Well, I see "respect" as "accepting my direction, guidance, and leadership". If a dog (for example, Wally) follows my directions and leadership in situations, I'd say he respects me.
What if Wally has an overriding fear that prevents him from complying? What if he stubbed his toe and he mechanically can't do as you requested? What if a bee is buzzing in the background and he hasn't generalized your cue to bee buzzing? What if you're sad one day and you ask for a recall and your saddened face is an overriding cue for him not to recall? What if Wally chases after a squirrel and you're trying to lure him with a tennis ball? Are any of these examples of disrespect? Or is it possible Wally cold choose not to follow your direction and still respect you?
There is an inherent problem with guessing at a dog's internal thoughts and motivation...we're guessing. It's not uncommon for dog owners to label their dog as stubborn, hard headed, stupid, or disrespectful, based on non-compliance alone. That's unfair to the dog, and often leads to punitive training protocols, when punitive training protocols aren't warranted.
Yes, you can make some judgment on your dog motivation by his behavior. However, we better be certain we're qualified to make a judgment before defining our training protocol, especially if that protocol is punitive by nature, as most pack theory protocols are.
A few threads ago someone posted a video of a dog being trained with an e-collar. The dog was constantly looking away from the trainer, and yawning...these are calming signals, signs of distress. The trainer labeled the dog "tired". Had he guessed overly stressed, he may have ceased the training session at the first few obvious signs of distress, not minutes later after what he was attempting to do failed after way too many trials.
First thing that freaked him out, he would only think about trying to get away. No listening to my directions or anything. Now, he looks to me for direction on how we should proceed. He'll come back to me, sit, shaking and shivering, and looking (literally) at me for direction. I'd say that's respect and trust in my leadership, guidance, and direction.
I'm not saying you were or are punitive to your dog, but dogs can be forced into compliance too. No question. However, just because a dog chooses to follow direction, this does not necessarily mean the dog enjoys doing it, or that he respects his owner while doing it. I've seen dogs lunge after a cat, heed a cue to cease, and redirect his aggression onto his handler. Not at any one moment is this dog being disrespectful. Yes, the behavior is no less unwanted, but really, the dog's internal thoughts are not valued in his behavior.
I don't think I, myself, follow just ONE protocol, so I couldn't describe it to you - except that I do what works and what brings no harm to my companion. And even then, I may not know what to do with a "normal" dog since I've never experienced owning one. Only fearful-but-becoming-less-so Wally.
Here, let me offer you a gift...you can pay me back later. I don't care what dog you are handling, this is your protocol...ABC. "A" stands for antecedent, "b" stands for behavior, and "c" stands for consequence. An antecedent is anything in the dog's environment that is driving the dog's behavior, anything. Behavior is what the dog observably does...wag his tail, sitting, roll over, blink his eyes, etc. A consequence is a result of the behavior...food rewards, leash jerks, withdrawal of attention are all consequences for behavior. Within the the ABC's, you, as the dog's handler, have control over only two parts of this equation...antecedents and consequences. How your dog behaves is determined by him and him alone. How well you control the antecedent and consequence determines what behavior you can/will elicit from your dog.
So how do you train a "normal" dog? Control the antecedent and consequence. How do you train a fearful dog? Control the antecedent and consequence. How do you train a deaf, blind, tripod dog? Control the antecedent and consequence.
Oh, and I think you can learn internal thoughts through external actions. Dog barking at the door, bumping it with his nose (speaking from personal experience again), means dog wants out - NOW. Dog comes up to me when I'm not looking at him and he whines and barks, he obviously thinks there's something that warrants my attention whether he's hungry or needs to go potty, etc.
There's no doubt we humans are learning creatures too. We evaluate antecedents, behave upon them, and experience consequences for our behavior. No differently than your dog would. If you've recognized your dog's cue to potty, you're likely to prefer the consequence of knowing you're dog's bladder is empty versus the piddle puddle he leaves for you on the carpet. I don't think though these cues tell you how the dog feels about piddling on the grass or the carpet, or if he's choosing to piddle on the grass for you.
Do I know what the voice in his head is saying, no. But that doesn't mean I'm totally in the dark about what he's thinking.
Here's how I deal with this evaluation. If what I've concluded about my dog's thoughts benefit my dog...I'm okay to imagine with as colorful of a canvas as my brain will paint. If, however, my conclusion does not benefit my dog from her POV, I need to control all possible antecedents to minimize the use of punitive consequences. Dominance theory or as it is sometimes called pack theory, doesn't approach it from an antecedent control standpoint. The dog is this, therefore, do this to the dog is dominance theory. A recipe for disaster IMO.
