Moon's Graden

by **SRLinds** » Sun, 20 Aug 1995 04:00:00

Re: Reliability of puppy temperament testing

I thought some of you might be interested in the results of a recent study
performed by Beaudet et al. (1994) regarding the reliability of puppy
temperament testing for the detection of a stable *** factor in the
young dog. Puppy tests are commonly employed to detect behavi***traits
in puppies, presumably to assist in their placement into appropriate homes
according to their individual temperaments and needs. Some scepticism
about the reliability of early temperament testing has accumulated over
the years, especially with regards to *** tendencies and ***
aggression -- a behavior problem believed to depend on social learning as
well as a genetic component. The researchers tested 39 puppies at 7 weeks
of age according to the procedures recommended by W Campbell (1992)
(arguably the most commonly employed instrument used by breeders and
trainers today) and then again at 16 weeks of age. The results were
surprisingly negative. The study indicates that temperament testing of 7
week old puppies is not predictive of relative *** when the puppies
are re-tested again at16 weeks for social ***. According to the
authors, "the test has no predictive value regarding future social
tendencies. In fact, the total value of the behavi***scores for social
tendencies between the two age groups showed a trend toward regression
from *** to submission" (1994:273). These findings are consistent
with the changing values between these age groups found by Fuller and
Scott (1965) showing relative *** to be a rather fluid social
process, becoming progressively more stable and permanent as the puppy
matures.

Beaudet R, Chalifoux A, Dallaire A (1994). Predictive value of activity
level and behavi***evaluation on future *** in puppies. Applied
Animal Behaviour Science, 40:273-284.

Campbell W (1992) Behavioir Problems in Dogs. Goleta, CA: Amer Vet Pub.

Scott JP and Fuller JL (1965). Genetics and the Social Behavior of the
Dog. Chicago, IL: Univ of Chicago Press.
Steve Lindsay
Canine Behavi***Services
Philadelphia, PA

"Good training is disciplined play." Hediger

by **Nancy E. Holme** » Mon, 21 Aug 1995 04:00:00

This is very interesting - I wonder how the pups were raised? I wonder
if this is a case of observation skewing the results? I know if I had a
pup that tested out *** I'd be on its case much more often. If the
dogs were left in the pack and not exposed to human handling then the
results would not (IMO) necessarially bear true when applied to dogs
raised as pets. I must say I think the quality and knowlege of the
tester and the puppy rearers bears examining too. I picked my male
giant schnauzer from a litter of 13! He was steady then and is the same
now. He loved people over all else then and is the same now. He was
amiable with other dogs then and is wonderful with my little ones now
and non-threatening strange dogs too.We went to puppy kindergarten and
reinforced all the lovely traits I admirted in him. He's 6 years old
now and agreat dog yet there were pups in his litter you couldn't have
paid me to take. Two were so tough they went off as police dogs. Others
have the more typical tough guardian temperament while I got one of the
best dogs I've ever had. Like I said interesting - I wonder what dog
I'd have purchased without the temperament test I did?
nancy

writes:

Quote:

>Re: Reliability of puppy temperament testing

>I thought some of you might be interested in the results of a recent
study
>performed by Beaudet et al. (1994) regarding the reliability of puppy
>temperament testing for the detection of a stable *** factor in
the
>young dog. Puppy tests are commonly employed to detect behavi***
traits
>in puppies, presumably to assist in their placement into appropriate
homes
>according to their individual temperaments and needs. Some scepticism
>about the reliability of early temperament testing has accumulated
over
>the years, especially with regards to *** tendencies and
***
>aggression -- a behavior problem believed to depend on social learning
as
>well as a genetic component. The researchers tested 39 puppies at 7
weeks
>of age according to the procedures recommended by W Campbell (1992)
>(arguably the most commonly employed instrument used by breeders and
>trainers today) and then again at 16 weeks of age. The results were
>surprisingly negative. The study indicates that temperament testing
of 7
>week old puppies is not predictive of relative *** when the
puppies
>are re-tested again at16 weeks for social ***. According to the
>authors, "the test has no predictive value regarding future social
>tendencies. In fact, the total value of the behavi***scores for
social
>tendencies between the two age groups showed a trend toward regression
>from *** to submission" (1994:273). These findings are
consistent
>with the changing values between these age groups found by Fuller and
>Scott (1965) showing relative *** to be a rather fluid social
>process, becoming progressively more stable and permanent as the puppy
>matures.

>Beaudet R, Chalifoux A, Dallaire A (1994). Predictive value of
activity
>level and behavi***evaluation on future *** in puppies.
Applied
>Animal Behaviour Science, 40:273-284.

>Campbell W (1992) Behavioir Problems in Dogs. Goleta, CA: Amer Vet
Pub.

>Scott JP and Fuller JL (1965). Genetics and the Social Behavior of
the
>Dog. Chicago, IL: Univ of Chicago Press.
>Steve Lindsay
>Canine Behavi***Services
>Philadelphia, PA

>"Good training is disciplined play." Hediger