# Punishment In Training



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...shment-effective-way-change-the-behavior-dogs
I thought this was an useful article in light of its last paragraph.


http://blog.smartanimaltraining.com...n-shock-collars-why-the-uk-wants-to-ban-them/


----------



## Elisabeth Kazup (Aug 23, 2008)

Incredible to me that some people STILL think brutality is training.


----------



## PiratesAndPups (Sep 24, 2013)

There are some very obvious things here that you would hope no one ever, EVER uses such as kicking or hitting. I do think that you have to have some negative feedback for a dog (calm down, I don't mean hurting them whatsoever), but I think a firm no (no shouted just said in a command voice) is important in teaching a dog, especially about things that are dangerous for him/her. We'd all love to be able to use 100% positive training, but dogs, like children, need to learn for their own good. A undisciplined child turns into a horrible adult and an undisciplined dog turns into a danger to himself or others. Just my two cents worth!


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Penny's Mom said:


> Incredible to me that some people STILL think brutality is training.


The sad thing is that the definitions of brutality get muddied when you have people who take a concept and stretch it to apply to all corrections or use of e-collars, prongs, etc. 

People know that using broom handles, kicking, etc... will mess up a dog. 

But there are people who basically take that concept and interpret it to mean that all corrections and use of corrective devices will mess up a dog. 

Which is wrong and why there is so much debate on these topics and divisiveness.  

I was just chatting with a coworker here about something she experienced with her neighbor who is selling her house and bringing her two dogs over to hang out in Sally's backyard while the house is being looked at. One of the dogs grabbed a table cloth off the outdoor table and yanked it off. It's little things like that where the owner watches the dog do stuff like that and does literally nothing besides telling the dog in a high pitched voice that they shouldn't do that. It's very much the same kind of behavior that some moms exhibit with their children who are monsters in public. Good example of that was my sister was standing in line behind a woman with a 4 year old. The child was old enough to have a very set idea of what is not allowed and respect of other adults. That is how I was raised and how many people who are successful parents raise their children. This child was having a tantrum because his mom wasn't buying him something and threw a toy right at my sister's face. It hit her in the face - and hurt. The mom was embarrassed, but there was no uproar that should have been there over a child doing something so terrible. The mom again did the high pitched "oh you shouldn't have done that" and she was the one apologizing to my sister who was still in a state of shock.


----------



## Titan1 (Jan 19, 2010)

Sigh....there are people who should never have kids or dogs.. I never try to put anyone else's methods down or try to make them see it my way. My dogs love to work for me and show it.. My children are decent,kind and respectful boys.. so I am sticking with my way.. Why can't we just all get along without having these horrible examples being brought up?? Just my two cents.. have a wonderful day. I am going to play with the dogs now!


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Sorry Michelle...


----------



## Sarah~ (Sep 16, 2013)

I think training collars and corrections are effective if you're doing it properly. I just mentioned in one of my other topics that my GSD chased cars when I walked him, ands after he nearly dragged us into a bus I used a prong collar and leash corrections on him, and he still starts to lunge sometimes but I correct him and he stops.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Penny's Mom said:


> Incredible to me that some people STILL think brutality is training.


I agree with you

Dr. Nicholas Dodman: Tufts University Animal Behavior

Bark: What do you feel is the place for punishment or negative re-enforcement in treating behavioral problems?

Dodman: I think that the direct punishment-based techniques are outmoded, a thing of the past, and should be avoided. Nobel Prize winners Lorenz, Tinbergen and Von Frisch might have disagreed on some points, but the three of them were all in agreement that punishment teaches a dog nothing. All it does is to teach a dog how to avoid the punishment. Which is not the same as teaching the dog what to do. There is no learning, other than learning avoidance of certain actions. You don’t need punishment to teach either dogs or children. I don’t believe in the concept of “sparing the rod and spoiling the child,” or sparing the chain-jerking and spoiling the dog. All the techniques that we use in the clinic are 100 percent motivational—we do not use any coercive techniques. I work on the theory that if you can train a killer whale to launch itself out of a swimming pool, roll on its side and urinate into a small plastic cup, given only a whistle and a bucket of fish, without a choke chain, then you don’t need those confrontational techniques with dogs.

As for those prong collars … I sometimes say to clients what John Lennon rudely said about Paul McCarthy—the only thing he did was “Yesterday.” Prong collars are yesterday. There are some trainers, not all trainers, who just seem to know only one thing, and that is how to escalate punishment to reach the desired effect. So they start off with puppies the right way with food motivation. But as soon as the dog reaches a certain age, they go into a slip collar, then a metal choke collar, and if these aren’t having the desired aversive effects, they escalate up to a prong collar; some even graduate higher, to electricity. What you have is a gradation of pain. And the pain is designed with the theory “you teach them to do something, and if they don’t do it, you hurt them.” Konrad Lorenz said that science and know-how aren’t enough in dog training; patience is the vital stuff. I find that non-confrontational techniques are more appreciated by owners who often aren’t of the disposition to want to hurt their animals to make them do anything.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

It's a false equivalency to suggest that a lack of punishment is the same thing as a lack of discipline. When somebody's dog is making a mess or jumping all over someone and the owner is ignoring it or ineffectively wringing their hands, that is not positive training—it's simply not training at all. Reducing or eliminating punishment in your training is not the same thing as being permissive with bad behavior, not by a long shot.

If people would, perhaps, read the first article all the way through rather than reacting to their assumptions about what it _probably_ says, they might note that it talks about the way punishment can create displaced aggression if you're not careful. That's very helpful to know if you plan to use punishment. It also ranks some common "corrections" by their likelihood in creating aggressive responses in subject dogs. It's interesting that a water spray or a forced release of an item are relatively high on that list, while a prong correction is fairly low

The second article I don't particularly like because it draws a number of unsupported conclusions from some research that was more interesting to me in its original form. I found the original paper far more persuasive than the blog entry.


----------



## Selli-Belle (Jan 28, 2009)

A lack of punishment in training does not mean a lack of rules and boundaries. In addition we can't really know how a dog or a child is reared by one brief snapshot of behavior. Positive does not mean permissive and punishment does not mean no-nonsense.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Selli-Belle said:


> A lack of punishment in training does not mean a lack of rules and boundaries. In addition we can't really know how a dog or a child is reared by one brief snapshot of behavior. Positive does not mean permissive and punishment does not mean no-nonsense.


But Carolyn - both are often misinterpreted by people. You have people who are afraid to correct their children or afraid to correct their dogs - because they don't want to look bad at that exact moment, or they attended classes where the only message was using treats and toys to appease and lure. 

Or something to that effect. :uhoh:

I definitely know some good trainers who minimize the corrections they use - but they will most definitely smack down on a dog who is acting up. I don't know if you were at the fun match I was a few months ago, but somebody's dog was acting up in the ring and Kathy went in there and gave that dog a fear of God. And good trainers know when you correct, when you REALLY correct, and when you encourage and reward. 

I'm not going to respond any further - but I think people who are interested in dog training should definitely join the training thread and report their progress with their dogs every week. It's fun - keeps you on tracks too.


----------



## olliversmom (Mar 13, 2013)

I always trained my own dogs and never felt the need for punishment type training. They all turned out beautifully.
Ollie's breeder is a trainer, who requested, for bonding purposes, 12 classes for all puppy parents as per contract. 

So, figured, ok. We started when Ollie was 4 months. Love it. Thought I knew everything about training dogs, but the positive food based reward methods are a little different. We are learning new things, the bonding aspect is great, plus Ollie is thriving on the work.

After 13 classes, wanted to try a highly recommended school right around the corner, rather than drive an hour+ each way, as my time constraints are killing me. Plus his regular trainer was not teaching session 3.

So, we signed up and lasted 2 classes at new school. 
The owner and teacher both have walls of medals and trophys. But their teaching methods are far different. They use the leash corrections. They yell. The instructor screamed at her dog first class. I almost left then. She wanted to know if I was going to continue with easy harness or if I wouldn't find training my "rambunctious Golden boy" with prong collar. On and on it went, this instructor making us feel like Ollie was out of step because he was not cowering.

I only went back a second time because I am not a quitter.
The dogs were practicing , "Leave It. The trainer actually bonked hers on top of the head until she finally Left It. Altho Olliver was only 5.1/2 months old and the youngest in the class, he executed the Leave It perfectly. No yelling, no leash jerking, just the calm command, the prolonged eye contact followed by a YES and a nice tasty treat.

And lesson after lesson that day Olliver excelled far beyond his older classmates. I kept giving out the treats and the positive affirmations. I was so proud.
We went back to our old school the next week.

I cannot tell you the stark difference in the mood, the tone and just the energy level in those two classes. In the correction class, I saw Ollie nervous and strained and doing what he was told, but not his happy self. I saw a trainers dog cower. Not once ever in my life did a dog of mine cower.

In the other class, Ollie learns and has fun doing it. And he wants to learn more and more. He is like a little sponge. 

If anyone ever says that you cannot teach a dog obedience with positive methods, they are wrong. My Ollie is proof.


----------



## Elisabeth Kazup (Aug 23, 2008)

I would tweek Brian's comment just a bit. 

" ignoring it or ineffectively wringing their hands, that is not positive training—it's simply not training at all."

Setting no boundaries IS training. It trains the dog that anything goes...it can be as "dog" as it wants. When ever I asked why my horse, my dog or my children were "doing that" the reply was always: Because he can!


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

olliversmom said:


> In the other class, Ollie learns and has fun doing it. And he wants to learn more and more. He is like a little sponge.
> 
> If anyone ever says that you cannot teach a dog obedience with positive methods, they are wrong. My Ollie is proof.


I agree with this for my goldens too. It is fun to have a partner who gives 100 percent attention to a discovery/learning process.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Here is another article relating to the topic: Do Some Dogs Need a Heavier Hand? | Wilde About Dogs


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

I'm glad this thread popped up again this morning, because I was teaching family dog class last night and watching some people handle their dogs. I'm always really, really curious to watch people handle because you can really see moments where things "click" for a dog, and you can also see moments where the handler is not getting results. I always try to observe to figure out what the handler is doing that's either producing success or confusion.

One major theme I've been noticing is how minor punishments build up on young, confused dogs. There are some people who have learned, somewhere, to pull up on the leash and say "no" when their dog is doing something they don't like. I say "somewhere" because nobody at our center teaches people to do that. The dogs who receive these corrections seem to consistently (not always, but frequently) shut down and stop offering new behaviors as easily. They don't readily follow lures, or readily learn things that involve spontaneous behavior (like palm targeting). They seem to have a tendency to retreat back to safe behaviors that have worked before (like sitting), and their owners start to get really frustrated.

The owners who seem to move more quickly with new behaviors are those who redirect their dogs when they're doing something undesired or carefully non-reward them for an undesired and then reward the desired behavior. If your GSD is a major puller who fixates on other dogs and wants to bark during class, pulling up on his leash and saying "no" often just confuses and energizes him, even if it interrupts the barking. However, playing attention games where he gets rewarded for eye contact makes him easier and easier to interrupt positively. We have one lady who has really bought into the reward-based model, and her young, intense GSD has made amazing progress in four weeks of classes. Instead of staring, pulling, and play-barking like he did at the beginning, he now looks at her when he's confused or energized, since she's been really good about rewarding that. Once she has eye contact, she has the opportunity to continue that connection and keep working. He's learning very quickly not to be a giant pain-in-the-butt in public.

The lady who collar pops her eskie, even though none of us have ever taught us to do that and several of us have suggested that she stop it, has a dog who still stares and barks, and if she keeps saying "no" and popping, the dog eventually sits, but continues to stare and then gets up and barks again after a minute. The dog almost never looks back at her or offers to work for her, so it's hard to help her because she won't reward the eye contact she does get, and she's really in this habit of pulling up on the leash and saying "no" which means she's not redirecting or finding something to reward. She doesn't pop hard or hurt the dog (or we'd tell her to quit it or leave class) but even so, the dog seems to retreat to a safer learned behavior when given repeated minor corrections, rather than opening up opportunities to learn new behaviors. The connection is not getting built.

This isn't a statement against all punishment ever in any kind of training, but it's an observation that I've been building over several months about how to build strong attention and polite public behaviors. Building and extending attention, connection, and eye-contact with praise, treats, and toys seems to work vastly better than trying to correct individual undesired behaviors with a stern "no" and a collar pop. Instead of trying to teach "barking=bad," we're teaching "working with me=good."

And a really telling thing is when one of the experienced instructors borrows a dog to demonstrate something. A dog who was previously acting confused and partially shut down will often come to life for an experienced handler. The eskie might pull and bark when her owner holds the leash, but when the instructor borrows her for a demo, she turns prancy and gives some eye contact and connection to the handler instead of running out to the end of the leash and staring at other dogs. It really shows you that many of these dogs that seem "dumb" or "stubborn" (as I've heard people call their dogs on multiple occasions) are often just confused and trying to avoid more corrections.


----------



## Elisabeth Kazup (Aug 23, 2008)

Excellent, Brian!!!! 

I have a phobia with non-instructional corrections such as "No" and leash pops. Saying "No" doesn't teach the dog a darn thing and a leash pop is akin to Gibbs hitting DiNozzo on the back of the head!


----------



## AmberSunrise (Apr 1, 2009)

Just as a side comment to this thread. One of the very real risks that I believe correction based trainers run is correcting a dog when the dog may not be feeling 100% - or is simply confused.

As a recent personal example, my Faelan started acting ‘off’ and was not his usual speedy, happy self. I took him in for TBD panels and my loving boy was actually avoiding the techs! Anaplasmosis!! A cycle or treatment and he is back to his normal, happy self.

Brady, my 1 year old, reacted weirdly at a class a few weeks ago. He actually arced away from the instructor when we were practicing entering into the Rally Ring. There was no convincing him that the bogey man was not hiding within her – and he has been fine with her since we started. Normally he does not even appear to notice other dogs or people since he is ‘the chosen one’ for that class. So off we go to the vets – again a diagnosis of anaplasmosis!! He is ½ way through his treatment and has snapped back to his usual self.

These are but 2 examples of when a physical or verbal correction could have led to serious problems – my dogs may have lost trust and certainly would not have understood why I was correcting them when they just felt sick. I would like to mention there were no fevers, no limping and in Faelan’s case he was a little slower eating while in Brady’s case he ate with his usual gusto. No indications of illness other than a slight reluctance to work or be touched by people not loved.


----------



## olliversmom (Mar 13, 2013)

Love your observations TippyK.
I never did formal obedience classes with any of my pups before I had Olliver, so the rewards based training is new to me. But my own home training methods previous to Ollie were always based on praise, respect and the pleasure of bonding vs negative corrections.
Before he turned maybe a year, I would only need to look at Homer the wrong way and he would know he did wrong. 
I think at the bottom of all training is the knowledge that dogs want to please their owner. They want to do good. It is not the opposite in my mind.

I kinda liken dog training with raising my kids. My late husbands' parents beat the tar out of him all his formative years, Spare the Rod Spoil The Child kinda deal. He may have been obedient to them, but inwardly he was a mess and afraid.
My folks were Anything Goes kinda people. There were no rules or boundaries other than a nightly curfew. Needless to say I had some issues as an adult as well related to this lackadaisical upbringing.

So, as a parent I opted for the middle road. Children need to learn respect, empathy and kindness but beating these ideas into them never occurred to me. They learned to love me and wanted to please me and make me proud of them, so we all won.

Lol. Of course, during my female middle child's teen years, if they had made a human shock collar...... (Only kidding)


----------



## olliversmom (Mar 13, 2013)

Sunrise said:


> Just as a side comment to this thread. One of the very real risks that I believe correction based trainers run is correcting a dog when the dog may not be feeling 100% - or is simply confused.
> 
> As a recent personal example, my Faelan started acting ‘off’ and was not his usual speedy, happy self. I took him in for TBD panels and my loving boy was actually avoiding the techs! Anaplasmosis!! A cycle or treatment and he is back to his normal, happy self.
> 
> ...


Oh boy, hope your pups are on the mend


----------



## Elisabeth Kazup (Aug 23, 2008)

I have trained more horses than dogs. An animal 'learns' by guessing at the answer to the 'question'. The most important facet of teaching is figuring HOW our dog or horse learns; how it wants to be taught. 

I had one horse who would try his heart out but invariably guessed wrong sometimes. He wasn't being "bad" or "stubborn" or "stupid", he simply guessed wrong. He knew he was trying very hard and would get impatient with me if I didn't stay patient with him and give him a chance to guess at a different answer. When he guessed "right" I would stop our work and go nuts over him. His reward was a sugar cube and scritches between his ears...his favorite place. In time, he understood that my questions meant there were answers and that he needed to answer me. He got better at guessing, I got better at asking him in a way that made him feel safe and confident. 

Our dogs are guessing too. They have no idea that they have to behave in a certain, undog -like manner. We are teaching them OUR way of doing things and it's pretty foreign to them. We are teaching them OUR language. Our rules. 

I hate to see punishment for a wrong guess. We just start over, do it again. When the guess results in the answer we're looking for we reinforce that...YES, YOU GUESSED RIGHT. As they learn and become confident as to what "sit" "come" "touch" means, they no longer have to guess. Because they are confident. They know the answer!

To me training is asking the question and then rewarding the right answer. We dismiss all the wrong answers by simply starting over.


----------



## olliversmom (Mar 13, 2013)

Penny's Mom said:


> I have trained more horses than dogs. An animal 'learns' by guessing at the answer to the 'question'. The most important facet of teaching is figuring HOW our dog or horse learns; how it wants to be taught.
> 
> I had one horse who would try his heart out but invariably guessed wrong sometimes. He wasn't being "bad" or "stubborn" or "stupid", he simply guessed wrong. He knew he was trying very hard and would get impatient with me if I didn't stay patient with him and give him a chance to guess at a different answer. When he guessed "right" I would stop our work and go nuts over him. His reward was a sugar cube and scritches between his ears...his favorite place. In time, he understood that my questions meant there were answers and that he needed to answer me. He got better at guessing, I got better at asking him in a way that made him feel safe and confident.
> 
> ...


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Okay.... for the sake of common sense and calm and level thinking....  

Corrective methods like saying "No" and leash corrections do not cause dogs to shut down.

The OWNERS using the corrective methods cause the dogs to shut down.

Generally the problem is you have people who are poorly taught using methods or tools such as those. Or the people themselves are going on automatic and not reading their dogs or communicating with their dogs. 

What Tippy described was nagging - and that is a huge issue with a lot of trainers who may be trying to train a dog without knowing the CORRECT way to train them, and or they may be overwhelmed or tired in the class. 

I can understand how that happens because I had a funny kind of class yesterday with somebody who is all over the place in the way that she teaches class and she makes ME flustered. LOL. As I lost interest in the class as taught by her, the communication with my dog while heeling with him slacked as well. I shut down and then Bertie shut down. Basically. 

Had nothing to do with the training methods I use or collars I put on my dogs or whatnot. Had more to do with what was actually going on that specific time.

And majority of the time when I see dogs not really working well with their owners - it's because the owners themselves have shut down. They are not as happy out there, their timing is slow, they may be reactive instead of proactive, they may forget to reward and praise, all kinds of things. 

It is simplistic and purely political trying to put the finger on a method causing the dogs to shut down as opposed to how the method was delivered.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Penny's Mom said:


> I have trained more horses than dogs. An animal 'learns' by guessing at the answer to the 'question'. The most important facet of teaching is figuring HOW our dog or horse learns; how it wants to be taught.
> 
> I had one horse who would try his heart out but invariably guessed wrong sometimes. He wasn't being "bad" or "stubborn" or "stupid", he simply guessed wrong. He knew he was trying very hard and would get impatient with me if I didn't stay patient with him and give him a chance to guess at a different answer. When he guessed "right" I would stop our work and go nuts over him. His reward was a sugar cube and scritches between his ears...his favorite place. In time, he understood that my questions meant there were answers and that he needed to answer me. He got better at guessing, I got better at asking him in a way that made him feel safe and confident.
> 
> ...


This is one of my favorite posts I have ever read. I love the understanding of both animals and training underlying it. I would love to be a dog or a horse belonging to you!


----------



## AmberSunrise (Apr 1, 2009)

So what is the purpose of 'automatic corrections'? They certainly nag and are by definition unfair since the dog is not given the option to avoid a correction. He is corrected right of wrong. 

Same goes for a 'motivational' pop ? 

I grew up using the above methods and never did think they were fair or motivating... but they were the way dogs were trained. 




Megora said:


> Okay.... for the sake of common sense and calm and level thinking....
> 
> Corrective methods like saying "No" and leash corrections do not cause dogs to shut down.
> 
> ...


----------



## Gwen_Dandridge (Jul 14, 2012)

I think it somewhat depends on the dog what exactly you do in training. I watched this week (I mentioned in it another forum) as a two year old male golden left his owner and tore around and around the agility field. He ignored everyone. When the trainer finally got a hold on him, she dragged him into a come position over and over. He ignored her and looked everywhere but at her for the first four times of her yanking him toward her. And I mean she was in his face. Finally, he looked up at her and she stopped. 

Now Maddie would have smartened up the first time she did that. Amber would have just rolled over and died at being yelled at like that. This dog barely deigned to notice. 

And, yep, the next time he took off again. I've seen his owner drop treats over and over directly into his mouth with him on a beautiful 'come.' He clearly doesn't give a fig.

I'm not sure what I would do with this pup. He's sweet as he can be, but a blockhead. :bowl:


----------



## Elisabeth Kazup (Aug 23, 2008)

Thank you, Jill. That means a lot to me, coming from you.


----------



## Gwen_Dandridge (Jul 14, 2012)

I read the second thing about shock collars. I won't use them (though I did let them use it on Maddie for rattlesnake aversion). 

I remember reading on a hunting dog forum that I stumbled upon, a man writing that he was having trouble training his "GOLDEN" to go out further in the water. He had a shock collar on the dog and the dog was swimming in circles. 

I was so angry when I read it I could have spit.


----------



## Elisabeth Kazup (Aug 23, 2008)

Gwen, some ARE blockheads and there's no hope. Not all dogs can do all things. Many owners make the mistake of deciding what THEY want to do and assume the dog will just do it. Kind of like a Nike thing. For this dog, if he's mature and otherwise obedient, my guess would be that agility is just too exciting for him. Off leash and excited will result in a happy time until he gets caught. He is probably better suited to something less exciting that requires much more focus from him. Just my guess.



Gwen_Dandridge said:


> I think it somewhat depends on the dog what exactly you do in training. I watched this week (I mentioned in it another forum) as a two year old male golden left his owner and tore around and around the agility field. He ignored everyone. When the trainer finally got a hold on him, she dragged him into a come position over and over. He ignored her and looked everywhere but at her for the first four times of her yanking him toward her. And I mean she was in his face. Finally, he looked up at her and she stopped.
> 
> Now Maddie would have smartened up the first time she did that. Amber would have just rolled over and died at being yelled at like that. This dog barely deigned to notice.
> 
> ...


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Pet Therapist: The shocking truth behind shock collars


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

<,*To me training is asking the question and then rewarding the right answer. We dismiss all the wrong answers by simply starting over.>>

*This works great in some instances. It is terrible timing and leads to much frustration on a lot of other instances. 

GROUP HUG!!!


----------



## Wyatt's mommy (Feb 25, 2011)

Gwen_Dandridge said:


> I read the second thing about shock collars. I won't use them (though I did let them use it on Maddie for rattlesnake aversion).
> 
> I remember reading on a hunting dog forum that I stumbled upon, a man writing that he was having trouble training his "GOLDEN" to go out further in the water. He had a shock collar on the dog and the dog was swimming in circles.
> 
> I was so angry when I read it I could have spit.


 
This goes back to what Megora was saying in her post bleow:

*And majority of the time when I see dogs not really working well with their owners - it's because the owners themselves have shut down. They are not as happy out there, their timing is slow, they may be reactive instead of proactive, they may forget to reward and praise, all kinds of things. *

*It is simplistic and purely political trying to put the finger on a method causing the dogs to shut down as opposed to how the method was delivered.*


----------



## Gwen_Dandridge (Jul 14, 2012)

Penny's Mom said:


> Gwen, some ARE blockheads and there's no hope. Not all dogs can do all things. Many owners make the mistake of deciding what THEY want to do and assume the dog will just do it. Kind of like a Nike thing. For this dog, if he's mature and otherwise obedient, my guess would be that agility is just too exciting for him. Off leash and excited will result in a happy time until he gets caught. He is probably better suited to something less exciting that requires much more focus from him. Just my guess.


Not so sure he's always obedient.  He doesn't listen if he doesn't choose to. He is still young, so that might be part of it.


----------



## Jennifer1 (Mar 31, 2012)

As someone who is not a trainer by any sense of the word

I guess I've always thought of a leash pop or a "ehh ehh" as a way of getting the dogs attention back on the task at hand.
I never ever correct a dog while teaching a new task, but will correct them for not doing something they know to do. I see it as saying "nope, try again"

Guinness for example is very "alert" on walks. He knows how to heel very well, but on most of our walks it is for enjoyment so I don't force a heel. If he sees a cat across the street he goes to complete tunnel vision on that cat. He no longer even knows I exist. That is when I would give a leash pop (he has a martingale collar on) and say "ehh ehh". Then when I get the slightest bit of recognition from him, I can get him to refocus on me and get a watch me from him to get past the distraction.


----------



## Brave (Oct 26, 2012)

Penny's Mom said:


> I have trained more horses than dogs. An animal 'learns' by guessing at the answer to the 'question'. The most important facet of teaching is figuring HOW our dog or horse learns; how it wants to be taught.
> 
> I had one horse who would try his heart out but invariably guessed wrong sometimes. He wasn't being "bad" or "stubborn" or "stupid", he simply guessed wrong. He knew he was trying very hard and would get impatient with me if I didn't stay patient with him and give him a chance to guess at a different answer. When he guessed "right" I would stop our work and go nuts over him. His reward was a sugar cube and scritches between his ears...his favorite place. In time, he understood that my questions meant there were answers and that he needed to answer me. He got better at guessing, I got better at asking him in a way that made him feel safe and confident.
> 
> ...


I like what you're saying, but I'm having a hard time visualizing it in a real world context. Can you expound on this? 

If he guesses wrong, what do you do? Do you sit there? Say "try again"? Repeat the command? How do you teach him that guessing is OK?


----------



## Jennifer1 (Mar 31, 2012)

Brave said:


> I like what you're saying, but I'm having a hard time visualizing it in a real world context. Can you expound on this?
> 
> If he guesses wrong, what do you do? Do you sit there? Say "try again"? Repeat the command? How do you teach him that guessing is OK?


I was thinking this same thing.
I also loved your post, but how do you let the horse know that he guessed wrong?


----------



## Elisabeth Kazup (Aug 23, 2008)

I guess a stay would be the best example. You say sit. Once the sit happens, you say stay. I like to end the stay quickly at first. If the dog moves before I end it, I just start over. 

If I'm heeling and the dog moves out of position, I just put him back and continue on.

The really neat thing about it is that the dog (or horse) does the behavior because it WANTS to, not because it gets criticized for something else or punished. I like to single out one behavior (at first) and not distract from teaching it by using a lot of words or other instructions. Just sit/stay. Then I release with "okay" and we jump for joy. I'm pretty quiet when I'm training. Just one or two words here and there. Once I release, then we jabber to each other and ruffle fur.


----------



## coaraujo (Nov 2, 2012)

Jennifer1 said:


> > Quote:
> > Originally Posted by Brave View Post
> > I like what you're saying, but I'm having a hard time visualizing it in a real world context. Can you expound on this?
> >
> ...


No reward = keep guessing. 

Clicker training is a great example of this. Dog keeps doing behavior until they hear the click. For example, when training my dogs to pick up objects I started by clicking them just looking at it. Then looking at it wasn't good enough, so they'd start trying new things (maybe sniffing, or pawing) I'd click sniffing. Then after they sniff it consistently I wouldn't click until they actually put their mouth on it. Eventually you get to the point where they're putting the object in their mouth. I love this training method because you can see your dog thinking. It's such an amazing thing to watch. 

My Oliver actually has a routine he goes through when he doesn't get a reward (i.e. doesn't do what I asked) He'll offer a down, then a sit, then move to heel position. Its really cute.

ETA: The idea is to not say anything or do anything to help the dog out. Let them figure it out on their own


----------



## olliversmom (Mar 13, 2013)

coaraujo said:


> No reward = keep guessing.
> 
> Clicker training is a great example of this. Dog keeps doing behavior until they hear the click. For example, when training my dogs to pick up objects I started by clicking them just looking at it. Then looking at it wasn't good enough, so they'd start trying new things (maybe sniffing, or pawing) I'd click sniffing. Then after they sniff it consistently I wouldn't click until they actually put their mouth on it. Eventually you get to the point where they're putting the object in their mouth. I love this training method because you can see your dog thinking. It's such an amazing thing to watch.
> 
> ...


Lol. My Olliver does the same. 
Ok sit didn't work...let me try down. No? Then I'll wave my paws? Still no reward? Huh. Let's start again!


----------



## Elisabeth Kazup (Aug 23, 2008)

The horses..and dogs...know they've guessed wrong because there's no reward. 

There has to be a give and take so it's not just asking asking asking. I don't always get the right answer the first day. Sometimes it takes a while; sometimes it takes strength that the horse has to build up before it can do what I'm asking; sometimes it guesses in the right direct. Even the slightest inclination to answer correctly gets the reward. 

And I laugh! Animals seem to understand that laughing is good; that people are happy. That's how they know they've pleased us. We laugh and praise.


----------



## Brave (Oct 26, 2012)

coaraujo said:


> No reward = keep guessing.
> 
> Clicker training is a great example of this. Dog keeps doing behavior until they hear the click. For example, when training my dogs to pick up objects I started by clicking them just looking at it. Then looking at it wasn't good enough, so they'd start trying new things (maybe sniffing, or pawing) I'd click sniffing. Then after they sniff it consistently I wouldn't click until they actually put their mouth on it. Eventually you get to the point where they're putting the object in their mouth. I love this training method because you can see your dog thinking. It's such an amazing thing to watch.
> 
> ...


This is before verbal commands are introduced. Correct? I take it if the dog guess WRONG after a verbal command is introduced, its time to take it back to non-verbal. 

Are you giving any commands at all? Any cues? 

Bear is the same way. He'll sit, than lay down, than sit, than come closer, than nudge me, than lay down, than sit (rinse and repeat). Eventually he will bark because he's frustrated. 

That's where I'm confused. If the dog doesn't understand what you want, and keeps guessing wrong. The dog gets frustrated. The owner gets frustrated. Where do you draw the line?


----------



## Brave (Oct 26, 2012)

Penny's Mom said:


> I guess a stay would be the best example. You say sit. Once the sit happens, you say stay. I like to end the stay quickly at first. If the dog moves before I end it, I just start over.
> 
> If I'm heeling and the dog moves out of position, I just put him back and continue on.
> 
> The really neat thing about it is that the dog (or horse) does the behavior because it WANTS to, not because it gets criticized for something else or punished. I like to single out one behavior (at first) and not distract from teaching it by using a lot of words or other instructions. Just sit/stay. Then I release with "okay" and we jump for joy. I'm pretty quiet when I'm training. Just one or two words here and there. Once I release, then we jabber to each other and ruffle fur.


I find a physical correction (i.e. moving the dog back into the spot again) works well for Bear. BUT he doesn't like it. 

We've been working on long-distance off-leash obedience (w/o distraction).


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Sunrise said:


> So what is the purpose of 'automatic corrections'? They certainly nag and are by definition unfair since the dog is not given the option to avoid a correction. He is corrected right of wrong.
> 
> Same goes for a 'motivational' pop ?
> .


I don't know what an automatic correction is....

Motivational pops - it depends. I have used them while training heeling. It works very well if you time the pops with immediate jackpots. And there are similar methods which really aren't negative at all as they are delivered. The dogs are over the top into playing the training game. 

Where methods fail is when they have not been appropriately taught to the people using them. Or the people using them just do not apply them correctly all the time. 

I'd be downright mad if somebody watched something I saw a couple years ago -

A guy standing outside a store and repeatedly telling his dog to heel while yanking around the leash - no praise or recognition when the dog briefly tuned in...

I saw harassment and cruelty when I passed by and definitely my thought was that dog probably hates training. 

I'd be downright mad if somebody watched that same instance and came away thinking what some people on this thread have asserted - "See that dog. So unhappy. That's what happens when you tell a dog no and use leash corrections." 

Never mind the fact that the trainer in that instance was a pretty crappy trainer and needed a kick the butt for what he was doing to his dog. Speaking as somebody who DOES tell her dogs NO and uses leash corrections. 

The difference is my dogs love training. They both are trying to get their head into the choke chain when I jingle it and hold it out to slip over whichever head comes first. 

The reason why my dogs love training is because I've had it drilled in my head that your hands have to be soft, your corrections need to be fair, and every correction you give needs to be followed up by immediate rewards when you get the results you want. 

It's the fact that my dogs enjoy training and I train with people who have similarly happy and over the top enthusiastic about working dogs.... I know that the statements quoted in this thread are biased and factually incorrect.


----------



## olliversmom (Mar 13, 2013)

Brave said:


> This is before verbal commands are introduced. Correct? I take it if the dog guess WRONG after a verbal command is introduced, its time to take it back to non-verbal.
> 
> Are you giving any commands at all? Any cues?
> 
> ...


I'll use Ollie as example. We were working recalls in class. He ran to me across room thru dogs lining both sides. Big praise and treats. Same with trainers on both sides, trainer with her dog off lead walking around. He was great. But then came tennis ball. Ball obsessed olliver did not come to me he went to trainer with the ball. I took his leash. We walked back and retried. Same thing. But it's sinking in that there is no payout at end. 
So here is where the dogs mind comes in to play. He has to make a choice. Third time and the next five times he made right choice. Lotsa praise and rewards.
I do believe the valuable and lovely lesson is he has to think and make a choice, it is now ingrained.
There is no frustration. I always keep it light. If he's just not getting it that minute or that class then we do something else.


----------



## Elisabeth Kazup (Aug 23, 2008)

I've found that when I start to become frustrated, it's time to quit. It means I haven't figured out how to make myself clear. My philosophy in riding is that it's never the horse's fault. Whatever he's doing or not doing is because of what I am doing or not doing. 

It's the same with dogs, I think. Some of them require a lot of work, a lot of repetition, a lot of focus. Penny got a lot of things really quickly. Pulling was something she out grew as she aged; it wasn't something I trained out of her. Was she capable of walking nicely? Of course. Did I do the work to train to do it? No. It didn't matter enough to me so I let that slide. I think a lot of failed training is because the handler settles for what is offered; a compromise. Penny's was that she wouldn't pull really hard but she wasn't going to heel either. So we agreed on that.


----------



## Jennifer1 (Mar 31, 2012)

Okay, I think I get it. I did some nose work with Kenzie and how we trained them to hit on the target was to hold treats in one hand and the scent tin in the other hand and put both hands in front if her. And sit. And sit until she finally stops nosing the treat hand and glances at the tin hand. Click and bring the treat to the tin. She learned pretty fast and always went straight to the scent. It was amazingly easy to train it.
I never really went beyond the set ups with that one.

So here is something that happened on tonight's walk. Yesterday Kenzie saw a rabbit dart into some bushes in front of my neighbors house. I had totally forgot about it, but apparently she remembered! As soon as we turned the corned she hits the end of her leash and is pulling with all if her might to get to that bush. I feel as if I've lost her completely. Had I thought about it I could have had her focus on me long before we turned that corner and hopefully kep her attention with treats. How do you deal with those completely focused owner doesn't even exist anymore moments without using a correction to bring them back/remind the you are there?

I guess I don't intuitively know how to move from a controlled setting to the real world with distractions that are much better than me or anything I have.


----------



## coaraujo (Nov 2, 2012)

Brave said:


> This is before verbal commands are introduced. Correct? I take it if the dog guess WRONG after a verbal command is introduced, its time to take it back to non-verbal.
> 
> Are you giving any commands at all? Any cues?


I think it depends on what you're teaching, are you teaching a new behavior, solidifying a current behavior, shaping? For instance, i'm working on fast sits with Bernie and obedience downs with Oliver (Oliver lowers his but first and then lays down instead of folding into a down). I'll tell Bernie to sit, if he sits quickly he gets a treat, if he sits slowly no treat. We reset and try again. And then from there, only sits that are as fast or faster than the one before it will be rewarded. Same goes for Oliver and his downs (I haven't been very consistent with this though so we're progressing slowly ). But if he downs butt first, no treat. Reset, try again. So here I am giving a command, but upping the criteria. Does that make sense? There's no help given though. We just reset and try again. The dog does the work, I don't do the work for the dog. I used to be very guilty of this and I had puppies who didn't think for themselves. Mind you they don't always use their brains, but they think a lot more now .



> Bear is the same way. He'll sit, than lay down, than sit, than come closer, than nudge me, than lay down, than sit (rinse and repeat). Eventually he will bark because he's frustrated.
> 
> That's where I'm confused. If the dog doesn't understand what you want, and keeps guessing wrong. The dog gets frustrated. The owner gets frustrated. Where do you draw the line?


I feel like Penny's Mom's response hits this on the head:
*Even the slightest inclination to answer correctly gets the reward. *
Even the smallest ear twitch or glance in the right direction gets a click. If the dog really isn't getting it, it just means that you've jumped up too many steps too quickly. There's a really great video of showing how we really need to layer our training, not "lump" steps together. If the dog isn't getting it, you just go back a few steps and start from there.






If everyone's getting frustrated then its time to stop, take a step back, rethink your strategy, and try again another time.

ETA: I just want to add I am very new at all of this so am by no means an expert, I just watch a lot of videos and buy a lot of training classes/videos/seminars  (and train my doggies of course)


----------



## coaraujo (Nov 2, 2012)

olliversmom said:


> Lol. My Olliver does the same.
> Ok sit didn't work...let me try down. No? Then I'll wave my paws? Still no reward? Huh. Let's start again!


It's the cutest thing isn't it! I taught my boys spin not too long ago, starting with using my hand as a lure. My lure kind of looks like the move I make when I ask Oliver to get into heel position. So some of the time when I'd ask for a spin he'd get confused, do half a spin and back into heel position. It was probably the most adorable thing ever. Its like he twirled into heel position . I love seeing the crazy things they come up with. And sometimes thats how you end up developing new tricks!


----------



## Elisabeth Kazup (Aug 23, 2008)

You stand like a tree. And wait. And wait. When the leash slackens a bit or Kenzie turns around to see what you are doing, call her to you. Treat. Big time. Take some high value treats when you go walking. You want the reward to be SO WORTH it!

When I was first teaching my horse to lunge...circle me on a long line...he would do fine and then suddenly pop to a stop, rear up and pull back. I planted my feet and hung on. I didn't give an inch. Neither did he. We stayed like that until he forgot why he was doing this or his neck got tired or something. I left him to figure out the solution. As soon as he relaxed and inclined himself towards me I went to his head and started him going again. Eventually, because he didn't get any reward from me, he quit doing it. A nice by product of it was the he taught himself to tie...when you hit the end of the rope you step toward the rope.

Remember that this will take time. There's 3 things working against it: prey drive/instinct; it's a learned behavior; you're trying to change that behavior by teaching a new one. You can't teach the new one until you've made progress in controlling the prey drive and unlearning the behavior. She's doing what she knows to do. She need to unlearn it and be open to something else.



Jennifer1 said:


> Okay, I think I get it. I did some nose work with Kenzie and how we trained them to hit on the target was to hold treats in one hand and the scent tin in the other hand and put both hands in front if her. And sit. And sit until she finally stops nosing the treat hand and glances at the tin hand. Click and bring the treat to the tin. She learned pretty fast and always went straight to the scent. It was amazingly easy to train it.
> I never really went beyond the set ups with that one.
> 
> So here is something that happened on tonight's walk. Yesterday Kenzie saw a rabbit dart into some bushes in front of my neighbors house. I had totally forgot about it, but apparently she remembered! As soon as we turned the corned she hits the end of her leash and is pulling with all if her might to get to that bush. I feel as if I've lost her completely. Had I thought about it I could have had her focus on me long before we turned that corner and hopefully kep her attention with treats. How do you deal with those completely focused owner doesn't even exist anymore moments without using a correction to bring them back/remind the you are there?
> ...


----------



## Jennifer1 (Mar 31, 2012)

I suspect I need to go back to some short training walks with just Kenzie. And walking the dogs separately for a while. I thought I had gotten to the point where I could walk them both together.
I guess I feel torn between getting a good walk in and training a behavior. It is easier to just pull her away from the distraction and continue on the walk but that isn't going to fix anything. Waiting her out is going to lead to some very short walks and isn't really fair to Guinness!

I know it's for the best but I feel like I'm cheating both dogs by trying to fit 2 walks in the timeframe I would do a single combined 2-dog walk


----------



## olliversmom (Mar 13, 2013)

And to just add one more thing to Couraugo post about not getting ahead of yourself with steps, a command should not be given a name until dog fully has command down pat.
Example: the command : Go to place.
You work on the dog getting to the place, then lying on the bed or whatever, then going and lying in quick sequence. Once your dog understands what the entire command is and performs a number of correct repetitions, then you name it. So your dog only associates the command : Go to place -with the beginning to end sequence of going to his bed or mat, lying down when he gets there and staying til released.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

tippykayak said:


> I'm glad this thread popped up again this morning, because I was teaching family dog class last night and watching some people handle their dogs. I'm always really, really curious to watch people handle because you can really see moments where things "click" for a dog, and you can also see moments where the handler is not getting results. I always try to observe to figure out what the handler is doing that's either producing success or confusion.


When you watch 100s of people manage puppies and teenage dogs week in and week out, you really feel the joy the teams experience when the lightbulb on/epiphany moments happen. Those never involve punishment. I so agree with TippyKayak that just from old culture of aversive training's heyday people feel they should yank on the leash or give a steady pull on the leash and overly manhandle dogs, which results in gradations of confusion on the dogs' parts and the humans' parts. People seem so thrilled to learn a system of training that has efficacy, that works, and doesnt involve intimidating or hurting the dogs.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Ljilly28 said:


> When you watch 100s of people manage puppies and teenage dogs week in and week out, you really feel the joy the teams experience when the lightbulb on/epiphany moments happen. Those never involve punishment. I so agree with TippyKayak that just from old culture of aversive training's heyday people feel they should yank on the leash or give a steady pull on the leash and overly manhandle dogs, which results in gradations of confusion on the dogs' parts and the humans' parts. People seem so thrilled to learn a system of training that has efficacy, that works, and doesnt involve intimidating or hurting the dogs.


This describes my progress as a trainer over the last ten years to a T. 

I trained right out of the textbook Monks' mindset. It was geared towards motivation, shaping, and building a bond, but it often went right to mild and then escalating punishment as a first-line way of dealing with many common scenarios. I ended up with a wonderful, obedient dog, but I always noticed that the behaviors that were trained more with punishment were less reliable and less joyful than those trained more with praise.

For example, Gus was trained not to pull primarily with gentle leash pops when he pulled. It was really just a jangle of his tags to remind him to pay attention, not a nasty yank or anything particularly painful or intimidating, and it worked. He became a dutiful non-puller on the leash. I thought I had to teach him _not_ to pull.

When he and I went to CGC classes that were much more geared around motivating a dog with rewards and catching him doing the right thing, we went from a strong team to a happier, stronger team. He was a great teacher. He taught me that I _could_ train him the old fashioned way, and he'd come through for me bigtime, but he also taught me that he'd do even better if I stopped worrying about showing him he was "wrong" and focused on being super clear and motivating him when he was right. I had already taught him recall that way because I _couldn't_ deliver a mild aversive at a distance (and I knew not to punish once he was coming back), and his recall was always the fastest, most reliable, most joyful thing he did. That should have been my first clue, but it still took me a while to catch on.

I learned that, rather than teaching a dog _not_ to pull, I could teach him _to_ offer a loose leash; that was a real awakening for me. Nearly everything in a real world scenario of having your dog be a gentleman in and out of the house can be trained in terms of teaching him what _to_ do rather than punishing him to teach him what _not_ to do. It's not "you're bad for being underfoot in the kitchen while I'm cooking." It's "go to your spot out of the way if you want to stand any chance of getting some of this chicken."

And I get results a lot faster this way. I think it stands to reason that it would, once your mindset catches up with contemporary training (which took me a while, as the folks who were trying to teach me ten years ago were already teaching this way; I was quite behind the curve). I was telling my dog "quit it." Then I moved to "quit it; do this instead; good dog." Now I do "that doesn't work; try something else; good dog." It's faster and more fun for me and my dogs too. Now I work hard to catch my dogs making a good choice so I can reward it, rather than worrying about catching them doing something wrong.

It's not that the punishment automatically leads to a shut down or joyless dogs, as it obviously doesn't. There are plenty of people who teach leash walking with a mix of pops, praise, and treats who end up with happy loose leash dogs. It's that punishment carries with it a potential for shutting down a dog that is simply not carried by a low-force or no-force training style. It's also slower and results in less reliable behavior than operant positive reinforcement. And it's the rewards that make for that joy, precision, and consistency. The pops just get in the way.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

One of my dog's experienced breeders had a good talk with me about choosing stud dogs, and being careful to think about training methodology along with titles etc. One problem with punishment training from a breeder's perspective is that it masks the dog's true biddability & personality. How do you know if the dog is working for fear of a big gun punishment, or bc he is that true golden with a deep affinity for working with humans?


----------



## AmberSunrise (Apr 1, 2009)

Yes, this is a very serious consideration point.



Ljilly28 said:


> One of my dog's experienced breeders had a good talk with me about choosing stud dogs, and being careful to think about training methodology along with titles etc. One problem with punishment training from a breeder's perspective is that it masks the dog's true biddability & personality. How do you know if the dog is working for fear of a big gun punishment, or bc he is that true golden with a deep affinity for working with humans?


----------



## lgnutah (Feb 26, 2007)

Thank you for that interesting link.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

For the past two weeks I have been to field training locations and talked to many people there. I have also met other field dogs, labs, cheesies, tollers and goldens. When those dogs see the e collar they go crazy happy because they enjoy what they are doing and they know that means it is hunting time, getting to run hundreds of yards and get that bird. If they were afraid of punishment they would cower away or hide the moment they would see the e collar. 
It also depends on the person behind the instrument. Some look at it not as a form of punishment but as James Spencer stated as a form of communicating with your dog at a long distance. 
I am of the opinion that a dog that is not biddable without the big gun would not be biddable with it.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Um. I would think you would know by the time the dog is 4 months old or so what that dog's trainability is. 

Very few people that I know of in training *who use ecollars on the adult dogs* actually start young puppies out with any major corrections. 

I believe when people who breed for obedience and field have somebody come to temperament test the puppies.... they are looking for traits which show up at that early age which indicate that they will be good strong working dogs.


----------



## Vhuynh2 (Feb 13, 2012)

I don't agree that training methodology can truly mask anything. If you only look at titles and never meet the dog and watch it work, then it might be the titles that will mask a dog's true trainability. Not all CDs are the same, and not all SHs are the same. There are dogs that can be trained to do the work, but not with the same desire and enthusiasm other dogs may have. 

Twice a week I go out to train with a trainer and his group. I can definitely tell which dogs are more biddable than others and they are all wearing e-collars. There may be varying degrees of biddability, but they are ALL enthusiastic to work. You cannot fake enthusiasm.


----------



## goldlover68 (Jun 17, 2013)

Claudia M said:


> For the past two weeks I have been to field training locations and talked to many people there. I have also met other field dogs, labs, cheesies, tollers and goldens. When those dogs see the e collar they go crazy happy because they enjoy what they are doing and they know that means it is hunting time, getting to run hundreds of yards and get that bird. If they were afraid of punishment they would cower away or hide the moment they would see the e collar.
> It also depends on the person behind the instrument. Some look at it not as a form of punishment but as James Spencer stated as a form of communicating with your dog at a long distance.
> I am of the opinion that a dog that is not biddable without the big gun would not be biddable with it.


Claudia,
Thanks for some common since in this discussion. Taking about training to most on this site is like taking real science to many of the Global Warming nuts. I agree with you perspective and comments....


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

Ljilly28 said:


> One of my dog's experienced breeders had a good talk with me about choosing stud dogs, and being careful to think about training methodology along with titles etc. One problem with punishment training from a breeder's perspective is that it masks the dog's true biddability & personality. How do you know if the dog is working for fear of a big gun punishment, or bc he is that true golden with a deep affinity for working with humans?


But you could look at that other ways too...how many dogs do something because they want a cookie for it, not because of a deep affinity for working with humans? I agree It's important to know as much as you can about a breeding prospect, not just titles earned and a glimpse of performance.

The topic reminds me of something I read somewhere about socialization. I think it was a German Shepherd breeder, who said he purposefully did not socialize his dogs. He wanted dogs who naturally had fantastic temperaments, not ones created by the environment the dog was exposed to, because he felt that was the best way to find good genes to pass on. He chose the dogs who showed naturally outstanding temperaments as his breeding stock. Not saying I agree, my own dogs are well socialized, but it was food for thought. If breeders/puppy owners go out of the way for extra socialization, then how much of the dogs temperament that shows is actually a genetic quality that can be passed on versus something shaped and created after birth?


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

goldlover68 said:


> Claudia,
> is like taking real science to many of the Global Warming nuts. I agree with you perspective and comments....


That is a very rude comment, and undermines the point made, if there is one. Usually, being so quick to name call and be defensive is not a sign of a good argument with good credentials behind it. Since I stepped down from moderating, I will not point out that political discussions about global warming and blantant rudeness are also against the rules here. I will just say it is no way to influence a debate. When people try to win the last word in a debate by getting personal, I can't take them seriously. I feel like I won the debate, and walk away with peace of mind.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Megora said:


> Um. I would think you would know by the time the dog is 4 months old or so what that dog's trainability is.


Well, sure, but my experienced breeder's point is that you usually did not know someone's stud dog as a four month old. I am lucky to have so many really experienced breeders with whom to work.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Sunrise said:


> Just as a side comment to this thread. One of the very real risks that I believe correction based trainers run is correcting a dog when the dog may not be feeling 100% - or is simply confused.
> 
> As a recent personal example, my Faelan started acting ‘off’ and was not his usual speedy, happy self. I took him in for TBD panels and my loving boy was actually avoiding the techs! Anaplasmosis!! A cycle or treatment and he is back to his normal, happy self.
> 
> ...


That is a really excellent post. Just last weekend a beautiful older golden we have here in class didnt show well. She passed away from hemangiosarcoma yesterday. I wonder how many times that happens, that a dog not feeling well is misinterperated.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Ljilly28 said:


> Well, sure, but my experienced breeder's point is that you usually did not know someone's stud dog as a four month old. I am lucky to have so many really experienced breeders with whom to work.


Is this person experienced with breeding performance dogs though?


----------



## AmberSunrise (Apr 1, 2009)

I do believe this comment is beyond rude and demeaning. As such I am reporting it.



goldlover68 said:


> Claudia,
> Thanks for some common since in this discussion. Taking about training to most on this site is like taking real science to many of the Global Warming nuts. I agree with you perspective and comments....


----------



## Brave (Oct 26, 2012)

I've been thinking about training and the different philosophies and the different styles/techniques that each individual trainer (and handler) use.

I remember in a different thread that training has four quadrants possible. 
+R ----> positive (given) reward
-R ----> negative (denial of) reward
+P ----> positive (given) punishment
-P ----> negative (removal of) punishment

It's interesting to me that punishment in general is given a bad reputation without seeing what constitutes a punishment for that specific dog/trainer. 

I use +P with Bear and in his case it is when I pick him up and put him back where he should have been before he broke his stay. That is punishment for Bear because he doesn't like it and you can see it in his face and body language that he understands he done messed up. Is he physically hurt by it? No. Is he emotionally damaged by it? No. Will it improve the communication between him and I? In our experience yes, it does improve our communication and dialogue. 

I also use +/- Reward with him. So far, I have gotten better and faster results since incorporating +P into our training program. I also get more reliable results, especially when dealing with things he will blow off treats and praise for b/c they are self-rewarding. 

If he doesn't come when called, I will walk out to him, take him by the collar and do the walk of shame back to where I was when I called him. In that instance he has both -R and +P. He lost his freedom AND did the walk of shame. Next time I call him, he came flying straight towards me and sat down beaming. He got lots of praise and treats AND got to go back out and play. 

I don't feel that the punishment I use is derived from dominance theory nor is it meant to (nor does it) intimidate or scare Bear into submission. Nothing BAD is going to happen when Bear is punished. 

In some ways I feel like I was spinning my wheels for months while I struggled with topping the value of whatever was enticing him at the moment. So I had something that was ALWAYS WORTH MORE to Bear to obey me. Now he is adding "Everything has a consequence" to his "Nothing in life is free". 

I'm very excited to see where utilizing various quadrants will take us. Though, the -P is still a bit uncomfortable for me. I see this as force fetch and what not. I don't think that would work well for my stomach or for Bear's training.


----------



## Brave (Oct 26, 2012)

Can we PLEASE play nice? I don't want to see this thread get closed too. 

*sad panda face*


----------



## Doug (Jul 17, 2010)

Good point Brave
Everyone should make sure that their messages are respectful and polite.


----------



## TrailDogs (Aug 15, 2011)

Ljilly28 said:


> When you watch 100s of people manage puppies and teenage dogs week in and week out, you really feel the joy the teams experience when the lightbulb on/epiphany moments happen. Those never involve punishment. I so agree with TippyKayak that just from old culture of aversive training's heyday people feel they should yank on the leash or give a steady pull on the leash and overly manhandle dogs, which results in gradations of confusion on the dogs' parts and the humans' parts. People seem so thrilled to learn a system of training that has efficacy, that works, and doesnt involve intimidating or hurting the dogs.


I have watched 60+ dogs a week run master tests this summer, most of which are trained with a balanced training program that involves e-collars and positive reinforcement and I am seeing a highly motivated, enthusiastic group of dogs that are a pleasure to watch work. 
I also train with some of the same people and the dogs are anything but intimidated. The teamwork required at this level is intense and the dogs and owners have great communication and bonding.


----------



## TrailDogs (Aug 15, 2011)

Ljilly28 said:


> One of my dog's experienced breeders had a good talk with me about choosing stud dogs, and being careful to think about training methodology along with titles etc. One problem with punishment training from a breeder's perspective is that it masks the dog's true biddability & personality. How do you know if the dog is working for fear of a big gun punishment, or bc he is that true golden with a deep affinity for working with humans?


I would be more wary of dogs bred with no working titles as this tells you nothing about the dogs ability. It is easy enough with field and obedience titles to research the dogs track record to see if the working ability fits your breeding program. 
I have had no problems with prospective stud dog owners disclosing whether their dogs had the level of trainability that I look for or not. It is a conversation I always have as this is important to me.


----------



## coaraujo (Nov 2, 2012)

Brave said:


> I remember in a different thread that training has four quadrants possible.
> +R ----> positive (given) reward
> -R ----> negative (denial of) reward
> +P ----> positive (given) punishment
> -P ----> negative (removal of) punishment


I believe the quadrants are actually 
+R ----> positive (given) reward
-P ----> negative (removal of or denial of) reward
+P ----> positive (given) punishment
-R ----> negative (removal) of punishment

Understanding the Four Quadrants of Operant Conditioning | Dogster

I really like the following training philosophy:
"the term positive is defined by the LIMA principle - Least Intrusive, Minimally Aversive. This means that all reasonable R+ methods have been tried or carefully and thoroughly considered before moving to P- methods, and all reasonable P- methods have been tried or carefully and thoroughly considered before moving to P+ or R- methods."


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

coaraujo said:


> I believe the quadrants are actually
> +R ----> positive (given) reward
> -P ----> negative (removal of or denial of) reward
> +P ----> positive (given) punishment
> ...


Thanks for this post. It's thoughtful.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Denise Fenzi: 

I recently had a conversation with a woman from a seminar. She’s been in dogs for a long time now; an obedience competitor who dabbles in agility and other dog sports. She wants to learn; attends a very large number of seminars, and thoughtfully sifts through what she learns to create a workable plan for her dogs. She’s neither traditional nor primarily positive in her training. She’s a trainer of both dogs and people; working as an instructor for her local training club. She’s kind, thoughtful and helpful.

In private, she opened up a conversation about a few comments I made in the seminar – comments about the logic of using compulsion to teach an exercise (specifically the retrieve). She talked about the dogs she had over the years, and what led her to the decision to use a forced retrieve- convincing the dog that retrieving was not optional.

In our conversation, I heard unsureness or maybe a little discomfort. Not based on my responses, but more the conflict in her own mind between wanting to use minimal compulsion and the need to get the job done – to get the exercises taught in a fair, expedient and reliable manner while retaining joy in the work for both halves of the team. Tradition -( the dog must perform) vs. motivational training -(make it worth the dog’s while) were in conflict for this trainer.

Having just finished the seminar, I knew that she had some understanding of my opinion – I don’t really have a problem getting the retrieve taught using positive methods and with relatively little effort – and they are surely as “reliable” as the next person’s dog. But then she made a final comment which really struck me. She said, “If I teach it your way, there is no one to ask for help when I have problems”

And therein lies a root problem.

I don’t live at the seminar location, and neither do any other competitive, motivational trainers. That leaves her with a choice; start down an unknown path with little help, or continue in a known direction. I believe she’ll continue with what she knows, and I do not fault her for that. She loves her dogs and provides them with a good quality of life. She tries to be fair, positive and consistent, but at the end of the day she also values participating in her sport. She wants her dogs to enjoy the training process, but isn’t quite ready to give up control – to throw out 35 years of training, especially when her training is far from cruel or unethical.

I’m not offering new tools in the toolbox; I’m suggesting a whole new toolbox that suggests you throw out many of your old tools. That’s not very comfortable when your current methods seem fair, even if those methods are occasionally unpleasant for the dog.

At the same time, what I offer seems attractive. Reliability, enthusiasm and teamwork with a cooperative teammate. Hard not to want it but at what cost? What if the dog fails to perform; where is the “have to”? I tried to demonstrate and explain that issue thoroughly over the course of the seminar weekend, but she wasn’t quite ready to hear me. Intrigued? Yes. Sold…no.

I’m hopeful that as motivational training becomes better understood, kind and thoughtful trainers with a traditional background will find access to the answers and resources that make them more comfortable training their next dog with a different philosophy, but change is hard.

Competition training is in the middle of a shift, and it’s a struggle for many who find themselves in between two worlds – both attractive for different reasons. I truly wish this trainer and her dogs well – regardless of the paths she may choose.


----------



## Brave (Oct 26, 2012)

coaraujo said:


> I believe the quadrants are actually
> +R ----> positive (given) reward
> -P ----> negative (removal of or denial of) reward
> +P ----> positive (given) punishment
> ...


Thank you. I stand corrected. I flipped two of the sides. Whoops!  Not bad for only reading it once in a thread a few weeks ago. 

Interestingly enough right after my post, I went to that exact website to read some more.  

Given your philosophy, wouldn't it make sense for ALL trainers to simply operate under the philosophy of "operant conditioning" and consider all four quadrants for each individual dog?


----------



## Rob's GRs (Feb 25, 2007)

This thread is being closed at the request of the original poster.


----------

