Coco's Dilemma

Just a few months ago a referring veterinarian called me on an aggression case that involved an elderly couple - the wife was 78 and the husband was 82 years old - and a young, very energetic two year old Springer spaniel neutered dog that their daughter had given them to keep them company in their country home.

My friend, a veterinarian who is well versed on behavioral issues, explained on the phone that this was a high-risk dominance aggression problem, the dog was not really that aggressive, she explained but the husband was on blood thinning medication and could not afford to continue being wounded from a bite or a scratch. On the other hand, the wife was arthritic and fragile, her ankles and knees were very weak and the dog could knock her down plus the fact that they lived relatively far from the nearest hospital made this a very serious situation indeed.

 Regardless of how bad the dog was, the mold had been cast and according to their physician, he had to go. The veterinarian painfully wanted my involvement just to exhaust all possibilities before euthanizing the animal. I understood and of course, said that I would see them and called them. After a lengthy and emotionally charged conversation with both owners on the phone, it became very clear to me that in spite of the problem, they loved their dog very much and that the welfare of the animal was their foremost concern, they would consider giving him up but not euthanize him. After all, they raised him from a tiny pup and were not blind to their health issues and their doctor’s concerns. Their physician even went as far as contacting the veterinarian, urging her to convince them to relinquish the animal and she in turn called me to help accomplish this task. Yikes! Who is going to take an aggressive dog? How am I going to convince them to let go of this dog that has tremendous significance in their lives? It was a tough situation all around. But nevertheless, we set up an appointment and see what happens.

When I arrived at the client’s home with my normal already conditioned “jitters” that I get when visiting cases involving aggression, I was pleasantly surprised to be exuberantly greeted at the door by a very pretty Springer spaniel. The dog looked like a large pup of about 35 pounds; I could not help but want to touch him, he was definitely a cuddling object. The dog’s name was Coco and he wiggled his way into my arms. He had huge expressive eyes and his head and ears were disproportionately larger than his body, a stimulus configuration that made him look like a baby animal. Ethological research indicates that baby or infant features in young animals act as releasing stimuli or triggers that elicit parental or caring behavior and that is what happened to me. Coco’s behavior also matched his looks: he whined and wiggled, smiling all the time in his exuberance while I petted him, he could not get enough of me and would run back and forth between his owners and myself in pure delight. 

While this was going on, I was observing the owners as well and their kind old faces radiated with love and pride in this most beautiful animal and his antics. Remember that I was there to get the dog out of the house for good, so I put on my professional hat and went to work. The initial interview and observations revealed that Coco was not only a very excitable dog but he also had very little education: he would not listen to basic commands unless they had a treat in hand that he had to see before responding; he would also steal stuff from the counters and table tops and the owners had great difficulty chasing him down. If they managed to corner and catch him, he would show his teeth and if they reached for the item, he would snap at them which made them let go and Coco would run off happily with the item and therefore his threats were reinforced: learned dominance/possessive aggression.

Furthermore, if they wanted to, say, groom him and tried to control him and he did not want to be restricted, he would also snap at their hands and arms in protest, not hard, but hard enough to risk a cut or bruise - the risk that we could not take! These, in a nutshell were the unacceptable things about Coco. Lucky for us, his aggressive behavior was not a well-established pattern where a dominant-aggressive dog bites down hard on the owner and truly attempts to do serious damage. Coco’s aggression was relatively mild but bad enough in this case where it was not affordable. He was also very attached, playful and loving: he kept them active and engaged in care-giving behavior. So what could we do?

Under normal circumstances and by following prescribed procedures, these cases are fixable but it takes energy, some minor risks and agility on the part of the owners- abilities that my clients did not have and therefore, not applicable. Simple adoption was also questionable since behavioral intervention and therapy require a great deal of dedication, attachment and love for the animal and new owners, no matter how caring, are not likely to be sufficiently motivated to save the animal who also does not have enough attachment to them to compensate against the often stressful and unpleasant temporary procedures required by the therapy.

So I presented the couple with this dilemma and as could be predicted, they adamantly rejected euthanasia just like they did with the veterinarian and their physician. They also understood that adoption was only going to prolong the suffering. I could not blame them, as they did not have to explain to me, their nonverbal message was loud and clear: Coco was integral to their lives, he kept them going from day to day, they both said to me that they could not imagine not having Coco around, let alone put him to sleep because of their own disabilities. I understood their conundrum perfectly well and did not like it. So what to do? I could not take the dog, fix it and then hand it back: therapy just does not work that way, I could teach the dog not to bite me since dominance aggression is relative to the nature of a relationship but I could not transfer my relationship with the dog to the owners, their relationship has to shift in vivo.

So, toward the end of my visit I was feeling pretty helpless but also realized that I had to make things work for them and Coco, which meant to go somewhere, think deeply of what I know (and don’t know), contemplate my navel, talk to colleagues, friends, gurunoids, angels, other psychologists, old professors and on and on… I had to come up with answers that would fit the situation. I had to engineer a very passive approach with zero-risk procedures, quite a set of requirements to be sure.

After a few days of dissecting things out in my head, the answers began to trickle in slowly but surely: first of all, since the dog was very energetic and we needed him to slow down a bit in the house and be somewhat tired, we hired a neighbor kid to take Coco out after school for long walks in the woods on a 30 ft. check-cord. We also fed him immediately after coming back tired and hungry, and here, since he was most motivated to get fed, we taught Coco to respond to various commands using both verbal and visual signals, in particular “lay down” and “roll over” - the most submissive positions I can think of for a dog to do. I also taught the owners to pay attention to his facial expressions and reward (reinforce) him with their own smiles, baby talk and petting for those expressions associated with submission like ears down and relaxed, tail relaxed, slack jaw, soft eyes and so on. By combining Ethology, which uses muscle contractions as the basic data to indicate internal emotional states and modern behavioristic psychology, which reinforces goal oriented behaviors, we were teaching the dog to give us submissive signals and therefore change his perspective. Also, in order to maintain control of Coco’s resources and be responsive to us, we only gave him 15 minutes to eat. These passive procedures are very helpful in producing dependency and prosocial submission, the logic being that if the animal is aware of its dependency and has to work for his resources and pay attention, it develops a submissive attitude, which counters the possessive tendencies of dominant animals.

Following the feeding, Coco was again taken out by both owners on a long leash to eliminate and was brought back to be placed in the laundry room with a comfortable bed for at least an hour, just to let him relax and be confined rather than running around the house terrorizing them. As in humans, these relaxation periods induce calmness in the animal as long as they are not too long and we took advantage of it by training and socializing quietly right after the animal was let out. Here, I had the owners wear leather gloves and long sleeve shirts, and they were to play-train him with balls, toys and petting - good exercise for them. If Coco jumped on their arms and hands, the gloves and long sleeves would protect them from injury. We also added a short check-cord at this time so that they could handle him without struggling to reach for the collar while the dog was moving around. This not only gave them control over the dog during times of excitement and emotional arousal but it diminished the chances of them getting hurt; this also taught Coco that they had the power to restrict him as well. Most importantly, aggressive bites in dominance issues as well as in cases of panic-triggered aggression are most often elicited when we reach for the collar and the hand is very close to the head. If the hand stays at a safe distance, which is attainable with the short check-cord, the bite is avoided altogether and one gains control.

If they saw that the dog was getting uptight, they were instructed to put Coco back in the laundry room for a time-out using the check-cord to guide him without need for touching or reaching for him and therefore avoiding aggression. So this procedure circumvented the bite and yet gave us control over the animal.

Eventually, the biting disappeared since the intention to bite was not reinforced by the person fearing and moving away or letting go of the animal or by going in the opposite direction with threats or striking the dog.

Another situation that reinforced the possessive and dominance behavior was when the owners unsuccessfully tried to take small items that he stole from counters and tabletops. So we set Coco up on a self-inflicting punishment program where we put specific items that he liked to steal in the past on tabletops with a small mousetrap underneath. When Coco reached, the trap went off and scared the hell out of him. This was very effective because Coco tried it only twice in different places and both times the trap went off (a stroke of luck). He has not tried to reach for things on tables since the second incident: talking about one-trial learning!

I now check with them every few weeks and I am happy to report that there have been no instances of aggression since we started. Coco quit jumping on them, has not stolen things and only play-bites, which is allowed during play when initiated by the owners wearing gloves and long sleeves. The gloves, in fact, have become cues for this kind of play and roughhousing - all necessary behaviors for the dog’s mental stability - and there has been no defense of food.   

So what was wrong with this dog? Nothing really. Simply, he never learned to be anything other than an unruly pup with no contingencies and by biting at them and taking things from the counters he got their attention and was in fact, in control.  Now Coco is still getting the attention he wants and more since the conflict and fear that was generated by anti-social encounters has been eliminated, our approach has infused a good sense of harmony into their relationship serving as fertile ground for developing an even stronger bond.

Cases like this bring home the fact that the real issue and the focus of therapy is always about the interaction between the players, human and animal. The behaviors of all animals have a range with some being typically more fearful, more aggressive, more reclusive, or more intense than the norm and so it takes unusual ameliorative behaviors on the part of the human to get them within the normal range. In Coco’s case, the dog was within this normal range, it was the people whose behavior was dysfunctional, so just by undoing the “harm” their dysfunction produced and getting them to be functional solved the problem.

Like any human being engaged in work that involves problem solving, I have days when nothing goes right. I feel deflated and question my ability, my knowledge, even my worth and usefulness. Then I reflect on events like Coco’s case: we started with an unhappy dog whose days were numbered, an unhappy veterinarian feeling helpless to aid her clients and a very sad older couple facing the reality of having to give up a pet that they truly loved because of problems no one could solve. In the end, my efforts brought harmony to everyone; I not only used my knowledge, my “science” as it were, but I connected with others in a very deep emotional sense as well. Thinking about this, my perception and feelings shift, the emotional gloom lifts and I get a deep sense of understanding that none of us is infallible and this brings me closer not only to my fellow humans, but to all beings. So I am grateful to Coco and his people for giving me this opportunity to grow.

I would love to be your friend but I can't

On our last post we discussed some important factors about fear motivated aggression. Now I would like to turn to the same issue where fear, instead of triggering aggression, elicits escape behavior. Obviously the same underlying problem but with a totally opposite response.

Rudy was a small  three year old female shepherd cross of about 35 pounds. She was very sweet at home and tolerant of a toddler who literally climbed all over her. She loved her people and was very attached to them; the model pet. However, she was petrified of strangers, be them dogs or humans.

The owners had consulted with their veterinarian who correctly diagnosed Rudy as shy, fearful and poorly socialized. He recommended to enroll Rudy in obedience school, take her to dog parks and in general expose her to a lot of social situations - a procedure commonly known as socialization. They did all that but instead of improving, Rudy became more fearful. Now predicting where they were going, she shook in the car  and began to snap at other dogs if they got too close to her in the park or school. Rudy's people stopped all procedures and called their veterinarian back who then referred the case to me.

We spoke on the phone and they conveyed the above information to me. My first response was that since Rudy was very happy at home, they could easily solve the problem by just letting her be the way she was and not expose her to anxiety provoking situations, why rock the boat? After a short silence and considering my suggestion, they replied that they would be OK with that if it wasn't that Rudy seemed to be suffering: if she saw a dog from the distance, she would get very excited and cry wanting to go out there and interact but if they let her go, she would become frightened and immediately run back, cry some more and show intense anxiety which took a while to settle. We went a bit deeper into that and I sensed their own suffering over Rudy's conflict, they wanted to help her overcome her fears and be truly happy. I got it, they were deeply connected to Rudy and they wanted to help her.

We then set up an appointment in my office in the next few days so I could run some standardized tests there. I did not have much hope for change and told them so since these problems are usually associated with a genetic predisposition described as the animal having a low threshold for emotional reactivity. Simply stated, this means that each one of us will spook with different intensities to the same fear producing stimulus, it is built in: emotionally reactive dogs spook more easily than the average dog and the same for people or any other animal for that matter. In my experience, these animals were very resistant to change. But I could at least listen and maybe ease the human's discomfort through understanding of the problem; also I might be able to learn something from the interview that we could use to help Rudy.

When they came into my office, I asked the owners to sit on the couch and to let Rudy move about the room freely and investigate bones and toys strewn on the floor. This is a modification of a standard laboratory procedure to test for emotionality in small animals -the Open Field Test. The average well adjusted dogs will explore the room openly and manipulate the objects as soon as they come into the Open Field, they are relaxed and their attention is focused on the activity of exploration. On the other hand, shy and emotionally reactive dogs will either not move at all or will hesitantly move about on the edges of the field: the body is tucked up, mouth closed and  demonstrate alertness to danger (more on this in future posts).

The test indeed showed Rudy to be very emotional - she froze in place. When I tried to interact with her  (as her test behavior would predict) her arousal level increased and she tried to hide behind her owners (escape). "Fine, she is very emotional", I thought, "but at least she chooses to leave rather than get nasty when freaked out like Thor". Then I laid down on the ground in order to make myself smaller, vulnerable and less threatening to see if by doing this I could reduce the intensity of the emotional response. I also talked sweetly to her - baby talk - in an attempt to demonstrate caring behavior and slowly her demeanor began to change: after a couple of minutes of this, while watching me from behind the couch, she took a couple of steps toward me. Her ears were pinned back and her mouth was retracted backwards, in a submissive and fearful smile. Her body was tucked up as well as her tail, but the tip of the tail was wagging and she tried to approach me indicating the desire to interact but in conflict (her owners were right, she wanted to be social).

 Her message to me was: "I would love to meet you and be your friend but I am so afraid that I really can't". So I continued with the baby talk,  coaxing her to me. Eventually she let me pet her, which I did softly for a few seconds (maternal behavior?) and then stopped to see what effect this had on her. She reacted by getting a bit more excited and nudged me for more! Her tail came up a bit and the wagging increased, the submissive facial expression shifted and became more relaxed. Then she shook herself as if getting rid of a heavy burden and began to move around freely, exploring the environment like a typically well adjusted dog would do when first entering the Open Field. I, of course, was pleasantly surprised. No, I was elated since I expected Rudy to be more recalcitrant because of the powerful pull of the genetic component in fearful behavior. I was just intuitively and in a very human way using baby-talk and  trying to show Rudy that I was not a threat and she understood. At this point I learned about a new (to me anyway) and very powerful tool in psychotherapy by sincerely showing empathy to this poor little animal.

I got up and  began to move around the room as well, threw a toy for her and she pounced on it in play/predation mode, then I playfully chased her around the room. All fear toward me had disappeared. She got into the spirit of the game and if I ran away from her she would chase me! We had a great time. I was now a non-threatening known playmate. I liked this little dog and we became friends. I now saw the problem as the owners saw it. When I went back to my professional psychologist mode and discussed the case further with them, she would not leave me alone. She was so enthralled by the experience that she could not have enough of it. Obviously, Rudy was starving for social contact outside the family but her fear kept her locked inside.

Then I exposed her to Cleo - a very clever female basset hound from my pack - to observe Rudy's reaction to dogs. Cleo  was the smartest and most independent dog I had. She was a trip and knew how to read my therapy dogs. She was so aware of my work that she would not even come into the open field if she sensed that the other dog was dangerous, commands from me be damned - a good thing for me to know, I could use her behavior as a guide. So Cleo walked in, did not pay attention to Rudy and came over by me and just hung out while I talked to her.

When Rudy realized that Cleo was not going after her, she approached us cautiously,  sniffed Cleo's anogenital area (her butt). Cleo was fine with that. She knew the ritual and sure enough, when Rudy saw that Cleo was neutral and friendly, her shyness diminished significantly; at first she was tentative in showing displays of sociability, then she allowed Cleo to investigate her too. They both began to wag their tails and their bodies relaxed - Rudy's emotions had shifted from fear to sociability. I picked up a toy again and played with both dogs, they competed for the toy and my attention but there was no seriousness to the competition, it was all play motivated: we had a good time of course but I also learned that Rudy did not have problems with hierarchical and dominance issues, her cognition of a harmonious social matrix was intact - she knew how to be social - but was blocked by her fear of strangers.

Of course, socialize the dog and solve the problem, the veterinarian was right. Yes, but that's what they attempted to do before and it failed! "Ah" thought I "the problem is not in the definition but in the application": it has been demonstrated in the laboratory that if the feared stimulus is too intense - as in a room full of strange dogs and people or a dog park - it is likely to trigger the fear response and continuous exposures will only increase the intensity of the undesirable response. If, on the other hand, the feared stimulus is presented below what is known as response threshold (small enough so that it barely triggers the emotion but not the external response), then other competing social responses can begin to take over and the approach/avoidance conflict in a dog like Rudy can be resolved or at least ameliorated in time with an observant eye, patience and lots of love. Our job was then so socialize Rudy but in small increments and to observe how she reacted.

Again, it would be impossible to solve these problems if the animal in question does not perceive friendliness and good intentions from the humans. So it is back to emphasizing the importance of establishing a relationship with the dog and interacting harmoniously. If during the exposures the dog becomes more emotional, we are in effect "anti-socializing" and reinforcing the fear. When we are observant of this fact, we become very sensitive and realize that the exposure can only be as intense as the dog can handle. We want to trigger curiosity and attraction to counter the fear and not increase it (systematic desensitization and counter-conditioning). If we slowly build up the intensity of that stimulation in accordance to the dog's behavior and what the dog has learned through its experiences, then socialization can take place.

I explained this to Rudy's people and we developed a systematic procedure for exposures to people and dogs, watching Rudy's reactions and increasing or decreasing the intensity of that exposure in order to let the pro-social tendencies surface and backing off when they did not. This did the trick: the therapy was long and tedious but after a few months of well thought out exposures, Rudy was capable of going out, interact with others and have a good time. She remained shy (the genetic component) and approached things slowly. The veterinarian could treat her now without traumatizing her as long as they too went slowly and lovingly. I believe that this kind of success is not only dependent on what I recommended from a scientific perspective but on the level of dedication and love that the owners put into it. The science and the caring had to come together, ergo the concept of harmony that is the ethos of this blog.

Theory and analysis:

Common wisdom has it that socialization is a method and after checking out the Web, magazine articles on the subject, speaking to dog trainers, veterinarians and so on, I gathered that the standard definition for socialization is that we should  take our shy animal to dog parks, enter it into some obedience classes and in general expose it to as many social situations as possible. This seems reasonable and makes intuitive sense. The missing part here is that it does not consider the emotional idiosyncrasies of the dog, the problem is not thought out deeply enough. As an analogy, this is like bending wood, all wood are capable of bending but if we do it too rapidly and intensely, it will break instead: "pay attention to  the wood" says the old artisan!

©

The Case of The Big Bad Wolf

At the beginning of my practice I was called on a case where a family with three teenage children had an eight month old male Great Dane named Thor, he already weighed over 100 pounds. The referring veterinarian explained that he was acting aggressively toward strangers coming to the house. He had not bitten anyone, not yet anyway. We set up an appointment.

When I pulled up to the driveway, I heard the dog already barking in alarm. Big bark- big dog- my heart began to race, and braced myself for some intense moments, part of my job. I knocked on the door which made the dog bark even more. While waiting to be let in, I listened carefully to the quality of the bark and noticed that it carried a high pitch indicative of youth and uncertainty. So he wasn't convinced of his own ferocity, I thought. I also heard the people inside scrambling and yelling and at the same time trying to calm the dog down with endearments. Total chaos, and they finally let me in. My fear increased but I managed to keep my composure. The father was holding on to the dog and I simply sat down, made myself as small and nonthreatening as possible while averting my eyes: I did not want to make direct eye contact with Thor since that would increase his emotional state.

I saw confusion in every one and the history that I gathered after things calmed down a bit also pointed to fear as the major motivator underlying the problem: the dog was shy as a puppy and extremely attached to its owners. He let the veterinarian that took care of him at an early age handle him but would struggle, urinate and try to escape from anyone else’s control as long as they were strangers.

Before my visit, they had consulted with a local dog trainer who concluded that the dog was territorial and dangerous. He recommended using a shock collar to punish the barking. Territorial aggression is offensive where the animal tries to make itself bigger, puffs up with piloerection (raised hackles), ears forward, lips retracted up, and the growl/bark is low pitched and threatening, and the animal lunges toward the target in an attempt to bite. Thor's demeanor didn't have any of these elements. The behavior that I saw, the actual movements and vocalizations, were certainly associated with fear: ears pinned, lips retracted toward the back of the head, body and tail tucked up, this together with the high pitch of the voice made it easy to diagnose. Therefore, the territorial hypothesis did not make sense to me. Fortunately the owners intuitively knew that shocking the dog was not the answer, they agreed with me that Thor was shy and spooky.

So I went for the fear-motivated hypothesis: the dog is afraid of strangers and acts up, the owners are afraid that the dog is going to bite and they panic, but the dog has no way of knowing this. So it interprets the humans’ reaction as them being afraid of the stranger as well- which further reinforces his fear. But at the same time the humans are acting abnormally in that they are yelling, pulling on him and petting, all at the same time and creating more confusion in the animal making him freak out even more. The whole thing is like a scene straight out of a Three Stooges movie, but no one is laughing.

Now for the therapeutic plan: If my fear hypothesis was correct, I had to show Thor that strangers are not a threat. The best approach was to counter the fear with another opposite emotion when encountering strangers and this had to be done systematically. I chose play specifically since it is very difficult to be playful and at the same time fearful and aggressive. When there is play, fear and aggression are diminished both in animals and humans.

Thor, like most dogs his age, loved to run after his favorite ball so we went outside into the fenced-in yard and turned him lose. He was still afraid of me- the feeling was mutual- but our reaction had diminished significantly by then. He kept a respectful distance from me but was a bit calmer now. I began to throw his favorite ball and play catch with the family and as if by magic, the dog engaged in the play with some caution. That was fine, the emotions had begun to shift. By the end of the session I was petting him, we ran around together and had a great time. Thor was a lot of fun, all fear toward me had disappeared. He now saw me as a friend and playmate, and not as the big bad wolf. Cool, now I have a potential method.

So the plan was to reintroduce the dog to strangers in a neutral environment- outside where it did not feel confined or protected- to associate strangers with play.This circumvented the aggressive barking (more on this on future posts). The role of the stranger was to throw the ball for him.

Thanksgiving was coming up in a few days and they were having friends and family over for the event. I took this opportunity and set up an appointment for that date. The guests were called ahead of time and informed that we were going to do some therapy that day where they would be involved. Everyone was amenable to the plan which was to flood the dog with ball playing- massed trials.

I arrived early, Thor remembered me and was happy to see me and so was I. I was also very nervous, I did not know whether my plan was going to work and thus ruin everybody's day. We went outside and when the guests arrived, they were given the ball to throw for the dog to chase and play catch with the rest of us. I, of course, kept a sharp eye on Thor.

The first few trials took some time to produce play behavior - he was apprehensive and kept his distance form them - but by the fifth or sixth trial , he began to look forward to the next arrival. As I was hoping, the massed trials had a cumulative positive effect on his mood. We had such a good time: we were all smiling and laughing at Thor's antics, the owners were radiating with joy. Thor was going to be OK. I felt so relieved and fulfilled that I could not believe this was actually working - it was after all an experiment based on theory on how the brain is organized. Thor's fear had completely disappeared ( at least for now) and was replaced by expectation of the new arrival with tail wagging and play. I stayed for a couple of hours, had my first and great Thanksgiving dinner for that day and met some wonderful people to boot. Thor was turned loose in the house making a nuisance of himself, insisting to be played with and fed. He was enjoying the company of strangers for the first time in his life, he did not hesitate to demand attention from all. He was the star of the show and I could barely fit in my clothes, I was so pumped. I had made a magical connection within myself, with my science and with the world, I loved everyone and everything at that moment.

I instructed the owners to continue with these play set-ups; not to let strangers touch or reach for the dog, just to let him come to them and then walk into the house together. This procedure allowed us to get around the immediate environmental triggers that lead to the emotional reaction at the door.

Follow ups indicated that, although Thor remained shy (probably genetically predisposed), the negative responses were curtailed and slowly replaced with social playful responses.

On the occasions in which the dog barked in alarm when someone came to the door unexpectedly, the owners were not to freak out and yell, simply give him a time-out. If the visitor could wait outside until the time-out was effective in quieting him down, then he was taken outside on a leash to meet, play and throw the ball with the stranger - Thor knew the routine by now. It is important to notice here that by the owners keeping calm and guiding the dog into social isolation (time-out), the dog learned what to expect when he became alarmed or when he was being social - discrimination learning. The social matrix of the family stayed intact: no trauma in spite of the punishment. Harmony in the family was maintained and chaos was avoided. In conclusion, we learned that only when the dog developed simple playful responses to strangers that his perception changed and the problem could be solved.


Analysis and theory:

Aggression/threatening behavior toward strangers in the home is a fairly common problem situation for dog owners. Sometimes we try to counteract this kind of problem with food, but food is a poor substitute for play as a countermeasure to fear motivated aggression: the emotions associated with food intake have nothing to do with the emotional circuitry associated with fear and aggression. The dog can take food from a stranger’s hand and still be fearful but it can not play and remain fearful at the same time. It does not fit into the emotional organization of the brain. Play is a change in mood. The organism relaxes and bonds with others and this relationship creates a pleasant internal state in each one of us. It is this very pleasant internal state that opens us up to others. It is the basis for the social bond where there is harmony and if that feeling were not mutual, it would not be possible. Therefore, mutuality of experience is essential. So I ask how can we question whether these animals that we relate to on a day to day basis have feelings and consciousness? This issue of animal consciousness has been a thorny and perennial one for psychologists for a long time; we will return to this question in many forms as our future discussions unfold.

From: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xvo1912cjjY

Curiously, there are many reported cases of prosocial interactions between individuals of many species- predators such as polar bears and dogs, gorillas and kittens and so on, all domestic animals at one time or another interact socially with one another. The Internet is full of documented cases where unusual relationships are established between individuals of different species. The interesting point here is that all these crosspecific relationships are mediated through play behaviors and are driven in most cases through play motivated responses and to a lesser extent through maternal behaviors. So play behavior is really a bridge to friendship, which in a human environment is very adaptive for dogs. Therefore, play-training (play as a reinforcer and for counteracting negative emotional states) is a powerful tool but can only be effective when the human and the animal develop a positive relationship which in turn creates a sweet and rhythmic feeling in both. It is this harmonic movement that form the base and the feelings of love between us. I believe that this is the magical, the "je ne sais quois", the satori state or whatever we want to call it that we are trying to attain when dealing with any kind of psychological therapy be it human or animal.

Again, your comments are appreciated and I can be contacted personally at: humananimalharmony@gmail.com 

©