Traits of drug and explosives detection in dogs of two breeds as evaluated by their handlers and trainers

• Autorzy: Adamkiewicz E. , Jezierski T. , Walczak M. , Gorecka-Bruzda A. , Sobczynska M. , Prokopczyk M. , Ensminger J.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Police dogs handlers’ and trainers’ opinions on Labrador retrievers (n=87) and German shepherds (n=96) trained for drugs vs. explosives detection have been compared. As most important traits in both specialties the responders indicated: (1) willingness to sniff objects, (2) concentration (focusing) ability, (3) acuity of smell and (4) willingness to bring an object back to a person. Only trainers but not handlers rated boldness in novel surroundings, and fear of specific things and of sudden loud noises, high in importance. Taking all traits together 43.7% and 44.4% of dogs showed an “ideal” level of the traits according to handlers’ and trainers’ opinion, respectively. Correlations coefficients between handlers’ and trainers’ ratings for the traits of real dogs did not exceed r = 0.33. Significant breed and specialty differences were found for the percentage of dogs that demonstrated too low,too high and “ideal” levels of the trait. Both handlers and trainers were consistent in their opinion that Labrador retrievers as service dogs of both specialties are too highly motivated to obtain food (P<0.05) and as drug detection dogs are overly friendly to people (P<0.01). The overall satisfaction rate did not differ significantly between breeds, specialties and sexes. This report shows a rather low consistency of opinions of dog trainers with those of dog handlers as to 28 behavioral and physical traits of drug and explosives detection dogs of both breeds and reveals no special preference for either breed in performing narcotics or explosives detection.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

drug; explosives detection; detection; dog; animal breed; handler; trainer; Labrador retriever dog; German shepherd dog

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Animal Science Papers and Reports
• Rocznik: 2013
• Tom: 31
• Numer: 3
• Opis fizyczny: p.205-217,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Adamkiewicz E.

• Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Department of Animal Behaviour, Jastrzębiec, 05-552 Magdalenka, Polan

autor

Jezierski T.

• Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Department of Animal Behaviour, Jastrzębiec, 05-552 Magdalenka, Polan

autor

Walczak M.

• Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Department of Animal Behaviour, Jastrzębiec, 05-552 Magdalenka, Polan

autor

Gorecka-Bruzda A.

• Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Department of Animal Behaviour, Jastrzębiec, 05-552 Magdalenka, Polan

autor

Sobczynska M.

• Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Department of Animal Behaviour, Jastrzębiec, 05-552 Magdalenka, Polan

autor

Prokopczyk M.

• The Canine Department, Police Training Centre, Sułkowice, 05-560 Chynów, Poland

autor

Ensminger J.

• Delta Hedge Consulting, Stone Ridge, New York, USA

Bibliografia

• BRADSHAW J.W.S., GOODWIN D., LEA A.M., WHITHEAD S.L., 1996 – A survey of the behavioral characteristics of pure-bred dogs in the United Kingdom. Veterinary Record 138, 465-468.
• GAZIT I., GOLDBLATT A., TERKEL J., 2005 – The role of context specificity in learning: the effects of training context on explosives detection in dogs. Animal Cognition 8, 143-150.
• JAKOVCEVIC A., ELGIER A. M., MUSTACA A. E., BENTOSELA M., 2010 – Breed differences in dogs’ (Canis familiaris) gaze to the human face. Behavioral Processes 84, 602-607.
• JONES A.C., GOSLING S.D., 2005 – Temperament and personality in dogs (Canis familiaris): A review and evaluation of past research. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 95, 1- 53.
• KALETA T., PISULA W., FISZDON K., KONDRAKIEWICZ P., 2011 – Individual differences in police dog handlers. Polish Psychological Bulletin 42, 52-55.
• KOBELT A. J., HEMSWORTH P.H., BARNETT J. L., COLEMAN G.J., BUTLER K.L., 2007 –The behavior of Labrador retrievers in suburban backyards: The relationships between the backyard environment and dog behavior. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 106, 70-84.
• KUBINYI E., TURCSAN B., MIKLOSI A., 2009 – Dog and owner demographic characteristics and dog personality. Behavioral Processes 81, 392-401.
• LEFEBVRE D., DIEDERICH C., DELCOURT M., GIFFROY J.M., 2007 – The quality of the relation between handler and military dogs influences efficiency and welfare of dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 104, 46-60.
• LIT L., SCHWEITZER J. B., OBERBAUER A. M., 2010 – Characterization of human – dog social interaction using owner report. Behavioral Processes 84, 721-725.
• MAEJIMA M., INOUE – MURAYAMA M., TONOSAKI K., MATSUURA N., KATO S., SAITO Y.,WEISS A., MURAYAMA Y., ITO S., 2007 – Traits and genotypes may predict the successful training of drug detection dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 107, 287-298.
• MURPHY J.A., 1998 – Describing categories of temperament in potential guide dogs for the blind. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 58, 163-178.
• ROONEY N.J., BRADSHAW J.W.S., ALMEY H., 2004 – Attributes of specialist search dogs – a questionnaire survey of UK dog handlers and trainers. Journal of Forensic Science 49, 296-302.
• ROONEY N.J., BRADSHAW J.W.S., 2004 – Breed and sex differences in the behavioral attributes of specialist search dogs – a questionnaire survey of trainers and handlers. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 86, 123-135.
• ROONEY N.J., GAINES S. A., BRADSHAW J.W.S., PENMAN S., 2007 – Validation of a method for assessing the ability of trainee specialist search dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 103,90-104.
• RUEFENACHT S., GEBHARDT-HENRICH S., MIYAKE T., GAILLARD C., 2002 – A behavior test on German Shepherd dogs: heritability of seven different traits. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 79, 113-132.
• SCOTT J.P., FULLER J.L. eds., 1965 – Genetics and the Social Behavior of the Dog. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
• SERPELL J.A., HSU Y., 2001 – Development and validation of a novel method for evaluating behavior and temperament in guide dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 72, 347-364.
• SINN D.I., GOSLING S.D., HILLARD S., 2010 – Personality and performance in military working dogs: Reability and predictive validity of behavioral tests. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 127,51-65.
• SLABBERT J. M., ODENDAAL J.S.J., 1999 – Early prediction of adult police dog efficiency – a longitudinal study. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 64, 269-288.
• SVARTBERG K., 2002 – Shyness-boldness predicts performance in working dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 79, 157-174.
• SVARTBERG K., 2006 – Breed-typical behaviour in dogs – Historical remnants or recent constructs? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 96, 293-313.
• SVARTBERG K., FORKMAN B., 2002 – Personality traits in the domestic dog (Canis familiaris).Applied Animal Behaviour Science 79, 133-155.
• SVARTBERG K., TAPPER I., TEMRIN H., RADESATER T., THORMAN S., 2005 – Consistency of personality traits in dogs. Animal Behavior 69, 283-291.
• VAS J., TOPAL J., GACSI M., MIKLOSI A., CSANYI V., 2005 – A friend or an enemy? Dogs’ reaction to an unfamiliar person showing behavioral cues of threat and friendliness at different times.Applied Animal Behaviour Science 94, 99-115.
• VAS J., TOPAL J., PECH E., MIKLOSI A., 2007 – Measuring attention deficit and activity in dogs:A new application and validation of a human ADHD questionnaire. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 103, 105-117.
• WILSSON E., SUNDGREN P.E., 1997a – The use of behavior test for selection of dogs for service and breeding. I. Method of testing and evaluating test results in the adult dog, demands on different kinds of service dogs, sex and breed differences. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 53, 279-295.
• WILSSON E., SUNDGREN P.E., 1997b – The use of behavior test for selection of dogs for service and breeding. II. Heritability for tested parameters and effect of selection based on service dog characteristics. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 54, 235-241.