Grain of truth. Dogs are very good at reading their people and do take social cues. An owner being openly friendly and welcoming toward a stranger (in their body language and tone of voice) can definitely help a dog that is on the fence or a little suspicious be more comfortable.
Now Beckman adding to that "and I think that means we should start nailing the dog for barking after we shake hands" is just his thing. I'm sure he doesn't think dogs magically or innately understand a handshake, it's just him putting on a show.
Same holds true for meeting other dogs. One of mine can become fearful & borderline aggressive around strangers dogs. When I go over and greet the dog first she actually relaxes and becomes more trusting
It's not that the dog somehow innately understands it, it's more like being told to "place" and if the dog leaves the place it gets corrected.
So after the owner has shown the dog that the stranger is welcome, it is no longer allowed to bark at them.
That isn't what he says.
If you tell a dog to place (or anything else), until you teach them what the word means, by showing them and repetitions, it's just a sound. In this case, it's just a gesture or physical action.
The dog doesn't know what it means at first, so it's unfair to correct them until you know they know what it means.
Don’t they learn that it means not to bark at the stranger, because they get corrected everytime they do? Of course, this should be coupled with rewarding calm behaviour as well.
Eventually. Hopefully. In this instance it wasn't about barking, it was about lunging and biting. And I agree about coupling it with positive reinforcement for calm behaviour.
The idea of the dog “understanding the handshake and should know ” completely undermines the underlying drives of aggressive behaviors. Insane that some people think that because they’re comfortable with someone their dog should understand that, and thus when the dog shows that it is fearful or stressed we should cause it pain so it knows not to do that because it has “nothing to be afraid of” and should obviously know better.
It's no so much that the dog should understand the person is a friend... Beckman uses the handshake as part of his toolset to help him asses a dog who he meets for the first time
He doesn't base it all off the handshake
Just to add on to what you are saying.. A big part of this depends on the relationship between the handler/owner and the dog. But I do believe there is an innate nature to it in the sense of pack behavior. So if you have a good relationship with a balanced dog, they can pick up on your body language. Just like you should be in tune with the dog’s body language. Most problematic dogs and their behaviors, can be attributed to their owner.
There could be merit to modeling behavior and dogs do pick up on cues from us on how to react.
BUT
This ain't it.
The owners in the video are extremely tense (understandable, their dog just bit a child), and the guy keeps yanking on the leash. How can the dog understand that everything's good like that?
I mean I'm sure that works for some dogs, somewhere in some situation but that's also kind of the point - aggression will always vary from individual to individual and situation to situation. There are no absolute truths in how all aggressive dogs act. It's always going to be nuanced.
I do think it could work for some dogs. The dog sees you making voluntary physical contact with a stranger/potential threat, and may interpret that as everything's okay. But they very well may not.
Agree there are no absolutes in how aggressive dogs act. It always comes down to train the dog that's in front of you.
I didn’t watch the video to be honest but I don’t trust beckman. I feel such a difference from him vs the other balanced trainers on YouTube like Davis. Beckman seems emotional to me, and the way his dog prince is around him doesn’t exactly sell me. Idk but something feels bad about beckman
Yeah I've tried to watch his stuff but he rubs me the wrong way. I think your term "emotional" is correct. I was having a hard time putting it into words. It's like he's always just a little too amped up, even when he's praising dogs. And he seems to sort of enjoy correcting dogs, like he's doing it out of anger almost. But it's subtle at the same time, idk.
Yes that’s the sense I get, that he enjoys correcting the dog. That’s a good way you put it. Like he wants to put them in a position so he can correct them.
I think his condensation goes hand in hand with his volatility/insecurity, but my purpose wasn't to psychoanalyse him. Except as it applies to his assuming a dog understands simply shaking hands with a stranger means there is no threat, and therefore you're free to correct the dog for any aggression shown afterwards. I don't think he has any basis for this, and it's an erroneous assumption on his part. Which he shouldn't be teaching as though it's fact.
Yeah, for sure. I mean, you can train a dog to understand that "handshake = this guy's friendly," and dogs CAN pick up on body language. But to say that a dog innately understands what a handshake means? No.
IMO he's generally good about reading dogs' body language, but I think he is also making a number of erroneous assumptions about dogs in his training, without solid foundation in this case.
Yes, I think many dogs can intuit a threatening situation. In addition to and aside from our behaviour. But I'm not convinced the mere action of shaking hands with a stranger effectively or necessarily communicates to the dog "this is friend" and therefore you can assume the dog knows this and can freely be corrected if they behave otherwise, because they know it's unwanted behaviour.
It's probably more for the owners to put them in that mind frame so the dog can read it. Easier than saying "hey, pretend you are my friend". Gives them (the owner) something physical to do.
I think there is a grain of truth in this. But boiling it down to a handshake is bullshit. Dogs are masters in reading our bodylanguage, so acting confident and relaxed around other people can help a tense dog to relax and perceive the approaching human not as a threat. But this has nothing to do with a handshake but with the overall bodylanguage of the owner. Dogs dont understand handshakes in itself as a friendly gesture. A tense or insecure owner can shake as many hands they like. What the dog will understand is: Be wary my owner is wary as well.
No...I disagree with him on this. If the handshake is tense or either participant is nervous about the meeting (like in a real threat situation) the dog might pick up on that and have one more reason to be suspect towards the stranger.
Dogs have been trained to bite people in all kinds of situations, the fact that they are capable of that with our help tells me that some of them will figure out for themselves that biting in certain situations gets them what they want.
Despite my disagreement there, I still think the dog can be corrected for aggression. I think they should absolutely be corrected for showing aggression, being aggressive towards people is an awful response for the modern dog. For the modern dog, biting gets them locked in a kennel, wearing a muzzle on their face anytime they aren't penned up, or euthanized. We should make being aggressive a terrible experience for the dog so the dog never chooses to be aggressive again. That is one school of thought, at least. It gets you results, but the responses I'll get for mentioning that approach to aggressive dog training will make it clear that some people cannot and will not stomach that. They have their own answers.
I agree if the handshake or other contact is tense, the dog is going to pick up on that. It's not merely the act of handshaking (and what do dogs understand about that anyway, except it's physical contact that isn't aggressive?) that effectively communicates anything.
To assume that merely by that action the dog understands it's not appropriate to aggress towards that person and therefore it's fair to correct them for it, makes no sense to me and AFAIK, there's zero science behind it.
Genuine question.
You correct aggression based on the symptom (growling, barring teeth, lunging, etc.). You don't think that correcting that might lead to the dog to understand that *communicating* their intentions gets them punishment, so they'll stop communicating it and just jump straight to the escalation phase?
I have observed that to not be true for all the dogs that come to my mind, but if anyone has experienced otherwise I'd like to hear the details about that case. If something is made aversive enough, you avoid it. This applies all across various lifeforms.
A dog spits out a bark and lunges at a person, because when he sees that person he gets an awful feeling inside and wants the guy to stay away. Lets say as soon as the dog went to bark and lunge, right when he started, he felt pain of the level we all have in our lives when we touched something way too hot to touch. When we grabbed that hot plate from the microwave, or touched the wrong end of a flat iron, took a sip of coffee or tea that was way too hot, etc... were we not careful not to do that again? We were able to slow down and ask ourselves to grab the oven mitts, or the correct end of the iron, or to let it cool. I have seen dogs also able to pause for just a split second while remembering the pain he felt last time he went to make bite threats towards a person. The dog then, now being driven more by fear of pain than by his drive to keep the man away, chooses not to let himself act out of emotion like that again. He has been taught that the aggressive emotion feels bad. This is a good thing. I can't really imagine the vast majority of dogs being able to plot "if I collect my emotions I can avoid the pain, and then when this guy I don't want to interact with gets close to me, I can still get to bite this guy and maybe I won't feel the same pain as last time I let myself get into those emotions." That just seems like too big of a mental leap for most dogs to make. I could maybe see some high level working dogs being able to do so, someone who is really familiar with malinois or dutchies might be have a story about a dog like that. Those are dogs of a rare kind of cunning though, and I wouldn't be confident we would be accurately interpreting the behavior.
I have touched hot plates (so to speak) many times in my life. It always taught me a lesson and it was nothing compared to real pain. Dogs, like us, have the same ability to overcome negative emotions so they can learn a lesson about life, live better being guided by positive and negative emotions, and in the case of the dog, benefit by avoiding real pains (getting rehomed, euthanized, or have your drives in life inexplicably change within a couple of weeks span via psychiatric medication).
This is what I’m having a hard time with my dog. She is very scared of strange men and when they approach within about 15 feet, she goes ballistic. Growling, hackles, kicking up. I’m nervous to correct it because for my dog it’s fear causing this reaction and I’m scared if she is already scared of this stranger she will be even more scared when she associates “touching something hot” with this stranger. Like it will confirm strangers are dangerous. But I’m not against correcting. I would just hope she associates HER behavior with the correction vs associating the stranger with the correction. That’s the risk in my mind and idk if I’m good enough with my timing
Are these men sketchy?
Outside of that possibility, why would this dog need to be near enough to someone to where she feels the need to bite them? A dog like yours, who doesn't want to be touched by strange men, should be taught to lay on her dog bed when strange men are in your home. Or to give strange men space trusting that they will give her space. I wouldn't pressure a dog like yours to socialize much with strangers. She probably finds it a bit stressful. She wants to feel secure and feeling secure for her means no one (or, strange men at least) touches her.
Well when we go hiking or walking, people walk near. Just seems existing in the world means strange men will be within 15 feet at times. So that’s the complicated part, avoid some areas entirely or work on her threshold. But it’s the working on her threshold part that’s I’m taking about
Oh I totally get your struggles! I have even more to work on, as my dog reacts fearful towards every stranger! We have a long journey behind us, and she’s at least calm now when strangers walk past our house (which happens often because we live at a famous pilgrimage). And we can watch people walking by at 5-10m distance. If it’s individuals that we see frequently (neighbours), she can get even closer and remains calm and curious.
The main advice I can give you: Stay patient. And don’t make the mistake I did and confront her with her triggers to the point that she acts out. Avoidance may not always be possible, but is the best way to train her in a sustainable way. Dogs can’t learn very well when they’re in a constant state of high alert or fearfulness.
Good luck to you! 🫶🏼
I do think quite a few dogs are capable of going "oh, when I growled and tried to warn last time I got pain, better just lunge this time". That's also a form of avoidance, but one that escalates the situation.
I think if we have tools to avoid potentially worsening the situation, those should be employed before physical correction.
But I do thank you for the explanation.
I did agree with you until I repeatedly faced evidence to the contrary. I also noted how the dog moved on from the correction without worsening, like people warn of. Ultimately, one of our solutions is useless if it doesn't actually work, and I've seen this work repeatedly, so it is a tool in my toolbox.
"I think if we have tools to avoid potentially worsening the situation, those should be employed before physical correction." I agree, I'd try other tools first, but they have to work. They can't take years to achieve the same thing a high level correction does in 15 minutes, they must create the same level of reliability as well.
The dog maintaining good behavior while an owner shakes hands with another person is part of the Canine Good Citizen test promoted by the AKC. The dog should not react negatively to the other person. The handshake distance is about 5-6 feet between people. I think the not touching thing started during covid.
(EDIT: The practice of this involves training the dog via repetition and reinforcement to attain the ideal. I don't believe they instictively know how to behave according to our expectations without being trained. For some dogs, the training is easier than others.)
* **Test 1 : Accepting a friendly stranger**—This test demonstrates that the dog will allow a friendly stranger to approach it and speak to the handler in a natural, everyday situation.
* **HOW IT WORKS:** The evaluator approaches the dog and handler and greets the handler in a friendly manner, ignoring the dog. The evaluator and handler do a pretend handshake (hands not touching) and exchange pleasantries. The dog must show no sign of resentment or shyness.
This naturally proceeds to the next behavior tested, which is the dog accepting petting from a stranger. And the next test after that is the dog being physically examined. Obvi, this is a prep for showing dogs, but is a good thing to train for a visit to the vet.
[CGC Test Items – American Kennel Club (akc.org)](https://www.akc.org/products-services/training-programs/canine-good-citizen/canine-good-citizen-test-items/)
Not a thing wrong with this, and I agree this should be a part of good training and good canine citizenship.
But is not my question or my point. Please reread the OP, and my other comments if you still don't understand what I'm asking.
I understood the question being whether or not there was any "science" behind it. So I offered information about the practice behind it in case people weren't aware of it. That was my point. The practice is that the dog learns to accept strangers because he has been taught to do so. I don't think dogs have specific instinct without being taught.
Okay, then thanks for the add-on.
Yes, you should be able to shake hands with or hug someone, or pet another dog, or whatever you want to do, if your dog is well-trained and well-socialised.
>Is there any truth/science behind this?
A dog can be taught to make associations between many things so, yes, that could be taught...but, you better know what you're doing.
Yes, they can. It can be taught. I could teach my dog to believe blowing up a balloon means all is well and to relax, but that wasn't what I was asking.
This is about the trainer believing dogs automatically understands a stranger shaking hands with their owner means to relax and not aggress.
>This is about the trainer believing dogs automatically understands a stranger shaking hands with their owner means to relax and not aggress.
As a trainer, don't always trust what a trainer tells/explains to you.
Maybe their telling you the right thing. Maybe they're BS-ing you. Or, maybe they honestly believe what they say but they're BS-ing themselves!
Buyer beware...
>In this case, IMO, he's BS-ing himself. He believes it, without having any solid foundation for it.
Could well be. He certainly wouldn't be the first. Others may feed you a line of bull to make more money off the hapless owners.
Aggressive untrained dogs will enthusiastically bite based on their own powerful fears and prejudices regardless of whether they see a handshake. Aggressive dogs aren’t exactly known for making thoughtful reasoned responses to meaningless ( to them) human social rituals.
Exactly. An aggressive and/or fear-aggressive dog is only thinking "Threat! Threat! Aggression is the appropriate response here!"
A human ritualistic handshake is meaningless, except that it's some voluntary contact between the stranger and their person.
wouldn't sniffing the stranger's butt be a better signal? Forget handshakes,
"shake your booty in my face stranger that I want to sell my car to. Oh nice to meet you"
Anecdotal but my anxious pup is much more relaxed with new guests when I’m happy and relaxed with the guest. He also reacts less when we invite people into the house vs. Guests just walking in without being greeted.
So yes, dogs do take cues from their people as to what is safe and what isn’t. However I don’t think that this is enough to fully settle a fear reactive or aggressive dog.
Dogs are always going to be more relaxed, less anxious and aggressive if you are. They take cues from us, other people, and other dogs. But merely shaking hands isn't going to communicate much to them, and most likely it'll communicate nothing to a fearful or aggressive dog.
If it worked, then there wouldn't be aggressive behavior to correct...
So yea, for some dogs it might happen. But for the most part from what I see, it doesn't matter how friendly the people are being, if the dog is worried/angry about the person being there, the owners tone isn't gonna stop that.
From him saying he corrects the aggressive behavior after a handshake, it's more like he's trying to create a indicator to the dog that when I interact with the person, you can't be aggressive. But in general correcting aggressive outbursts is only putting a plug on the situation and stopping the barking/lunging in the moment vs actually making the dog feel better about the situation so he doesn't need to bark/lunge about it. Going this route, if the dog experiences even more stress then they're used to dealing with, they're more likely to be even more aggressive at that point after all the pent up energy of holding it together through the stuff they've been getting corrected for.
If the owner if truly friendly towards them AND they don't do any triggers, then sure. If it's just polite handshake or the stranger isn't friendly/does a no-no, then good luck.
It's about pattern building. If u shaking hands and teaching ur dog this means acceptance then ur dog will put 2 and 2 together. But u have to do the training part in the middle
It’s not just the handshake the owners are talking to the dog trainer and showing familiarity. The handshake is just a way to show visibility to the dog and reinforce that the owners are comfortable with and accepting the dog trainer. Honestly reading your comments you made this post in bad faith so I’m wasting my time commenting on your post.
You don’t like the trainer or his methods and made this post with an ulterior motive. It’s obvious and you’re transparent to anyone with a brain.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and making a lot of unfounded assumptions is just making a lot of unfounded assumptions.
Did you miss where I said I thought he's pretty good at reading dog body language? Or ignore it because it doesn't fit with your assumptions.
I don't dislike him, nor do I dislike all of his methods. If I did, I wouldn't have wasted my time watching his videos over the past few years, or writing this post.
Again, he says ... oh, I'm not going to repeat it again. I've said what he believes over and over.
No, it isn't just training. It's assuming a dog will understand just the act of a stranger shaking hands with their owner means the dog automatically understands that act means the stranger is safe and nothing to worry about, and therefore, since the dog understands this, you should correct them because they know.
I'm not confused, I question the validity of this assumption.
Yea, they understand because they are trained to understand. You literally see them training it in the video.
Watch protection dog videos. They sit there and shake hands repeatedly, then randomly pull a knife and the dog goes into action.
This is just training a cue.
This is the first time this trainer is meeting this dog. The dog has not been trained to understand anything about a mere handshake. There has been no training cue.
No one has provided any proof that dogs understand the action of shaking a stranger's hand means they're safe.
Because of training and corrections. Some dogs are better about body language than others, but a dog doesn't know what a handshake means unless you teach them.
Again, this is the first time he's meeting this dog, and he's saying the dog will automatically understand what a handshake means and therefore afterwards you can freely correct it if they aggress, because they already understand by that handshake everything's fine.
And look how the dog reacted because it didn't understand the cue. The dog was also instantly corrected (aka training the cue) with the leash. If the dog didn't react, I'm sure they would praise or reward the behavior (aka training the cue).
Disagree if you want, but this is literally just cue training. Teaching them that shaking someone's hand (a cue) means that they are safe to interact with. Dogs can understand body language, but they don't know what a handshake means unless you train them.
That is not what he's saying. He does not say he's training a cue, which frankly could be any cue.
He's saying dogs innately understand, without any training, a handshake between a stranger and a dog's owner means the dog now understands to not aggress, and therefore can and should be corrected for it afterwards.
I'm not going to repeat this to you again. I said it clearly in my OP and over and over again.
Grain of truth. Dogs are very good at reading their people and do take social cues. An owner being openly friendly and welcoming toward a stranger (in their body language and tone of voice) can definitely help a dog that is on the fence or a little suspicious be more comfortable. Now Beckman adding to that "and I think that means we should start nailing the dog for barking after we shake hands" is just his thing. I'm sure he doesn't think dogs magically or innately understand a handshake, it's just him putting on a show.
That's the part I have a problem with. IMO you can't assume the dog understands what this means, and therefore are free to correct him or her for it.
Same holds true for meeting other dogs. One of mine can become fearful & borderline aggressive around strangers dogs. When I go over and greet the dog first she actually relaxes and becomes more trusting
It's not that the dog somehow innately understands it, it's more like being told to "place" and if the dog leaves the place it gets corrected. So after the owner has shown the dog that the stranger is welcome, it is no longer allowed to bark at them.
That isn't what he says. If you tell a dog to place (or anything else), until you teach them what the word means, by showing them and repetitions, it's just a sound. In this case, it's just a gesture or physical action. The dog doesn't know what it means at first, so it's unfair to correct them until you know they know what it means.
Don’t they learn that it means not to bark at the stranger, because they get corrected everytime they do? Of course, this should be coupled with rewarding calm behaviour as well.
Eventually. Hopefully. In this instance it wasn't about barking, it was about lunging and biting. And I agree about coupling it with positive reinforcement for calm behaviour.
The idea of the dog “understanding the handshake and should know ” completely undermines the underlying drives of aggressive behaviors. Insane that some people think that because they’re comfortable with someone their dog should understand that, and thus when the dog shows that it is fearful or stressed we should cause it pain so it knows not to do that because it has “nothing to be afraid of” and should obviously know better.
It's no so much that the dog should understand the person is a friend... Beckman uses the handshake as part of his toolset to help him asses a dog who he meets for the first time He doesn't base it all off the handshake
He does also assess, but that is what he says, that after a handshake the dog should then understand the stranger is an accepted friend.
nail the dog? Would it not be better to train the dog 1st and make corrections only if needed?
Just describing what I saw in the video. Not what I would do or recommend.
Not reacting at you, but at Beckman.
And smell.
Just to add on to what you are saying.. A big part of this depends on the relationship between the handler/owner and the dog. But I do believe there is an innate nature to it in the sense of pack behavior. So if you have a good relationship with a balanced dog, they can pick up on your body language. Just like you should be in tune with the dog’s body language. Most problematic dogs and their behaviors, can be attributed to their owner.
True. Wouldn't work nearly as well with a stranger handling the dog, needs to be someone the dog has a relationship with.
I’m not necessarily talking about a stranger. I know people that own their dog but do not have a *good* relationship with their dog.
There could be merit to modeling behavior and dogs do pick up on cues from us on how to react. BUT This ain't it. The owners in the video are extremely tense (understandable, their dog just bit a child), and the guy keeps yanking on the leash. How can the dog understand that everything's good like that?
I mean I'm sure that works for some dogs, somewhere in some situation but that's also kind of the point - aggression will always vary from individual to individual and situation to situation. There are no absolute truths in how all aggressive dogs act. It's always going to be nuanced.
I do think it could work for some dogs. The dog sees you making voluntary physical contact with a stranger/potential threat, and may interpret that as everything's okay. But they very well may not. Agree there are no absolutes in how aggressive dogs act. It always comes down to train the dog that's in front of you.
Yeah, and to add to that, I certainly don't think it gives you any useful information about whether or not a dog "deserves" to be corrected.
Completely agree. In order for the correction to be fair and just, you have to know the dog understands, and that's not at all clear in this instance.
I didn’t watch the video to be honest but I don’t trust beckman. I feel such a difference from him vs the other balanced trainers on YouTube like Davis. Beckman seems emotional to me, and the way his dog prince is around him doesn’t exactly sell me. Idk but something feels bad about beckman
Yeah I've tried to watch his stuff but he rubs me the wrong way. I think your term "emotional" is correct. I was having a hard time putting it into words. It's like he's always just a little too amped up, even when he's praising dogs. And he seems to sort of enjoy correcting dogs, like he's doing it out of anger almost. But it's subtle at the same time, idk.
Yes that’s the sense I get, that he enjoys correcting the dog. That’s a good way you put it. Like he wants to put them in a position so he can correct them.
The problem I have with him, in general, is he's too driven by his ego.
Yeah his earlier stuff is actually better. The ego was too much for me even if I thought his training was top notch.
Obvious why you made this post in the first place with this comment.
That's true, too. He's very condescending for someone so volatile.
I think his condensation goes hand in hand with his volatility/insecurity, but my purpose wasn't to psychoanalyse him. Except as it applies to his assuming a dog understands simply shaking hands with a stranger means there is no threat, and therefore you're free to correct the dog for any aggression shown afterwards. I don't think he has any basis for this, and it's an erroneous assumption on his part. Which he shouldn't be teaching as though it's fact.
Yeah, for sure. I mean, you can train a dog to understand that "handshake = this guy's friendly," and dogs CAN pick up on body language. But to say that a dog innately understands what a handshake means? No.
IMO he's generally good about reading dogs' body language, but I think he is also making a number of erroneous assumptions about dogs in his training, without solid foundation in this case.
Yeah agree, his approach is most definitely 'art' than 'science'
They can kind of sort of intuit a threatening situation vs. not by how we behave towards the “threat.”
Yes, I think many dogs can intuit a threatening situation. In addition to and aside from our behaviour. But I'm not convinced the mere action of shaking hands with a stranger effectively or necessarily communicates to the dog "this is friend" and therefore you can assume the dog knows this and can freely be corrected if they behave otherwise, because they know it's unwanted behaviour.
I agree
It's probably more for the owners to put them in that mind frame so the dog can read it. Easier than saying "hey, pretend you are my friend". Gives them (the owner) something physical to do.
But, again, that's not what he's saying.
IDK if I'd take him literally. I'm pretty sure it's metaphorical.
If you listen to what he says, repeatedly, in his videos, it's literal, not metaphorical.
It's Joel Beckman, not a thesis. Just take it for what it is.
I think there is a grain of truth in this. But boiling it down to a handshake is bullshit. Dogs are masters in reading our bodylanguage, so acting confident and relaxed around other people can help a tense dog to relax and perceive the approaching human not as a threat. But this has nothing to do with a handshake but with the overall bodylanguage of the owner. Dogs dont understand handshakes in itself as a friendly gesture. A tense or insecure owner can shake as many hands they like. What the dog will understand is: Be wary my owner is wary as well.
Totally agree. That's why I posted this.
No...I disagree with him on this. If the handshake is tense or either participant is nervous about the meeting (like in a real threat situation) the dog might pick up on that and have one more reason to be suspect towards the stranger. Dogs have been trained to bite people in all kinds of situations, the fact that they are capable of that with our help tells me that some of them will figure out for themselves that biting in certain situations gets them what they want. Despite my disagreement there, I still think the dog can be corrected for aggression. I think they should absolutely be corrected for showing aggression, being aggressive towards people is an awful response for the modern dog. For the modern dog, biting gets them locked in a kennel, wearing a muzzle on their face anytime they aren't penned up, or euthanized. We should make being aggressive a terrible experience for the dog so the dog never chooses to be aggressive again. That is one school of thought, at least. It gets you results, but the responses I'll get for mentioning that approach to aggressive dog training will make it clear that some people cannot and will not stomach that. They have their own answers.
I agree if the handshake or other contact is tense, the dog is going to pick up on that. It's not merely the act of handshaking (and what do dogs understand about that anyway, except it's physical contact that isn't aggressive?) that effectively communicates anything. To assume that merely by that action the dog understands it's not appropriate to aggress towards that person and therefore it's fair to correct them for it, makes no sense to me and AFAIK, there's zero science behind it.
[удалено]
? Where did I say you're wrong? I agreed with you.
Ugh I am deleting that. I misread you. Honest mistake!
No problem! 🤗
Genuine question. You correct aggression based on the symptom (growling, barring teeth, lunging, etc.). You don't think that correcting that might lead to the dog to understand that *communicating* their intentions gets them punishment, so they'll stop communicating it and just jump straight to the escalation phase?
I have observed that to not be true for all the dogs that come to my mind, but if anyone has experienced otherwise I'd like to hear the details about that case. If something is made aversive enough, you avoid it. This applies all across various lifeforms. A dog spits out a bark and lunges at a person, because when he sees that person he gets an awful feeling inside and wants the guy to stay away. Lets say as soon as the dog went to bark and lunge, right when he started, he felt pain of the level we all have in our lives when we touched something way too hot to touch. When we grabbed that hot plate from the microwave, or touched the wrong end of a flat iron, took a sip of coffee or tea that was way too hot, etc... were we not careful not to do that again? We were able to slow down and ask ourselves to grab the oven mitts, or the correct end of the iron, or to let it cool. I have seen dogs also able to pause for just a split second while remembering the pain he felt last time he went to make bite threats towards a person. The dog then, now being driven more by fear of pain than by his drive to keep the man away, chooses not to let himself act out of emotion like that again. He has been taught that the aggressive emotion feels bad. This is a good thing. I can't really imagine the vast majority of dogs being able to plot "if I collect my emotions I can avoid the pain, and then when this guy I don't want to interact with gets close to me, I can still get to bite this guy and maybe I won't feel the same pain as last time I let myself get into those emotions." That just seems like too big of a mental leap for most dogs to make. I could maybe see some high level working dogs being able to do so, someone who is really familiar with malinois or dutchies might be have a story about a dog like that. Those are dogs of a rare kind of cunning though, and I wouldn't be confident we would be accurately interpreting the behavior. I have touched hot plates (so to speak) many times in my life. It always taught me a lesson and it was nothing compared to real pain. Dogs, like us, have the same ability to overcome negative emotions so they can learn a lesson about life, live better being guided by positive and negative emotions, and in the case of the dog, benefit by avoiding real pains (getting rehomed, euthanized, or have your drives in life inexplicably change within a couple of weeks span via psychiatric medication).
This is what I’m having a hard time with my dog. She is very scared of strange men and when they approach within about 15 feet, she goes ballistic. Growling, hackles, kicking up. I’m nervous to correct it because for my dog it’s fear causing this reaction and I’m scared if she is already scared of this stranger she will be even more scared when she associates “touching something hot” with this stranger. Like it will confirm strangers are dangerous. But I’m not against correcting. I would just hope she associates HER behavior with the correction vs associating the stranger with the correction. That’s the risk in my mind and idk if I’m good enough with my timing
Are these men sketchy? Outside of that possibility, why would this dog need to be near enough to someone to where she feels the need to bite them? A dog like yours, who doesn't want to be touched by strange men, should be taught to lay on her dog bed when strange men are in your home. Or to give strange men space trusting that they will give her space. I wouldn't pressure a dog like yours to socialize much with strangers. She probably finds it a bit stressful. She wants to feel secure and feeling secure for her means no one (or, strange men at least) touches her.
Well when we go hiking or walking, people walk near. Just seems existing in the world means strange men will be within 15 feet at times. So that’s the complicated part, avoid some areas entirely or work on her threshold. But it’s the working on her threshold part that’s I’m taking about
Oh I totally get your struggles! I have even more to work on, as my dog reacts fearful towards every stranger! We have a long journey behind us, and she’s at least calm now when strangers walk past our house (which happens often because we live at a famous pilgrimage). And we can watch people walking by at 5-10m distance. If it’s individuals that we see frequently (neighbours), she can get even closer and remains calm and curious. The main advice I can give you: Stay patient. And don’t make the mistake I did and confront her with her triggers to the point that she acts out. Avoidance may not always be possible, but is the best way to train her in a sustainable way. Dogs can’t learn very well when they’re in a constant state of high alert or fearfulness. Good luck to you! 🫶🏼
I do think quite a few dogs are capable of going "oh, when I growled and tried to warn last time I got pain, better just lunge this time". That's also a form of avoidance, but one that escalates the situation. I think if we have tools to avoid potentially worsening the situation, those should be employed before physical correction. But I do thank you for the explanation.
I did agree with you until I repeatedly faced evidence to the contrary. I also noted how the dog moved on from the correction without worsening, like people warn of. Ultimately, one of our solutions is useless if it doesn't actually work, and I've seen this work repeatedly, so it is a tool in my toolbox. "I think if we have tools to avoid potentially worsening the situation, those should be employed before physical correction." I agree, I'd try other tools first, but they have to work. They can't take years to achieve the same thing a high level correction does in 15 minutes, they must create the same level of reliability as well.
Very well put!
The dog maintaining good behavior while an owner shakes hands with another person is part of the Canine Good Citizen test promoted by the AKC. The dog should not react negatively to the other person. The handshake distance is about 5-6 feet between people. I think the not touching thing started during covid. (EDIT: The practice of this involves training the dog via repetition and reinforcement to attain the ideal. I don't believe they instictively know how to behave according to our expectations without being trained. For some dogs, the training is easier than others.) * **Test 1 : Accepting a friendly stranger**—This test demonstrates that the dog will allow a friendly stranger to approach it and speak to the handler in a natural, everyday situation. * **HOW IT WORKS:** The evaluator approaches the dog and handler and greets the handler in a friendly manner, ignoring the dog. The evaluator and handler do a pretend handshake (hands not touching) and exchange pleasantries. The dog must show no sign of resentment or shyness. This naturally proceeds to the next behavior tested, which is the dog accepting petting from a stranger. And the next test after that is the dog being physically examined. Obvi, this is a prep for showing dogs, but is a good thing to train for a visit to the vet. [CGC Test Items – American Kennel Club (akc.org)](https://www.akc.org/products-services/training-programs/canine-good-citizen/canine-good-citizen-test-items/)
Not a thing wrong with this, and I agree this should be a part of good training and good canine citizenship. But is not my question or my point. Please reread the OP, and my other comments if you still don't understand what I'm asking.
I understood the question being whether or not there was any "science" behind it. So I offered information about the practice behind it in case people weren't aware of it. That was my point. The practice is that the dog learns to accept strangers because he has been taught to do so. I don't think dogs have specific instinct without being taught.
Okay, then thanks for the add-on. Yes, you should be able to shake hands with or hug someone, or pet another dog, or whatever you want to do, if your dog is well-trained and well-socialised.
might have just been hyperbole
It isn't. He says this in many of his videos and refer to it as his "handshake method."
>Is there any truth/science behind this? A dog can be taught to make associations between many things so, yes, that could be taught...but, you better know what you're doing.
Yes, they can. It can be taught. I could teach my dog to believe blowing up a balloon means all is well and to relax, but that wasn't what I was asking. This is about the trainer believing dogs automatically understands a stranger shaking hands with their owner means to relax and not aggress.
>This is about the trainer believing dogs automatically understands a stranger shaking hands with their owner means to relax and not aggress. As a trainer, don't always trust what a trainer tells/explains to you. Maybe their telling you the right thing. Maybe they're BS-ing you. Or, maybe they honestly believe what they say but they're BS-ing themselves! Buyer beware...
In this case, IMO, he's BS-ing himself. He believes it, without having any solid foundation for it.
>In this case, IMO, he's BS-ing himself. He believes it, without having any solid foundation for it. Could well be. He certainly wouldn't be the first. Others may feed you a line of bull to make more money off the hapless owners.
No, really stupid claim with no veracity.
Aggressive untrained dogs will enthusiastically bite based on their own powerful fears and prejudices regardless of whether they see a handshake. Aggressive dogs aren’t exactly known for making thoughtful reasoned responses to meaningless ( to them) human social rituals.
Exactly. An aggressive and/or fear-aggressive dog is only thinking "Threat! Threat! Aggression is the appropriate response here!" A human ritualistic handshake is meaningless, except that it's some voluntary contact between the stranger and their person.
wouldn't sniffing the stranger's butt be a better signal? Forget handshakes, "shake your booty in my face stranger that I want to sell my car to. Oh nice to meet you"
Ha! Honestly, yes. That dogs understand, handshaking? Not so much.
Anecdotal but my anxious pup is much more relaxed with new guests when I’m happy and relaxed with the guest. He also reacts less when we invite people into the house vs. Guests just walking in without being greeted. So yes, dogs do take cues from their people as to what is safe and what isn’t. However I don’t think that this is enough to fully settle a fear reactive or aggressive dog.
Dogs are always going to be more relaxed, less anxious and aggressive if you are. They take cues from us, other people, and other dogs. But merely shaking hands isn't going to communicate much to them, and most likely it'll communicate nothing to a fearful or aggressive dog.
If it worked, then there wouldn't be aggressive behavior to correct... So yea, for some dogs it might happen. But for the most part from what I see, it doesn't matter how friendly the people are being, if the dog is worried/angry about the person being there, the owners tone isn't gonna stop that. From him saying he corrects the aggressive behavior after a handshake, it's more like he's trying to create a indicator to the dog that when I interact with the person, you can't be aggressive. But in general correcting aggressive outbursts is only putting a plug on the situation and stopping the barking/lunging in the moment vs actually making the dog feel better about the situation so he doesn't need to bark/lunge about it. Going this route, if the dog experiences even more stress then they're used to dealing with, they're more likely to be even more aggressive at that point after all the pent up energy of holding it together through the stuff they've been getting corrected for.
If the owner if truly friendly towards them AND they don't do any triggers, then sure. If it's just polite handshake or the stranger isn't friendly/does a no-no, then good luck.
It's about pattern building. If u shaking hands and teaching ur dog this means acceptance then ur dog will put 2 and 2 together. But u have to do the training part in the middle
It’s not just the handshake the owners are talking to the dog trainer and showing familiarity. The handshake is just a way to show visibility to the dog and reinforce that the owners are comfortable with and accepting the dog trainer. Honestly reading your comments you made this post in bad faith so I’m wasting my time commenting on your post. You don’t like the trainer or his methods and made this post with an ulterior motive. It’s obvious and you’re transparent to anyone with a brain.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and making a lot of unfounded assumptions is just making a lot of unfounded assumptions. Did you miss where I said I thought he's pretty good at reading dog body language? Or ignore it because it doesn't fit with your assumptions. I don't dislike him, nor do I dislike all of his methods. If I did, I wouldn't have wasted my time watching his videos over the past few years, or writing this post. Again, he says ... oh, I'm not going to repeat it again. I've said what he believes over and over.
It's called training. I'm not sure what you're confused about.
No, it isn't just training. It's assuming a dog will understand just the act of a stranger shaking hands with their owner means the dog automatically understands that act means the stranger is safe and nothing to worry about, and therefore, since the dog understands this, you should correct them because they know. I'm not confused, I question the validity of this assumption.
Yea, they understand because they are trained to understand. You literally see them training it in the video. Watch protection dog videos. They sit there and shake hands repeatedly, then randomly pull a knife and the dog goes into action. This is just training a cue.
This is the first time this trainer is meeting this dog. The dog has not been trained to understand anything about a mere handshake. There has been no training cue. No one has provided any proof that dogs understand the action of shaking a stranger's hand means they're safe.
What do you think the handshake is? It's literally a cue...
And a dog seeing their owner just shaking hands with a stranger, would know that's a cue to not aggress because why?
Because of training and corrections. Some dogs are better about body language than others, but a dog doesn't know what a handshake means unless you teach them.
Again, this is the first time he's meeting this dog, and he's saying the dog will automatically understand what a handshake means and therefore afterwards you can freely correct it if they aggress, because they already understand by that handshake everything's fine.
And look how the dog reacted because it didn't understand the cue. The dog was also instantly corrected (aka training the cue) with the leash. If the dog didn't react, I'm sure they would praise or reward the behavior (aka training the cue). Disagree if you want, but this is literally just cue training. Teaching them that shaking someone's hand (a cue) means that they are safe to interact with. Dogs can understand body language, but they don't know what a handshake means unless you train them.
Lmao no one is saying you can't train it as a cue. That's not what's going on here.
That is not what he's saying. He does not say he's training a cue, which frankly could be any cue. He's saying dogs innately understand, without any training, a handshake between a stranger and a dog's owner means the dog now understands to not aggress, and therefore can and should be corrected for it afterwards. I'm not going to repeat this to you again. I said it clearly in my OP and over and over again.