Remember that woman in rural LA county who was killed by a pack of dogs last week?

[Nine]

200. You should realize that is not real research.

1. I looked up the authors' names and the terms dog and identification to find the actual study. I found this, which I believe is the pilot study: http://article.sapub.org/10.5923.j.sociology.20130302.02.html#Sec3

That publisher has been identified as a fake academic journal: http://scholarlyoa.com/2012/02/05/new-publisher-scientific-academic-publishing/

2. The study is being sponsored by the National Canine Research Council, a pit bull advocacy group.

Even if the study were valid, the implications you want to draw from it seem questionable.

1. Even in the pilot study, the 20 mixed breed dogs used were correctly identified as mixes over 90% of the time. The Clifton report, which documents reports of dog bite fatalities, lists 2235 dogs that were identified as pit bulls and only 148 that were identified as pit bull mixes. The study did not demonstrate that mixed breed dogs were being erroneously identified as purebred, much less that they were being erroneously identified as purebreds of the pit bull variety.

2. The two dogs that had the highest misidentification rate as purebreds (25% and 21%) were not pit bull mixes. One was a predominantly dalmation mix that had a dalmation type coat and was correctly identified as predominantly dalmation by 95% of the respondents who recognized the dog as a mix. The other was predominantly shih tzu with some other small breeds mixed in. This dog was also correctly identified as predominantly shih tzu.

3. Your premise that the dogs involved in DBRFs are mostly identified by visual inspection is incorrect. Information is gathered from a variety of sources including statements from the very owners of these dogs. Do you really think that most people have no idea what kind of dog they have?