Login
Registrieren
Passwort zurücksetzen
Veröffentlichen & Verteilen
Verlagslösungen
Vertriebslösungen
Themen
Allgemein
Altertumswissenschaften
Architektur und Design
Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft, Buchwissenschaft
Biologie
Chemie
Geowissenschaften
Geschichte
Industrielle Chemie
Informatik
Jüdische Studien
Kulturwissenschaften
Kunst
Linguistik und Semiotik
Literaturwissenschaft
Materialwissenschaft
Mathematik
Medizin
Musik
Pharmazie
Philosophie
Physik
Rechtswissenschaften
Sozialwissenschaften
Sport und Freizeit
Technik
Theologie und Religion
Wirtschaftswissenschaften
Veröffentlichungen
Zeitschriften
Bücher
Konferenzberichte
Verlage
Blog
Kontakt
Suche
EUR
USD
GBP
Deutsch
English
Deutsch
Polski
Español
Français
Italiano
Warenkorb
Home
Zeitschriften
Vision Rehabilitation International
Band 3 (2010): Heft 1 (January 2010)
Uneingeschränkter Zugang
Dog Distraction Quantified
Peter McKenzie
Peter McKenzie
| 01. Jan. 2010
Vision Rehabilitation International
Band 3 (2010): Heft 1 (January 2010)
Über diesen Artikel
Vorheriger Artikel
Nächster Artikel
Zusammenfassung
Artikel
Figuren und Tabellen
Referenzen
Autoren
Artikel in dieser Ausgabe
Vorschau
PDF
Zitieren
Teilen
Online veröffentlicht:
01. Jan. 2010
Seitenbereich:
9 - 26
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21307/ijom-2010-002
© 2010 Peter McKenzie published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Table 1.
Percentage of dogs with dog distraction referrals by calendar year.
Figure 1.
Percentage of dogs with dog distraction referrals by calendar year.
Figure 2.
Number of dogs associated with aftercare issue (N = 280).
Figure 3.
Major aftercare issues associated with dogs placed in calendar years 2000 to 2003.
Figure 4.
Major aftercare issues associated with dogs placed in calendar years 2004 to 2006.
Figure 5.
Major aftercare issues associated with dogs placed in calendar years 2007 to 2008.
Table 2.
Observed frequencies of dog distraction referrals by region.
Table 3.
Observed frequencies of dog distraction referrals by dog breed.
Table 4.
Observed frequencies of dog distraction referrals by dog sex and user gender (Golden Retrievers excluded) n = 243.
Table 5.
Observed frequencies of dog distraction referrals by breeder quantity of dogs.
Table 6.
Observed frequencies of dog distraction referrals by puppy raiser experience.
Table 7.
Observed frequencies of dog distraction referrals by puppy raiser numbers.
Table 8.
Observed frequencies of dog distraction referrals by training intake assessment score.
Figure 6.
Percentage of dogs with dog distraction referrals by assessment score.
Table 9.
Observed frequencies of dog distraction referrals by puppy raising variable and assessment score.
Table 10.
Observed frequencies of dog distraction referrals by supervising instructor.
Table 11.
Observed frequencies of dog distraction referrals by batch type.
Table 12.
Observed frequencies of dog distraction referrals by training type.
Table 13.
Percentage of dogs with dog distraction referrals by program instructor.
Table 14.
Observed frequencies of dog distraction referrals by user age.
Table 15.
Observed frequencies of dog distraction referrals by user experience.