Does Dominance Exist in Dog Behaviour?

Despite advancements in our understanding of canine behaviour and the continuous efforts of dog trainers and behaviourists worldwide, the dominance myth continues to permeate the dog training industry. Thanks to social media and tv personalities, dominance is regularly asserted to be the driving force behind many unwanted behaviours in dogs. This has led unqualified dog trainers to promote the idea that dogs are obsessed with world domination and that their undesirable behaviour is evidence of that. Where did the dominance myth come from and does dominance really exist in dog behaviour?

Origin of the myth

The dominance theory was originally devised by animal behaviourist Rudolph Schenkel, who

conducted studies on captive wolves in a Switzerland zoo in the 1930-1940s. Based on his

observations, he hypothesized that wolves were in continual competition for dominance and

that only the aggressive behaviour of the alpha male maintained order in the pack. This

theory was then extrapolated and applied to canine behaviour, asserting that dogs compete to be the alpha or ‘top dog’. American Biologist David Mech (2000), who studied wild, related

wolves on Ellesmere Island Canada over a period of 13 summers, demonstrated that these

studies conflicted with the usual characteristics and behaviour of wolves. When further

studies by David Mech and many after him, were conducted, their research established that

wild wolves in a pack are a family that consists of one mating pair and their offspring of the

past one to three years.

As the offspring matures, they leave the pack to form their own families, whilst the long term

breeding pair remain, with two or three families of wild wolves occasionally grouping

together. In comparison, captive wolves are forced to live in a small and artificial

environment with unrelated wolves, which creates tension and often violence between the

mature members, which is what Rudolph Schenkel had witnessed in the 1930s. Despite the

dominance theory being scientifically debunked many times over, tv personalities

popularized the theory and sadly it is still applied to canine behaviour today.

True Meaning of Dominance

That being said, dominance does exist in canine behaviour, but it is not a personality trait or a

means to create conflict. According to Drews (1993), “Dominance is an attribute of a social

relationship between two individuals in which one of the two (the dominant one) emerges as

the consistent winner of repeated agonistic interactions, whereas the other (the subordinate)

usually defers without escalation.” We often observe this in multi-dog households, whereby

dogs value certain resources and allow the other dog to have the resource with minimal

conflict. This is a fluid dynamic, whereby each dog can display dominance over a preferred

resource, meaning there is no “alpha” or “top dog” and every dog in the group can be

dominant in certain situations. John Bradshaw (2011) refers to this as the ‘Resource Holding

Potential (RHP) model’, which asserts that whenever there is a potential for conflict over a

resource, the dog is met with two decisions; how much they want that resource and how

likely the dog is going to win the resource if they fight for it.

Interestingly, John Bradshaw (2011) relates that some of his studies on groups of dogs

revealed that dogs do consider how much the other dog wants the resource. One such study

on French bull dogs, showed that one of the four females was consistently given priority

access to food, despite not being the oldest or mother to the most recent litter. The single

male in the group regularly deferred to her when it came to food but he had priority access to

toys.

If dominance was a rigid personality trait, the dogs in this group and in many other similar

studies, would fight for priority access to every resource. In dog to dog interactions,

submission is offered voluntarily and is rarely ever forced, to ensure conflict is avoided.

Resource guarding can become a common issue in a multidog household, creating potential

conflict, however, this is usually due to the dog’s insecurities, rather than an effort to establish

rank. Dominance continues to be blamed as the driving force for aggressive behaviour,

however, studies show that when dominance hierarchies are established amongst dogs, there are already established orders of access to resources, meaning there is no need for conflict or aggression. (Victoria Stillwell 2024)

Does it matter what we believe?

Does it matter what we believe? This is the ongoing argument I see occurring on social media, but we need to remember that canine behaviour is a science and as such, we owe it to dogs to align our understanding and training methods with the most up to date scientific research. What are the consequences if we don’t?

Well the theory that dogs misbehave because they are trying to assert dominance and be the ‘alpha’, significantly influences the type of training approaches guardians choose, leading many to use aversive equipment. Jean Donalson describes this as the ‘dominance panacea’, whereby guardians assume every behaviour is due to dominance and that all issues will be resolved if you can just exert ‘adequate dominance’. (Jean Donaldson 2013)

A survey study in 2009, revealed the significant impact of using dominance based methods to address behaviour issues. It recorded that 43% of dogs responded aggressively when they

were kicked or hit, 38% of dogs responded aggressively when resources were forcibly

removed, 26% responded aggressively to being shaken or grabbed by the scruff and 29% of

dogs responded aggressively to the alpha roll method. (Meghan E. Herron *, Frances S.

Shofer, Ilana R. Reisner 2009) Other studies prove that dominance based methods

significantly impact canine welfare, trigger abnormal behaviours and hinder their ability to

learn and communicate with their guardian. This emphasises how critical it is to understand

the true reasons behind canine behaviours and address them using reward based methods.

Sadly, when trainers and guardians continue to blame behaviour issues on dominance, the

root cause of the behaviour will never be identified or effectively resolved.

In conclusion, dominance does exist within canine behaviour, but it is not a personality trait

or a means to create social conflict, as is commonly believed. Rather, it is actually a means to

peacefully resolve it between conspecifics.

Bibliography

Bradshaw. J. 2011 In Defence of dogs, Penguin Books, London, England

Donaldson. J. 2013 The Culture clash, 2 nd edn, Dogwise Publishing, Washington

Drews. 1993. The Concept and Definition of Dominance in Animal Behaviour, January 1993

Behaviour 125(3):283-313 DOI:10.1163/156853993X00290

 Herron. M, Shofer. S, Reisner. I. 2009. Survey of the use and outcome of confrontational and

non-confrontational training methods in client-owned dogs showing undesired behavior.

Department of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania,

3900 Delancey Street, Philadelphia. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 117 (2009) 47–57

Mech, L. David. 1999. Alpha status, dominance, and division of labor in wolf packs.

Canadian Journal of Zoology 77:1196-1203. Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie Wildlife

Research Center Home Page. http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/2000/alstat/alstat.htm

(Version 16MAY2000)

Sandøe.P, Palmer.C,  Corr,S. 2015 Companion Animal Ethics, Wiley Blackwell, place

published unknown.

Stillwell 2024. Aggression. Positively. Accessed 11/05/2024. Aggression | Positively.com