It sounds like you are entirely on the right track in dealing with this: sounds like anxiety and sounds like you are doing a great job with it!

Cheers,
Jim Ha

Let me fill in some blanks. We picker her up at 10 weeks of age from the breeder. At the time, the breeder told us that she had a problem with cars that surfaced when she took her mom and grandma together with all the pups to the Swiss Retriever “pope” who is also a Vet for examinations. Ours was the only one who had a problem in the car, screaming the whole way and throwing up in the car. She’s one of a litter of 8.

She is unneutered and will remain so, inasmuch as she has a beautiful coat and in brown flatties, many loose their coat quality when neutered. Her last heat went off without a htich and almost no false-pregnancy symptoms. We would re-evaluate this decision iif we determine that she has real problems with her heats, but we have no plans to breed her. We’ve kept in touch with the breeder and with some of the guardians. All guardians have reported to either the breeder or us directly of their dogs being, even for Flatties extremely sensitive and varying in descriptions from nervous to extremely over-friendly.

Your explanation about anxiety/fear would make sense. Usually an enforced but positively introduced time-out usually will help keep the episodes to a minimum. I’ve also noted a marked decrease in the last 6-8 months. She’s now 3.25 years old and can deal with stress situations much better, of course i’ve been working with her using techniques like “Look at me”. Now, when we come across situations of high stress, we seldom need this, I watch her body language and will start this if she’s tense or fixated on something – and she lightens up right away. I suppose such general calming also occur with progressing maturity. OTOH, the reports I’ve received from breeder and guardians NOW is, that we’re miles ahead of her siblings. One gentleman who hires me for computer consulting has her sister and he’s had to stop bringing her to work because she can’t settle and goes bonkers when people enter the office. Mine will respond to attention but will also stay laying at my feet if no one pays her attention. I’m sure, a combination of maturing, but also relaxing protocols and reinforcing calm behavior.

Thanks for your help on this!

greetings

Buzz Cecil and Vela
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dN9XBVs-gXc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-84LNUAwVo
(proud papa alert)

Sorry, I should have been clearer: 90% of the dogs out there are spayed and neutered (thank goodness) and so my comments referred to them. In your case, you are referring to reproductively intact dogs, and the story is entirely different. Your comments and conclusions about sexual drives, the role of high levels of hormones, play behavior in practice for real procreation are all valid interpretations of misdirected copulatory behavior in intact animals, especially groups of intact animals. My comments referred to the majority of cases we see which are neutered animals.

Cheers,
Jim

To make sense of humping I think you need to pay attention to age, reproductive status, persistence, degree of familiarity between dogs, owner’s reaction, history of behavior . . . perhaps breed . . . and perhaps other things as well.

Now, let me be clear as well: “humping” (copulatory behavior) is, obviously, quite genetic for clear evolutionary success reasons… get it wrong and those genes don’t pass on! But what we are discussing here is inappropriate RELEASE of the behavior. And let me also be clear: (inappropriate) humping is a pathological behavior used as for self-soothing of anxiety, and ANXIETY may (in fact, sounds likely) is genetic in this family line. You speak of extreme anxiety at a young age, in the car, for instance, very unusual. Also, the humping starts at about 9mo, you say: exactly as I would expect if it’s a response to anxiety and fear… 7-9mo is the neophobic critical period at which many fear responses appear in dogs.

So my (admittedly long distance) diagnosis of the humping behavior in this case would be inappropriate manifestation of profound anxiety, probably of genetic origin. Not genetics for inappropriate humping but genetics for anxiety, which is manifesting itself in inappropriate humping. Why humping? One major factor is reproductive status, which I don’t think you mention: unneutered dogs and dogs neutered at too young an age are more likely to manifest anxiety in this way.

Hope this helps,
Cheers,
Jim Ha, PhD, CAAB

The breeder is one of the best here in Switzerland and that is not something to be taken lightly. Terrific quarters for the pups in her house with dozens of different type of flooring for the pups to get used to, 2 other dogs and three cats in the household, play time inside and outside. change of environment every week or so, meaning tearing down and building up new quarters inside and play areas outside. social walks as a group in town, car rides, people (future owners, family members neighbors school children (she^s a biology and geology teacher). After getting the pup at 10 weeks, despite all of this, the first job was to desensitize the pup to the car, sine she SCREAMED the who way home 45 minutes, even though sitting on lap. now she’s ok with the car. Humping started at approx 9 months. intermittent, depending upon the other dog. Back and forth one after the other with her bros and sisters, None whatsoever with other dogs. Starts within 30 seconds with others. fortunately, if the other dog shows that this behavior is not on, she stops.

1) Interesting, that ALL her bros and sisters show this behavior.
2) extremely sensitive example of a Flat-coated Retriever. Was people and dog reactive (not aggressive, but rather completely and utterly over-the-moon friendly. Look-at-me has gotten this pretty much under control, no longer a problem with people.
3) puppy classes and then 6 months of adolescent dog classes. Well socialized with other dogs – but still typical Flattie with their typical manner of greeting.
4) the fact that, as in all her family, the reaction to the other dog does seem to make a difference as to whether the behavior starts or not and then whether it is continued cannot be ignored. The other dog must be supply some kind of antecedent stimulus, but I am not seeing it. I don’t have your experience or eye for this.
5) I can redirect her about 9095% of the time if she’s not completely into the act. If she is, too late.
6) I really wonder about humping not being genetic, after all, it is, whether meant at that moment or not, an act of procreation, which under “normal” circumstances is necessary to pass on the genes. If it were a learned behavior, not a genetic one, Although I’m not a behaviorist as you are, I do understand the basic mechanics of ABC. There must be some kind of trigger in play that, combined with the successful completion of the act as positive consequence is keeping this alive. But the behavior itself wasn’t learned in the sense that she didn’t know how it goes until someone or another dog taught her.
7) As a humpee she is extremely sensitive to what dog tries it with her. She’s been “raped” a couple times in dummy classes, such that she stopped going after the dummy, because the “rape” happened just as she left the line to get a dummy.

I know you used the term “generally” and that may be applicable. OTOH, if it is a learned behavior, then how does the male dog learn to hump to reproduce? Especially if he’s never been in contact with another humping male? I suppose many are about as successful or unsuccessful as other males of other species. (grin). But then, if it is a learned behavior, it should be relatively easy to “unlearn”, like umping up, either by redirection or substituting an incompatible behavior. Of course, being that it’s a self-rewarding behavior, that makes it more difficult – there’s probably not much I can offer the dog that will exceed the reinforcers it procures for him- or herself by humping. But the fact that it doesn’t seem redirectable once it’s fully started causes me to question this – as if at that moment the brain checks out and a ??? sequence of actions takes over.

Now either I’ve got it all wrong, or there could be some basis to a genetic action being carried out, one anchored in reproduction, but abducted, yes very likely as a result of over anxiety or over arousal.

Or … ?

Let me respond to several of these comments in one response here:
FAP’s or MAP’s: the terms are being misused in either case, in the example provided by LC. In either case, as pointed out O’Heare, these terms refer to a sequence of behaviors, performed in stereotypical fashion, triggered by a specific and characteristic stimulus called a sign stimulus, and having a strong genetic basis. The term Modal Action Pattern was suggested to replace FAP in 1986 by George Barlow, to imply a less rigid requirement for stereotyped patterns of behaviors, given that we could not identify any behavior sequences that fit the definition of a FAP. Here is the definition from Paul Chance’s Learning and Behavior Sixth Ed.: “A Modal Action Pattern is a series of interrelated acts found in all or nearly all members of a species. Resemble reflexes, and have a strong genetic basis.”

The more recent term which has replaced a FAP or a MAP is simply a stereotyped motor pattern or an even more up-to-date term, a motor pattern with a high heritability. But in the case of humping, this behavior does not fit the definition for several reasons: it does not constitute a sequence of behaviors, there is no triggering sign stimulus, and it is unlikely that there is any genetic basis to the behavior. Just because the behavior is stereotyped does not make it a sequence of stereotyped behaviors or genetic in basis. In fact, it is not likely to be genetic, or most animals of that species would perform the behavior… which they don’t… thank God!

Humping is a pathological behavior, resulting generally from anxiety due to lack of proper early socialization and is used to self-soothe in stressful situations. It’s NOT a FAP or a MAP, but a stereotyped behavior (as most behaviors related to reproduction are) triggered by internal anxiety levels… quite different.

The term “instinctive drift” was coined many decades ago by comparative psychologists, and refers to what we call today phenotypic plasticity. That is, animals are constrained by their genotype and early experience, their biology, in what they can learn and the degree to which they can learn it. Thus, an animal may not be able to learn certain associations, or may not be able to retain some associations as long as others: there are biological predispositions, as we say today, for certain behaviors, including learning. So again, a once-useful term has been updated.

But the real discussion is about “predatory drift.” There is no such concept in ethology, and the term doesn’t even fit with the idea of instinctive drift in my mind. Are the users of this term suggesting that the default behavior for domestic dogs is predation, that when play or social behavior is performed for a while that the tendency for dogs is to revert to predation (as animals are supposed to revert to innate behaviors in instinctive drift)? This whole concept fails for me.

Regardless, there are numerous reasons why a dog might “appear” to be playing or behaving socially and suddenly attack a smaller dog, reasons that may or may not include predation. A major reason is that many (most?) small dogs do not communicate in the same was as more primitive breeds of dogs, a point driven home in Erik Zimen’s excellent work with wolf and poodle comparative behavior (and more recent studies) and reinforced by our modern knowledge of genetic relationships among breeds. When you are interacting with another dog, you throw a lot of body language at them, to check them out, to determine their emotional state, to anticipate their intentions, and when you receive nothing coherent back, or perhaps even (inadvertent) signals of anxiety, aggression, or weakness, a dog of certain temperament might react with defensive aggression… this is just one common example that I have seen in my cases.

I really don’t see how the Bolles work on instinctive drift, or the Breland article popularizing that work, or for that matter, the more modern understanding of phenotypic plasticity (or constraints, if you are a “glass is half empty” type) can support or weaken the compulsion (or confrontational, as we call them in applied animal behavior research) trainers. The concepts would apply equally to any kind of learning…

Now for “calming signals”: another term not part of the animal behavior literature, or certainly not in any form similar to how they are used by trainers and poorly trained behaviorists. I have heard of all sorts of behaviors in this category: displacement behavior, redirected behaviors, reconciliation (the new form of appeasement) behaviors, vacuum behaviors, behaviors intended to reduce anxiety in the performer, behaviors intended to reduce anxiety in the recipient, just an incredible mish-mash of stuff. There is no established use of such a term, and in the uses of the term “calming signals” that I have heard, I have not even detected a clear or consistent understanding of what calming signals are, how they are defined or exhibited. So the term is useless: why not use the terms in standard usage? In some cases, calming signals are displacement behaviors, in some cases they are redirected behaviors, in some cases they are self-soothing behaviors, etc. These are established and well-studied concepts in behavior. “Calming signals” is another good addition to my collection of bad ethology!

So I hope that this reveals a bit more of modern ethology… there is a real science out there, as accessible, or inaccessible, as any other science like genetics, organic chemistry, and ecology. Some evolution of terminology is inevitable but usually reflects new knowledge and new discoveries, and good-quality education, and then keeping up-to-date with ongoing new discoveries, is the key to tapping into that new knowledge to benefit yourself, benefit your clients, and especially to benefit the companion animals on which we are focused.

Be that as it may, it is an interesting insight into the state of research at that moment and it’s development up to Dr. Ha’s blog. I also found interesting your breed list of dogs prone to “predatory-like attacks” like attacks. I believe it’s Trish King in her excellent DVD set Different Breeds, Different Needs who mentioned in her area having seen a spate of Golden Retriever who’d killed smaller dogs, usually Chihuahuas.

When you appeal to Dr. Ha to start some research, I’d like to also place a request:
I’ve looked high and low for some peer reviewed research on the so called “Calming Signals” which of course includes all the nomenclature variants and extension so many people have developed (appeasement, distance gaining, etc.). I found one dubious Italian study that has pretty much been discounted due to methodology problems. As far as I can tell, we’ve got mostly Turid Rugaas and her personal work and very little else of a substantial, recognized scientific base, yet we all speak of these “signs” or “signals” without really having any formal study having been done as to cause-effect. There are for example groups who say, that these “signals” are in no way intentionally used by dogs to signal anything, they are simply reactions to certain stimuli and are nothing more than an expression of inner feelings/conflicts. Others are completely convinced that dogs intentionally use these in hierarchical patterns from mild through full blown aggression to achieve their goals of distance (increasing or decreasing). Are these people basically correct (who? some? all?) in their anecdotal observations? Why can’t these signs/signals be systematically be studied?

Before moving on to my plea, I would like to share the history of the term, which I have researched and to which you briefly alluded. The term “instinctive drift” was coined in the famous 1961 Breland and Breland article, “The Misbehavior of Organisms,” to describe an observed phenomenon. Whether it was an unfortunate word choice does not change the observation that certain behaviors were much harder to train using operant conditioning, and appeared to be “interfered with” or “hijacked by” species-specific action patterns. (Notice I do not use the word “fixed” or “modal.” They are actions in a pattern, though!) The Brelands were behaviorists in the old sense — they had studied with Dr. Skinner and had a successful business using applied behaviorism (i.e. operant and classical conditioning) to train multitudes of animals to do multitudes of interesting and difficult behaviors. I have confirmed with their last surviving colleague, Bob Bailey, that he does not have any recollection of the variant term, “instinctive drift” being used in the Breland era, or by himself thereafter. (Personal communication, 9/10/2008.)

Years later, apparently Dr. Ian Dunbar threw out the term “predatory drift” quite casually to describe an apparently related, observed phenomenon — dogs who are engaged in social behavior and switch abruptly into predatory behavior (often with deadly results) toward a member of a species with which the dog had been socialized — dogs, sometimes people, and quite often cats. Jean Donaldson (who is careful to note that “predatory drift” is not a sanctioned term and that the underlying phenomenon has not been studied and reported on in a scientific fashion — see her video “Predation in Family Dogs”) heard this and was the first to start discussing it in public, in more detail. So there are really no ethologists in the history, although Dr. Dunbar did a substantial amount of dog ethology long ago when in graduate school.

I suspect I can identify one reason this phenomenon (whatever you call it) has not been formally studied, analyzed, and labeled by ethologists. It is a behavior that is exhibited by domestic dogs, and domestic dogs have received extremely little attention from ethologists, in the past. (This is changing!) I believe this phenomenon is, in fact, almost by definition going to be limited to domesticated predators. This is because any non-domesticated (large) predator who kills a small dog, cat, or child will be said to have predated. Not being domesticated means that “socialization with humans” is a much more limited effect. Only dogs have been persistently and intensively bred exactly for the ability to socialize with humans in a way no other species can. So, a behavioral phenomenon that seems to be basically limited to dogs has had very little chance to be studied.

Regardless of whether “predatory” and/or “drift” are unfortunate choices of terminology, there clearly IS a a phenomenon at work here. We see behavior that *looks like* dog social behavior (e.g. lots of social signalling such as turning sideways, play bows, “sexy ears,” rolling over, barking, growling, very inhibited playful bites to the head and neck, or pokes to the flank in some breeds, and so on) be rapidly replaced by behavior that *looks like* predatory behavior (silence, very contained stalking, staring, straight and rapid rushing toward the target, very hard and damaging bites to the loin or underside or a very hard grab and shake resulting in a broken neck). In fact, it appears to me that pit fighting in game bred pit bulls resembles this predatory behavior and not social fighting behavior.

If this isn’t some sort of abrupt “switch” into a predatory motor pattern, what is it? There has to be some kind of genetic component here. (I realize there could be a genetic component that doesn’t involve predation, etc., but still, what is it?) Experienced trainers know the breeds most likely to engage in this type of behavioral shift — Siberian Huskies are one good example, but we see it in some terriers such as the Jack Russell, pit bulls, and Fox terriers. I also see it in Dobermans, Rottweilers, German Shepherds, and many of the Belgian Shepherds, though probably far more in protection-bred Malinois than in the other Belgians. This is my observation — I’d be thrilled for a more systematic study on breed frequency. If there are breed tendencies on this, as appears to be the case, then there is a genetic component. Interestingly, I think this range of breeds is quite varied in how close to wolf-type dominance behaviors they tend to show, and it is hard to rely on, say, “offended dominance notions” to explain the phenomenon. So if it’s not some sudden shift to actual predatory behavior, what is it?

Since this is a low-frequency but extremely high-stakes behavior, it needs study for practical reasons. Trainers need to be able to know roughly what it is, what it looks like, and how likely it is to occur with a given dog. Can we make guesses based on breed? Prior history? How reliable are our typical guesses about what will trigger it? The “cat is a friend inside, but dead from a neck shake when it runs outside” scenario is very familiar to experienced dog trainers. And so is the apparent trend for dogs killed in predatory-like attacks to be small and often white, often fluffy, and squealing and/or moving rapidly. Sometimes it seems to be a child who triggers it. This is a very tough one to get across to clients, because apparently, it simply does not matter how much the dog “likes” or “is friends with” the other dog or child at other times. It does not appear to correlate *at all* to fearfulness. Getting people to understand that “he’s doing better with my Chihuahua now” may not affect the chances of him killing the same Chihuahua later is very tough. Having an explanation for the *why* of this behavior would be useful in these cases.

In terms of scientific interest, well, I think it’s pretty interesting. How does a brain handle the tension between later-evolved social behaviors and early-evolved food-acquisition behaviors? Other than kittens provoking parental nurturing responses, cats don’t have to deal with other cats that are one-tenth their size, so the question of “prey buttons being pushed by an adult conspecific” is just not likely to come up. Dogs are unique in this multi-species social group affiliation and this behavior pattern seems to me to reflect a tension there. Or I could be wrong. But I’d really like to know.

So on to my plea. Dr. Ha, you *are* an ethologist! You, more than any of us, are in the position to possibly study this, or get it studied. It’s important. It’s interesting. I vote for further study. Thanks!

Now I’m wondering about humping. This has been a cause of endless discussions as to what humping is and what it isn’t. Having a female humper myself,the experience I’ve had is, that if I can catch her as she’s getting into position, I can call her out of performing the humping. Once she’s started humping, I’ve got a 50% chance at most, practically only if the humpee shows specifically that he/she doesn’t want to be humped.

Now if we now do NOT classify this as a FAP or a MAP, does it hold to the definition as set forth by the AABP? Or is this definition also dated. Your article was great in explaining why former FAPs aren’t anymore, but I missed an explanation as to what they ARE. I don’t really need to classify humping as this that or the other for myself. I work with the onset, since frankly I do not see any kind of antecedent stimulus that my dog does. Why she does it with one dog but not with another. And she does it only very sporadically, the sex of the other dog playing no role whatsoever. Moreover, when helping a client deal with this, what is the best way to accurately describe to them the whats and whys as part of detailing what we can do about it?

thanks in advance!