Skip to main content
. 2020 Jul 22;7:508. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2020.00508

Table 3.

Mean number of commands given per training session (±SE) for dogs trained with E-collars and the two control groups, including number of verbal, hand, and lead signals, number of times a single “Come” and “Sit” command were given and numbers of times multiple signals were given for each command (Come+ and Sit+) and the number of times dogs obeyed on first comment, obeyed after multiple commands (Obey+) or did not obey.

Command given Mean ± Standard Error of commands given F-Ratio from GLM
E-Collar Control 1 Control 2
Verbal 16.5 ± 1.4 20.5 ± 1.6 16.6 ± 1.1 F(2, 293) = 3.05, P = 0.051
Hand 5.4 ± 0.4a 8.9 ± 0.7b 1.6 ± 0.2c F(2, 293) = 57.7, P < 0.001
Lead 4.2 ± 0.5a 7.5 ± 1.0b 0.1 ± 0.0c F2, 293) = 39.6, P < 0.001
Sit 12.5 ± 0.8a 16.2 ± 1.0b 3.4 ± 0.5c F(2, 293) = 69.2, P < 0.001
Sit+ 3.4 ± 0.4a 5.5 ± 0.6b 0.6 ± 0.1c F(2, 293) = 35.4, P < 0.001
Come 7.4 ± 0.6a 10.2 ± 0.8b 11.8 ± 0.8b F(2, 293) = 8.92, P < 0.001
Come+ 2.9 ± 0.5a 4.9 ± 0.7b 2.5 ± 0.3a F(2, 293) = 6.84, P = 0.001
Obey 15.4 ± 1.1a 19.2 ± 1.1b 12.8 ± 0.9a F(2, 293) = 8.78, P < 0.001
Obey+ 4.1 ± 0.3a 6.3 ± 0.5b 2.0 ± 0.2a F(2, 293) = 37.5, P < 0.001
Disobey 0.4 ± 0.1a 1.0 ± 1.1b 0.4 ± 0.1a F(2, 293) = 9.50, P < 0.001

Different subscripts (a, b, and c) indicate where training groups differed based on Tukey pair-wise comparisons.