Resource type: Systematic review

Publication

Karen Brady; Nina Cracknell; Helen Zulch; Daniel Simon Mills (2018). A Systematic Review of the Reliability and Validity of Behavioural Tests Used to Assess Behavioural Characteristics Important in Working Dogs. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 5, article 103. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2018.00103

Published online: 25 May 2018.

Reading note: Reliability and predictive validity are distinct questions in this review. The authors report gaps and inconsistencies in the evidence rather than certifying all working-dog selection tests.

Author abstract

The following is the authors’ abstract, not a site-written summary. Wording is retained; paragraph structure and inline typography are formatted for this page.

Background

Working dogs are selected based on predictions from tests that they will be able to perform specific tasks in often challenging environments. However, withdrawal from service in working dogs is still a big problem, bringing into question the reliability of the selection tests used to make these predictions.

Methods

A systematic review was undertaken aimed at bringing together available information on the reliability and predictive validity of the assessment of behavioural characteristics used with working dogs to establish the quality of selection tests currently available for use to predict success in working dogs.

Results

The search procedures resulted in 16 papers meeting the criteria for inclusion. A large range of behaviour tests and parameters were used in the identified papers, and so behaviour tests and their underpinning constructs were grouped on the basis of their relationship with positive core affect (willingness to work, human-directed social behaviour, object-directed play tendencies) and negative core affect (human-directed aggression, approach withdrawal tendencies, sensitivity to aversives). We then examined the papers for reports of inter-rater reliability, within-session intra-rater reliability, test-retest validity and predictive validity.

Conclusions

The review revealed a widespread lack of information relating to the reliability and validity of measures to assess behaviour and inconsistencies in terminologies, study parameters and indices of success. There is a need to standardise the reporting of these aspects of behavioural tests in order to improve the knowledge base of what characteristics are predictive of optimal performance in working dog roles, improving selection processes and reducing working dog redundancy. We suggest the use of a framework based on explaining the direct or indirect relationship of the test with core affect.

Source and attribution

Copyright © 2018 Brady, Cracknell, Zulch and Mills Reused under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0). The researchers named above are the publication authors; this site provides the resource presentation.

Read the original publication · Read the repository copy (Europe PMC)

Presentation changes: bibliographic and resource-type labels added; import formatting cleaned. Author-abstract wording is preserved. Existing images, source URLs and attachments are retained; separately credited material remains subject to its own terms.

Existing attachment

The existing file remains available through this page’s attachment/download area. See the version and reuse information above; no replacement file has been introduced.