No better than flipping a coin: Reconsidering canine behavior evaluations in animal shelters

AbstractUse of behavior evaluations for shelter dogs has progressed despite their lack of scientific validation as reliable diagnostic tools. Yet results of these evaluations are often used to make life-and-death decisions. Despite acknowledging the significant limitations of evaluations, most authors suggest that the solution is to continue to attempt to remedy deficiencies. We take a contrary position and use existing data and principles of diagnostic test evaluation to demonstrate that reliably predicting problematic behaviors in future adoptive homes is vanishingly unlikely, even in theory, much less under the logistical constraints of real-world implementation of these evaluations in shelters. We explain why it would be difficult, if not impossible, to calculate robust values for sensitivity and specificity of a shelter canine behavior evaluation as required for any valid diagnostic test. We further explain the consequences of disregarding the effect of prevalence on the predictive value of a positive test (e.g., eliciting biting or warning behavior from the dog in the behavior evaluation). Finally, we mathematically demonstrate why, for any plausible combination of sensitivity, specificity, and prevalence of biting and warning behaviors, a positive test would at best be not much better than flipping a coin, and often be much worse, because many of the dogs who test positive will be false positives. Shelters already screen from adoption obviously dangerous dogs during the intake process. Subsequent provocative testing of the general population of shelter dogs is predicated on an assumption of risk that is far in excess of existing data and relies on assumptions about dog behavior that may not be supportable. We suggest that instead of striving to bring out the worst in dogs in the stressful and transitional environment of a shelter and devoting scarce resources to inherently flawed formal evaluations that do not increase public safety, it may be far better for dogs, shelters, and communities if effort spent on frequently misleading testing was instead spent in maximizing opportunities to interact with dogs in normal and enjoyable ways that mirror what they are expected to do once adopted (e.g., walking, socializing with people, playgroups with other dogs, games, training). In conjunction with a thorough and objective intake history when available, these more natural types of assessment activities will help identify any additional dogs whose behavior may be of concern. Engaging in the normal repertoire of activities familiar to pet dogs has the additional benefit of enriching dogs' lives and minimizing the adverse effect of being relinquished and confined to a shelter, will be more indicative of the typical personality and behavior of dogs, and may help make dogs better candidates for adoption

Comparison of Object and Animal Hoarding

Recent research has highlighted the prevalence and harmful consequences of hoarding,1 and investigators have proposed inclusion of hoarding disorder in DSM-5.2 An unanswered question about the proposed disorder is whether people who hoard animals would meet diagnostic criteria for it. This article discusses the similarities and differences between object and animal hoarding. People who hoard animals appear to meet the basic diagnostic criteria for hoarding disorder. Their homes are cluttered, disorganized, and dysfunctional. They have great difficulty relinquishing animals to people who can more adequately care for them, and they form intense attachments (urges to save) that result in significant impairment. However, they differ from people who hoard objects in several ways. These differences are significant enough to warrant comment in the text description accompanying the diagnostic criteria and consideration as a subtype of hoarding disorder. More research is necessary to determine the exact relationship between object and animal hoarding. © 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc

Press Reports of Animal Hoarding

This article explores how the press reports nonhuman animal hoarding and hoarders. It discusses how 100 articles from 1995 to the present were content analyzed. Analysis revealed five emotional themes that include drama, revulsion, sympathy, indignation, and humor. While these themes draw readers\u27 attention and make disparate facts behind cases understandable by packaging them in familiar formats, they also present an inconsistent picture of animal hoarding that can confuse readers about the nature and significance of this behavior as well as animal abuse, more generally

Development and evaluation of an ecological model for describing the pet dog population in the United States and an epidemiologic study of risk factors for an owner\u27s failure to retain their dog as a pet in the home

The euthanasia of unwanted pets in animal shelters is believed to be the single leading cause of death for dogs. However, fundamental aspects of the ecology of the pet dog population remain difficult to quantify and risk factors for relinquishment of dogs to animal shelters have not been scientifically evaluated. An ecological model for estimating the annual turnover in owned dogs, household breeding, and mortality was evaluated in St. Joseph County, Indiana. The annual turnover in owned dogs was 14.1%, and between 60 and 72% of newly acquired dogs originated from household breeding. Puppies from household breeding were whelped in 2.4-2.9% of all dog owning households, and were whelped by 5.7% of the females 0.5-7 years of age and 2.3% of the females $\u3e$7 years. A case-control study was conducted to identify characteristics of dogs and their owners that were associated with relinquishment to a shelter. The potentially modifiable risk factors with the highest population attributable risk for relinquishment were not participating in dog obedience classes post-acquisition (68.1%), lack of veterinary care (65.7%), being intact (30.9%), care of the dog requiring more work than expected (32.3%), and daily or weekly inappropriate elimination (19.3%). Dogs 0.5-3 years of age receiving no veterinary care were at a three hundred fold increased risk of relinquishment compared to dogs 17 years of age that visited a veterinarian 12 times per year; dogs with frequent behavior problems that did not receive veterinary care were at a 20-35 fold increased risk of relinquishment compared with dogs that had a low frequency of behavior problems and that visited a veterinarian $\ge$2 times per year. Current trends in the delivery of preventive health care to puppies, including earlier completion of primary vaccinations and prepubertal sterilization, might increase the relinquishment of dogs to shelters as a result of fewer opportunities for veterinarians to counsel dog owners. Implementation of routine behavior prophylaxis during the period of greatly increased risk for relinquishment (i.e. 0.5-3 years of age) is recommended

Factors Associated with High Live Release for Dogs at a Large, Open-Admission, Municipal Shelter

Better understanding of factors contributing to live release (rehoming) may help shelters improve outcomes. In this cross-sectional, exploratory, non-interventional study, data for all intakes (n = 21,409) for dogs eligible for rehoming from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2016 are analyzed to identify such factors. Live release was >88%. A total of 1510 (7.1%) dogs interacted with the foster care system, 98.9% of whom had live release. Foster care increased the odds of live release by about five-fold for all dogs (odds ratio (OR) 5.30 (95% confidence interval (CI): 3.13; 8.97), p < 0.001) and by >20-fold for adult dogs (OR 22.2 (95% CI: 5.48; 90.2), p < 0.001) compared to first-time owner-surrendered dogs. Dogs returned from foster care had a 70% reduction in health concerns, as judged by intake staff, compared with dogs sent to foster. In addition to saving 2882 lives, the rescue network utilized by this shelter was estimated as having reduced in-shelter care needs by 13,409 animal care-days over two years. Dogs returned from adoption also had increased odds of live release (OR 4.74 (95% CI: 3.02; 7.44), p < 0.0001). Nearly a third (29.6%) of dogs originally brought in by owners for euthanasia were determined to be potentially savable, and a fifth of the original group (21.1%) were ultimately placed. Less than 4% of dogs presented with behavioral concerns at intake. It remains to be determined whether other large, open intake shelters performing animal control can replicate these results

Community Partnering as a Tool for Improving Live Release Rate in Animal Shelters in the United States

Collaboration among all shelters and nonhuman animal welfare groups within a community along with the transparent, shared reporting of uniform data have been promoted as effective ways to increase the number of animals' lives saved. This article summarizes the shelter intakes, outcomes, and live release rate (LRR) from 6 geographically diverse communities participating in the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Partnership program for 5 years (2007 -- 2011). This program is both a grant program and a coaching program that works to focus the community partners on a data-driven goal using standardized definitions and metrics. There was improvement in LRR in all communities over time regardless of intake numbers, human population, or mix of dogs/puppies and cats/kittens entering shelters. Averaged across all communities over the 5-year period, there was an overall improvement in LRR of 62%. Within individual communities, the degree of improvement ranged from 18% to 96%. This improvement in LRR was accomplished through a wide variety of programs in each community based on resources and interests during the time period

Characteristics and Antecedents of People who Hoard Animals: An Exploratory Comparative Interview Study

Currently, case studies and media reports provide the only descriptive information available to understand what distinguishes hoarding of animals from nonhoarding animal ownership. This poorly understood problem appears to be associated with substantial mental health difficulties. The present study investigated characteristics and antecedents that might explain hoarding behaviors. Sixteen people who fit criteria for hoarding of animals and 11 nonhoarding controls who owned large numbers of animals participated in semistructured interviews that were analyzed using somewhat atypical qualitative and quantitative methods. The interviews focused on demographic information, history of animal contact, social history, insight into physical and mental health issues, collecting behaviors, and beliefs and emotions associated with animals. Descriptive statistics and qualitative analyses were used to examine differences between hoarding and nonhoarding groups and to capture distinguishing themes and patterns. Both groups were well matched in demographic variables and were mainly White women of middle age; the average number of animals owned was 31. Thematic content common to both groups was stressful life events (both childhood and adult), strong emotional reactions to animal death, strong caretaking roles and attitudes toward animals, a tendency to rescue animals, and intense feelings of closeness or attachment to animals. Themes found significantly more often among animal hoarding participants than controls included problems with early attachment, chaotic childhood environments, significant mental health concerns, attribution of human characteristics to animals, and the presence of more dysfunctional current relationships. These themes are elaborated and discussed with regard to potential models for understanding hoarding of animals