Skip to content

Research Studies and Articles

Navigating the world of raising and training your puppy or dog can feel overwhelming. With so much information available, it’s hard to separate fact from fiction. We’ve taken the time to gather research and data that have guided us in creating a safe, effective, and informed approach to training. One that prioritizes understanding your dog as an individual.

While the information provided here offers valuable insights, it only scratches the surface. We encourage you to explore further, ask questions, and make informed decisions to ensure the best life for your canine companion.

Disclaimer: Things to Keep in Mind When Reviewing Research

When exploring the studies and articles we’ve curated, it’s important to critically assess the information presented. Here are some key pointers to help guide your review:

  • Context Awareness: Understand the study’s scope and limitations to avoid overgeneralizing conclusions.
  • Methodological Considerations: Evaluate the research methods used and their impact on the findings.
  • Sample Size: Be cautious with studies involving small sample sizes, as these may not represent broader trends.
  • Correlation vs. Causation: Remember that correlation does not imply causation—look deeper into the data for clarity.
  • Publication Source: Verify the credibility of the journal or platform where the research was published.
  • Bias and Confounding Factors: Be mindful of potential biases or external factors that could influence results.
  • Temporal Relevance: Consider when the study was conducted; newer research may reflect updated knowledge.
  • Industry Influence: Be aware of funding sources and whether the study’s outcomes could benefit specific industries.
  • Peer Review: Check if the study has been peer-reviewed, which ensures higher research quality.
  • Data Interpretation: Focus on accurate interpretation of statistical significance and real-world applicability.

By being an informed reader, you’ll be better equipped to make decisions that align with your dog’s needs. We hope these insights inspire you to dig deeper, ask questions, and evaluate trainers and their methods critically. A well-informed pet guardian is the foundation of a safe, enriching, and rewarding life for your dog.

Spay & Neuter

We encourage you to discuss this with your vet and use the data below to help you decide on when the best time is for your pet. We know that some vets may not be up to date with the latest data and want to help you ensure your pet gets the best!

Behavior & Aggression
  • Behavioral Risks & Aggression
    • McGreevy et al., 2018: Early neutering linked to increased aggression and anxiety behaviors.
    • Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2020: Review of neutering-associated aggression and behavioral implications.
    • Batson, 2022; Miller et al., 2013: Inflammatory disease related to hormonal changes post-neutering/spaying can affect serotonin and dopamine levels, potentially increasing anxiety and aggression behaviors.
    • Kirchoff et al., 2019; Mondo et al., 2020; Batson, 2022: Altered gut microbiota, influenced by neutering-induced hormonal changes, may contribute to aggression and anxiety through altered serotonin and dopamine metabolism.
    • Kim et al., 2006: Increased reactivity in female German Shepherds spayed between 5-10 months.
    • Zink et al., 2014: Increased thunderstorm phobia in spayed female Vizslas. Highlights increased risk of fear and aggression in dogs neutered before maturity, especially males. Suggests hormone-preserving alternatives.
    • Reisner et al., 2005: Increased owner-directed aggression in spayed female spaniels.
    • Balogh et al., 2018: Increased noise and fear reactions in spayed Labradors.
    • Root et al., 2018: Phantom pregnancies post-spay linked to increased reactivity and aggression.
    • Mongillo et al., 2014: Cognitive decline potentially accelerated by hormonal changes after spaying.
Joint Issues, Cancer & Breed-Specific Considerations
  • Hart et al., 2016: Increased joint disorders and cancers in neutered German Shepherds.
  • UC Davis, 2020: Neutering impacts on joint health and cancers by breed.
  • Torres de la Riva et al., 2013: Joint disorders and cancers in Golden Retrievers.
  • Hart et al., 2014: Health comparison post-neutering in Labrador and Golden Retrievers.
  • Hart et al., 2020: Assisting Decision-Making on Age of Neutering for 35 Breeds of Dogs.
    Large-scale study examining joint disorders, cancers, and urinary incontinence across 35 specific breeds. Suggests individualized timing based on size, sex, and breed.
  • Hart, Hart & Thigpen, 2023: General Principles and Cultural Complexities of Spay/Neuter Decision-Making. This paper focuses almost entirely on physical health outcomes and population control rather than behavioral neuroscience or integrative behavioral health.
    Provides a broader framework for making spay/neuter decisions, emphasizing individualized, breed-specific timing. Reinforces previous health risk data and includes a call for flexibility in practice.
  • AKC Updated Spay-Neuter Guidelines: Breed-specific timing recommendations.
  • Thyroid Health: Neutering significantly affects thyroid function, potentially leading to hypothyroidism and behavior changes (Kutzler, 2020; Batson, 2022).
Mammary Tumors & Reproductive Health
  • Kutzler, 2020: Luteinizing Hormone and Reproductive Health Post-Gonadectomy.
    Explores how spaying affects LH receptor activity, increasing risks for urinary incontinence and potentially influencing mammary and adrenal health.
  • Alenza et al., 2000: Factors influencing canine mammary tumor incidence and prognosis.
  • Baba & Câtoi, 2007: Comprehensive overview of mammary gland tumors.
  • Journal of Veterinary Advances, 2016: Risk factors, prognosis, and treatments for canine mammary tumors.
  • PetMD, 2013: Preventive spaying significantly reduces mammary cancer risks.
Urinary Incontinence
  • Arnold et al., 1989: Increased urinary incontinence in spayed female dogs.
  • Veronesi et al., 2009: Therapeutic management of spay-related urinary incontinence.
  • Reichler & Hubler, 2014: Updated insights into urinary incontinence post-spaying.
  • Kutzler, 2020 (again): Provides a hormonal explanation for spay-related urinary incontinence, focusing on chronic LH elevation and tissue sensitivity.
  • Hart et al., 2020: Notes increased urinary incontinence risks for early-spayed female dogs in several breeds, especially larger-bodied breeds.
Prostate & Testicular Health
  • Christensen, 2018: Review of canine prostate disease.
  • Urfer & Kaeberlein, 2019: Review of Desexing and Longevity.
    Includes discussion of gonadal hormone removal’s impact on longevity, prostate disease, and cancer susceptibility.
  • BluePearl Pet Hospital: Overview of canine testicular tumors.
  • VCA Hospitals: Information on retained testicle (cryptorchidism) risks and management.
  • AVMA: Neutering and its effects on prostate health.
Hormonal Health & Behavior
  • Kutzler, 2020; Batson, 2022: Spaying/neutering can significantly alter gonadal hormones impacting health and behavior long-term.
  • Harvey et al., 2019; Craig, 2016; Batson, 2022: Chronic stress related to neutering/spaying influences inflammation, affecting skin, gut, and behavior.
  • Frohlich et al., 2019: Hypothyroidism risks increased after gonadectomy.
Obesity & Metabolic Health
  • Bjørnvad et al., 2019; Batson, 2022: Neutering increases obesity risk due to metabolic rate changes, potentially affecting joint and behavioral health.
Immune Health & Autoimmune Conditions
  • Sundburg et al., 2016, Batson, 2022: Neutering associated with increased risk of autoimmune conditions, especially in larger dog
Medical & Surgical Alternatives
  • Egalitte, 2024: Reversible neutering vaccine developments.
  • (Kutzler, 2020, Batson, 2022): Vasectomy and ovary-sparing surgeries as alternatives preserving hormonal health.
  • (Batson, 2022): Chemical castration options (Suprelorin implants, Tardak injections) offer reversible hormonal suppression but carry distinct health considerations.
Neurological & Gut Health Post-Surgery
  • Surgical stress from neutering/spaying may induce classical fear conditioning, affecting post-surgical behavior (Batson, 2022).
  • Surgery and medication (anesthetics, NSAIDs, antibiotics) may disrupt gut microbiota, impacting behavior post-neutering (Han et al., 2021; Maseda et al., 2020; Lucchetti et al., 2021).
Indirect Factors: Gut Health & Diet After Neutering/Spaying (Clarified Context)
  • Spaying or neutering can lead to metabolic and hormonal changes, which may indirectly affect your dog’s gut microbiome and dietary requirements. Although the following studies do not directly investigate spaying or neutering, they highlight broader relationships between gut health, diet, and behavior, suggesting potential secondary impacts:
    • Gut Microbiome & Aggression: Distinct gut microbiome profiles have been associated with behaviors like aggression and anxiety, emphasizing the importance of considering gut health post-neutering or spaying, especially if behavioral changes are observed (Kirchoff et al., 2019; Mondo et al., 2020; Batson, 2022).
    • Diet & Behavior: Dietary influences significantly affect neurotransmitter balance, gut health, and behavior, potentially becoming even more critical following neutering/spaying due to altered metabolic rates and hormone regulation (Batson, 2022; Schmidt et al., 2018).

Note: These studies provide context and insight into broader health considerations following spay/neuter procedures but were not explicitly conducted within the context of sterilization surgeries.

Additional Comprehensive Reviews & Recommended Readings
Puppy Developmental Stages, Imprinting (Fear Periods), Adolescent Stage
Puppy Development & Socialization
Fear Periods & Imprinting
Adolescent Stage (Teenage Dogs)
  • Asher et al., 2020:
    Adolescent conflict behaviors linked to attachment style and developmental timing.
  • Batson, 2022:
    Owners’ attachment style and personality influence adolescent dogs’ stress reactivity and self-regulation​.
  • Behavioral Changes in Adolescence:
    Adolescent dogs may become less responsive to their owners due to hormonal and brain development changes, similar to teenage humans.
  • Batson, 2022:
    Hormonal surges during adolescence affect impulse control, stress responses, and social behavior​.
  • Owner Perceptions During Adolescence (2023):
    Owners commonly report adolescent dogs as intentionally “mischievous,” reflecting developmental challenges.
  • Training Regression in Adolescent Dogs:
    Adolescent dogs often show temporary regression in trained behaviors, requiring patience and consistent reinforcement.
  • Batson, 2022:
    Social buffering through strong human or conspecific relationships helps mitigate adolescent stress and support emotional resilience​.
Dog Body Language Studies/ and Noted Authors
Recommended Experts on Dog Body Language
  • Turid Rugaas
    Renowned for identifying and explaining calming signals in dogs, helping owners recognize stress and appeasement behaviors.​
  • Sarah Kalnajs
    Specializes in canine body language and aggression signals, providing insights into early warning signs of discomfort.​
  • Barbara Handelman
    Author of comprehensive guides on dog communication, focusing on visual signals and interactions.​
  • Brenda Aloff
    Known for her work on canine behavior, body language, and training techniques that promote positive interactions.
Dog Play Behavior
Dog Body Postures
Dog-Human Communication
Canine Facial Expressions
Vocal Communication in Dogs
Cognition, Communication, and Problem Solving
Comprehensive Reference on Canine Behavior
Information on Harnesses
Effects of Harness Design on Limb Movement
  • Lafuente, Provis, & Schmalz (2018)
    Studied restrictive vs. non-restrictive harness effects on shoulder extension.
    Note: Small sample size (n=9); treadmill-based, controlled condition. Not fully representative of everyday walks.
  • Knights & Williams (2021)
    Investigated three harness types’ impact on limb movement in assistance dogs.
    Note: Small sample size (n=10); laboratory-controlled environment. Limited direct household applicability.
  • Williams, Anderson, & Stafford (2023)
    Analyzed three commercial harnesses’ effects on limb movement (n=66).
    Note: Larger sample size; conducted under controlled conditions. May vary at home.
  • Dowdeswell & Churchill (2024)
    Compared six harnesses’ impact on forelimb biomechanics (n=30).
    Note: Reasonable sample size; controlled setting. Limited household applicability.
Pressure Distribution & Comfort
  • Murray, Guire, Fisher, & Fairfax (2013)
    Evaluated girth design’s pressure distribution (originally in horses).
    Note: Not canine-specific; lab-based measurements. Low direct household applicability.
  • Peham et al. (2013)
    Pressure distribution beneath guide dog harnesses (n=8).
    Note: Small sample size; controlled lab conditions. Limited general household applicability.
Spine & Body Mechanics
  • Galla et al. (2013)
    Effects of harness types on guide dogs’ spinal movement.
    Note: Small sample size; specialized guide dog harnesses in lab conditions. Limited household applicability.
  • Nagymáté, Kiss, Farkas, & Meszlényi (2018)
    3D motion-capture analysis of harness kinematics.
    Note: Lab-controlled, treadmill conditions; unclear sample size. Limited household applicability.
  • Weissenbacher et al. (2022)
    Harness influence on guide dogs’ biomechanics (n=12).
    Note: Small sample; controlled lab testing. Limited direct household applicability.
Leash Pulling Behavior
  • Shih et al. (2021)
    Compared leash-pulling behaviors with harness vs. collar (n=20).
    Note: Modest sample size; controlled laboratory testing. Partially applicable to general households.
Specialized Uses & Methodologies
  • Carr & Zink (2017)
    Harness considerations specifically for agility dogs.
    Note: Expert opinion; no empirical data. Applicable primarily to agility/performance dogs, limited household applicability.
  • Pálya, Nagy, Miklósi, & Kiss (2022)
    Detailed gait-analysis methodology for harness evaluation (pilot study).
    Note: Pilot study, limited sample; treadmill-based lab conditions. Limited household applicability.
Systematic Reviews
  • Blake, Williams, & Ferro de Godoy (2019)
    Systematic review of harness/head-collar biomechanics.
    Note: Highlights limited high-quality studies; calls for more household-relevant, rigorously designed studies.
Aggression Studies
General Aggression & Dominance Clarification
Interdog Aggression (Multi-Dog Households)
  • Feltes et al. (2020)
    Identifies factors influencing aggression between household dogs and predicts outcomes.
  • Sherman et al. (1996)
    Examines triggers and successful treatment strategies for aggression between dogs.
  • Wrubel et al. (2011)
    Highlights patterns and management strategies for aggression between dogs living together.
Resource Guarding Aggression
Child-Directed Aggression
  • Reisner et al. (2007)
    Explores the contexts and risk factors involved in dog aggression toward children.
Human-Directed Aggression
Breed Differences in Aggression
Recent Aggression Prevalence & Insights
Canine Emotion & Neuroscience in Aggression
Emotion & Neuroscience in Aggression
  • B
Emotion & Neuroscience in Aggression
  • B
Shock/Prong Collar Use

A quote by Dr Ian Dunbar:
To use shock as an effective dog training method you will need:|
• A thorough understanding of canine behavior.
• A thorough understanding of learning theory.
• Impeccable timing.
And if you have those three things, you don’t need a shock collar.”

And from a Neuro Perspective:
“According to neuroscientists Jaak Panksepp and Joseph LeDoux, even a low level stem (such as a mild shock or vibration collar) can serve as a “royal road” directly into the brain’s fear circuitry (LeDoux, 2000; Panksepp, 2011). This occurs because aversive stimuli rapidly activate the amygdala, the emotional processing center crucially involved in fear learning within the brain. Such activation may lead to unintended emotional consequences like anxiety, stress, or fear based reactions, even if the physical sensation itself is minimal (Panksepp, 2011).”

In simpler terms, even mild aversive signals can quickly and powerfully trigger the dog’s fear response at the neurological level, potentially creating lasting negative emotional effects. Basically if a dog has past history with this type of experience any future event that would be fun and exciting will get impacted with a potential for hazard and concern as this system also lights up in activation alongside the play and seeking systems. Similar to a trauma victim years after the terrible event.

References:
LeDoux, J. E. (2000). Emotion circuits in the brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 23(1), 155-184.
Panksepp, J. (2011). The basic emotional circuits of mammalian brains: Do animals have affective lives? Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 35(9), 1791-1804.

Behavioral & Welfare Effects
  • Schilder & van der Borg (2004)
    Dogs trained with shock collars exhibited increased stress, fear, and pain behaviors, both immediately and long-term.
    Criticism Note: Critics claim scenarios were severe, yet they reflect realistic misuse situations.
  • Schalke et al. (2007)
    Confirmed electronic collars cause significant anxiety and distress responses during everyday use.
    Criticism Note: Balanced trainers argue stress is setting-dependent; this study noted stress across multiple intensities.
  • Polsky (2000)
    Discusses increased aggression risks linked directly to shock collars.
    Criticism Note: Correlation is questioned, yet aggression linked explicitly to collar corrections.
  • China, Mills & Cooper (2020)
    Shock collars offered no significant training advantage over positive methods, highlighting negative welfare impacts.
    Criticism Note: Critics argue controlled conditions differ from real-world scenarios, yet realistic training was simulated.
  • Ziv (2017)
    Systematic review confirms negative welfare impacts of aversive methods like shock collars.
    Criticism Note: Balanced trainers argue correlation isn’t causation and that dogs with pre-existing issues are typically trained with aversives.
  • Fact Check: Ziv’s study, a literature review, does highlight a correlation between aversive methods and increased stress behaviors. The scientific consensus strongly supports that aversive tools (e-collars, prong collars) can significantly increase stress, fear, and aggression, even when skillfully applied, due to the underlying neurological response (LeDoux, 2000; Schalke et al., 2007).
  • Vieira de Castro et al. (2019)
    Dogs trained aversively (shock/prong) showed significantly more stress than positively trained dogs.
    Criticism Note: Critics mention small groups; however, findings align consistently with other studies.
  • Johnson & Wynne (2024)
    E-collars quickly stopped chasing behavior but caused welfare concerns due to evident pain signals like yelping.
    Criticism Note: Effectiveness noted, but welfare impact underscores risks.
  • The Kennel Club (2023)
    Dogs trained with shock collars showed significantly higher stress (25%) compared to positive methods (<5%).
    Criticism Note: Reinforces the argument against shock collar necessity due to welfare impacts.
  • DEFRA Study on Shock Collars (UK Government)
    Documents welfare concerns and stress-related behaviors linked directly to shock collar use.
    Common Criticism:
    Opponents sometimes claim the government study was overly cautious; however, its findings align closely with other scientific research.
  • Electronic Training Devices Discussion (European Society of Veterinary Clinical Ethology)
    Summarizes veterinary concerns about the welfare and behavioral risks associated with shock collars.
    Common Criticism:
    Critics question the study’s neutrality, but multiple veterinary organizations independently support its conclusions.
  • Dr. Karen Overall on Punishment-Based Training
    Highlights significant behavioral and welfare risks of punishment-based training methods, including shock collars.
    Common Criticism:
    Balanced trainers argue Overall’s view is overly protective, but scientific consensus strongly aligns with her findings.
  • Effects of Training Methods on Stress Behaviors (Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 2014)
    Shows aversive methods, including shock collars, significantly increase stress behaviors in dogs.
    Common Criticism:
    Critics often cite small sample sizes; however, this study’s findings align consistently with larger-scale research.
  • Electronic Collars vs. Positive Reinforcement (Fear Free Pets)
    Compares electronic collars unfavorably against positive reinforcement methods, highlighting welfare concerns.
    Common Criticism:Opponents may label this biased due to its advocacy stance, yet findings consistently match peer-reviewed research outcomes.
  • Hiby et al. (2004)
    Found punishment-based training, including shock collars, was associated with increased behavior problems compared to reward-based methods.
    Common Criticism: Critics argue the study’s self-reported data is subjective and lacks standardized evaluation.
  • Fact Check: While it’s true this study relied on owner surveys, multiple subsequent studies using observational methods (Blackwell et al., 2008; Herron et al., 2009) have replicated similar outcomes, consistently demonstrating positive reinforcement as effective and less likely to increase aggressive responses or stress behaviors.

Physical Impacts & Risks
  • Hunter et al. (2019)
    Studied neck pressure from collars, highlighting significant injury risk.
    Criticism Note: Simulation accuracy questioned, but results align with clinical veterinary findings.
  • Carter et al. (2020)
    Collar pressures measured on simulated necks demonstrated potential physical harm.
    Criticism Note: Critics question simulations; findings match known veterinary injury reports.
  • The Mechanics of Prong Collars
    Describes mechanical design and inherent risks for pain or injury from prong collars.
    Criticism Note: “Proper use” claimed harmless, yet pain mechanism is central to collar function.
  • Cooper et al. (2014)
    Electronic collars did not outperform positive training; risks noted as unnecessary.
    Criticism Note: Critics suggest the study unfairly compared inexperienced e-collar trainers with experienced positive reinforcement trainers.
    Fact Check: Although trainer experience was a variable, the central finding—that dogs trained with e-collars exhibited more stress signals—has been repeatedly validated. E-collar stimulation, even at low levels, produces stress-related physiological changes measurable through cortisol levels and behavior (Schilder & van der Borg, 2004; Salgirli et al., 2012).
  • RSPCA (2023)
    Explains physical and psychological harm caused by prong collars, advocating for their discontinuation.
    Criticism Note: Reinforces animal welfare consensus opposing prong collars.
Owner–Dog Relationship & Aggression
  • Owner Aggression Linked to Dog Aggression (ScienceDaily)
    Suggests owners using harsh methods, like shock collars, have dogs more prone to aggressive behaviors.
    Common Criticism:
    Some trainers argue correlation isn’t causation, yet repeated research confirms clear behavioral patterns linking harsh training to aggression.
  • Training Methods & Owner–Dog Interactions (Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2011)
    Details negative effects on owner–dog relationships when punishment-based methods, including shock collars, are used.
    Common Criticism:
    Balanced trainers frequently argue outcomes depend on individual handling; however, consistent evidence supports generalized risk.
  • Deldalle & Gaunet (2014)
    Observed that punishment-based training negatively affects dog owner interactions, increasing stress and reducing trust.
    Common Criticism: Balanced trainers claim stress isn’t inherently harmful and suggest short-term observations limit validity.
  • Fact Check: While transient stress can be part of learning, chronic or repeated stress from coercive training techniques is well-documented to negatively impact long-term welfare and learning outcomes (Mills et al., 2014). Consistent, mild-to-moderate stress is fundamentally different from repeated, aversive-based corrections that produce fear-based responses.
Veterinary & Expert Statements
  • American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (AVSAB, 2007)
    Official stance strongly discouraging punishment-based methods due to welfare risks.
    Criticism Note: Neutrality questioned by some trainers, but stance widely accepted by veterinary experts.
  • Jones Animal Behavior (2019, 2020)
    Science-backed reviews emphasizing shock collar ineffectiveness and welfare concerns.
    Criticism Note: Often dismissed as opinion-based, but strongly supported by peer-reviewed literature.
  • Ian Dunbar (2019)
    Ethical and behavioral concerns regarding shock collar use discussed, promoting humane methods.
    Criticism Note: Balanced trainers suggest Dunbar supports conditional collar use; Dunbar explicitly highlights welfare concerns.
  • Eileen Anderson (2015)
    Addresses common justifications for aversives, clearly outlining evidence-based welfare risks.
    Criticism Note: Sometimes dismissed as anecdotal, yet based on established behavioral science.
    eileenanddogs.com/blog/2015/08/10/dog-training-defend-aversive-use/
  • ISCP (2020)
    Overview of long-term behavioral risks of shock/prong collars and forceful training.
    Criticism Note: Argued as biased; extensively references scientific literature.
  • Blackwell et al. (2008)
    Correlated aversive training methods with increased behavior problems.
    Criticism Note: Correlation vs. causation argument; repeated correlations strengthen study validity.
  • Atlantic Veterinary College (2023)
    Clearly outlines risks and potential negative effects of shock collar use, promoting positive methods.
    Criticism Note: Supports veterinary consensus advocating positive reinforcement over aversives.
Comprehensive Reviews & Summaries
Slip Lead & Collar Safety Studies & Findings

We recognize slip leads as a convenient tool for quick access and movement. While often marketed for emergency or brief use, some manufacturers now offer designs that specifically avoid choking risks while still providing easy control. When choosing a slip lead, look carefully for models that include an adjustable stop designed explicitly to prevent choking, not just a stop to prevent the lead from slipping off the dog’s head.

Behavioral & Welfare Impacts
  • Lead Pulling Welfare Concern (BVA Journals, 2022)
    Dogs consistently pulling on slip leads and collars experience increased physical stress, discomfort, and potential injury, raising significant welfare concerns.
  • Common Criticism: Some argue harm only occurs with improper use; however, pulling remains widespread, making the study highly relevant.
  • Slip Leads Cruelty Evaluation (WagWalking)
    Discusses potential harm and risks associated with slip leads, emphasizing the ease with which they can cause throat and neck injuries even unintentionally.
    Common Criticism: Balanced trainers often state correct use is harmless; however, widespread misuse highlights genuine concerns.
Physical Risks & Neck Injury Studies
  • Canine Collar Pressure Study (BVA Journals, 2020)
    Evaluated physical forces applied to dogs’ necks from different collars, clearly demonstrating risks of injury with slip leads, choke chains, and similar equipment.
    Common Criticism: Critics question simulation accuracy, yet results align closely with veterinary clinical observations of neck injuries.
  • Attaching Leash to Dog’s Neck (Dogmantics)
    Describes clear risks of damage to dogs’ sensitive neck structures (muscles, trachea, spine) from attaching leads directly to collars or slip leads.
    Common Criticism: Some trainers believe risks only occur with harsh handling; however, veterinary cases show even moderate misuse can cause serious harm.
  • Collar Injuries & Thyroid Risks (Dr. Jean Dodds, Hemopet)
    Highlights specific dangers of pressure injuries from collars or slip leads on the thyroid and salivary glands, potentially causing serious long-term health issues.
    Common Criticism: Critics argue risks are overstated; yet ongoing veterinary reports confirm significant injury risks from common use.
  • Choke Chain Pathologies (Anita Miles)
    Provides detailed veterinary documentation of health conditions (neck strain, tracheal damage, spinal injury) frequently linked to choke chains, slip leads, and similar restraint equipment.
    Common Criticism: Advocates of slip leads suggest proper technique prevents injuries, yet widespread veterinary evidence indicates frequent misuse and resulting trauma.
    (PDF Resource)
Invisible Fences & Electronic Pet Containment
  • Electronic Pet Fences – Behavioral Impacts (Eileen and Dogs)
    Reviews potential negative behavioral consequences from electronic fencing systems, including increased anxiety and aggression.
    Common Criticism: Advocates argue proper training eliminates these issues; yet, documented behavior issues remain common in practice.
  • Fallout of Invisible Fences (Trailie Paws)
    Explores potential unintended behavioral consequences such as fearfulness, aggression, and anxiety resulting from invisible fence use.
    Common Criticism: Some suggest these issues are anecdotal; however, numerous behaviorists report similar consistent concerns.
  • Invisible Fences Evaluation (Dr. Jen’s Dog Blog)
    Critically assesses invisible fence effectiveness and welfare concerns, highlighting potential behavioral impacts versus perceived convenience.
    Common Criticism: Proponents may dismiss the findings as biased; yet veterinary behaviorists widely validate these concerns.
Anthropomorphism & Canine Emotions
  • Anthropomorphism & Dog Emotions (Reader’s Digest)
    Explores how people project human emotions onto dogs, often leading to misunderstandings of canine behaviors and needs.
    Common Criticism: Critics argue anthropomorphism helps bond humans and animals; however, it can sometimes overlook actual canine emotional experiences.

    Insights from Animal Behavior (The Conversation)
    Examines how studying animal behavior (including dogs) enhances understanding of human emotions, motivations, and social interactions.
    Common Criticism: Some researchers caution against overly simplistic comparisons between species, yet agree animal studies provide valuable insight.

    Pets & Anthropomorphism (BARKS Magazine)
    Discusses the positive and negative impacts of treating pets like humans, emphasizing the need for realistic understanding of animal behavior.
    Common Criticism: While some trainers feel anthropomorphism promotes empathy, this resource highlights risks of misinterpreting animal signals.

    Respecting Dogs’ Emotional Lives (Psychology Today, Dr. Mark Beckoff)
    Highlights the importance of recognizing and respecting dogs’ complex emotional experiences in training and daily interactions.
    Common Criticism: Opponents argue this approach is overly sentimental, yet extensive behavioral science supports acknowledging animal emotions.
Effects of Head Halters on Dogs in training

Will be updated soon

Additional points of data – GI, Compulsive, stereotypes,

Noise Sensitivity

en_GBEnglish
en_GBEnglish