Abstract
Abstract This study assessed the consistency with which aggressive occurred across 3 different provocation tests that are currently used in practice to evaluate the and safety of dogs. The aim of this study was not to validate the tests, but to evaluate tests that are not validated but are nevertheless being used in a legal context in Switzerland, by investigating the hypothesis that 3 different approaches, all claiming to correctly evaluate the of dogs, should be expected to show significant agreement. The same 60 dogs were tested in 3 behavioral tests being used in Switzerland at the time of this study in the year 2003 (Test A: Test of the American Staffordshire Terrier Club; Test B: Halterprufung; Test C: Test of the Canton of Basel-Stadt). Intraspecific behavior and interspecific toward humans that might relate to potential aggressive were of particular interest. The observed agreement among the 3 tests was compared relative to chance using a κ test. Significant but low levels of agreement were found among the 3 tests for the criterion intraspecific behavior (κ = 0.133, P = .014), with the highest correlation between Tests A and B (κ = 0.345, P P = 0. 014), with Tests A and B (κ = 0.220, P = .005) showing the highest correlation. However, significant absolute values of κ were low in all cases. In a further analysis, dogs evaluated to show no signs of potential aggression in the test situations by all 3 tests were eliminated, and the results of the remaining dogs (interspecific behavior, n=23; intraspecific behavior, n=29) were assessed for disagreement in pairwise combinations using a McNemar chi-square test. No significant levels of disagreement were found for intraspecific behavior, however, for interspecific behavior, Tests A and B ( P = .035), and Tests B and C ( P P = 0.11). The inconsistency of the results from different tests suggests test bias at the very least and questions the validity of these tests. Further work examining the validity of each individual test is warranted if they are to be used in a legal context.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
