Chiang Mai, Thailand, 19.07.2025
Dogs trained with aversive techniques experience significantly more stress and pessimism than those trained with reward-based methods, highlighting major welfare implications.
Do training methods impact more than just obedience? A 2020 study published in PLoS ONE investigated the welfare consequences of different dog training methods in a sample of 92 companion dogs.
The researchers categorized training schools into three groups: reward-based (n = 42), mixed (n = 22), and highly aversive-based (n = 28). Dogs were observed during training and tested outside the training environment for stress and emotional outlook using cortisol sampling and a cognitive bias test.
Key findings: Dogs in aversive-based programs showed significantly more stress behaviors (e.g., yawning, lip licking), higher post-training cortisol levels, and more pessimistic responses during the cognitive task. They also appeared more tense and panted more during training than dogs in the reward-based group. Even dogs from mixed-method schools showed increased stress and tension compared to those in reward-only environments.
The researchers concluded that aversive methods compromise dog welfare—both during training and in general wellbeing. This provides robust evidence for discouraging punishment-based techniques in companion dog training, urging a shift toward more humane, positive reinforcement approaches.
Does training method matter? Evidence for the negative impact of aversive-based methods on companion dog welfare
