Three Things to Know
Correctly interpreting dog distress signals may reduce the likelihood of dog bites for both children and adults. Researchers investigated how accurately children and parents identify these signals and whether video training on Shepherd’s “ladder” of distress improved their performance.
The study revealed that people tend to notice a dog’s behavior only during stronger reactions. Adults and the oldest children (aged 5) showed greater initial awareness of escalating conflict signals and demonstrated a reasonable ability to identify them after training.
However, both parents and children struggled to recognize subtle conflict-avoiding and defusing signals before the training. While the training improved parents’ recognition of these subtle signals, it did not benefit the children, who continued to struggle with their interpretation.
For Dog Welfare Practitioners
This study underscores a critical gap in understanding dog distress signals among both children and adults, with recognition typically occurring only when a dog’s stress escalates to overt conflict.
Improved recognition of early stress signals could not only prevent dog bites but also encourage owners to avoid pushing their dogs toward aggression, potentially reducing the number of owner surrenders.
Given the increasing prevalence of dog ownership, dog welfare advocates, such as shelters and humane societies, have a vital role in educating the community about canine behavior and safe interaction practices.
The Full Picture
Dog ownership yields health, well-being, and developmental benefits for children. However, rising dog bite injuries, disproportionately affecting 5–9 year olds, present a significant risk. Most bites occur at home with known dogs during child-initiated interactions.
A key factor in dog bites is human misinterpretation of dog body language, particularly stress signals. Children and adults often miss cues of discomfort, which can lead to aggression. Current prevention programs inadequately address recognizing these signals in familiar settings.
Therefore, urgent education is needed for both children and parents on identifying and interpreting canine stress signals (e.g., nose-licking, turning away, freezing) to prevent risky interactions. This study, titled “Teaching Children and Parents to Understand Dog Signaling”, measured participants’ knowledge before and after the intervention and is part of a broader effort to create safer interactions between children and dogs through education and awareness.
Study Methods
Materials
- Video Clips: Sets of 16 short videos showed dogs displaying distress signals based on Shepherd’s Ladder, plus four “happy” dog clips. Sounds (like growling) were included when appropriate. Videos were 6 seconds long and edited for consistency.
- Audio Stimuli: Each video had matching audio instructions: drawing attention to the dog’s behavior, explaining its meaning, and giving a safety tip (e.g., “Look! The dog is blinking its eyes. The dog is worried. You should leave the dog alone.”).
- Rating Scale: Children used a 1–5 scale with faces ranging from very happy to very unhappy/angry to rate the dogs’ emotional states.
Procedure
Children (ages 3–5) were recruited from schools and nurseries in Lincolnshire, UK. They were tested in quiet school or nursery rooms, sitting about 70 cm from a laptop screen. They went through:
- Baseline Test (Test 1): Rated 20 videos to assess initial knowledge.
- Training Phase: Watched 32 videos with audio guidance highlighting distress behaviors.
- Post-Training Tests: Immediately after training (Test 2), and again at 6 months (Test 3) and 12 months (Test 4), children rated another set of 20 videos (including some new ones and some repeated ones).
In addition, 40 parents completed only the baseline and training tests on the same day.
Study Results
In total, 88 children (39 girls, 49 boys) participated in all tests. In addition, 40 parents participated during the initial testing phase. About 37% of the children and 27.5% of the parents were dog owners.
The results showed that distress signal type played a significant role: while both children and adults were able to clearly distinguish conflict-escalating signals from the others, both had significant difficulties correctly interpreting conflict-defusing and conflict-avoiding signals. Mistakes were common, with 3-year-old children showing the most misunderstanding.
| Correct % | Baseline Test (Test 1) | Post-Training (Test 2) | After 6 Months (Test 3) | After 1 Year (Test 4) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conflict Escalating Signals | ||||
| 3 year-olds | 47% | 50% | 64% | 66% |
| 4 year-olds | 55% | 72% | 70% | 76% |
| 5 year-olds | 64% | 83% | 77% | 81% |
| Parents | 83% | 100% | ||
| Conflict Avoiding Signals | ||||
| 3 year-olds | 23% | 26% | 33% | 30% |
| 4 year-olds | 31% | 27% | 33% | 36% |
| 5 year-olds | 27% | 42% | 25% | 20% |
| Parents | 52% | 93% | ||
| Conflict Defusing Signals | ||||
| 3 year-olds | 16% | 14% | 16% | 14% |
| 4 year-olds | 13% | 13% | 15% | 17% |
| 5 year-olds | 20% | 20% | 18% | 13% |
| Parents | 28% | 73% |
Older children not only performed better overall but also showed greater improvement over time, especially when identifying conflict-escalating signals. Five-year-olds also briefly improved in recognizing conflict-avoiding signals after intervention, although this improvement was not lasting. Thus, the intervention did not help children’s understanding to reach a level of complete accuracy.
On the other hand, the intervention was highly effective in improving adults’ ability to accurately interpret dog distress signals. After the training, adults’ ratings closely matched the appropriate responses to the dogs’ signaling behavior, with high scores for conflict-escalating signals and appropriately high scores for conflict-avoiding and conflict-defusing signals.
In addition, anecdotal reports from parents indicated a positive shift in behavior: after learning about distress signals, many parents realized they had unintentionally caused their dogs stress and expressed intentions to change their behavior, potentially improving household safety and dog welfare.
Conclusion
The study revealed how often children and adults misinterpret dog signals and where the most errors occur. It also offered an intervention that improves how children and adults interpret dog body language. Training participants led to significant and lasting improvements in recognizing and correctly interpreting dog distress signals, especially conflict-escalating signals (like snarling), which are critical for preventing risky interactions and dog bites. Future work should build on these findings by implementing and assessing longer-term prevention steps, like teaching not just recognition but also appropriate reactions.
Miscellaneous
Data From Study:
Owned Dogs > Offering Better Care > Youth Education Programs
Year of Publication:
2018
External Link:
Meints K, Brelsford V and De Keuster T (2018) Teaching Children and Parents to Understand Dog Signaling. Front. Vet. Sci. 5:257. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2018.00257