Professional Dog Trainers' Perspectives on Training Methods: Ethical and Evidentiary Insights

Jamie L DeLeeuw^1*Todd J Williams^2*

• ¹Community Research Plus, Grand Rapids, United States
• ²Grand Valley State University, Allendale, United States

The professional dog training field sits at the intersection of applied behavioral science, ethics, and lived experience. Despite its significant animal welfare implications, it remains largely unregulated. This primarily qualitative study, complemented with quantitative analyses, examined how professional trainers with differing methodological orientations view humane and effective practice. Using stratified sampling, 35 trainers affiliated with independent certification directories (17 reward-based; 18 mixed methods) completed a pre-screen survey and semi-structured interviews. Data were analyzed to explore associations among training approach, certification, and demographics, as well as ethical reasoning, evidentiary interpretation, and views on industry regulation. Across orientations, trainers consistently emphasized positive reinforcement as their most frequently used and effective method, shared a strong commitment to canine emotional well-being and owner education, and expressed concern over the industry's lack of professional regulation. However, their epistemic orientations diverged: reward-based trainers primarily grounded their practice in behavioral science and welfare frameworks, whereas mixed methods trainers prioritized experiential knowledge and framed aversive tools as pragmatic instruments for safety and communication that could rival the effectiveness of positive reinforcement. Overall, the findings depict a profession characterized by ethical pluralism and epistemic tension yet marked by reflection and adaptive learning. To strengthen professional cohesion and increase the practical relevance of future research and ethical frameworks, we recommend integrating adversarial collaboration into a community-based participatory research approach.