Search

Behavioral problems are a major source of poor welfare and premature mortality in companion dogs. Previous studies have demonstrated associations between owners’ personality and psychological status and the prevalence and/or severity of their dogs’ behavior problems. However, the mechanisms responsible for these associations are currently unknown. Other studies have detected links between the tendency of dogs to display behavior problems and their owners’ use of aversive or confrontational training methods. This raises the possibility that the effects of owner personality and psychological status on dog behavior are mediated via their influence on the owner’s choice of training methods. We investigated this hypothesis in a self-selected, convenience sample of 1564 current dog owners using an online battery of questionnaires designed to measure, respectively, owner personality, depression, emotion regulation, use of aversive/confrontational training methods, and owner-reported dog behavior. Multivariate linear and logistic regression analyses identified modest, positive associations between owners’ use of aversive/confrontational training methods and the prevalence/severity of the following dog behavior problems: owner-directed aggression, stranger-directed aggression, separation problems, chasing, persistent barking, and house-soiling (urination and defecation when left alone). The regression models also detected modest associations between owners’ low scores on four of the ‘Big Five’ personality dimensions (Agreeableness, Emotional Stability, Extraversion & Conscientiousness) and their dogs’ tendency to display higher rates of owner-directed aggression, stranger-directed fear, and/or urination when left alone. The study found only weak evidence to support the hypothesis that these relationships between owner personality and dog behavior were mediated via the owners’ use of punitive training methods, but it did detect a more than five-fold increase in the use of aversive/confrontational training techniques among men with moderate depression. Further research is needed to clarify the causal relationship between owner personality and psychological status and the behavioral problems of companion dogs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Canine thunderstorm phobia is considered a noise phobia, however, it has been theorized that pain associated with discharge of accrued static electricity could contribute to this malady. This project aimed to determine if a purported anti-static cape (the Storm Defender®) and a non-anti-static cape (placebo cape) were therapeutic for canine thunderstorm phobia. Twenty-three owners used either the Storm Defender® (n =13) or the placebo cape (n =10) on their dogs during four thunderstorms. A baseline pretreatment anxiety score (pre-cape use) and four treatment anxiety scores (with use of a cape) were generated by scoring owners’ responses to 12 questions that concerned the severity of behaviors associated with thunderstorm phobia. Use of both cape types was associated with a statistically significant decrease in median anxiety scores from baseline. After a fourth cape use, the median anxiety score of the Storm Defender® group decreased by 63% from baseline (P =0.005) and the placebo cape group''s median anxiety score decreased by 36% (P =0.002). Owners in both groups indicated that their dogs displayed significantly less hiding behavior by the fourth use of the cape. Seventy percent of owners who used the Storm Defender® on their dogs and 67% of the placebo cape owners reported some degree of improvement via a global assessment score, made after the fourth use of the cape. There was no statistically significant difference between the Storm Defender® and placebo cape groups in their baseline pretreatment anxiety scores, median treatment anxiety scores or in their owner global assessment. The results indicate that use of a form-fitting cape may be moderately therapeutic in treating canine thunderstorm phobia. More research is needed to determine why owners reported effectiveness with both cape types. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objective—To evaluate blanket and flank sucking and any association with pica in Doberman Pinschers. Design—Survey and case-control study. Animals—153 Doberman Pinschers (77 dogs with blanket or flank sucking and 76 unaffected dogs). Procedures—Owners of Doberman Pinschers with blanket sucking, flank sucking, or both were surveyed regarding the age of onset, triggers, frequency, duration, interruptability, and associated medical and behavioral consequences. A putative association of blanket sucking and flank sucking with pica was examined by comparison of affected dogs with unaffected dogs. Results—Apart from the difference in the object of oral activity between blanket and flank suckers, age of onset was the only variable that differed between dogs with the 2 conditions. Dogs with blanket or flank sucking had a higher prevalence of pica than the unaffected population. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance--Blanket and flank sucking are apparently related conditions that can occur with sufficient intensity to cause medical sequelae. These nonnutritive suckling behaviors share similarities with other canine compulsive disorders and are associated with pica. Veterinarians should advise owners that flank and blanket sucking are abnormal, potentially harmful behaviors in dogs. Treatment should be considered for severely affected dogs or when flank or blanket sucking is associated with medical problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents a case of a cat which was evaluated for episodes of severe, unprovoked owner-directed aggression. Medical reasons for the cat's aggressive episodes; Administration of phenobarbital to treat presumed behavioral seizures; Reduction in the frequency of the cat's aggressive episodes.

Evaluates dogs for episodic bouts of bizarre behavior termed glugging and snoofing by their respective owners. Case history; Physical examination findings; Laboratory results; Diagnosis; Treatment plans for both dogs.