IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v16y2019i21p4081-d279648.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Small Animal Veterinarians’ Perceptions, Experiences, and Views of Common Dog Breeds, Dog Aggression, and Breed-Specific Laws in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Lori R. Kogan

    (Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA)

  • Regina M. Schoenfeld-Tacher

    (Department of Molecular Biomedical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27607, USA)

  • Peter W. Hellyer

    (Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA)

  • James A. Oxley

    (Measham, 102 Bosworth Road, Measham, Swadlincote DE12 7Q, UK)

  • Mark Rishniw

    (Veterinary Information Network, 777 W Covell Blvd, Davis, CA 95616, USA)

Abstract

Dog aggression directed towards humans is a common and serious behavioral and public health issue. This cross-sectional study was designed to gain insights into U.S. small animal veterinarians’ views and experiences with the most common dog breeds in the U.S., dog aggression, and breed-specific legislation. An electronic survey was distributed via email to an online veterinary community, and responses were summarized and compared by means of χ 2 and Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel tests. Most respondents were concerned about the risks of dog bite injuries, but the majority were not in favor of banning specific breeds of dogs in order to enhance public safety. When participants rated the perceived bite risk associated with popular dog breeds, Chow Chows were perceived as the highest risk, with pit bull types categorized as a moderate risk. Golden Retrievers were seen as the most appropriate for families with children. Public education about animal behavior was the most frequently endorsed policy intervention to increase public safety. These findings suggest that most veterinarians feel that banning an entire dog breed is not an effective way to ensure human safety. Instead, most respondents endorsed alternative initiatives, such as public education and stricter leash laws, to reduce the risk of dog bites.

Suggested Citation

  • Lori R. Kogan & Regina M. Schoenfeld-Tacher & Peter W. Hellyer & James A. Oxley & Mark Rishniw, 2019. "Small Animal Veterinarians’ Perceptions, Experiences, and Views of Common Dog Breeds, Dog Aggression, and Breed-Specific Laws in the United States," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-15, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:21:p:4081-:d:279648
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/21/4081/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/21/4081/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Finn Nilson & John Damsager & Jens Lauritsen & Carl Bonander, 2018. "The effect of breed-specific dog legislation on hospital treated dog bites in Odense, Denmark—A time series intervention study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-8, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Aubrey H. Fine, 2020. "The Psycho-Social Impact of Human-Animal Interactions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-4, June.
    2. Jan Náhlík & Petra Eretová & Helena Chaloupková & Hana Vostrá-Vydrová & Naděžda Fiala Šebková & Jan Trávníček, 2022. "How Parents Perceive the Potential Risk of a Child-Dog Interaction," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-12, January.
    3. Lori R. Kogan & Wendy Packman & Phyllis Erdman & Jennifer Currin-McCulloch & Cori Bussolari, 2022. "US Adults’ Perceptions of Dog Breed Bans, Dog Aggression and Breed-Specific Laws," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-15, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sara C. Owczarczak-Garstecka & Robert M. Christley & Francine Watkins & Huadong Yang & Carri Westgarth, 2021. "“ If You Don’t See the Dog, What Can You Do?” Using Procedures to Negotiate the Risk of Dog Bites in Occupational Contexts," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(14), pages 1-20, July.
    2. Lori R. Kogan & Wendy Packman & Phyllis Erdman & Jennifer Currin-McCulloch & Cori Bussolari, 2022. "US Adults’ Perceptions of Dog Breed Bans, Dog Aggression and Breed-Specific Laws," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-15, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:21:p:4081-:d:279648. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.