By Gaby Dufresne-Cyr, CBT-FLE
Many years of observation led me to believe that sociability is genetic; that is to say, we are born sociable or not. Instinctively the majority of people believe this statement without having scientific proof to back it up. Are they right? I think so. I’ve seen dogs (Canis Familiaris) with adequate socialization develop behavioural problems in my practice. I’ve also seen dogs, isolated from stimuli during the critical period, be socially well-adjusted. Recently I had the chance to observe four wolves (Canis Lupus) socialised according to a strict protocol. Three of them displayed typical fear behaviours wild wolves demonstrate; the fourth was fearful. The fearful wolf approached after a long session of encouragement. So, why is it that the recipe for socialization failed?
The canine socialization period is well-known to researchers and animal trainers/behaviourists. John Paul Scott and John L. Fuller introduced it in their book “Genetics and Social Behaviour of the Dog”, published in 1965. This period lasts from zero to sixteen weeks, peaking between the fourth and eighth week. We also know that a lack of exposure to stimuli during this period will create behavioural deficiencies. We will get back to this shortly. I am in no way questioning this theory. However, questions come to mind. If the dog is born sociable could the constant exposure to stimuli create behaviour problems? Are we creating hyper-reactive dogs by systematically sending them to puppy kindergarten? Is placing them in a continuous social context positive or negative? Before answering these questions, let's first look at the scientific research exploring sociability genes.
The Research
In 1997 Dr. Anthony Wynshaw-Boris from the National Human Genome Research Institute (USA) discovered a gene responsible for social behaviour in whiskery mice (
By closely observing the animals, they noticed a decrease in social interaction. They also noticed that the mice had difficulty eliminating exterior stimuli and concentrating on one specific stimulus. These same asocial behaviours are observed in humans suffering from psychiatric disorders such as autism or schizophrenia. Against all expectations, the genetically modified mice interacted, nestled, slept and groomed less. Visibly, something had changed in the group. The mice had become asocial. Was the gene removed responsible for sociability? The conclusion of the study wasn’t clear. However, the facts demonstrated that social interactions were gone, their behaviours had changed, and this gene was responsible.
A few years later, in 1999, Dr. Tom Insel and Larry Young from Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia (USA) published research in the journal Nature. The study aimed to discover the mechanisms of a neurotransmitter responsible for social attraction and intimacy, the hormone vasopressin. This time researchers created a social mouse by inserting the gene from a species of prairie vole (Microtus Ochrogaster) known for its sociability and fidelity. The hormone vasopressin was injected in a species of polygamist and asocial mice. The new transgenic species demonstrated the same social and gregarious behaviour as the prairie voles. It was the first time a gene was identified as responsible for social behaviour.
Discoveries did not end there. In 2001 a study published in the journal Science demonstrated that only one gene could regulate social behaviour in red fire ants (Solenopsis Invicta). Researchers from the University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia (USA), Michael Krieger and Kenneth Ross, discovered a gene responsible for exchanging information that allows ants to interact socially, a protein named Gp-9. This protein functions by allowing ants to send and receive olfactory signals (pheromones) used to recognize each other as members of the same colony.
The most extraordinary discovery was published in August 2003 in the journal Medical Genetics. The researchers Teresa Doyle and Ursula Bellugi from the Salk Institute, San Diego, California (USA) in collaboration with Julie Korenberger and John Graham from the UCLA and Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California (USA) published research on children affected by Williams syndrome. Children suffering from this syndrome have an extremely extroverted and hyper-social personality. They also have cardiovascular problems, particularly physical and facial characteristics, and a certain mental delay. Adults suffering from this syndrome demonstrate unusual capabilities for language despite reduced cognitive abilities.
Williams syndrome is rare. One out of twenty thousand people are affected. It is the consequence of the absence of twenty genes from one chromosome located on the seventh pair. Virtually every person affected by the syndrome lacks the same series of genes. Researchers discovered that children with Williams syndrome got very high marks when sociability tests were administered. These tests included the ability to recognize faces and names, the desire to please, empathy and social attraction. The same study discovered that one child retained one of the twenty genes usually missing. After this discovery, the little girl was administered a new behavioural test. Surprisingly, she did not demonstrate the socially extroverted characteristics other children with Williams syndrome demonstrated. She was rather introverted, lacked sociability and was fearful of strangers. The results implied that the presence of this gene altered the hyper-sociability typically observed in people with Williams. Researchers concluded the study by saying they were unsure if the gene regulating social behaviour was applied to the general population or simply to those affected with Williams syndrome.
Conclusion
Although inconclusive, research demonstrates that a sociability gene, or series of genes, could exist. So, back to our questions: does overexposing genetically social puppies to highly social situations hinder or help development? In the near future, the answer will undoubtedly be yes. I personally believe that oversocializing dogs hinders development and has the potential to create behaviour problems. All the while, an anti-social dog does benefit from regular low-intensity social interaction. After all, being social means dogs have the ability to use their species-specific language in the situations they have chosen; conversely, if dogs do not wish to be social in a certain situation does not mean they are systematically anti-social; it might simply mean they do not wish to interact with this specific individual at this specific moment.