Studies About Dogs
Summaries and Links here please

Here is a link to articles written by Catherine O'Driscoll DVM, based on research conducted at Purdue. Purdue is a large university, where a lot of research is conducted, by people who regularly publish, such as Dr Glickman DVM et al. I suggest you read Dr O'Driscoll's article and the supporting research.

I tried to read the supporting research, but the links are broken. Do you have working links to them?

Here is a link to articles written by Catherine O'Driscoll DVM, based on research conducted at Purdue. Purdue is a large university, where a lot of research is conducted, by people who regularly publish, such as Dr Glickman DVM et al. I suggest you read Dr O'Driscoll's article and the supporting research.

I tried to read the supporting research, but the links are broken. Do you have working links to them?

"A 30-item survey of previous interventions was included in a behavioral questionnaire
distributed to all dog owners making appointments at a referral behavior service over a 1-
year period. For each intervention applied, owners were asked to indicate whether there
was a positive, negative, or lack of effect on the dog’s behavior, and whether aggressive
behavior was seen in association with the method used."

Abstract. Many of the structural modifications of modern breeds of domestic dog, Canis familiaris, can
be explained by changes in the rate of development, during domestication from the wolf, C. lupus. These
changes have been dominated by paedomorphosis, or underdevelopment, so that the adult passes
through fewer growth stages and resembles a juvenile stage of its ancestor. In this paper the effects of
these processes on the signalling ability of 10 breeds selected for their degree of physical dissimilarity to
the wolf are examined. The number of ancestral dominant and submissive behaviour patterns used
during signalling within single-breed groups ranged from two (Cavalier King Charles spaniel) to 15
(Siberian husky), and this correlated positively with the degree to which the breed physically resembles
the wolf, as assessed by a panel of 14 dog behaviour counsellors. When the signals displayed by each
breed were grouped according to the stage of wolf development in which they first appear, those breeds
with the smallest repertoires were found to draw most of their signals from those appearing before 20
days of age in the wolf, suggesting that physical paedomorphism has been accompanied by behavioural
paedomorphism.

Abstract. Many of the structural modifications of modern breeds of domestic dog, Canis familiaris, can
be explained by changes in the rate of development, during domestication from the wolf, C. lupus. These
changes have been dominated by paedomorphosis, or underdevelopment, so that the adult passes
through fewer growth stages and resembles a juvenile stage of its ancestor. In this paper the effects of
these processes on the signalling ability of 10 breeds selected for their degree of physical dissimilarity to
the wolf are examined. The number of ancestral dominant and submissive behaviour patterns used
during signalling within single-breed groups ranged from two (Cavalier King Charles spaniel) to 15
(Siberian husky), and this correlated positively with the degree to which the breed physically resembles
the wolf, as assessed by a panel of 14 dog behaviour counsellors. When the signals displayed by each
breed were grouped according to the stage of wolf development in which they first appear, those breeds
with the smallest repertoires were found to draw most of their signals from those appearing before 20
days of age in the wolf, suggesting that physical paedomorphism has been accompanied by behavioural
paedomorphism.

Interesting, start, but needs much more work to be convincing. I would have liked to see more description of Fox's studies of wolf behaviour, eg., description of where it was done under what circumstances. His work is ~ 40 years old . . . are his methods still considered valid? Do the wolves he studied reflect wolves as a whole? And more importantly, do they represent wolves as they existed before extensive environmental modification by Homo sapiens.
I don't think you can characterize all French Bulldogs by observing four females interact in five one hour sessions. I find the group behaviour of Labradors varies considerably between breeders . . . don't know if this is due to genetics or environment.
It's peculiar that he doesn't mention Balyaev's work with foxes which so strongly showed correlation between morphological and behavioural changes during domestication.

ABSTRACT: Canine aggressive behaviour is one of the most common problems being reported by dog owners. However, the biochemical basis of this phenomenon remains unclear. In humans, alterations in omega-3 plasma polyunsatured fatty acids and elevated omega6/omega-3 ratio have been linked to behavioural alterations, including aggression. Thus far, however, the relationship between plasma polyunsatured fatty acid status and aggression has not been investigated in the dog. In the present study we sought to investigate whether polyunsatured fatty acid status could be altered in plasma of pathologically aggressive Canis familiaris. Eighteen adult male German Shepherd dogs, aged 4.9 ± 0.9 years, showing no clinical signs but aggression, were investigated. Eighteen healthy male dogs, aged 4.8 ± 0.7 years, with a negative history of behavioural and neurological disorders served as controls. Baseline fasting plasma polyunsatured fatty acid composition was determined by gas chromatography. Compared to normal dogs, aggressive dogs showed lower docosahexaenoic acid (22:6 n-3) concentrations and a higher omega6/omega-3 ratio. In addition, they showed reduced cholesterol and bilirubin concentrations compared to their normally behaving counterparts. Altogether, our results suggest that low omega-3 fatty acids may adversely impact behaviour in dogs, resulting in greater propensity to aggression. However, given the cross-sectional design of our study, we cannot claim any causal relationship between the presence of alterations in fatty acid status and canine aggressiveness. Whether omega-3 fatty acids supplementation may be useful to reduce aggressive behaviour in the dog deserves further investigation.

There have been some interesting studies comparing aggressive and non-aggressive individual dogs from the same breed. Much of the work has been done on golden retrievers in Scandanavia. They seem to be finding some genetic causes related to seratonin and dopamine. (see www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100525090552.htm or Google 'canine aggression seratonin dopamine). Wouldn't it be great if they come out with ways to identify inherently aggressive dogs via cheek swabs and forget all this breed specific nonsense.

"Social support is critical for psychological and physical well-being, reflecting the centrality of belongingness
in our lives. Human interactions often provide people with considerable social support, but can
pets also fulfill one’s social needs? Although there is correlational evidence that pets may help
individuals facing significant life stressors, little is known about the well-being benefits of pets for
everyday people. Study 1 found in a community sample that pet owners fared better on several well-being
(e.g., greater self-esteem, more exercise) and individual-difference (e.g., greater conscientiousness, less
fearful attachment) measures. Study 2 assessed a different community sample and found that owners
enjoyed better well-being when their pets fulfilled social needs better, and the support that pets provided
complemented rather than competed with human sources. Finally, Study 3 brought pet owners into the
laboratory and experimentally demonstrated the ability of pets to stave off negativity caused by social
rejection. In summary, pets can serve as important sources of social support, providing many positive
psychological and physical benefits for their owners."

BACKGROUND:
It is commonly assumed that owning a pet provides older residents in the community with health benefits including improved physical health and psychological well-being. It has also been reported that pet owners are lower on neuroticism and higher on extraversion compared with those without pets. However, findings of research on this topic have been mixed with a number of researchers reporting that, for older people, there is little or no health benefit associated with pet ownership.

OBJECTIVE:
To identify health benefits associated with pet ownership and pet caring responsibilities in a large sample of older community-based residents.

METHODS:
Using survey information provided by 2,551 individuals aged between 60 and 64 years, we compared the sociodemographic attributes, mental and physical health measures, and personality traits of pet owners and non-owners. For 78.8% of these participants, we were also able to compare the health services used, based on information obtained from the national insurer on the number of general practitioner (GP) visits they made over a 12-month period.

RESULTS:
Compared with non-owners, those with pets reported more depressive symptoms while female pet owners who were married also had poorer physical health. We found that caring for a pet was associated with negative health outcomes including more symptoms of depression, poorer physical health and higher rates of use of pain relief medication. No relationship was found between pet ownership and use of GP services. When we examined the personality traits of pet owners and carers, we found that men who cared for pets had higher extraversion scores. Our principal and unexpected finding, however, was that pet owners and carers reported higher levels of psychoticism as measured by the Revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS:
We conclude that pet ownership confers no health benefits for this age group. Instead, those with pets have poorer mental and physical health and use more pain relief medication. Further, our study suggests that those with pets are less conforming to social norms as indicated by their higher levels of psychoticism.

CONCLUSIONS:
We conclude that pet ownership confers no health benefits for this age group. Instead, those with pets have poorer mental and physical health and use more pain relief medication.

They could just as easily conclude that people with poorer mental and physical health, or those who suffer from pain, seek out the company of pets to provide social support, as suggested by the experimental data in McConnell et al. (2011).