reinforced (i.e. not enough reinforcement, inconsistent reinforcement). Alpha rolling him, even behavioral lifestyle changes (crating, NILIF) is not going to fix a bad out if you are not properly training.

 Quote: amber morgan

And pack drive and motivational obedience training are not mutually exclusive, btw. It seems like you're saying they are. They actually reinforce each other.

Amber you are wise

Benjamin...

We all know you expect your dog to out on command as you have trained it and reinforced it as you say.

Do you expect your dog to listen to the "out" command from people who are not pack members?

There are many people who's dogs may out for their pack leaders/owners(those who have trained them), but not someone from outside the pack. Think police dog for an example.

You could say that they haven't been trained to out for strangers or you could say that they do not respect them as the authoritative pack leader. Pack leaders ARE trainers in the wild and otherwise. They reinforce and correct behaviors all the time.

Is this just all a semantics argument or am I missing something?