# Terri Arnold's Motivational Pop



## laffi

I would like to hear what people think about the Terri Arnold's Motivational Pop? 

I use clicker training in 90% of my training (obedience, agility and flyball) so I have to say I am having hard time with the pop concept. Not that I think it's cruel but I definitely do not consider it positive reinforement, although food is coming straight after. 

I just wanted to know what other people think about it and how they 'justify' it.


----------



## LibertyME

I am reading Terri first book right now...have never seen the 'motivational pop' applied...so look forward to hearing the responses...


----------



## AmbikaGR

I have always considered it as a "reminder" not a correction. If done with proper timing with a treat it is a positive reinforcement in my eyes.


----------



## laffi

AmbikaGR said:


> I have always considered it as a "reminder" not a correction. If done with proper timing with a treat it is a positive reinforcement in my eyes.


The more I think about it the more I agree with you. 

But then for example prong collars are even illegal to use in some state of Australia (where we live right now) and so it makes me feel: am I a really bad owner to even consider that? I think that it could be a great tool (like for the motivational pop) but can be easily misused.


----------



## mylissyk

Could you explain what that is?


----------



## AmbikaGR

laffi said:


> But then for example prong collars are even illegal to use in some state of Australia (where we live right now) and so it makes me feel: am I a really bad owner to even consider that? I think that it could be a great tool (like for the motivational pop) but can be easily misused.


No a prong collar is not a "bad" thing but they are not for every dog (or handler) either. The key to it's use is EXACTLY what you refer to - using it correctly. I would not use the pop to "teach" a behavior the dog does not already know or understand but I would use it as a "reminder" after I know the dog does know what is expected. I hope that makes sense.


----------



## Rastadog

*it is a positive reinforcement*

It is a trained response. You don't just start popping your dog. The dog is taught the pop by being popped up for praise and food. It becomes a positive. It is not used as a correction. It brings up attitude and reinforces good attention when used properly. Laffi my sense is this is more an issue about compulsion in training which purely positive trainers don't use. Terri does use compulsion with her motavational method. While not a "pop"ular idea I feel compulsion is essential in training reliability for serious obedience work. The prong is not a torture device. It is a communication tool. Watch a good trainer use a prong and a leash. It is a very small,l 1/2 to 1 1/2 inch, hand movements that are not mean or violent. Keep in mind anything can be misused in training. Including a trainers hand and voice.


----------



## laffi

Rastadog said:


> It is a trained response. You don't just start popping your dog. The dog is taught the pop by being popped up for praise and food. It becomes a positive. It is not used as a correction. It brings up attitude and reinforces good attention when used properly. Laffi my sense is this is more an issue about compulsion in training which purely positive trainers don't use. Terri does use compulsion with her motavational method. While not a "pop"ular idea I feel compulsion is essential in training reliability for serious obedience work. The prong is not a torture device. It is a communication tool. Watch a good trainer use a prong and a leash. It is a very small,l 1/2 to 1 1/2 inch, hand movements that are not mean or violent. Keep in mind anything can be misused in training. Including a trainers hand and voice.


Thank you so much for your answer! Definitely gives a lot to think about


----------



## laffi

AmbikaGR said:


> No a prong collar is not a "bad" thing but they are not for every dog (or handler) either. The key to it's use is EXACTLY what you refer to - using it correctly. I would not use the pop to "teach" a behavior the dog does not already know or understand but I would use it as a "reminder" after I know the dog does know what is expected. I hope that makes sense.


Makes sense :agree:


----------



## AmbikaGR

Rastadog said:


> Keep in mind anything can be misused in training. Including a trainers hand and voice.


 
You are right on the mark with this statement.


----------



## FlyingQuizini

By definition, when it's done properly and works, it is being used as punishment. You're adding something (the pop) to decrease an unwanted behavior (lack of attention).

I've used that method with Quiz. He has nice attention.

I've also recently really gotten into clicker training and had a chance to work with the top competitive team from Norway where their working obedience trials are way harder than ours. All their dogs are 100 percent clicker trained and they have the most beautiful attention, attitude and focus I've ever seen on a dog!

I'm no longer quite as comfortable with the Teri Arnold method as I once was. It can definitely work, and you do have to be sure that you're skilled in using it. I think most people who use it don't put enough effort into actually *teaching* and *rewarding* the dog for being attentive before they start correcting the dog for inattention. I also think there are some dogs who just can't handle it. It seems to work best on high-drive dogs. I've also seen it make some dogs a bit neurotic and stressed when they heel. There is some scientific research that shows that if you follow a correction immediately with a reinforcer of any kind, you can create a bit of a neurotic (myword, not the research - I'm still trying to find the actual study - I just heard it mentioned at a conference) animal. I believe that to be the case with *some* dogs.

So - I'm not totally convinced that it's the method I'll use with my next obedience dog. It's certainly kinder than much of the circle-jerk heeling methods that are still being used which employ heavy leash corrections. At least Teri is big on having fun and trying to motivate the dog - and that's super important.


----------



## laffi

FlyingQuizini said:


> By definition, when it's done properly and works, it is being used as punishment. You're adding something (the pop) to decrease an unwanted behavior (lack of attention).
> 
> I've used that method with Quiz. He has nice attention.
> 
> I've also recently really gotten into clicker training and had a chance to work with the top competitive team from Norway where their working obedience trials are way harder than ours. All their dogs are 100 percent clicker trained and they have the most beautiful attention, attitude and focus I've ever seen on a dog!
> 
> I'm no longer quite as comfortable with the Teri Arnold method as I once was. It can definitely work, and you do have to be sure that you're skilled in using it. I think most people who use it don't put enough effort into actually *teaching* and *rewarding* the dog for being attentive before they start correcting the dog for inattention. I also think there are some dogs who just can't handle it. It seems to work best on high-drive dogs. I've also seen it make some dogs a bit neurotic and stressed when they heel. There is some scientific research that shows that if you follow a correction immediately with a reinforcer of any kind, you can create a bit of a neurotic (myword, not the research - I'm still trying to find the actual study - I just heard it mentioned at a conference) animal. I believe that to be the case with *some* dogs.
> 
> So - I'm not totally convinced that it's the method I'll use with my next obedience dog. It's certainly kinder than much of the circle-jerk heeling methods that are still being used which employ heavy leash corrections. At least Teri is big on having fun and trying to motivate the dog - and that's super important.


LOL, I got the books because of you and now you are telling me you are into clicker training :doh: 
I find her books great, esp the detailed footwork and the precision she demands (like the use of metronome). I think I am going to incorporate these parts into my training but do it all with clicker training. Does it make sense? Do you think it's actually possible to adapt her way into 100% clicker training?


----------



## MaddieMagoo

Linda is the first person to have ever taught me the pop. I don't used it as a negative correction. Linda corrects her dogs, but she NEVER EVER uses it as a negative reinforcement. It's an upbeat pop up OFF the ground, with one hand in the collar and the food in the right hand. The food is then luring/bribing the dog while you have them have little licks of the cookie. Then the dog will anticipate it as you go. WHich is great...as the dog gets used to this pop...then all you will ever have to do is use one finger. Which is the stage Maddie is at...(I figured that out last night). YOu can ONLY use this with a buckle collar. NO chokes or prongs. (By the way...I hate chokes.)

This is the type of Motivational pop I use with Maddie, everytime when we warm-up and get her pizazzed. Otherwise she is boring without this. Linda also uses a pop as a reminder for dogs who decide not to come to you. All it is, is a sit and left hand in the collar and you should be 2 feet away from your dog, then you pop and say "come" and back away as dog will come towards you. I use these pops for whenever she is slacking.

Get it?

I haven't really used Terri's...because I don't know what it is exactly.


----------



## Rastadog

FlyingQuizini said:


> By definition, when it's done properly and works, it is being used as punishment. You're adding something (the pop) to decrease an unwanted behavior (lack of attention).
> 
> I've used that method with Quiz. He has nice attention.
> 
> S, You couldn't be more wrong about the motavational pop. It is not a negative. It is not punishment. If you used it that way you got it wrong. It is used to reinforce positive behavior in much the same way the clicker does. It is a trained positive response just like the clicker. Used properly you pop up when the dog IS heeling the way you want. It brings up interest and attitude and lets the dog know that they are right. I learned this from Terri. It is basic to her heeling method.


----------



## laffi

CreekviewGoldens said:


> Which is the stage Maddie is at...(I figured that out last night). YOu can ONLY use this with a buckle collar. NO chokes or prongs. (By the way...I hate chokes.).


I thought you are using a micro prong (as you mentionned in the Yesterday's and Today's Training Sessions thread). (?)


----------



## FlyingQuizini

Rastadog said:


> FlyingQuizini said:
> 
> 
> 
> By definition, when it's done properly and works, it is being used as punishment. You're adding something (the pop) to decrease an unwanted behavior (lack of attention).
> 
> I've used that method with Quiz. He has nice attention.
> 
> S, You couldn't be more wrong about the motavational pop. It is not a negative. It is not punishment. If you used it that way you got it wrong. It is used to reinforce positive behavior in much the same way the clicker does. It is a trained positive response just like the clicker. Used properly you pop up when the dog IS heeling the way you want. It brings up interest and attitude and lets the dog know that they are right. I learned this from Terri. It is basic to her heeling method.
> 
> 
> 
> My mistake.... my brain and my fingers were not in alignment when I first responded. I've been fairly out of it the past few days - death in my immediate family.
> 
> Yes - the motivational pop is a conditioned reinforcer. I had sorta fast-forwarded in my head to the idea of correcting the dog during the correction phase. That's where I see a lot of people mess it up by, in my opinion, not truly teaching what's expected in the first place, and then correcting for lack of attention. So.... really, I guess I sorta posted a response that was pretty off-topic to the original poster! Sorry about that!
> 
> I do think, however, that I will do a lot more clicker work with my next obedience dog. I was totally blown away and impressed by the team from Norway, and I know most people in the US say you can't do well in obedience with a purely clicker trained dog. I like the challenge of proving otherwise... but I seem to like challenges, given that my first obedience dog was a Whippet. Haha! :
Click to expand...


----------



## MaddieMagoo

laffi said:


> I thought you are using a micro prong (as you mentionned in the Yesterday's and Today's Training Sessions thread). (?)


There is a BIG difference between a regular and a micro-prong. I don't like the HUGE prongs...I like these miros...small and easy to use for me.


----------



## Rastadog

*The clicker is a very important tool*

S, I have used one on and off for years. They make teaching things easier. It's not clear to me how you train reliability without some compulsion. Terri Arnolds method was developed for a specific purpose, competing in AKC obedience trials. Her dogs and her students dogs work with attitude and attention. My dogs everyday life improved with better confidence, attitude and a much improved ability for us to communicate with each . I used compulsion in our training after it was clear to me that my girl knew what was expected. Compulsion when the dog doesn't understand is abuse in my opinion. There are many ways to get to the same point. If you and Quiz do well with a different method good for you. I understand that. I'm 5 years removed from training and competing. I'm sure there are plenty of good new methods out there. Alex


----------



## missmarstar

Rastadog said:


> *There are many ways to get to the same point. If you and Quiz do well with a different method good for you. I understand that. I'm 5 years removed from training and competing. I'm sure there are plenty of good new methods out there*. Alex


Caryn, you would do well to take some pointers from this guy on a gracious and tactful way to accept advice on training, even if it may be a bit different than what you are used to doing, without getting hostile and giving attitude.


----------



## Bogart'sMom

Now lets see it's suposed to be a positive pop right? Lets see if I would give you just a light pop on the head (not hard) just to get your attention and of course you get a piece of choclate when you do look up at me do you like the pop,pop,pop? I think that would be counter productive. Maybe I have to read more about it also. All of Bogart's training was done with a clicker and he has great adetude and attention he walks on a flatcollar 100% of the time and has never seen a halti, a choke collar or a prong collar. I'm kind of proud of that.
All the best,


----------



## mylissyk

Bogart'sMom said:


> Now lets see it's suposed to be a positive pop right? Lets see if I would give you just a light pop on the head (not hard) just to get your attention and of course you get a piece of choclate when you do look up at me do you like the pop,pop,pop? I think that would be counter productive. Maybe I have to read more about it also. All of Bogart's training was done with a clicker and he has great adetude and attention he walks on a flatcollar 100% of the time and has never seen a halti, a choke collar or a prong collar. I'm kind of proud of that.
> All the best,


You should be proud, I wish I could say that.


----------



## Rastadog

*Different strokes for different folks.*



Bogart'sMom said:


> Now lets see it's suposed to be a positive pop right? Lets see if I would give you just a light pop on the head (not hard) just to get your attention and of course you get a piece of choclate when you do look up at me do you like the pop,pop,pop? I think that would be counter productive. Maybe I have to read more about it also. All of Bogart's training was done with a clicker and he has great adetude and attention he walks on a flatcollar 100% of the time and has never seen a halti, a choke collar or a prong collar. I'm kind of proud of that.
> All the best,


You do need to read more. The motavational pop is not a correction. It is not used as a negative. It is not counter productive. Have you seen someone use it who understands how it works, why and has done the background training to get to that point? NO you have not. It is a positive when used the way Terri Arnold meant it to be. You use a clicker to do the same thing. Yet you are critical of a method that's a positive. You have never seen used. That confuses me.


----------



## Bogart'sMom

Rastadog said:


> You do need to read more. The motavational pop is not a correction. It is not used as a negative. It is not counter productive. Have you seen someone use it who understands how it works, why and has done the background training to get to that point? NO you have not. It is a positive when used the way Terri Arnold meant it to be. You use a clicker to do the same thing. Yet you are critical of a method that's a positive. You have never seen used. That confuses me.


Boy you get kind of emotional about this sorry if I offended you:wavey:. Have you trained with this lady before or just used her training method from a Book? Is there more info about the trainer on the Net maybe you have website? I have been to formal obedience classes (walk ins) and people have chokers on their dogs and I have a regular flat collar on mine and he still keeps his attention on me. I guess everyone uses what works best for them. PEACE!


----------



## Rastadog

*I did train with this woman*

I learned first hand during many private lessons with Terri. I also did 3 -5 day camps over a four year period. It just amazes me that people comment on the motivational pop and only see the word pop. Then comment on something they have never seen used and know nothing about. My first golden went from a posterdog for poop face to a partner that loved to train. She loved to heel, had a sweet drop and did the cutest signals. You should of seen how she looked at me when we worked which was really just play. Terri made it fun.


----------



## FlyingQuizini

I do see how the motivational pop can be a hard thing for a clicker trainer to swallow.

When done correctly, the light pop serves as a conditioned or secondary reinforcer. So yes, in the example of bonking me on the head and then giving me a goodie, over time, scientifically, that would make me come to enjoy being bonked on the head, provided that, A: I really liked the goodie you were serving and B: the bonk wasn't at such a level as to be abusive or anything near that. To do it right, you really have to invest your time in creating that positive association. If you have't conditioned the pinch collar to be a true secondary reinforcer, then any pop motion on the leash will more than likely be percieved as punishment by the dog. You *teach* the dog that the light pop is a good thing.

Now, that said, I think the vast majority of people fall short in that area. Just my opinion... but people are so goal oriented that often the foundation work is glossed over. When you intend to do a motivational pop, you need to watch the dog. He'll tell you if it's percieved as motivational or a correction! At the end of the day, it's the dog's opinion, not ours, that counts!

I know most people don't think you can do well in obedience at higher levels w/o some degree of compulsion. I've certainly not done it myself yet, so I can't say for sure, and really, the only known person in obedience who has clicker trained all the way is Morgan Spector, and from the talk I hear, he's not super well respected b/c I think he's just put through a CDX on his dogs. Not that I think that means he *couldn't* put a UD on his dogs, it's just that he hasn't, so people tend to think he can't or whatever.

The couple from Norway that I met and worked with are getting ready to launch a website in English. Their dogs were amazing! Heeling and working as cute and up as any video or photos that I've seen of Teri. All clicker trained. So, I do believe it can be done, but no doubt it takes longer and may seem more challenging? I dunno... And it's not even that I'm totally uncomfortable with the bits of compulsion that I, myself have used. I certainly use it sparingly and aim to only do so after I really believe I've taught the dog what is expected. I still think I'm going to try and make my next dog a total clicker dog - just for the challenge of doingso in competitive obedience.

BTW - the Norwegian website will be here: http://www.canis.no/clickertraining.html


----------



## Rastadog

*I'm open to the clicker*

There are many different ways to train. Compulsion vs. no compulsion brings up strong feelings in our dogs humans. I have been at training venues where I have seen horrible unfair compulsion being used on dogs that bordered on abuse. When used it must be fair, without negative emotion, and only when the dog has a clear understanding as to what's expected. We as humans apply human values to our dogs. I think that's the rub. Dogs are dogs and learn differently than humans. Compulsion is part of their pack life. I respect what you are trying to do. What Terri developed worked beautifully inside the AKC obedience ring. That said there is more than one way to skin a cat. Now I'm off to look at the Norwegian's website.


----------



## Pointgold

I have to say that although I have been pretty much "lurking" these obedience threads, I am fascinated and really enjoying the discussions - very enlightening hearing from proponents of differing methodologies. I have personally done little in the way of competitive obedience for the past few years, and then at lower levels. I've been much too busy in conformation, as well as caring for elderly parents, but these discussions are "watering the seeds"... Getting back into obedience is again looking more attractive to me...

Thanks!

(back to lurking :curtain


----------



## FlyingQuizini

Unfortunately, Morten and Cecilie's webiste (the Norwegians) hasn't been translated to English just yet, but should be in April or so.

Here's where the Clicker Trainer side of me falls into a state of cognative dissonance, and Alex, I'd love your thoughts on this:

I get the motivational pop - it's a conditioned reinforcer and is actually a reward for the dog while heeling nicely. BUT, Teri also advocated later giving corrective pops on the pinch collar, right? (In the business of full disclosure, I admit that I have all three books but haven't read them cover-to-cover, so I'm basing some of my understanding on what my coach, who claims to use Teri's method, has shared with me.)

The science-based, clicker trainer part of me has a hard time wrapping my head around the thought that I'll use the pinch one way as a good thing, and then use the same tool later in a very different way to = a bad thing... which, no matter how you slice it, a corrective pop is punishment given that it's designed to decrease an unwanted behavior such as lack of attention.

I think that's what I was trying to get at with my earlier post where I mis-spoke on the motivational pop. I think there's a bit of a danger, scientifically speaking, to use the same tool to sometimes = good (moti-pop) and sometimes = bad (corr. pop). Granted, most dogs let we humans get away with a helluva lot of "scientific slop" in training and for most dogs, it may not be an issue.... but I do think it for some and becomes a source of stress.

Even in Quiz... He is very "UP" when he heels, but it's not a relaxed kind of up. I've traditionally thought that it was just the result of having a ******** of drive and being asked to contain it... so he heels in position, head up, all that is nice - but looks like he could EXPLODE at any second. The more I look at the scientific end of things, I start to wonder if part of what I'm seeing isn't somehow a manifestation of stress coming from sometimes pop = good and sometimes pop = bad. And I don't know the answer... it's just something I'm exploring a bit more as I delve deeper into the science side of training.

Anyone care to comment?


----------



## MaddieMagoo

Pointgold said:


> I have to say that although I have been pretty much "lurking" these obedience threads, I am fascinated and really enjoying the discussions - very enlightening hearing from proponents of differing methodologies. I have personally done little in the way of competitive obedience for the past few years, and then at lower levels. I've been much too busy in conformation, as well as caring for elderly parents, but these discussions are "watering the seeds"... Getting back into obedience is again looking more attractive to me...
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> (back to lurking :curtain


I think you SHOULD Laura!! That would be a great expirience for you...again. I LOVE obedience and reccomend it to anyone who is trying to have fun with their dogs!

Hope to see you in the rings!


----------



## maiapup

I have found that some of the Terri Arnold followers are ardent fans and *extremely* 'protective' of her and her methods. 

I personally am not fond of her in general. I know/heard that she has changed (somewhat) since I attended a workshop of hers many years ago but it left such a bad taste in my mouth and her dog was quite obviously terrified of being corrected and was not a happy worker, that I just can't get past that. 

Sure, I know, forgive and forget but the images from that workshop actually changed my viewpoint on competitive "obedience" training forever. You know what they say about first impressions being everything.

I think training with your dog is fun if it's the right atmosphere/instructor and it's not at the expense of the dog's well being and behavioral health.


----------



## Rastadog

*maiapup*

I haven't been protective of Terri personally in any of these threads. I have seen people walk out of camps and understood why. Terri is tough. This thread has been specificly about the motavational pop. I will defend it. If used the way she teaches it it is a positive.

"I think training with your dog is fun if it's the right atmosphere/instructor and it's not at the expense of the dog's well being and behavioral health."

I couldn't agree more with this statement. My dog flourished using Terri's method. Her confidence in everyday life, our ability to communicate and her love of training all came from what Terri taught us. I judged our ring preformance not by scores but by how happy my girl worked in the ring. After we began to fight the mast cell tumors and I retired her from the ring, we still trained every day because it was so much fun for us. What I wouldn't give to play drop and signal games one more time with my old girl. 

You don't like Terri. I get that and understand completely. It doesn't make her method bad for a dog's well being or behavioral heath. I would be happy to discuss specfics. Alex


----------



## MaddieMagoo

All I can say is...I LOVE TERRI!! I have all of her books...and have read bits and pieces of each.


----------



## maiapup

Hi Alex,
I will say that her prior methods and you may even ask her about it since you appear to be a friend or client, I believe she was known to admit that her dog was afraid of her (and this was during the time I went to the workshop many years ago) and that she changed her approach somewhat. The dog that I had taken to the workshop already had a UD and OTCH points (this was before the UDX) but was retired shortly after this workshop. The workshop helped me decide it was no longer important to me to compete and just after the workshop at our final show, she was viciously attacked during the Open B long down (she didn't break the down). I don't really need any other information about Terri's current method. I hope it's different than prior but I was so disturbed that I am afraid I wouldn't re-consider paying money for anything by her. I can tell you that her dog referenced above was very well trained but not what I would consider behaviorally healthy quite frankly, it broke my heart.

I think that sometimes when people are all about the end result, titles, scores, etc. they overlook some very basic elements of animal behavior. These are dogs and not robots. I'm not saying you do, I trust you know your dog well, but I see it time and time again at obedience trials. The dogs are 'trained' but fearful, submissive, aggressive, etc. 

I still train for the obedience exercises but I no longer compete, it's simply not important to me but I love the challenge of training the exercises by thinking outside the box and not using traditional things like collars and pops, ('motivational or not'), etc. We have great fun together and I have ended up with very cool dogs who have great temperaments, are a joy to live with and are very well trained.

I do wish you continued success with your dog(s) and I appreciate your agreeing to disagree on this particular trainer. : )


----------



## laffi

Thank you everybody for your input :wavey:. I have been training my dogs with 90% clicker shaping and 10% luring. My dogs are always taught everything off leash and I never touch them during training (unless to praise). (We do competitive obedience, agility and flyball). Which means I am never going to put them into position or correct them.

I don't think I will want to use Terri's methods when it comes to any leash training, with or without the prong. I do think that her books still contain a lot of excellent information (like footwork or food games).

BTW I do know dogs that have UD titles with positive only methods, so it definitely does work but it takes much much longer to get there.


----------

