02/27/2025
Ever notice how the loudest, most aggressive voices in dog training tend to be the ones defending pain, fear, and intimidation? Thatās not a coincidence.
Thereās a pattern to the hostility toward force-free training, and psychology helps explain why.
Studies show that people with inflated but fragile self-esteem react with hostility when their expertise is questioned.
Itās not about what works or what is more advanced. Itās about protecting their identity. Trainers who have built their reputation on dominance-based methods see the shift toward humane training as a threat to their credibility, so they fight back. Not with science, but with fallacious outrage.
People donāt just overestimate their expertise, they actively resist changing their minds when confronted with evidence that contradicts their beliefs.
This is called motivated reasoning, a well-documented cognitive bias where people interpret information in a way that supports their existing views, even when itās demonstrably false (K***a, 1990).
For example, when studies show that force-free training is more effective and less harmful, trainers who rely on punishment donāt engage with the data, they dismiss it outright or twist it to fit their existing beliefs, claiming that āreal-world trainingā is different or that āscience canāt train dogs.ā
Additionally, cognitive rigidity plays a major role. Studies show that people with rigid thinking styles struggle to adapt to new information, especially when it challenges something theyāve built their identity around (CaƱas et al., 2003).
This explains why some trainers, despite overwhelming evidence against punishment-based methods, double down instead of evolving, itās not about facts, itās about identity preservation.
I already know the counterarguments:
āArenāt YOU the one lashing out?ā
āIsnāt this just ego on your part?ā
Hereās the difference between advocacy and ego driven aggression:
Advocating for humane training isnāt about personal dominance, itās about aligning with the most credentialed experts in the field.
The ACVB, AVSAB, BVA, and ESVCE, the most respected bodies in animal behavior, all state unequivocally (based on scientific evidence) that force-free methods are superior to punishment-based methods.
Thatās not my ego talking. Thatās the consensus of modern science.
The people attacking force-free trainers arenāt debating, theyāre ignoring every major body of expertise in favor of personal pride. Thatās the difference.
I donāt call out harm because my feelings are hurt. I call it out because itās necessary.
The difference between cruelty and advocacy is intent. They attack to protect their egos. We advocate to protect dogs and the public.
Cruelty isnāt strength. Itās a lack of imagination. Trainers who claim force is ānecessaryā arenāt proving strength, theyāre exposing mental rigidity.
Modern research shows that punishment damages trust and isnāt more effective than humane methods. So why do some trainers refuse to change?
Because they canāt imagine another way. And thatās human nature.
But hereās the thing: itās one thing to struggle with new ideas, itās another to actively reject them, to lash out at those who present them, and to fight for the right to keep using force when better methods exist. Thatās where the problem lies.
People use force when they lack the patience, creativity, or skill to train differently. The same is true in human interactions, those who resort to personal attacks do so because they donāt know how to engage meaningfully.
And this fight is bigger than just dog training. The same people who insist on hurting dogs also attack people, harassing, belittling, and ridiculing those who challenge them.
There is a well-documented connection between normalizing cruelty toward animals and a brand of male violence (also adopted by women in the industry as well) in human society, particularly in the U.S.
Historically, the same justifications used to defend violence against animals, control, dominance, submission, have been used to excuse violence against marginalized groups, including women and children. This isnāt a coincidence.
They operate in the same way with both dogs and humans: force, fear, and control.
The best trainers, the most skilled, respected, and knowledgeable, arenāt the ones jerking dogs around by their necks or shocking them. Theyāre the ones who can adapt. Who are open to learning. Who understand that dogs arenāt meant to submit out of fear but to thrive through trust.
Sources:
Relation of Threatened Egotism to Violence and Aggression: The Dark Side of High Self-Esteem
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8650299/
Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing Oneās Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/12688660_Unskilled_and_Unaware_of_It_How_Difficulties_in_Recognizing_One%27s_Own_Incompetence_Lead_to_Inflated_Self-Assessments
Threatened Egotism, Narcissism, Self-Esteem, and Direct and Displaced Aggression: Does Self-Love or Self-Hate Lead to Violence
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/13599643_Threatened_Egotism_Narcissism_Self-Esteem_and_Direct_and_Displaced_Aggression_Does_Self-Love_or_Self-Hate_Lead_to_Violence
Offering Family Therapy that includes 4legged friends too! Engaged Walks + 1:1 Training availableš¶
