02/23/2025
Written by Zac George Shared to bring awareness
Dogs don’t use force to teach each other. So why are they telling you to?
Balanced trainers, those who use both positive reinforcement and punishment through pain or fear, often claim that prong collars, shock collars, and leash pops mimic how mother dogs “correct” their puppies.
They say that because dogs sometimes growl or muzzle-grab, using force is just “speaking their language.”
This is not backed by scientific evidence or research, and it’s not even a logical argument.
Here’s what the research actually shows:
Dogs avoid physical conflict whenever possible, using body language, vocalizations, and space to communicate.
They aren’t shocking or pinning each other to “teach respect.”
When mother dogs do intervene with puppies, it’s brief, controlled, and non-damaging; nothing like the repeated and sustained pain of a prong collar correction or an e-collar shock.
Studies show that dogs trained with aversive methods exhibit higher stress levels, more fear-based behaviors, and a greater risk of aggression.
Aversive training does not enhance learning, it inhibits it and suppresses behavior through fear, which is fundamentally different from how dogs naturally communicate.
Imagine stubbing your toe hard on a table leg, and right at that moment, someone demands you solve a math problem. Are you focused on learning, or are you just trying to deal with the pain? That’s what happens when dogs are corrected with pain, they aren’t learning a lesson, they’re just trying to avoid the next hit.
When humans deliver corrections through pain or intimidation, research shows that dogs do not respond as if they are receiving a “natural consequence.”
Instead, they exhibit increased stress behaviors, avoidance, and even defensive aggression - reactions that are starkly different from how puppies respond to natural maternal guidance.
When corrected by their mother, puppies typically adjust their behavior without signs of fear or distress, as maternal cues are brief, controlled, and non-threatening.
This contrast suggests that dogs perceive human-imposed corrections not as meaningful communication, but as unpredictable, aversive events.
If corrections really worked like dog-to-dog communication, we wouldn’t see so many side effects. Yet study after study shows that dogs trained with force are more anxious, less engaged, and more likely to react aggressively.
So why do some trainers keep pushing this claim? The answer is simple: it provides a convenient justification for using outdated, harmful methods that prioritize control over effective and humane communication.
That trauma may not always be immediately obvious, but research shows it can manifest in chronic stress, anxiety, and behavioral fallout, undermining a dog’s well-being long after the training session ends.
And I don’t say this to stir controversy, but to inform the public: a trainer calling themselves “balanced” is openly admitting to a lack of modern, science-based knowledge. The industry has moved forward, but they haven’t.
Dogs learn best through trust, not fear.
The best trainers in the world don’t rely on intimidation, they rely on knowledge, skill, and ethical communication that affirms the dogs emotional state at all times.
There will no doubt be upset balanced trainers in the comments, but pay attention, because while they may resort to insults or deflections, they won’t provide peer-reviewed evidence to support their claim.
The question now is not whether this myth is false, but whether we will finally move beyond it and do right by the dogs and the public who trust us.
Sources:
1. Herron, M. et al. (2009). Survey of the use and outcome of confrontational and non-confrontational training methods in client-owned dogs showing undesired behaviors.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2008.12.011
2. Ziv, G. (2017). The effects of using aversive training methods in dogs – a review.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2017.02.004
3. Vieira de Castro, A.C. et al. (2020). Does training method matter? Evidence for the negative impact of aversive-based methods on companion dog welfare.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225023
4. Lezama-García, K. et al. (2019). Maternal behaviour in domestic dogs.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6776987/
5. Blyth, T. (n.d.). If a mother dog snaps at her pups, why can’t we use ‘corrections’ to train?
https://www.tarynblyth.co.za/post/if-a-mother-dog-snaps-at-her-pups-why-can-t-we-use-corrections-to-train
A video that I saw a while ago is doing the rounds again on social media. I often just try and ignore these things, as the points made are so utterly stupid that I hope most people will see through them easily. However, this one is cropping up a bit too much, so I thought I better take the time to a...
