Advocating for Humane Dog Training: Experts Discuss "Both Sidesism" and the Shifting Landscape of Animal Welfare

Leading animal behavior experts Zazie Todd, PhD, and certified professional dog trainer Kristi Benson recently engaged in a critical discussion regarding the promotion of reward-based dog training methods and the ethical complexities of presenting conflicting viewpoints, often termed "both sidesism," in animal welfare discourse. Their conversation, featured on "The Pawsitive Post in Conversation," underscored a growing consensus within the scientific and professional community that certain training approaches are unequivocally superior for animal welfare and efficacy, challenging the notion that all methods warrant equal consideration.

The core of their discussion revolved around the journalistic principle of impartiality versus the responsibility to disseminate accurate, science-backed information, particularly when one "side" of an argument is overwhelmingly supported by evidence while the other poses demonstrable risks. Benson highlighted the influence of journalist Rachel Gilmore’s work on journalistic bias, noting that presenting a neutral stance can inadvertently legitimize harmful or unsupported claims. This observation resonated deeply with Todd, who emphasized the direct parallels to dog training, where a clear scientific consensus exists favoring reward-based methods.

The Scientific Consensus on Reward-Based Training

For decades, the field of animal behavior has undergone a significant evolution, moving away from outdated, dominance-theory-driven training paradigms towards methods rooted in positive reinforcement and modern learning theory. Numerous scientific studies have consistently demonstrated that reward-based training not only fosters a stronger, more trusting bond between dogs and their guardians but also effectively teaches desired behaviors without resorting to fear, pain, or intimidation.

Research published in journals such as Applied Animal Behaviour Science and Journal of Veterinary Behavior has linked aversive training techniques—including the use of shock collars, prong collars, choke chains, and physical corrections—to a range of negative outcomes for dogs. These include increased stress indicators (e.g., cortisol levels), heightened anxiety, fear-related aggression, suppressed natural behaviors, and a greater likelihood of developing behavioral problems. Conversely, studies have shown that dogs trained with positive reinforcement exhibit lower stress levels, demonstrate better learning retention, and display fewer problematic behaviors, ultimately leading to improved overall welfare and a more harmonious human-animal relationship.

Dr. Todd articulated this scientific consensus, stating, "There’s a clear consensus on the methods that we should be using to train dogs. They provide dogs with positive experiences, which is really important for animal welfare. They avoid risks of things like increased fear, anxiety, aggression, a worse relationship with the guardian, and pessimism." This statement reflects the robust body of evidence supporting the efficacy and ethical superiority of reward-based approaches.

The Problem of "Both Sidesism" in Animal Welfare

The concept of "both sidesism" posits that all viewpoints in a debate should be given equal airtime, regardless of their scientific validity or ethical implications. While seemingly fair, this approach can be deeply problematic when one side lacks scientific backing or, worse, promotes practices that are harmful. As Benson noted, this can open the discourse to manipulation by "bad actors" who seek legitimacy for their methods despite the evidence against them.

In the context of dog training, giving equal weight to aversive methods alongside reward-based techniques can mislead the public, suggesting a false equivalency where none exists. Dr. Todd explained, "If there’s a broad consensus on something… and if you give them equal weight in your piece, then you’re actually doing a disservice to their ideas." She drew parallels to established scientific facts like human-made climate change, where presenting dissenting, scientifically disproven views as equally valid can undermine public understanding and necessary action.

For dog training, this means refusing to legitimize methods that are demonstrably detrimental to animal welfare. The discussion highlighted that professional responsibility dictates advocating for what is best for dogs, not merely presenting all available options without qualification.

A Shifting Professional Landscape and Organizational Stances

The evolution in understanding canine behavior and welfare has led to a significant shift in the positions of leading animal welfare and veterinary organizations worldwide. What might have once been considered a "last resort" use of aversives is now largely rejected by mainstream professional bodies.

Organizations such as the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (AVSAB), the Pet Professional Guild (PPG), the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) in the UK, and Dogs Trust (also in the UK) have issued strong position statements advocating exclusively for reward-based, humane training methods. These statements are regularly updated to reflect the latest scientific research, explicitly advising against the use of punitive tools and techniques due to their potential to cause physical and psychological harm. Many of these organizations have "tightened up" their positions in recent years, reflecting an increasing intolerance for practices that compromise animal welfare. The consensus among these diverse global organizations signifies a unified professional front against coercive training.

The Overton Window and the Normalization of Humane Practices

The discussion also explored the concept of the "Overton Window," a political theory describing the range of policies politically acceptable to the mainstream population at a given time. This window can shift, making previously unthinkable ideas acceptable, or vice versa. Applied to dog training, the experts identified a clear movement of this window towards positive, welfare-focused methods.

Kristi Benson articulated Trevino’s degrees of acceptance: from "unthinkable" to "radical," "acceptable," "sensible," "popular," and finally "policy." She suggested that reward-based dog training, once perhaps considered "radical" in the 1980s with pioneering works like Jean Donaldson’s The Culture Clash, has now moved firmly into the "popular" phase. Dr. Todd agreed, noting that while kindness to dogs has always existed, the systematic application of non-aversive methods as the professional standard is a relatively recent, yet rapidly accelerating, development.

The experts anticipate that the next phase for reward-based training is to become formalized "policy," meaning regulation of dog training and mandatory adherence to humane practices for professionals. This move would solidify reward-based methods as the only acceptable professional approach, ensuring better welfare outcomes for countless dogs. The visible reduction in the use of shock and prong collars in public spaces, as observed by Dr. Todd, serves as anecdotal evidence of this cultural shift and the increasing popularity of humane approaches among the general public.

Effective Communication: The "Truth Sandwich" Approach

In an environment where misinformation can spread rapidly, particularly on social media, the way advocates communicate about dog training methods becomes crucial. The experts discussed strategies to counter harmful narratives without inadvertently amplifying them. One such technique is the "truth sandwich."

As explained by Dr. Todd, a "truth sandwich" prioritizes accurate information. It begins by stating the truth (the "bread"), briefly addresses the misinformation (the "thin, undesirable filling"), and then immediately returns to reinforcing the truth (the second "chunky piece of bread"). For example, one might start by stating, "Reward-based training methods are highly effective and beneficial for dogs," then briefly mention, "some outdated methods use punishment, but these are associated with negative side effects," before concluding with, "focusing on positive reinforcement builds a strong bond and lasting learning."

This method ensures that cognitive effort is directed towards correct information, minimizing the mental real estate given to erroneous or harmful ideas. It also emphasizes the importance of proactively framing the narrative rather than allowing "loudest voices" or "bad actors" to set the agenda with misinformation.

Implications for Public Education and Professional Standards

The dialogue between Dr. Todd and Kristi Benson carries significant implications for public education and the future of professional dog training. It advocates for:

1. Clear and Unambiguous Messaging: Animal welfare advocates and professionals must be direct in endorsing reward-based methods and unequivocally denouncing harmful ones, without softening language for the sake of "fairness" to unscientific practices.
2. Protecting the Public: By establishing clear professional standards and discrediting dangerous methods, the public can be better protected from trainers whose practices may inadvertently harm their pets.
3. Fostering Ethical Practice: The movement towards policy-level acceptance of reward-based training would elevate the ethical standards of the entire profession, ensuring that all dog trainers adhere to humane, evidence-based practices.
4. Continuing Education: For trainers currently using aversives, numerous free and paid resources are available for transitioning to reward-based methods, underscoring that the choice to continue harmful practices is a professional failing, not a lack of alternatives.

The experts’ discussion serves as a powerful call to action for everyone involved in animal welfare, from pet guardians to seasoned professionals, to uphold the highest standards of care and communication, ensuring that the welfare of dogs remains at the forefront of every training conversation.

Recommended Reading

In a segment dedicated to recent reads, Kristi Benson recommended By Strength We Are Still Indigenous Peoples and Indian Residential schooling in Inuvik, Northwest Territories by Crystal Gail Fraser. This academic work, based on Fraser’s PhD dissertation, is praised for its beautiful prose and its vital contribution to understanding Canadian history through Indigenous methodologies and survivor stories, particularly focusing on a residential school that remained open until the 1990s.

Dr. Zazie Todd shared her enjoyment of Pugs and Kisses by Farrah Rochon, a romance novel set in New Orleans. The story follows a veterinarian, Evie, as she navigates a breakup and joins forces with a former vet school acquaintance to save an animal rescue. The book is highlighted for its engaging plot, vibrant setting, and themes of animal welfare and romance. Farrah Rochon is slated to discuss Pugs and Kisses at Bark! Fest, a book festival for animal lovers, alongside authors Julie Haworth (New Beginnings at the Cosy Cat Cafe) and Nicola Knight (Washed Up). Both recommended books are available through various bookstores and online retailers, including affiliate links provided by the hosts.