A qualitative investigation of the perceptions of female dog-bite victims and implications for the prevention of dog bites

Abstract

Preventing dog bites is an increasingly important public health and political issue with implications for both human and animal health and welfare. Expert opinion is that most bites are preventable. Intervention materials have been designed to educate people on how to assess the body language of dogs, evaluate risk, and take appropriate action. The effectiveness of this approach is rarely evaluated and the incidence of dog bites is thought to be increasing. Is the traditional approach to dog bite prevention working as well as it should? In this novel, small scale qualitative study, the perceptions of victims regarding their dog bite experience were explored in-depth. The study recruited 8 female participants who had been bitten by a dog in the past 5 years. In-depth, one-to-one interviews were conducted, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis. The findings indicate that dog bites may not be as easily preventable as previously presumed, and that education about dog body language may not prevent some types of dog bites. The reasons participants were bitten were multifaceted and complex. In some cases, there was no interaction with the dog before the bite so there was no opportunity to assess the situation and modify behavior around the dog accordingly. Identifying who was to blame, and had responsibility for preventing the bite, was straightforward for the participants in hindsight. Those bitten blamed themselves and/or the dog owner, but not the dog. Most participants already felt they had a theoretical knowledge that would allow them to recognize dog aggression before the dog bite, yet participants, especially those who worked regularly with dogs, routinely believed, “it would not happen to me.” We also identified an attitude that bites were “just one of those things,” which could also be a barrier prevention initiatives. Rather than being special to the human-canine relationship, the attitudes discovered mirror those found in other areas of injury prevention. A new approach to dog-bite prevention may now be required, drawing on other injury prevention strategies including awareness-raising and minimizing the damage caused by a bite when it happens.

Exploration of Perceptions of Dog Bites among YouTube™ Viewers and Attributions of Blame

“…moreover, given that reasons for dog bites may not always be clear, disagreements and contradictions regarding what constitutes risk, why bites occur, and who should be blamed are to be expected. Previous research suggests that many bites may not always be easily prevented; for instance, because the victim did not know what they were doing before the bite or what provoked it, or they did know it was a risk situation but continued anyway for various reasons (Westgarth & Watkins, 2015). In contrast, our analysis suggests that dog bites are perceived to be avoidable accidents and those thought to be responsible for them (e.g., parents or owners of dogs) are blamed.…”

“…Other viewers opposed this view, saying that regardless of the specialist training that the dog received it is not acceptable for them to bite outside of these contexts and the owner should always be able to control the dog's behavior in public. Normalization of bites could be detrimental to bite prevention, as risks that are seen as normal may be perceived as unavoidable, impossible to manage or reduce through changes in behaviors or practices around dogs (Westgarth & Watkins, 2015).…”

“…Studies suggest that people perceive and understand dog bites and severity of a bite in different ways, making it difficult to identify universally applicable prevention strategies. For example, a study of women bitten by dogs found that there was not a single definition of a bite (Westgarth & Watkins, 2015). moreover, in an ethnographic study, practicing vets were found to often re-construct minor bites as "just nips," and in some cases deny being bitten even when a bite was observed (Sanders, 1994, p. 52).…”

“…Risk and blame have to be understood together, as defining blame is a part of a process of justifying why something poses a risk (Douglas & Wildavsky, 1983). Previous research indicates that bite victims rarely blame the dog-they blame themselves or the owner instead (Westgarth & Watkins, 2015). tracing how blame is attributed helps to provide insight into bite perception, as to ascribe blame it is necessary to define a causal relationship between different actors-a process by which a harms B (Douglas, 1992).…”

Dominance in domestic dogs—A response to Schilder et al. (2014)

“…Moreover, the "body-language" of dogs is not interpreted consistently, 385 and even those with considerable experience of dog behavior can misread their behavior 386 (Westgarth and Watkins, 2015) . 387…”