Adopter-dog interactions at the shelter Behavioral and contextual predictors of adoption Alexandra (Sasha) Protopopova, MS, PhD Candidate, CPDT-KA University of Florida
What do consumers want? Not straight forward!
What is choice? Entering your shelter, looking longer at dog, taking dog out
of kennel, adoption, keeping the current dog How do we measure choice? 1. Surveys 2. Observational methods 3. Experimental designs
Choice while at the shelter In-kennel selection
Out-of-kennel selection
Choice while at the shelter In-kennel selection
Out-of-kennel selection
In-kennel selection Survey Don’t bark, be in the front, temperament is important (Wells & Hepper, 1992)
Observational study (Protopopova et al., submitted to PLOS One) N = 300
Front of kennel Face forward No walking back and forth No leaning and rubbing on enclosure
How about out-of-kennel selection? Survey (Weiss et al., 2012) What did the dogs do right before adoption? ANSWER: Approached and greeted Licked Jumped on them Wagged their tails
What about
observational research?
Out-of-Kennel Selection We observed 250 interactions between potential adopters
and shelter dogs Aims: 1. Can we find behaviors that increase likelihood of adoption? 2. Can we find behaviors that impede adoption? 3. Are there other non-behavioral variables that are important? 4. How do people interact with dogs (Who are these people and why did they think they adopted / not adopted the dog?)
Methods Alachua County Animal Services
250 interactions 151 different dogs and 154 potential adoptive families
Data collection Followed potential adopter
Filmed entire interaction until adoption/ non-adoption
decision reached Video coded on ethogram 25% double coded
Behavior Accepting Petting Rejecting Petting Human Toy Play
Operational Definition Dog does not walk away when person touches or strokes dog Dog walks or darts away when person reaches for dog Dog engages with toy that is held by person or runs towards the toy when it is thrown and brings back to person
Ignoring Play Initiation Independent Toy Play Human Play
Dog walks away or otherwise ignores initiation of play by person (through toy or body) Dog engages with toy away from the person Dog engages with playing person by play bowing, barking, light mouthing, jumping. No toy involved
Attending To Person Dog is facing person, looking in direction of the person. Proximity is not necessary Accepting Food Rejecting Food Obeying Command
Dog ingests food when given or thrown by person Dog ignores food when given or thrown by person Dog complies with a command (i.e. sit, down, shake, get off, stop it, give, come here, etc.)
Disobeying Command Lie In Proximity Sit In Proximity Mouthing Person Jump On Person Barking
Dog does not comply with command Dog is lying down within an arm’s reach (~1 m) Dog is sitting within an arm’s reach (~1 m) Dog places teeth on person Dog places both front feet on person simultaneously and somewhat forcefully Dog emits a bark
Post-interaction survey Demographic information on adopter (head of household)
Did you plan to bring a dog home today? What will be the purpose of the dog? Other pets? Household members? Children?
Why did you adopt this dog? If behavior which behaviors did you like?
Why did you not adopt this dog? If behavior which behaviors did
you not like?
Protopopova, A., Wynne, C. D. L. (2014).
Some descriptive stats 35% of interactions ended in adoption
62% of dogs taken out only once People like different dogs/adopt dogs that they like right away 1 dog taken out SEVEN times! (Pretty but badly behaved?)
Average duration of interaction: 7.9 minutes (no difference in adoption/ non-adoption)
Protopopova, A., Wynne, C. D. L. (2014).
What predicts adoption? Morphology? NO Presumably, people already made their decision based on
morphology during in-kennel selection 70
70
60
60
50
50
40
40
30
30
20
20
10
10
0
0
Not adopted Adopted
Protopopova, A., Wynne, C. D. L. (2014).
What predicts adoption? Location of interaction? YES
BEST
Percent dogs in the outcome category
80 70 60
50 Not adopted Adopted
40 30 20 10 0 Indoor room
Small outdoor
Large outdoor
Protopopova, A., Wynne, C. D. L. (2014).
What predicts adoption? Intention to adopt a dog in general? YES 100 Percent of dogs in the outcome category
90 80 70 60 Not adopted Adopted
50 40 30 20
10 0 No intention
Intention
Protopopova, A., Wynne, C. D. L. (2014).
What predicts adoption? Dog’s behavior? YES 5.0%
Ignoring Play Initiation
4.5%
Lying in Proximity
7.0%
4.0% Percent time spent
8.0%
6.0%
3.5% 3.0%
5.0%
2.5%
4.0%
2.0%
3.0%
1.5%
2.0%
1.0%
0.5%
1.0%
0.0%
0.0% Not adopted
Adopted
Not adopted
Adopted
Protopopova, A., Wynne, C. D. L. (2014).
Who were the potential adopters? Female (58%)
Young (37% under 25 yrs) Lived with more than 2 other people (54%) Did not have children (54%)
Already had other pets (58%)
No demographic category was more likely
to adopt
Protopopova, A., Wynne, C. D. L. (2014).
Survey results- Why did you choose to adopt this dog?
Protopopova, A., Wynne, C. D. L. (2014).
Survey results- Why did you choose to adopt this dog?
Protopopova, A., Wynne, C. D. L. (2014).
Survey results- Why did you choose to adopt this dog?
Protopopova, A., Wynne, C. D. L. (2014).
Survey results- Why did you choose to NOT adopt this dog?
Protopopova, A., Wynne, C. D. L. (2014).
Survey results- Why did you choose to NOT adopt this dog?
Protopopova, A., Wynne, C. D. L. (2014).
Survey results- Why did you choose to NOT adopt this dog?
Summary: How do people chose dogs at shelters? Preconceived notions on what they want ( untested hypothesis)
In-kennel selection (20-70 sec) Morphology is important! Size, breed, coat length, and age matters Behavior: Front of kennel, facing front, no excessive locomotion, no
rubbing on kennel Out-of-kennel selection (8 min) Behavior: Lie down in proximity, don’t ignore play signals from adopter Location: smaller is better Mindset of adopter: needs to be willing to take the dog home today!
Experimental Assessment Correlation ≠ Causation!
If we train dogs and arrange appropriate conditions, would
adoption increase? Experimental Group
ADOPTION RATE
Control Group
Training Dogs for Out-of-Kennel Interactions Target behaviors Lie down next to potential adopter
EASY ENOUGH…
Don’t ignore play initiation by the adopter
MY SOLUTION: Ask the dog what kind of play it prefers (individual preference assessment of play) Encourage the potential adopter to engage with the dog in preferred play style Measure likelihood of adoption
Experimental Assessment Experimental condition Small interaction area Step 1: allow the dog to potty Step 2: play with preferred toy Step 3: leash the dog and sit on bench Short leash next to adopter Reinforce laying down with treats
Control condition Off-leash in a large area containing various
toys and agility equipment
Structured Out-of-Kennel Interactions Increase Adoption Rates Observed 160 interactions
Percentage Adopted
Χ2= 4.22, P = 0.03
45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Control
*
Experimental
Structured Out-of-Kennel Interactions Increase Adoption Rates Observed 160 interactions
Percentage Adopted
Χ2= 4.22, P = 0.03
45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Control
*
Experimental
Summary: How do people chose dogs at shelters? Preconceived notions on what they want ( untested hypothesis)
In-kennel selection (20-70 sec) Morphology is important! Behavior: Front of kennel, facing front, no excessive locomotion, no
rubbing on walls Out-of-kennel selection (8 min) Behavior: Lie down in proximity, don’t ignore play signals from adopter Location: smaller is better Mindset of adopter: needs to be willing to take the dog home today!
Summary: How do people chose dogs at shelters? Preconceived notions on what they want ( untested hypothesis)
In-kennel selection (20-70 sec) Morphology is important! Behavior: Front of kennel, facing front, no excessive locomotion, no
rubbing on walls Out-of-kennel selection (8 min) Behavior: Lie down in proximity, don’t ignore play signals from adopter Location: smaller is better Mindset of adopter: needs to be willing to take the dog home today!
Summary: How do people chose dogs at shelters? Preconceived notions on what they want ( untested hypothesis)
In-kennel selection (20-70 sec) Morphology is important! Behavior: Front of kennel, facing front, no excessive locomotion, no
rubbing on walls Out-of-kennel selection (8 min) Behavior: Lie down in proximity, don’t ignore play signals from adopter Location: smaller is better Mindset of adopter: needs to be willing to take the dog home today!
What should you do? Know your adopters! Demographics Mindset
Encourage dogs to come forward
to greet adopters
Simply give them a treat
Structure interactions Bring treats and leash Know which toys individual dogs
like Encourage lying down
References Protopopova, A., Mehrkam, L. R., Boggess, M. M., Wynne, C. D.
L. (Submitted). In-kennel behavior predicts length of stay in shelter dogs. PLOS One. Protopopova, A., Wynne, C. D. L. (2014). Adopter-dog interactions at the shelter: Behavioral and contextual predictors of adoption. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 157, 109-116. Protopopova, A., Wynne, C. D. L. (Submitted). Improving inkennel presentation of shelter dogs: A case for a Pavlovian treatment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. Weiss, E., Miller, K., Mohan-Gibbons, H., Vela, C. (2012). Why did you choose this pet? Adopters and pet selection preferences in five animal shelters in the United States, Animals, 2, 1-17. Wells, D., & Hepper, P. G. (1992). The behaviour of dogs in a rescue shelter. AnimalWelfare, 1(3), 171-186.
Thank you! Alachua County Animal Services Maria Brandifino, Nathaniel Hall Undergraduate research assistants at UF Rachel Bradley, Caroline Leibrecht, Courtney Alexander, Kissel Goldman, Devin
Caballero, Austin Folger, Jessica Vondran, Monica Perdomo, Nancy Ordax, Steph Junco, Sarah Weinsztok, Keila Ames Photo credit: Beth Zavoyski, ACAS volunteers, Dory Rosati
[email protected]
Supplemental Slides
Validated Brief Toy Assessment 2 min acclimation period to the enclosure off-leash
Present toys consecutively in a random order 3 times each toy If dog engages in oral contact with toy, the experimenter offers a
treat to get the toy back The number of contacts for each toy is counted Retain only toys that are played with at least 2/3 times
Tennis ball
Fleece rope
Squeaky vinyl toy
Plush toy
Brief Toy Assessment Play in the Brief Toy Assessment predicts play with that toy
and in general in naturalistic observations Example of two subjects:
Derby
Spartan
1 0.9
Proportion of Play
0.8 0.7 0.6
0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Ball
Squeaky Brief Assessment
Rope
Plush
Average Naturalistic observation
1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0
Ball
Squeaky
Brief Assessment
Rope
Plush
Average Naturalistic observation
Video coding 103 interactions coded so far… (64%) Lengths of interactions: Control- 8.5 min, Experimental- 7.3 min
16%
*
14%
*
12% 10%
8% 6% 4%
*
2%
0% Ignoring Play Initiation
Human Toy Play Control
Human Play
Independent Toy Lie in proximity Play
Experimental
Improving in-kennel behavior Simply tossing treats is enough!
Relative Percent Difference in Medians during Probe Trial of Inappropriate Behavior
100% 80%
60% 40% 20% 0% -20%
-40% -60% -80% -100%
Operant
Pavlovian
*
Control
Protopopova, A., Wynne, C. D. L. (Submitted).
