Jim Gillies CAB | CDBC( Certified Dog Behaviour Consultant )

Jim Gillies CAB, CDBC is a Clinical Animal Behaviourist based in Glasgow with over a decade of experience across a wide range of canine behaviour issues. He is an APBC Full Member, ABTC Registered, and IAABC Certified Dog Behaviour Consultant — and works across clinical consultations, veterinary collaboration, and expert witness instruction. His practice is welfare-led and evidence-based throughout. Jim runs CBT Dog Behaviour & Training and shares behaviour insights through his blog and podcast.

Dominance-based explanations still shape how many owners interpret problem behaviour in their dogs, despite the model being a poor fit for most cases seen in clinical practice. Behaviours such as resource guarding, growling, handling sensitivity, and owner-directed aggression are frequently labelled as “dominance” — when a more accurate formulation usually involves emotional state, learning history, context, and the consequences that have followed the behaviour. Understanding where the theory came from, why it fell apart scientifically, and what a better framework looks like is important for anyone making decisions about how to work with a dog that is showing difficult behaviour. For more on ethical, evidence-based training and behaviour modification, see our full guide.

Last Updated: April 2026

Where Did the Alpha Theory Come From?

The concept of the “alpha” wolf originates from a 1947 study by Swiss animal behaviourist Rudolph Schenkel, who observed captive wolves in a zoo and described dominant individuals competing aggressively to establish rank. This work was later expanded by L. David Mech, whose 1970 book The Wolf brought the alpha model into mainstream awareness — and, from there, into dog training.

The critical problem with Schenkel’s observations was the context in which they were made. Captive wolves — unrelated individuals confined together with limited resources — do not behave as wild wolves do. Mech’s own subsequent field research, conducted over decades studying wolves in their natural habitat, led him to a fundamentally different conclusion: wild wolf packs are family units led by the breeding pair by default of parenthood, not unrelated adults in constant status competition. The aggression and dominance displays Schenkel had described were products of captivity, not natural wolf social structure. Mech has since requested that his original book be taken out of print.

The further step — applying this framework to domestic dogs — involves an additional leap the evidence does not support. Dogs and wolves diverged thousands of years ago. Domestic dogs have co-evolved with humans over that entire period. Their social behaviour, motivational systems, and responses to humans are shaped by that history, not by wolf pack dynamics.

Is Dominance a Real Concept in Animal Behaviour?

It is worth being precise here, because the answer matters for credibility. Dominance is a real ethological concept. Social relationships and competition over resources do occur within species, including in dogs. The scientific literature does not say hierarchy is fiction.

What it does say is more specific: the old “alpha pair fighting for constant rank” model has been substantially revised even in wolf research; the cross-species application to domestic dogs is not scientifically supported; and most importantly, the idea that dogs are attempting to achieve “alpha” status over their human owners is not a useful or evidence-based framework for explaining or modifying behaviour.

Veterinary behaviour guidance — including from the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior and the British Small Animal Veterinary Association — has explicitly cautioned against using dominance theory as a general explanatory framework, because it encourages coercive interpretations and obscures more plausible, clinically useful ones.

What Does This Mean in Practice? The Resource Guarding Example

Resource guarding is probably the behaviour most commonly framed in dominance terms. Owners are frequently told their dog is “challenging them” or “controlling the space” when they guard food, resting places, or stolen items.

In clinical assessment, the picture is usually quite different. A dog guarding a resource is typically better understood through the value of that resource to the individual, the dog’s emotional state when approached, the predictability of human behaviour around that resource, and what has happened previously when the dog has guarded — whether guarding has worked to increase distance or retain access. Fear, conflict, and reinforcement history are doing most of the explanatory work, not a bid for social rank.

This distinction is not just theoretical. A dominance-based response to resource guarding — confronting the dog, forcing removal of the item, using physical correction — is likely to suppress warning signals such as growling while increasing the underlying emotional arousal. That combination raises the risk of an unwarned bite. The clinical response is a structured behaviour modification programme built around desensitisation, counter-conditioning, and management, applied carefully to the specific context.

How Dominance Theory Gets Applied in Training

When the alpha model is used to justify training methods, it tends to produce a specific set of recommendations: establish yourself as pack leader, never let the dog go through a door first, use physical corrections to assert control. Techniques such as the alpha roll — forcing a dog onto its back to simulate submission — were widely taught on this basis.

The consequences of these methods are well documented. Confrontational techniques increase the likelihood of aggression. A dog that responds to physical dominance with apparent compliance may be shutting down through fear rather than learning. Warning signals such as growling are suppressed rather than addressed, and the trust required for effective behaviour modification is damaged rather than built. In cases where the underlying problem is fear or anxiety — which is common in cases mislabelled as dominance — these approaches make the emotional state driving the behaviour worse, not better.

What to Do If a Trainer Talks About Dominance

If a trainer, behaviourist, or well-meaning contact advises you to “show the dog who is boss,” use physical corrections to establish rank, or apply any technique derived from the alpha dominance framework, that is a meaningful signal about their underpinning approach. It is reasonable to ask some direct questions before proceeding:

• What behaviour mechanism do they think is operating?
• How are emotional state and learning history being considered?
• Does the plan involve force, submission, or physical punishment?
• Is the approach grounded in current evidence on how dogs learn?

In the UK, practitioners registered with the Animal Behaviour and Training Council (ABTC) or holding membership with the APBC or IAABC are required to adhere to evidence-based, welfare-centred practice. These are reasonable starting points when selecting professional support.

A Better Framework for Difficult Behaviour

The alternative to dominance-based training is not the absence of boundaries, structure, or guidance. It is a more accurate and clinically useful framework for understanding why behaviour occurs. When a dog is growling, guarding, snapping, or showing conflict behaviour, the first question should not be how to establish control. It should be what the dog is experiencing, what it has learned, and what the context suggests about the function of the behaviour.

Labelling behaviour as “dominance” can shut down that process too early. It offers a simple explanation, but one that often directs owners towards interventions that are poorly matched to the underlying problem and may increase stress, conflict, or risk. For dogs showing difficult or escalating behaviour, careful assessment of emotional state, learning history, triggers, consequences, and environmental context provides a more reliable starting point than assumptions about status or control.

FAQs on Alpha Dominance Theory

Further Reading

• Association of Pet Behaviour Counsellors (APBC) — professional standards in clinical animal behaviour
• L. David Mech on wolf social behaviour — the original researcher who later retracted the dominance model
• Fear Aggression in Dogs — how fear-based responses are frequently misread as dominance