# Your Feedback on "Positive Only" Training



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Are you putting all this stuff in a book?


----------



## Bogart'sMom (Sep 16, 2005)

I've been training with Bogart now for a long time since puppyclass and he is 3 years old now, we clicker trained all the sit, down, come comands. He learned very fast, he loved and still loves training even though for the above mentioned comands I don't use a clicker anymore. When he heels really well he gets a NICE or AWESOME and a treat or still jackpot. New tricks he learns I still use the clicker. Bogart has never worn a chocke collar/training collar in his live. Only regular Flatcollars. He is a soft dog and usualy a No or AHAH will get him back on track. We might not move on as fast with Titles (we are competing in Rally Obedience) but I'm happy with my Boy he has his advanced Rally Title and we are mostly in the upper 90s point wise. 
We still have to work to get into the formal obedience but I'm pasing myself. 
All the best,


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

I prefer positive training, and I don't use corrections to train a *new* behavior for the most part (yelling, leash pops, etc). But I do use them to stop some behaviors I don't like. For example, I would yell at a dog that tried to drink out of the toilet.


----------



## hgatesy (Feb 14, 2007)

I'm not a "trainer" by any means... but I've attended weekly classes with both my boys since we got Camden. We use mainly positive methods, however for things my dogs should know and just isn't complying with (pulling on lead when I gave the "by me" command) I will use a small correction.... we say "oops" and maybe a small leash pop or turn around and walk the other way. 

I will scruff the dogs and tell them "NO" occasionally for HUGE offenses... however that's only done when a small correction isn't able to get my point across or what they are doing could injury themselves or another. I would never go that far for just not complying with a command or anything similar to that. We usually try to match the correction level to the offense is the best way I can describe it.


----------



## avincent52 (Jul 23, 2008)

I think it's really important that you don't beat them so hard that you leave scars.
At least when anyone is looking.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

Shadow considers a loud voice a correction, so yes, I've used corrections. They both hate it when I walk away from them after stomping my foot. My behavior is not "positive" so once again, I feel I am using a correction. I've also given a slight tug on the leash if I give them the "slow it down command" and they ignore me.

If you are writing a book and include any of the above, please be sure to credit me as the source! LOL Hey, Sinclair Browning did...


----------



## dannyra (Aug 5, 2008)

I'll use a leash pop occasionally, usually when working on her heal and she starts drifting to far out in front.
Each dog is different and so is each dog-trainer bond. Of course a timid dog won't need as much negative reinforcement and neither will a very strong dog-trainer bond. 
However I do believe there is a place for negative reinforcement as some dog behaviors may be more rewarding to the dog than anything we can offer. So they need to understand there is a consequence for not complying.


----------



## Bock (Jun 23, 2008)

I train all new behaviors with the clicker. The only time I correct is if the dog breaks a sit or down stay and even then I only put them back in to position (proper clicker training says to abort that attempt and start again.) As far as everything else goes it's mainly positive, especially since Tysen knows the leave it command it makes things a LOT easier because I can make something that is normally negative into a positive by him listening to the command.


----------



## fostermom (Sep 6, 2007)

I don't believe that there is such a thing as positive only with NO corrections. Even if you are using negative punishment, which is part of a positive type of training, you are making a correction.

Leaving the room is a correction. Making a noise to get their attention is making a correction (because it stops the unwanted behavior). Putting a dog back into a sit when they get up is a correction. 

So I do not believe you can train a dog without making corrections. Regardless of how kind your corrections may be.


----------



## Abbydabbydo (Jan 31, 2007)

Positive reinforcement is fantastic! But if you ever get a lab, you may have to consider alternatives .

It's interesting how some of them (Abby) look to please and make you happy, and some of them (Finn) love you just as much but could give a crap about whether you are happy or not.

I'm just saying....

And Laura, you made a childhood memory pop up. I grew up in a family of seven children plus two adults and one bathroom. My dad was always yelling "hey, are you writing a book in there...."

Not so far.


----------



## LOVEisGOLDEN (Jan 4, 2008)

I consider myself a "balanced" trainer. I use corrections when needed as a last resort. when working with other animals (llamas, goats, cattle, horses, hogs) I find I am more controlling & "fast to snap" as they are much larger & cannot be allowed their head -within reason.


----------



## MyCodyBoy (Sep 27, 2008)

I am a first time dog owner and the positive training is working well for us. I do use a stern voice when dealign with nipping and my children but no hitting is involved.


----------



## GoldenGratitude (Jan 25, 2007)

I think alot depends on the dog. I do believe that corrections are a necessary part of learning - just like with kids! One of my goldens is very stuborn and requires more correction than the other (for example being put in a different room when he won't settle down). But Archie you can just give him a nasty look and a tone of voice and that is a correction to him.


----------



## Debles (Sep 6, 2007)

Gunner is SO sensitive that I can only use the most very positive feedback with him.
He totally responds to anything postive and freaks (practically crawls away with his tail between his legs) if he even hears a negative tone.(which I have to use with Selka sometimes but rarely) I try not to though since Gunner is so very sensitive.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Some of you had mentioned corrections. I would like to get your feedback and ideas of what you believe a correction is.


----------



## vrocco1 (Feb 25, 2006)

Joel, I am very interested in your ideas on this subject. You probably have trained more types of animals then anyone else on this forum. I could not imagine *not *using corrections, but some people claim to be able to do it, and I usually just chuckle when I hear it.


----------



## Kohanagold (Nov 5, 2008)

My take is that if you only use "positive training" or "correction training", that the dog only gets half the picture. If you only tell them when they do the right thing and never acknowlege it when they do the "wrong" thing, you're really only giving them 1/2 of what they need to succeed. I dont believe in harsh corrections... most of the time a simple "no" or "ah uh" or "fix it" will suffice. I look at it like constructive critisism and if all you ever get is positive feedback, how do you know how to improve. BJ


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

Kohanagold said:


> My take is that if you only use "positive training" or "correction training", that the dog only gets half the picture. If you only tell them when they do the right thing and never acknowlege it when they do the "wrong" thing, you're really only giving them 1/2 of what they need to succeed.


ahh but the idea isn't JUST to praise the positive you are also redirecting the unwanted behaviour to stop it becoming a habit. It is just a different way of 'acknowledging' the wrong...you don't just pretend it isn't happening you are doing something positive to slim down the chance of it occuring again...you are telling your dog it is better to do something else instead. 

I think it is totally unrealistic for anyone to say they have never 'corrected' their dog, as that would include any raised voice or even the slightest correction on the lead when your dog is pulling towards a passing squirrel! Whenever I find myself giving one of these mild corrections I know it isn't half as effective as redirecting the behaviour and REALLY thinking about what they are dong and how to stop it...but it takes more effort that way. I do think it takes more skill and generally more time and effort to train a dog in a positive way...I am having trouble with what exactly 'positive' and 'corrective' training is defined as (its not exactly black and white to me)... I mean if you are training a dog to heel and your method is stoping when the dog pulls, that is a correction but it is being taught in the kindest possible way. However if you whip out a collar that will hurt the dog if it pulls then that is unacceptable in my eyes, yet both would come under the banner of corrective training would they not? Dogs can be trained without harsh corrective training so why not do it the kinder way...it is like children, they *can* be raised without being hit/smacked so why do some parents resort to it? It just shows a lack of skill and control. (not that I am saying that people that use corrective methods actually hit their dogs, I am saying if there is a kinder way to achieve something then why not do it!) I think I basically don't do anything that would physically hurt my dogs...no choke/prong/electric collars (god no!) no jabs in the dogs side (as demonstrated regularly be CM) and I try not to make annoying 'ah ah' noises, as lets face it that annoys everyone and the dog doesn't care or even know what you are going on about. I know not all corrective methods physically hurt the dog...some mild corrections can be helpful if timed impeccably, others are just pointless...


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

vrocco1 said:


> Joel, I am very interested in your ideas on this subject. You probably have trained more types of animals then anyone else on this forum. I could not imagine *not *using corrections, but some people claim to be able to do it, and I usually just chuckle when I hear it.


 
Yes, me, too. Stimulating discussion is good (we certainly have been doing it for a long time here...) but you indicated that you are here to teach us. I'd like to know _your _thoughts on the questions you toss out.


----------



## Kohanagold (Nov 5, 2008)

Emma&Tilly said:


> ahh but the idea isn't JUST to praise the positive you are also redirecting the unwanted behaviour to stop it becoming a habit. It is just a different way of 'acknowledging' the wrong...you don't just pretend it isn't happening you are doing something positive to slim down the chance of it occuring again...you are telling your dog it is better to do something else instead.
> 
> I think it is totally unrealistic for anyone to say they have never 'corrected' their dog, as that would include any raised voice or even the slightest correction on the lead when your dog is pulling towards a passing squirrel! Whenever I find myself giving one of these mild corrections I know it isn't half as effective as redirecting the behaviour and REALLY thinking about what they are dong and how to stop it...but it takes more effort that way. I do think it takes more skill and generally more time and effort to train a dog in a positive way...I am having trouble with what exactly 'positive' and 'corrective' training is defined as (its not exactly black and white to me)... I mean if you are training a dog to heel and your method is stoping when the dog pulls, that is a correction but it is being taught in the kindest possible way. However if you whip out a collar that will hurt the dog if it pulls then that is unacceptable in my eyes, yet both would come under the banner of corrective training would they not? Dogs can be trained without harsh corrective training so why not do it the kinder way...it is like children, they *can* be raised without being hit/smacked so why do some parents resort to it? It just shows a lack of skill and control. (not that I am saying that people that use corrective methods actually hit their dogs, I am saying if there is a kinder way to achieve something then why not do it!) I think I basically don't do anything that would physically hurt my dogs...no choke/prong/electric collars (god no!) no jabs in the dogs side (as demonstrated regularly be CM) and I try not to make annoying 'ah ah' noises, as lets face it that annoys everyone and the dog doesn't care or even know what you are going on about. I know not all corrective methods physically hurt the dog...some mild corrections can be helpful if timed impeccably, others are just pointless...


While I certainly agree with much of what you've said, I think that there has to be middle ground somewhere. I agree that there is no need to hurt the dog to get your point across. But when my young dog jumps on me, I tell her "uh uh" and turn away. That gets my point across, without having to think on my feet about what I could redirect her to (and truthfully, I know WHY she does it... she's excited to see me, but I'd rather her not jump on me to tell me so). By the time that a redirection comes into play, its already too late, and when she's running full speed at me, telling her to "sit" or something isn't going to work. What I found with my older girl was that doing so simply made her think the order of the greeting was 1. run full speed at mom, 2. jump up on mom 3. sit infront of mom when your feet have landed back on the ground. I dont grab for them or knee them in the chest. I dont think "corrections" should hurt, but just let the dog know that what they've done isn't good enough. I want Paige to be an obedience dog, so when I do a recall or a hault, and if she sits with her bum crooked, just telling her "fix it" is enough to let her know that's not what I want and truthfully, if she can fix her own mistakes, that's what I want. I dont want to have to lure her into a straight sit everytime and then walk into an obedience ring and if she's crooked, she's not going to know how to get back into position. I think you're completely right in that it depends on your definition of what a correction is. Most of the time for us, its simply another verbal that my dogs understand. I do use training collars but again, they shouldn't hurt unless you really dont know what you're doing (although I've never used an electric one... maybe they are, but I mean prongs or chokes) Not to equate it to children, but I cant imagine a child raised with never hearing the word "no", and I dont think a dog should either. JMO though. But certainly a discussion worth having because I think it is very insightful as to what works for different people. BJ


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

vrocco1 said:


> Joel, I am very interested in your ideas on this subject. You probably have trained more types of animals then anyone else on this forum. I could not imagine *not *using corrections, but some people claim to be able to do it, and I usually just chuckle when I hear it.


I, like you cannot imagine that either, yet there are many people that do not have an idea of what a correction truly is.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> Yes, me, too. Stimulating discussion is good (we certainly have been doing it for a long time here...) but you indicated that you are here to teach us. I'd like to know _your _thoughts on the questions you toss out.


I did not indicate I am here to teach you.. I here to _help_ you.. and also create good conversation.. You should lighten up and try to enjoy yourself.. We're having a great conversation here.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> I did not indicate I am here to teach you.. I here to _help_ you.. and also create good conversation.. You should lighten up and try to enjoy yourself.. We're having a great conversation here.


 
We always have great conversations. I'm just suggesting that you join them rather than simply initiate them. Many of us wonder what _your _thoughts on your questions are. You ask, but it's only _us _answering, unless we press.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> I, like you cannot imagine that either, yet there are many people that do not have an idea of what a correction truly is.


 
So, tell us what a correction truly is, please.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Kohanagold said:


> While I certainly agree with much of what you've said, I think that there has to be middle ground somewhere. I agree that there is no need to hurt the dog to get your point across. But when my young dog jumps on me, I tell her "uh uh" and turn away. That gets my point across, without having to think on my feet about what I could redirect her to (and truthfully, I know WHY she does it... she's excited to see me, but I'd rather her not jump on me to tell me so). By the time that a redirection comes into play, its already too late, and when she's running full speed at me, telling her to "sit" or something isn't going to work. What I found with my older girl was that doing so simply made her think the order of the greeting was 1. run full speed at mom, 2. jump up on mom 3. sit infront of mom when your feet have landed back on the ground. I dont grab for them or knee them in the chest. I dont think "corrections" should hurt, but just let the dog know that what they've done isn't good enough. I want Paige to be an obedience dog, so when I do a recall or a hault, and if she sits with her bum crooked, just telling her "fix it" is enough to let her know that's not what I want and truthfully, if she can fix her own mistakes, that's what I want. I dont want to have to lure her into a straight sit everytime and then walk into an obedience ring and if she's crooked, she's not going to know how to get back into position. I think you're completely right in that it depends on your definition of what a correction is. Most of the time for us, its simply another verbal that my dogs understand. I do use training collars but again, they shouldn't hurt unless you really dont know what you're doing (although I've never used an electric one... maybe they are, but I mean prongs or chokes) Not to equate it to children, but I cant imagine a child raised with never hearing the word "no", and I dont think a dog should either. JMO though. But certainly a discussion worth having because I think it is very insightful as to what works for different people. BJ


 
I agree. Behavior precedes learning. A dog will not repeat a behavior that goes unrewarded. A proper correction will not be so forceful as to cause fear, but it won't be effective unless it causes a level of discomfort or annoyance, ie a pop on a leash, a stern "NO!". But it cannot be without purpose - the dog learns what it takes to stop the correction, and how to keep it from occurring again. Everything done correctly is rewarded, even when the correct behavior occurs from a correction.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> I agree. Behavior precedes learning. A dog will not repeat a behavior that goes unrewarded. A proper correction will not be so forceful as to cause fear, but it won't be effective unless it causes a level of discomfort or annoyance, ie a pop on a leash, a stern "NO!". But it cannot be without purpose - the dog learns what it takes to stop the correction, and how to keep it from occurring again. Everything done correctly is rewarded, even when the correct behavior occurs from a correction.


 "but it won't be effective unless it causes a level of discomfort or annoyance, ie a pop on a leash, a stern "NO!"

I beg to differ. You asked my for my opinion... here it is. A correction CAN be effective _without causing pain or discomfort_. 90% of the time, my corrections are nothing more than asking the dog to repeat the behavior. That is in fact a correction. People get the idea that a correction may involve something negative like a physical correction, but in my opinion, the art of good dog training is to correct the animal in a way with as least amount of physical corrections as possible. Make no mistake, with some dogs there are going to be physical corrections along the way. 

Most importantly, I understand in animal training that in order for an animal to understand how to do a behavior right, he must do it wrong. Like a child it is part of the learning process. I actually read a few posts in this thread that touched on this very nicely too.


----------



## Lucky's mom (Nov 4, 2005)

Training without correction in my opinion...is like working for some utopia. Positive and correction is just natural and works.

Correction ...to me...either stops the behavior cold due to some sort of forced method...or its an unpleasent consequence.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

All I can think of is, "You will write on the chalk board 50 times." A non-physical correction, but it sure gets the point across. I wonder if I can get my dog to write?

Actually, if I'm in the yard working with my two and I have them in a "down" "stay" and one breaks the stay (it always amazes me that one might break the stay and the other doesn't automatically follow); I reward the one still in the "down" "stay" and command the other to go back into position and I repeat the lesson. Hmmm...I never thought of that as a correction, but it is.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Kimm said:


> All I can think of is, "You will write on the chalk board 50 times." A non-physical correction, but it sure gets the point across. I wonder if I can get my dog to write?
> 
> Actually, if I'm in the yard working with my two and I have them in a "down" "stay" and one breaks the stay (it always amazes me that one might break the stay and the other doesn't automatically follow); I reward the one still in the "down" "stay" and command the other to go back into position and I repeat the lesson. Hmmm...I never thought of that as a correction, but it is.


... exactly.........and that is what my style of dog training is all about...


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> "but it won't be effective unless it causes a level of discomfort or annoyance, ie a pop on a leash, a stern "NO!"
> 
> I beg to differ. You asked my for my opinion... here it is. A correction CAN be effective _without causing pain or discomfort_. 90% of the time, my corrections are nothing more than asking the dog to repeat the behavior. That is in fact a correction. People get the idea that a correction may involve something negative like a physical correction, but in my opinion, the art of good dog training is to correct the animal in a way with as least amount of physical corrections as possible. Make no mistake, with some dogs there are going to be physical corrections along the way.
> 
> Most importantly, I understand in animal training that in order for an animal to understand how to do a behavior right, he must do it wrong. Like a child it is part of the learning process. I actually read a few posts in this thread that touched on this very nicely too.


We don't disagree at all. You are just wording it somewhat differently. "Discomfort or annoyance" does NOT mean pain, and as I said, a proper correction will never cause fear. A pop on the leash or a verbal correction such as "No" is by no means a painful correction. 
Now, asking a dog to repeat the behavior and calling that a correction makes no sense to me as you have written it - "_90% of the time, my corrections are nothing more than asking the dog to repeat the behavior_." A correction would be for a negative behavior, not asking for them to do it again.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> ... exactly.........and that is what my style of dog training is all about...


By Golly, I think I get it! I find my repeating the command with both of them actually reinforces the behavior with the dog who did it correctly because he gets another reward for just laying there and not moving!:


----------



## vrocco1 (Feb 25, 2006)

Yay, so I am not the only one who does not do positive only. (huh?) 

It's funny how the positive only trainers are *sometimes *the most vocal in these threads. I guess it only works with dogs?


----------



## vrocco1 (Feb 25, 2006)

JoelSilverman said:


> I did not indicate I am here to teach you.. I here to _help_ you.. and also create good conversation.. You should lighten up and try to enjoy yourself.. We're having a great conversation here.


See that! Joel does know how to do a correction. LOL

I for one, appreciate the way you participate in these threads, Joel. Rather then forcing your opinions down our throats, you wait to see what everyone else has to say first, and then you comment on it. Very professional IMHO.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> We don't disagree at all. You are just wording it somewhat differently. "Discomfort or annoyance" does NOT mean pain, and as I said, a proper correction will never cause fear. A pop on the leash or a verbal correction such as "No" is by no means a painful correction.
> Now, asking a dog to repeat the behavior and calling that a correction makes no sense to me as you have written it - "_90% of the time, my corrections are nothing more than asking the dog to repeat the behavior_." A correction would be for a negative behavior, not asking for them to do it again.


Yes you and I do.....an animal repeating a behavior does not involve discomfort and is not an annoyance...


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

vrocco1 said:


> See that! Joel does know how to do a correction. LOL
> 
> I for one, appreciate the way you participate in these threads, Joel. Rather then forcing your opinions down our throats, you wait to see what everyone else has to say first, and then you comment on it. Very professional IMHO.



_Can you tell Laura that please? She has pretty much accused me of posting these threads because she thought I was "writing a book"_. That is what I like to do.. I like to listen to what people have to say and then respond. By the way, you can see by a number of the posts, that you all have the same ideas I do too!!

The reason I started these too, is to get different opinions on this. Believe it or not, I have been blasted in other forums for even using the term "correction".


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> Yes you and I do.....an animal repeating a behavior does not involve discomfort and is not an annoyance...


Not if it is the correct behavior it doesn't.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> Not if it is the correct behavior it doesn't.


Why would you correct the animal for doing a behavior correctly? This thread is about corrections, and corrections are given when the animal does a behavior incorrectly, not correctly.


----------



## Jo Ellen (Feb 25, 2007)

> A correction would be for a negative behavior


Can we consider a dog not performing a behavior correctly to be a negative behavior? If we approach it that way, then having them perform the behavior again correctly would be an appropriate correction.

Do I understand?


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> Why would you correct the animal for doing a behavior correctly? This thread is about corrections, and corrections are given when the animal does a behavior incorrectly, not correctly.


 
No kidding. 

You said - "_90% of the time, my corrections are nothing more than asking the dog to repeat the behavior_."

I said - "A correction would be for a negative behavior, not asking for them to do it again."


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Jo Ellen said:


> Can we consider a dog not performing a behavior correctly to be a negative behavior? If we approach it that way, then having them perform the behavior again correctly would be an appropriate correction.
> 
> Do I understand?


I don't call it a negative behavior. To me that has always been confusing to people. I call it an incorrect behavior. And yes you are right about that too. That is a totally appropriate correction.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> No kidding.
> 
> You said - "_90% of the time, my corrections are nothing more than asking the dog to repeat the behavior_."
> 
> I said - "A correction would be for a negative behavior, not asking for them to do it again."


Why does everyone seem to understand this except for you???


----------



## vrocco1 (Feb 25, 2006)

JoelSilverman said:


> _Can you tell Laura that please? She has pretty much accused me of posting these threads because she thought I was "writing a book"_. That is what I like to do.. I like to listen to what people have to say and then respond. By the way, you can see by a number of the posts, that you all have the same ideas I do too!!
> 
> The reason I started these too, is to get different opinions on this. Believe it or not, I have been blasted in other forums for even using the term "correction".


I could tell her, but I am sure we will have to think of some sort of correction before she will listen! ROFLOL!!!!

I can imagine how using the word correction could get you in trouble. I one time suggested rolling a puppy into the submissive position in order to care for his nails, and was accused of child abuse. I guess some people can't differentiate between a child and a puppy.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> Why does everyone seem to understand this except for you???


Dumb blond.


----------



## katieanddusty (Feb 9, 2006)

I think it's a little misleading/dangerous to say how you can't imagine training without corrections on a forum that is read by people with a wide variety of education on dog training, when some of them probably hear "correction" and only think leash pop, bop on the nose, etc. Of course if you define asking a dog to do a behavior again as a correction, no one trains without "corrections." But it is very possible to train using no positive punishment and only use negative punishment or extinction to eliminate unwanted behaviors. And it wouldn't be good for a lurker who is just dropping by or something to see that the big fancy TV star uses corrections all the time and go out and yank on their dog's leash continuously because that's what they think a correction is.

It's similar to saying "I use the alpha roll" when you apparently meant trimming puppies' nails with them on their backs. Of course most people are going to think you mean the macho violent Cesar Millan-style slamming a dog to the ground and holding it there until it stops struggling.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

Well, that was a bit insulting. You could have gotten your point across with out the insult.


----------



## Jo Ellen (Feb 25, 2007)

I read this thread and it never occurred to me to "pop" my dog with the leash or bop her on the nose. I learned something very useful, and very kind.

I don't think most people here are impressionable dog owners. And I don't think of Joel Silverman as a "big fancy TV star." I think it's really cool that he is here, I enjoy reading all the discussions and I think we all have something positive to take away from what we are discussing.


----------



## vrocco1 (Feb 25, 2006)

Kimm said:


> Well, that was a bit insulting. You could have gotten your point across with out the insult.


Katie has found it impossible to communicate on this forum without being insulting. Apparently, we (impressionable) pet types are incapable of learning how to train our dogs. 

I guess, since I am so stupid, I'll just go down to the liquor store and get anther six pack. I may be stupid, but at least I'm happy.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

Well, that's a shame. I know she's an intelligent young lady and has done a lot with her dogs.


----------



## Merlins mom (Jun 20, 2007)

Wow. As a "pet owner" type, without all the fancy letters behind my dogs name I am very offended by your post. 

Why is it that some people here seem so on the defensive that a "big fancy tv star" has joined our forum? I like learning from many styles of training so I can use what works best for me and Merlin. I'm glad to have a new voice in the crowd.

Sorry to go off topic!



katieanddusty said:


> I think it's a little misleading/dangerous to say how you can't imagine training without corrections on a forum full of somewhat impressionable "pet owner" types, when most of them hear "correction" and only think leash pop, bop on the nose, etc. Of course if you define asking a dog to do a behavior again as a correction, no one trains without "corrections." But it is very possible to train using no positive punishment and only use negative punishment or extinction to eliminate unwanted behaviors. And it wouldn't be good for some pet owner to see that the big fancy TV star uses corrections all the time and go out and yank on their dog's leash continuously because that's what they think a correction is.
> 
> It's similar to saying "I use the alpha roll" when you apparently meant trimming puppies' nails with them on their backs. Of course most people are going to think you mean the macho violent Cesar Millan-style slamming a dog to the ground and holding it there until it stops struggling.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

katieanddusty said:


> I think it's a little misleading/dangerous to say how you can't imagine training without corrections on a forum full of somewhat impressionable "pet owner" types, when most of them hear "correction" and only think leash pop, bop on the nose, etc. Of course if you define asking a dog to do a behavior again as a correction, no one trains without "corrections." But it is very possible to train using no positive punishment and only use negative punishment or extinction to eliminate unwanted behaviors. And it wouldn't be good for some pet owner to see that the big fancy TV star uses corrections all the time and go out and yank on their dog's leash continuously because that's what they think a correction is.
> 
> It's similar to saying "I use the alpha roll" when you apparently meant trimming puppies' nails with them on their backs. Of course most people are going to think you mean the macho violent Cesar Millan-style slamming a dog to the ground and holding it there until it stops struggling.


I appreciate your concern, but I guess I am a little different than you in that I obviously give the "pet owner" a lot more credit for their intelligence and open-mindedness than you do. 

But how I define a correction is exactly what you stated. Many times it is having the animal repeat the behavior. But the whole point is that you just learned something, and so did the people that read this thread. That is why I am here.. to simply share some ideas that you may have never heard before.

In my training vocabulary there is no positive punishment or negative punishment or negative reinforcement. The animal did it either right or wrong. If he did it right he is rewarded, and if he did it wrong he is corrected.... that's it.

As far as the big TV star yanking on leashes, I am trying to understand what you are saying... maybe you can clarify that one. 

You obviously have some issues with Cesar. As far as Cesar goes, if you have read what I do, and see what he does, you have found out that he and I are like night and day, so bringing him up really makes no sense, unless you want to vent.


----------



## katieanddusty (Feb 9, 2006)

I wouldn't put any of the regular posters into that category. There are people who don't compete in anything but are still educated dog people, and then there are "pet people," and just by posting regularly and reading everything that goes on here I think the people here are much more educated than your average Joe the Dog Owner. Yes, I should have put that in the first post, and I would have except that I forgot how much some of you love to be offended by me (the alpha roll discussion was what, three years ago?). I'll go edit the original post now.


----------



## MurphyTeller (Sep 28, 2008)

I think Purely positive is a myth - that being said I train with a couple of people who are purely positive - I could never live with their dogs - ok to jump on people's heads, countersurf, etc. 

I like to think I'm on the positive side of the fence - I don't yank and pull on my dogs - but if they do something wrong they know it's wrong. I just spent the day at a Bobbie Anderson seminar today and love the way she puts it - "corrections aren't a bad thing - correction doesn't mean punish, it means fix". I show in obedience, breed, conformation and we're training for fieldwork and tracking - I can't ignore it when my dogs go down on their sit stays and wait for them to "offer" the correct behavior. There's no room for grey there - sit until I tell you not to sit anymore. I don't want my dogs releasing themselves to do something else when they get bored...

Do I want them to think when they're training - you betcha - but once we've trained something if I've done my job they understand what it is they are supposed to do - honestly how can a dog understand what they are supposed to do if you don't communicate what they aren't supposed to do?

I ran into a problem with my first obedience dog using the "purely positive" choose to heel method - basically rewarding the dog for finding their way into heel position while the handler moved around the room (or other area). The problem with this method is that some dogs frankly choose NOT to heel and it doesn't give them a clear understanding of what you want - a similar problem comes into play with the 300 peck method of heeling - the dogs QUICKLY learn to "reset" the peck clock back to 1 step - Murphy would get to 8, get out of position and when we went back to one step he'd get a higher rate of reinforcement - dogs can count.

So I've done things pretty differently with my current obedience dog and I'm careful to communicate fair feedback when what he does isn't correct - fix it - solidify the understanding...

Erica


----------



## katieanddusty (Feb 9, 2006)

I understand now how you define a correction, and under that definition I would agree that it is absolutely impossible to train without "corrections" (because every response to a behavior would either be a correction or a reward, and you obviously can't reward an undesired behavior, so you have to use what you would define as a correction). I still think it is very misleading to say that it is impossible to train without corrections without clarifying your definition right up front.

I consider "positive-only training" as if the dog performs correctly he gets something good, and if the dog performs incorrectly he doesn't get anything good (but he also doesn't get anything unpleasant). Assuming you at least understand the terminology of operant conditioning, in technical terms that would mean using positive reinforcement to reward good behavior, negative punishment (taking away something good such as the opportunity to keep moving forward while trying to teach loose-leash waling) or extinction (just ignoring incorrect responses and only rewarding correct responses) to reduce the frequency of unwanted behavior. What I consider "positive-only training" is definitely possible, and it sounds like your methods are very close to that.

The big-TV-star-yanking-on-leashes comment was because when most people see "correction," that's what they think of. So when you say you train with corrections, before you clarify what correction means to you, the logical impression it gives is that you use positive punishment (adding something unpleasant when the dog does an incorrect behavior), not that you just ask the dog to try it again.

The part about Cesar Millan was in response to a later post by someone else. Sorry for not clarifying that.


----------



## MurphyTeller (Sep 28, 2008)

JoelSilverman said:


> You obviously have some issues with Cesar. As far as Cesar goes, if you have read what I do, and see what he does, you have found out that he and I are like night and day, so bringing him up really makes no sense, unless you want to vent.


Cesar is an interesting fellow - I personally find that I don't quite have the stomach to watch a lot of his show - I end up yelling at the TV a lot. 

Every time the topic of purely positive is discussed (on any list) Cesar's name comes up in the context of "he's really a bad dude" or "OMG Cesar is GOD" - very rarely are there people (like me) that are sort of neutral on the topic - and the topic always becomes emotionally charged - I've read his books, his theory I more or less agree with - the application I don't. 

I think he gets some super quick fixes with his methods - but I'm not sure they pan out longterm for those dogs and owners. What happens a year or two from now? In general I don't think you can fix aggression with further aggression and when I've seen folks pull out the really heavy handed alpha rolls they consistantly do it incorrectly - watch a mother correct her puppy with a roll - it's quick and it's done - humans IMO can't do that effectly - dog whisperer or not...it's not the same.

Erica


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

Heck, you can't teach anything in life without some sort of correction. You wouldn't be teaching, you'd be learning. And, I'll bet you some students are correcting their teachers.


----------



## Lucky's mom (Nov 4, 2005)

I consider "correction" appropriate when bad behavior is happening, and its important to stop it immediately. I believe each time a bad or good behavior is done sucessfully its more ingrained. Sometimes reward training simply isn't feasible to successfully stop the unwanted behavior...because of the situation or time issue or perhaps its such a serious thing that an impact must be made. 

Sometimes in real life.... inappropriate behavior happens when its inconvenient to stop what you are doing and strategize a positive plan.

I think the definition of what "corrective' really means is relevant. I consider isolating my puppy in his crate, electric collars, prong collars, gentle leaders, choke chains, a firm 'no", screaming in panic when your puppy is trying to eat a bee, tapping your dog on the nose when he bites and telling your dog 'down" when he's getting out of control are corrective. All these techniques I consider valid if it works.

Positive training is reward for doing the right behavior. When you have the plan, the treats and the timing its great! I like Lucky to "sit" because he's reacting to a past good feeling rather then a past "bad' feeling. Though I'm not sure if he's feeling anything by the time he's done it a zillion times.

Frankly corrective and positive are pretty simple concepts but I'm finding some of this conversation confusing...so hope I'm not off topic base.

and that's my two cents.


----------



## FishinBuddy (Nov 20, 2008)

I agree with many of the previous posts. It's really very dependant on the dog. Some dogs need a more "physical" approach while others need only to sense they are in trouble. Just My .02


----------



## Soda (Feb 23, 2008)

A little late in the discussion here but....So change the terminology.

Correction and reward = communication. The trick is finding clarity and the right communication while maintaining the right attitude in the dog. 

To me, that's dog training in a nutshell. Word smithing the terms such as purely positive, correction etc. is for the general public who pay trainers to help. The dog owner has to feel comfortable in training their dog and thats when spin comes in.

It would be interesting to take a group of people who are at the same level in training their dogs. Use terms such as correction in one and communication in the other. Measure how many remain at the end of 4 weeks.

I would bet the later would have more remaining and would probably be more consistant with their training.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Lucky's mom said:


> I consider "correction" appropriate when bad behavior is happening, and its important to stop it immediately. I believe each time a bad or good behavior is done sucessfully its more ingrained. Sometimes reward training simply isn't feasible to successfully stop the unwanted behavior...because of the situation or time issue or perhaps its such a serious thing that an impact must be made.
> 
> Sometimes in real life.... inappropriate behavior happens when its inconvenient to stop what you are doing and strategize a positive plan.
> 
> ...


I think that I can help you. Can I what you consider a correction?


----------

