Did I teach my dog a dog-wrestling move?
July 7, 2008 9:25 AM   Subscribe

Did I teach my dog a dog-wrestling move?

The other day while at the park, my dog was playing with a stranger's dog. While they were wrestling, I noticed that my dog (who seemed to be in the alpha role) had a new move. When he would go for a take-down, he'd pin the other dog at the neck/shoulder to the ground with his own neck and head. He would hold the other dog to that position for a few seconds, neither moving. Then he'd get up and they'd resume playing. He kept doing this, and I seemed to recall seeing other dogs learn new moves by watching/playing with other dogs. But I couldn't remember ever seeing another dog show mine that particular wrestling hold.

Then a few days later, as I was hugging my dog, I realized I was doing that exact move myself, pressing his head/neck/shoulder region down with my own as I hugged and praised him. Suddenly I wondered if he picked this up from me.

Is that possible? Can dogs pick up dog-play moves from humans? Or, did I learn the move from him instead? Or, have we both been duped by Toxoplasma gondii?
posted by christopherious to Pets & Animals (15 answers total)
 
Oh, dogs will absolutely learn from you. I remember buying my dog one of those tug toys - the ones with the knotted rope on one end for the dog to bite and and nice plastic handle for the human to hold onto. After about a day or so of playing with the rope toy and really going at it, he realized that he'd have an absolute advantage if he took the plastic end first. It was a very uneven battle after that! I also taught him to play keep-away when he was a puppy - it was hilarious. They learn very, very quickly. I'm sure you've seen dogs who know how to open doors by the knob? They certainly didn't figure it out by themselves.
posted by The Light Fantastic at 9:42 AM on July 7, 2008


All us higher order mammals are able to learn by imitation. It's way cool.
posted by solipsophistocracy at 9:52 AM on July 7, 2008


Aw, he's just hugging that other doggy!
posted by availablelight at 9:54 AM on July 7, 2008


Response by poster: It's just the change of context that gets me. Humans, sure. But I had assumed dogs were limited to applying newly-learned behaviors within the same (or a very similar) context.

When I was doing the move, we were not actually wrestling or sparring. It was pure love and praise. It's conceivable, I suppose, that he simply recognized a neat trick and had no trouble applying it in a completely different context.

Or, perhaps he was feeling affection for the other dog. Or, that he was picking up on my own (concealed) powerful attraction to the other dog's owner, who was totally hot.
posted by christopherious at 9:57 AM on July 7, 2008


I suppose it's possible, but unlikely -- especially given the differing circumstances under which you provided the example and your dog exhibited similar behavior. I don't believe dogs learn new skills simply by watching. After all, it's no simple cognitive exercise to experience an event as the one being done to, and then mentally reverse roles so you see yourself on the other end of the exchange. Dogs tend to learn new skills by trial and error and by reinforcement from a dominant creature (i.e. you). (When you train a dog, the easiest way to do so is through positive reinforcement of existing behaviors.)
posted by pmbuko at 10:09 AM on July 7, 2008


Which begs the question, did your dog KNOW that you were hugging him? Or did he think that YOU were wrestling?
posted by jeanmari at 10:55 AM on July 7, 2008


Don't you now wonder who taught you that move?
posted by metajc at 11:35 AM on July 7, 2008 [1 favorite]


Best answer: If the dog indeed picked that up from you, I imagine that the dog was experiencing your hug as more of a dominance thing than an affection thing. Being on top of a dog and pressing them down is most definitely dominance behavior, whether that's what you mean by it or not.
posted by Jupiter Jones at 12:37 PM on July 7, 2008


Dogs can be taught such tricks on other dogs for sure...

I used to trip up my dog when we were roughhousing by grabbing it's far-front paw and pushing on it's close front shoulder to thump it to the ground before a tussle and a tummy rub.

As the dog got bigger and got rougher with other dogs, I watched it bite at the other dog's far front paw over and over. Finally the other dog jumped up at the same time and ended up getting slammed into the ground the same way.

I was so proud :-P
The dog would do this with some success through most of it's years.
posted by upc_head at 1:47 PM on July 7, 2008


Response by poster: Jeanmari & Jupiter Jones, that makes perfect sense. It's even obvious now, in hindsight. And jeanmari raised an important question, but I was unsure when my own behavior in this case would get classified as dominance in the dog's mind. But, thanks to Google, it appears clear now that I've been dominating him with this message of affection all along:
The muzzle and nape of the neck are sensitive areas for dogs. They are sites at which the dog's mother would deliver messages of chastisement, admonishment and her leadership. When dogs grow up they seem to remember this early mode of communication and many retain sensitivity regarding interferences in these areas. In dogfights, most of the 'legal' action is directed toward the head. Muzzle- or scruff-grabbing are favorite fight moves. When humans come along and grab a dog by the muzzle or scruff they are asking for trouble. Whether they get it or not depends on their perceived level of authority.
...
Being high up and/or on top of another dog is a way that signals dominance. A dominant, in-charge individual will rise up to his fullest height and may literally take the high ground when approaching and signaling his seniority to a more inferior creature. On reaching the other dog, he may rest his head or a paw on the other dog's back. Mild mannered acceptance of such challenges from above will be viewed as concession and submission.

When people tower over a dog, lie on him, or rest a hand on him, the message is similar. The response, however, depends on the relationship between the person and the dog. A dominant dog may repel such a challenge to his rank while a submissive dog may squat and urinate. The message is opposite if a person lies on the floor next to a dog, allows the dog to sit next to him on a couch, or permits the dog to sit on his lap. In these instances, the sent and received is one of social equalization or deference on your part. With respect to lap sitters, an easy way to remember the social implications of such placement is to consider the rhetorical question, "In this situation, who is the king and who is the throne?" - Dr. Nicholas Dodman, PetPlace.com
posted by christopherious at 2:01 PM on July 7, 2008


I don't really like the thinking that tend to accompany the terms "alpha" and "dominance" in relationship to dogs.

That aside, the move you've described sounds like a very typical dog move. Maybe you provided the immediate trigger to bring it out, but it seems just as likely that it happened spontaneously. I've seen dogs do that all the time. Sometimes one dog will tend to go down willingly when subject to neck wresting, but proably almost as often, the same two dogs will switch off in the same play session, first one will be the first to yield, then the other, then back.
posted by Good Brain at 3:35 PM on July 7, 2008


"alpha" and "dominance" are of primary concern to dogs.

that's how dog-society functions. a highly orginized pack where each member is aware of his or her position in the ladder. don't confuse the matter by trying to apply Human notions of social equality to the matter. trust me, fido is not offeneded by this structure, he craves it.
posted by swbarrett at 4:56 PM on July 7, 2008


Response by poster:
...the move you've described sounds like a very typical dog move. Maybe you provided the immediate trigger to bring it out, but it seems just as likely that it happened spontaneously.
Good point, Good Brain. They do seem equally likely.
posted by christopherious at 6:00 PM on July 7, 2008


swbarret, thank you for proving my point.

Do not apply social theories derived from observations of un-related wild wolves (packs are usually extended families) living in captivity to domestic dogs. First, wolves and domestic dogs have important behavioral differences, and second the theory is largely discredited when applied to wolves.

I don't dispute that domestic dogs need social structure, I dispute the understanding of their social structure that usually comes with talking about alpha dogs and dominance. For one thing, the dogs that most people call alphas are generally quite insecure about their spot in the hierarchy and so need to keep proving themselves.
posted by Good Brain at 12:32 PM on July 8, 2008


Good Brain, I don't think there is any ambiguity on the subject of whether or not dogs are social animals with a strong sense of hierarchy maintained through dominance and submission. You may choose to believe that they're little furry people, but the reality is that they are animals who live a life filled with instinctual behavior of this sort. For sure they have personalities and some intelligence and are not entirely governed by instinct, but the reality is that whether we realize it or not our behaviors towards them are interpreted in this fashion. The quote from the doctor above stands behind this.

The behavior of christopherious's dog was clearly dominance behavior towards the other dog. This is neither a bad or a good thing, it is just the way things are.
posted by Jupiter Jones at 10:33 PM on August 8, 2008


« Older How to compress a bunch of folders to their own...   |   How do Upper West Side grocery stores comare with... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.