Pack theory originated with a misunderstood wolf study. It just doesn’t apply to dog training.
Unfortunately, some people, including less-informed professional trainers, still adhere to the idea of "pack theory," even though it has been shown to be incorrect.
"Pack theory" is an erroneous and outdated idea that dogs need or strive to be an ‘'alpha" leader at the top of the family hierarchy, while other members of the family fit into fixed slots underneath the "alpha." Today, scientific research has provided better understanding, so old-school thinking about "pack leadership" and "pack theory" is now rightly dismissed by modern trainers, veterinarians, and veterinary behaviorists.
How pack theory in dog training got started
The dangerous but common misunderstanding about the concept of dominance and pack theory in the dog world is based in large part on research collected from studies performed on a group of unrelated, captive wolves during the 1970s. Interpretation of those early studies suggested there was a rigid hierarchy in which leaders, or "alphas" had priority access to resources and forcefully maintained the group structure through displays of aggression to others.
Based on behavior of that group of captive wolves, many assumed that domestic dogs also formed similar social groupings and would display similar violent dynamics, resulting in a hierarchy based on competitive success.
This theory became so popular that, despite the fact that dogs and wolves are separated by thousands of years of evolution and that dogs and humans are completely different species, it was used to explain the social interactions between people and dogs, including how dogs should be trained.
Problems with the original wolf pack studies
The original captive wolf studies have since been renounced by the very scientists who performed them and drew those original conclusions. One reason is that they realized that unrelated wolves forced to live together in captivity behave differently, and have different social pressures, needs, and behaviors, from wolves living naturally in the wild.
Normal wolf behavior doesn’t support dominance theory
Captive wolves with no choice but to live in unrelated groups (not their own blood-related families) behave very differently from members of what we now know to be a true, natural working wolf pack.
Dr. David Mech, the wolf expert and senior scientist who was largely responsible for the original study promoting "pack theory" now explains that there are pronounced behavioral differences between captive wolves like those used in the study and wolves in the wild.
The original study’s results were skewed because the animals being observed were under severe stress. The wolves were living as captives with other unrelated wolves, and this was discovered to be an unnatural environment. In a natural environment, wolves live in family packs. The captive wolves were unable to behave naturally, so their behavior changes in order to cope with that stress. Imagine if someone tried to learn the dynamics of a human family unit by observing a group of strangers stuck on a crowded bus in an hour-long traffic jam on a hot day! The behaviors wouldn’t look the same.
Behavior of these captive wolves was likely driven by simple needs: the need for safety, survival, and reproductive success. Was it safe to gain access to a particular resource from another wolf or not? Acquiring a resource safely would ensure survival, so although some wolves figured out how to hold onto their resources by challenging others and defending themselves, other wolves learned to ensure their survival by showing deference.
The researchers were observing a dysfunctional group of wolves that were using threat and deference displays in order to seek safety and survive within their unnatural captive group. This was not a true pack that functions primarily on deference displays rather than violence.
A wild wolf pack actually works like a family
More recent scientific research has concluded that in the wild, a true natural pack is actually composed of a mother and father and their offspring. This pack survives rather like a human family, in which the parents take the leadership roles and the children follow. In a natural pack, harmony is created because deference behaviors are offered freely by the younger wolves rather than being forced onto them by their parents.
This is a far cry from the ideas of fighting for resources and asserting dominance and rank through intimidation and aggression.
Dogs are not wolves
Even though dogs and wolves are genetically similar, they are separated by at least fifteen thousand years of domestication which has changed them in many important ways.
It is likely that modern domestic dogs are descended from solitary feral dogs that scavenged human garbage for food. Observations of feral dogs have shown a much more accurate picture of the domestic dog’s social structure.
- Today’s domestic dog is about as genetically similar to the wolf as humans are to chimpanzees. Wolves and dogs share certain physiological and behavioral traits, but they are far more different from each other than traditional pack theorists would have you believe.
- The difference in developmental stages between wolves and dogs in early life affects their ability to form social relationships throughout their lives. Dogs generalize their social relationships to humans and are good at adapting to changing situations; but wolves are very specific about their social attachments and do not adapt well to novelty, even when raised in captivity with or near humans.
- Solitary feral dogs scavenged human garbage for food. Scavengers do not need a team to track and bring down prey; they are usually more successful when operating by themselves rather than being reliant on other members of their group to find food.
- The mating behavior of feral dogs and wolves is also different because feral dogs don’t stay in fixed family packs. In a wolf pack, the only wolves that mate are the breeding pair; in a feral dog population, mating is unrestricted and can occur among dogs within a family group or between dogs of different groups.
Pack theory causes problems
Trainers who talk about pack theory usually resort to some type of physical punishment and intimidation. These aversive training methods are not only outdated, they have potentially nasty behavioral side-effects: they lead to increased anxiety, stress, and aggressive behaviors.
In addition, if a trainer ascribes to pack theory, but doesn't learn about a dog’s communication, body language, learning style, needs, or other motivations, they could easily wind up scaring a dog into trying to defend himself. Intimidation and physical force can stop a behavior in the moment but can lead to increased stress and a scared dog who is more likely to defend themselves in the future.
Studies have shown that rewards-based training is more effective and doesn’t increase the likelihood of aggressive behaviors. Dogs show fewer stress signals, show a better bond with their owner, and tend to respond more quickly to cues or commands.
Real leadership instead of pack leadership
Real leadership and "being a pack leader" are two different things.
Do we need to provide leadership and guidance for our dogs? Of course. Should we teach and reward our dogs for making the right choices as much as possible? Absolutely! Real leadership means teaching, guiding, and helping dogs through positive, supportive, and force-free methods.
Do we need to force dogs to be submissive and view us as a dominant figure in their lives? No. In fact, techniques designed to physically dominate or intimidate our companion dogs contributes to behavioral problems. What's more, dogs know we are not dogs!
If we want to be true leaders, for the good of our dogs and our lives with them, we must lead without violence, domination, or intimidation.
