Table 4.

Content analysis of agreement and disagreement to the proposed definition by participants.

Category	Behaviors	# Agree	Target	# Agree	Underlying Affect or Motivation	# Agree	Object/Item types	# Agree
Original definition	Defensive, threatening or aggressive	2	Person or other animal	2	Prevention of loss, desire to maintain	4	Food or non-food object	2
Proposed substitutions	“Changes in affect” (used as a blanket term for observed behaviors)	1	Another individual	1	Maintaining control of “valued” resource	2	“item” better than non-food object	2
	Agonistic behaviors	2			“Perceived” valued resource control	2	Distinction made between items dog can hold in mouth or not hold in mouth (e.g couch)	2
	Avoidance (instead of defensive)	1			“Perceived” potential loss to possession	1
Proposed additions	Tense body posture	1	N/A		Defense (as the motivation)	1	People	2
	Specific behaviors (e.g., taking item and running off, rapidly consuming item, stiffening and hovering over it, lip lifting, barking, growling, lunging, snapping, biting)	6					Resting and sleeping places (e.g., couches)	2
							Territories (i.e., “area”)	1
Proposed Context-specific inclusions	Anxious behaviors (e.g., lip licking, yawning, averting gaze, freezing)	2	N/A		Anxiety (as a component)	2	N/A
	Defensive or offensive, depending on behaviors observed	3
	Deferent or submissive	1
Proposed deletions	Defensive should not be included	2			Should not include motivation in a definition	1	People and territories should not be included	2

The original proposed definition was: “A dog that is displaying defensive, threatening, or aggressive behaviors to prevent a person or other animal from gaining access to a food or non-food object.” The “number agree” represents a count of individuals that either proposed the respective component or agreed with a previous participant regarding the component proposed (N = 14).