Griffin Karen E, John Elizabeth, Pike Tom, Mills Daniel S
School of Life Sciences, College of Science, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, United Kingdom.
Department Population Health Sciences, Unit Animals in Science and Society, Animal Behaviour, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Front Vet Sci. 2022 Jan 14;8:796596. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.796596. eCollection 2021.
Rehoming organisations often undertake some type of behaviour evaluation to determine dogs' suitability for rehoming and/or the type of suitable home. Assessments can carry considerable weight in determining dogs' fates. Although evaluation of the validity and reliability of any test is important, a more fundamental consideration is if the nature of the information sought and the weight given to this in organisations' decision making is of more than anecdotal value. Therefore, this study's aim was to conduct a qualitative analysis of organisations' pre-adoption dog behaviour screenings and potential justifications, comparing this with the available scientific evidence. A written enquiry was sent electronically to rehoming organisations in the UK and US from February 2016-July 2017. Of 73 respondents, the majority conducted assessments for all dogs. Using a thematic analysis, nine themes and 71 sub-themes emerged concerning the types of information respondents aim to gather from assessments. The majority of respondents used, at least partially, scoring, i.e., certain outcomes would lead to dogs being deemed unadoptable. Forty-one sub-themes and one theme were identified as potentially leading to a dog being deemed unadoptable. The evidence base for these factors was identified from the scientific literature relating to: increased risk for relinquishment, impact on a dog's quality of life, and human safety risk. Evidence supported 10 factors: "aggression towards people", "aggression towards cats or other animals", "aggression towards dogs", "biting or snapping", "resource guarding", "activity level or exercise needs", "destructiveness", "housetrained", "fearfulness", and "knowledge of basic commands and/or general training". Of those, seven were associated only with relinquishment risk, two ("resource guarding", "knowledge of basic commands") with human safety risk, and one ("fearfulness") with both. Thus, for >85% of characteristics organisations deemed important for dogs' adoptability, scientific evidence to support this is lacking. More research is needed to investigate the value of behaviour assessments, especially concerning the assessment of factors that could pose a public safety risk. However, given the current lack of scientific support for many decisions regarding dogs' rehoming suitability and recognised pressure on resources, it is suggested that organisations should focus on pre-adoption adopter education and post-adoption support.
重新安置组织通常会进行某种类型的行为评估，以确定狗是否适合重新安置和/或适合的家庭类型。评估在决定狗的命运方面可能具有相当大的权重。虽然评估任何测试的有效性和可靠性都很重要，但一个更基本的考虑因素是，所寻求信息的性质以及组织决策中给予该信息的权重是否具有轶事价值之外的意义。因此，本研究的目的是对组织收养前的狗行为筛查及潜在理由进行定性分析，并将其与现有科学证据进行比较。2016年2月至2017年7月期间，通过电子邮件向英国和美国的重新安置组织发送了书面询问。在73名受访者中，大多数对所有狗都进行了评估。通过主题分析，出现了九个主题和71个子主题，涉及受访者希望从评估中收集的信息类型。大多数受访者至少部分地使用了评分，即某些结果会导致狗被认为不可收养。确定了41个子主题和一个主题可能导致狗被认为不可收养。从与以下方面相关的科学文献中确定了这些因素的证据基础：被送养风险增加、对狗生活质量的影响以及人类安全风险。证据支持10个因素：“对人的攻击性”、“对猫或其他动物的攻击性”、“对狗的攻击性”、“咬人或猛咬”、“资源守护”、“活动水平或运动需求”、“破坏性”、“是否习惯在室内排便”、“恐惧”以及“对基本指令和/或一般训练的了解”。其中，七个仅与被送养风险相关，两个（“资源守护”、“对基本指令的了解”）与人类安全风险相关，一个（“恐惧”）与两者都相关。因此，对于组织认为对狗的可收养性很重要的超过85%的特征，缺乏支持这一点的科学证据。需要更多研究来调查行为评估的价值，特别是关于可能构成公共安全风险的因素的评估。然而，鉴于目前对于许多关于狗重新安置适宜性的决策缺乏科学支持，并且认识到资源方面的压力，建议组织应专注于收养前对收养者的教育和收养后的支持。
