# Predictability - When to be predictable..



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

This is another one of my favorite topics. This should get a lot of different points of view from a wide variety of ideas and training philosophies. How important is being predictable (doing the same thing) and variation (changing it up)? Is it based on the situation at the time? Is it based on the animal?


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> This is another one of my favorite topics. This should get a lot of different points of view from a wide variety of ideas and training philosophies. How important is being predictable (doing the same thing) and variation (changing it up)? Is it based on the situation at the time? Is it based on the animal?


I don't understand your question. Because I start puppies so young, I teach one or two commands at a time, making sure that they are reliable before moving to the next. And as they gain a larger repertoire that they are reliable on, I use them in every day life, not as a string of commands, so there is always "variety". 
What I don't understand about your question is this - when you say "changing it up" are you referring to order? Or, changing the way you ask for a particular command? A dog learns by repetition. You need to be consistent and persistent. A well socialized, flexible dog that is reliable on all the commands can handle what you require in any situation.


----------



## moverking (Feb 26, 2007)

I'm guilty of using a 'string of commands' with mine and have started changing first simply what 'position' I am in when I give the commands...on the floor, standing on a chair, with my back turned. I'm amazed how poorly they respond! So myself and the girls are guilty of way too much predictability on both our parts. We have our winter's work cut out for us :


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

It's a general question...it can be related to giving a cue, correcting, rewarding, a certain dog, your style... People have different styles.... I love to hear them..


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

One thing that makes RallyO interesting is having to read the signs which changes the way of giving cues . It really gives a 2 or 3 heartbeat variation from my usual way of giving Tally cues. If I take too long, he tilts his head, awaiting. I love to try and surprise all three dogs with commands- like out hiking asking for down/stay. They know it's a fun game, and they are great at reacting fast to commands in changing circumstances.


----------



## bizzy (Mar 30, 2007)

I like to be predictible in the sence of I expect the same result for a command but once the command is learned I like to find new ways to use it to add varietly to our training.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

I think we have a great video on here regarding predictability. I believe FlyingQ mentioned the subject and LibertyME tested this while filming. It was pretty interesting. Now where is that thread...



http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com/showthread.php?t=41454&highlight=stephanie

http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com/showthread.php?t=41467&highlight=green+eggs


----------



## jnmarr (Mar 7, 2008)

I try really hard to be consistant when teaching.. but then shake it up by giving the commands in different order and under different circumstances.. With my bridge boys I noticed I would tell them to sit.. for a treat.. they would sit, give 5 , down, speak and roll over.. :doh: because I had been too predicable. Life is so unpredictable, so I am now twisting things up so my shy guys will gain ( hopefully ) more confidence in different situations. The question is thought provoking and almost loaded.. LOL.. Of course it depends on the situation, and the animal.. and the weather, and the time of day.. I live in Florida.. home of the wonderful ( NOT ) hurricanes and tropical storms. One thing I learned from them is this.. To survive the storm you have to be flexible.. Huge, stong, unyielding trees came down.. Limber ones that were able to " go with the flow " made it.. I am trying to teach my dogs to " go with the flow! 
You sure know how to ask a question and sit back and enjoy! LOL.


----------



## dannyra (Aug 5, 2008)

I think there is certain things that you have to be predictable on. If your dogs a jumper and you have someone at the door. That's not the time to change things up. 

I think it's good to change things up a lot in other instances. Where you ask them to do commands. When you give the reward (as long as they know it's coming). What the reward is, food, toy, attention.

I also don't mind different things for the same command. For example recall. Sometimes I tell her to come, sometimes I whistle, pat on the leg if I have eye contact. As long as I don't use anything that is to much like another command and would cause some confusion.

My dogs have all been adopted pass the puppy stage, where I do think being predictable is a must.
I also think if your going to have a response to them not doing something correctly, you should be predictable(consistent) as well, so they know when they haven't pleased you.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

I will be consistent in my training, but I try not to be predictible. To me, they are different.

I will *consistently* reward my dog for doing what I ask, but I don't want him to be able to *predict* what reward is coming. 

Then of course you can get into fluency and generalization. I believe a behavior cannot be fluent until it has generalized. In order to generalize, you have to mix it up a bit. For instance, if we just do "sits" in the living room, or only work on recall by leaving the dog in a stay, turning, walking away and calling the dog to us, the dogs won't generalize those behaviors and it won't reach fluency.

On the other hand, in the obedience ring, for example, dogs become pattern trained and in that setting, it's helpful for the dog if you're are predictible in what YOU do. However - you still need behaviors to be fluent so you don't get off-cue behaviors stemming from anticipation. 

In general, I'm not a fan of being predictible in training. Predictibility can be... ho hum.... boring! The more I mix it up, the more my animal has to pay attention to me to see what might come next. Again - I'm CONSISTENT, but not PREDICTIBLE.


----------



## HovawartMom (Aug 10, 2006)

Predictability is more of a fault than a quality!.
If you are predictable,you can't improve yr training cos yr dog knows what to expect and thus, does it!. By not making any mistakes,you can't correct or improve him or you,as a trainer!.
Hope i make sense!!.


----------



## Angel_Kody (Feb 27, 2007)

I must be very predictable....Jester won't come into the house unless he sees me going over to the treat jar! :doh: Sometimes I fake it though and he falls for it anyway...Is that considered changing it up? : (seriously....I know...I've created a monster! )


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

FlyingQuizini said:


> I will be consistent in my training, but I try not to be predictible. To me, they are different.
> 
> I will *consistently* reward my dog for doing what I ask, but I don't want him to be able to *predict* what reward is coming.
> 
> ...


Pedictability can facilitate anticipation, which can cause failure If a dog anticipates that you are always going to do the same thing, they can jump the gun, and do it before being asked. Not good, for example, if the dog knows that you always call them after 30 seconds, and he says "I'll get there in 29"... he just failed a stay command. It all come down to reliability on any given command, and the dog waiting for your next one, no matter what it is. Again, if a dog is reliable, you can change up the order of things, or, in every day life situations, know that whatever you ask he will comply. And you can then add fun things and games, and enoy each other to the fullest.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

Pointgold said:


> Pedictability can facilitate anticipation, which can cause failure If a dog anticipates that you are always going to do the same thing, they can jump the gun, and do it before being asked. Not good, for example, if the dog knows that you always call them after 30 seconds, and he says "I'll get there in 29"... he just failed a stay command. It all come down to reliability on any given command, and the dog waiting for your next one, no matter what it is. Again, if a dog is reliable, you can change up the order of things, or, in every day life situations, know that whatever you ask he will comply. And you can then add fun things and games, and enoy each other to the fullest.


What you call reliable, I call fluent. Yes, a dog must be fluent in the obedience exercises so as not to anticipate. However, I still say that in the ring is not the time for the handler to throw in something new, i.e., you always start your figure 8 to the inside, but in the ring one day, to change it up, you start to the outside. A dog with truly fluent heeling shouldn't have a problem with that, but I think most dogs rely on our patterns like that a bit more than we think.


----------



## Debles (Sep 6, 2007)

I guess I agree with Quiz. To be honest, I don't actually give it all that much thought anymore. 
My boys are 9 and 5, have been great with their obedience for years and we practice to keep it fun and up to date but I also use it and expect good behavior from them consistently. I rarely use treats anymore and they don't expect it for what to them is normal good behavior. They have gotten used to getting a treat with Gunner's meds so in that way, they are spoiled! If I didn't give them one then, they'd be upset! LOL!


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

FlyingQuizini said:


> What you call reliable, I call fluent. Yes, a dog must be fluent in the obedience exercises so as not to anticipate. However, I still say that in the ring is not the time for the handler to throw in something new, i.e., you always start your figure 8 to the inside, but in the ring one day, to change it up, you start to the outside. A dog with truly fluent heeling shouldn't have a problem with that, but I think most dogs rely on our patterns like that a bit more than we think.


I like the word fluent.  I think I might be more likely to use "fluent" with an older dog (as opposed to the babies that I am more often working with.) I think of fluency as being more refined - polished - but it certainly is fitting as you use it, Steph. I full well believe that dogs, being very much creatures of habit, DO rely on aour patterns, as you've stated. And I would never change something up, even with a fluent dog, when in the ring!


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

I think you need to differentiate between general pet training and obedience show training, which several peoples' posts did. In show training, JMO, once a dog solidly knows a particular behavior you have to be very unpredictable in training to avoid the anticipation problem that we tend to have with our VERY SMART goldens, but I think we call it "proofing", not being unpredictable. But once in the ring, you need to be as predictable as you possibly can be to give your dog every advantage to cue from your body language, movements, etc. 
Things like throwing the dumbbell off to one side rather than always straight across the jump, or doing the exercises in a different order, sometimes calling for a drop on the recall and sometimes calling a straight recall, sometimes calling a swing finish and sometimes calling a regular finish and sometimes calling no finish at all etc. seem very valuable in what I call "ring training" but wouldn't matter a hoot in pet training.


----------



## Abbydabbydo (Jan 31, 2007)

From the peanut gallery I would say I am consistent AND predictable and my doggies are very happy because of it. Shower at six means I am going to work and they are going to their beds to wait for a lunch walk. If I sleep past six it means it must be the weekend or a day off and wonderful things will happen. Yes, they do their tricks all in row but it is very cute to see. They are not show dogs, just my dogs.

I had to laugh, we just went for a walk in the pouring rain and I wanted them to get dried off a bit before they came inside. 

So I said SHAKE YOU GUYS (in the grarage) and they both held a paw up. Only as smart as their owners I say


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

Abbydabbydo said:


> So I said SHAKE YOU GUYS (in the grarage) and they both held a paw up. Only as smart as their owners I say


Thank you for the chuckle! 

I'm consistent and predictable because I learned to be, raising an ADD son. Some habits are hard to break, but my boys forgive my flaws!


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Abbydabbydo said:


> From the peanut gallery I would say I am consistent AND predictable and my doggies are very happy because of it. Shower at six means I am going to work and they are going to their beds to wait for a lunch walk. If I sleep past six it means it must be the weekend or a day off and wonderful things will happen. Yes, they do their tricks all in row but it is very cute to see. They are not show dogs, just my dogs.
> 
> I had to laugh, we just went for a walk in the pouring rain and I wanted them to get dried off a bit before they came inside.
> 
> So I said SHAKE YOU GUYS (in the grarage) and they both held a paw up. Only as smart as their owners I say


MY dogs are also very happy because of my "predictability", which is, when they are well mannered, and do as I request, they get boatloads of hugs and kisses and "good dog!"'s and cookies. Every time (predictability). And, if they don't, there are consequences. Every time (predictability). Because they are reliable (fluent - I'm liking this word, Steph! ) and there is a circle of pleasing each other, the symbiotic relationship is - "predictable".


----------



## LibertyME (Jan 6, 2007)

Predictability during the early learning phase is a mighty good and powerful thing...
But over the life of the dog...how terribly boring...

Remembering my favorite professors - I can remember the names of every prof that was unpredictable in their teaching style - all of the others are a nameless, faceless blurrr.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

This is what makes animal behavior so cool!!! Everyone has their own idea and style... I have seen so many different takes with regards to "predictability" vs "change". I was reading these and wow, they really come from both ends of the spectrum too.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> This is what makes animal behavior so cool!!! Everyone has their own idea and style... I have seen so many different takes with regards to "predictability" vs "change". I was reading these and wow, they really come from both ends of the spectrum too.


But, what we are not getting is YOUR take on it... hint hint...


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

I think it totally depends upon the situation..... and in some situations you want predictability. I can't tell you about showing dogs, because I just don't know. For about 5 years I trained dogs for narcotics detection and in that training situation, there is no question you would want predictability. _The dog has to know that when he alerts on the odor, the toy will appear_. So predictability is used in that scenario.

I have read a lot of the styles and I respect them all. I can only tell you from my past experience where being predictable would be a problem. Here is a good example:

When I train a dog on the set, there are times he might have to do 15 to 20 things with actors from 20 feet away while the camera is rolling during a 2 minute scene _all in sequence_. Remember that we may shoot that same scene 10 times. The training that goes into this is very intense and sometimes lasts two to three months. Here is where there would be a problem. If you were predictable and only rewarded the dog at the end of the sequence you would get a total breakdown of the behaviors in between. 

The way it works with a chain of behaviors is to _randomly_ reward the dog at certain times during the sequence, and _stay unpredictable_. This keeps the behaviors in the middle of the sequence strong. After listening to many of you , I know that most of you know this. This is really used when I am training a dog when there is a "chain" of behaviors. And as the other people mentioned, by varying things, it also creates interest from the animal's perspective.

On the front page of my site the "work away" behavior with Foster is a great example. The only way that a behavior like that is trained is with variation and unpredictability. The same thing with the "mailing a letter". That is a chain of many behaviors, and at times you need to break things up and reward certain parts of it.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> But, what we are not getting is YOUR take on it... hint hint...


Good God Gertrude, Gertie... I must be tired from all that monster in-law dress shopping. 

Joel, did anyone tell you that one of our member's Golden Retriever was Air-bud in the lastest movie? 

I find all of this very interesting. I learn from all of you who train.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

That must of been _AIR BUD 103_. Was that the one they did a few months back in Vancouver?


----------



## moverking (Feb 26, 2007)

Abbydabbydo said:


> So I said SHAKE YOU GUYS (in the grarage) and they both held a paw up. Only as smart as their owners I say


Hahaha, loved this! I'm noticing a faux pas I've done with my two recently.

"Come" and "who's coming?" used when a family member is coming home from work. Until said person is home, when I say come! 50% of the time they are running away from me to the end of the driveway to look for who's coming! Not good.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

moverking said:


> Hahaha, loved this! I'm noticing a faux pas I've done with my two recently.
> 
> "Come" and "who's coming?" used when a family member is coming home from work. Until said person is home, when I say come! 50% of the time they are running away from me to the end of the driveway to look for who's coming! Not good.


HA! Sort of like when someone is frustrated when working with stays... they'll go "C'mon, STAY!" Or, when putting a dog into a crate "C'mon, kennel up!" Dog is like, " Make up yer mind, will ya?" :bowl:


----------



## moverking (Feb 26, 2007)

"How to Confuse Your Dog 101" I could write a book, I think, lol.

Me: "Come!"
Dogs: "What? Who's coming!"
Me: "No, Come here"
Dogs: "Who's coming here, Mama2, Steph, who, who who?!?!?!" 
(now at end of driveway scanning road, looking at me)
Me: "*R-i-g-h-t N-O-W*"
Dogs: "Ah, hell, Loo, I thinks she means us" (sauntering to me, hang dogs, big time)

Yes, I use too many words and need to get complete reliable response, I know. I have it on the trail, but not in my own yard


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

or my personal favorite, I hear people tell their dogs all the time, "SIT DOWN!"
ok, which is it? Sit, or down????


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

JoelSilverman said:


> The way it works with a chain of behaviors is to _randomly_ reward the dog at certain times during the sequence, and _stay unpredictable_. This keeps the behaviors in the middle of the sequence strong. .


When you say "chain" to you mean behaviors that are forward-chained or back-chained?


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

When I say chained, I am talking about a chain of behaviors.. more than one behavior.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

JoelSilverman said:


> When I say chained, I am talking about a chain of behaviors.. more than one behavior.


Yes, I understand that... but a true chain of behaviors has either been built forward or backward. From the sound of things, I suspect forward. Have you ever played with backchaining?


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Backward chaining has been proving to be very helpful in the treatment of autism, because the learner always knows what the next step is whenever a new step is learned.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

I think we are saying the same thing. I have simply defined a chain of behaviors as anything that is more than one behavior. I have my own style that I have developed over the years that I learned many years ago from marine mammal training, where 90% of what we did had to do with chaining behaviors. To this day, I have incorporated much of that marine mammal style into dog training. I keep myself pretty distant so I just have never heard of front chaining.. backward chaining.. etc...but if that is what you have learned, I am sure that many people call it that. 

If we are training a sequence of many behaviors like 20 or 25, we do teach the chain in reverse and that is the only way I would teach a person to train a dog a chain of behaviors. That might answer that question. 

My point was that since this thread was about predictability, I was saying in my previous long, drawn out, and bloviating post, that in training anything that involves a chain of behaviors (more than one), you cannot be predictable and only reward at the end. If so, you will have a total breakdown of the behaviors in the middle.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

My only question is your mention of feeding in the middle of a chain.... especially when back-chaining, you want to keep the reward at the end of the chain -- behaviors along the chain become reinforcers on their own (so long as they were positively trained) that keep the animal working toward the end of the chain -- the last behavior being the one that comes with the external reward and has the highest reinforcement history for the animal b/c stastically, it's been practiced in the sequence more than any other behaviors in the chain. If you externally reinforce a behavior in the middle of a back-chained set of behaviors, you've just broken the chain. 

Even in forward chaining, if you reinforce along the way, you're breaking the chain. You of course need to train and reinforce behaviors individually so that they keep their individual intregity and don't just become a link in the chain.

My interpretation of the science is that if reinforcement comes anywhere other than at the end, it's a sequence and not a chain. And certainly, as most every pet owner has experienced, if you practice a set sequence enough, the animal makes it a chain for you, as evidenced by the dog who, when asked to sit, sits, downs and rolls over b/c that's the order in which he's used to things being asked for.

Just curious -- with your marine mammal background, you seem to incorporate more positive punishment than any other modern-day marine mammal trainer I've worked with -- Ken Ramirez, Kathy Sdao, Bob Bailey (not just a mm trainer, but certainly has worked with them), etc. I'm not saying one would NEVER apply +P in a training program, but given the use of the "training chain" it seems to represent a fair portion of your training platform. I find that unusual for someone who has worked with MMs. Were you unhappy with the methods used in mm training?


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

You had mentioned pet owners. I mentioned in one of my previous posts that I can only speak on behavior chains with regard to training animals for movies and commercials because that is what I do. What a was a pet owner does with their dog at home is a whole different ballgame than what I do on the set. Same thing with doing 13 shows a day with a killer whale. You just cannot compare those things.

You asked about my methods. Actually, there are many methods of MM training that I still use a lot with dogs. RIR (random and interrupted reinforcement) , VR (varied reinforcement), using bridges, and chaining behaviors. Based on my experience as a marine mammal trainer and dog trainer, you cannot use straight 100% MM training in training dogs. _Let me clarify that.. to train a dog to work on the set and to work reliably._ 

And I actually know Ken Ramirez well and have known him for over 20 years, and we did some things together for my book at Shedd Aquarium last year. I will tell you that Ken Ramirez, and any other marine mammal trainer that I have worked with will totally disagree with you on this. This is a very basic training concept. In order for the chain of 25 behaviors to remain strong, you must randomly reward the behaviors in the middle. That is what makes it a chain, and that is what keeps the chain strong, and I know Ken Ramirez will pretty much tell you the same thing in those same words.

But let me try to understand what you are saying, and maybe I am wrong. You are saying if you only reward the animal at the end after 25 behaviors all the time, you will never have a breakdown in any of the first 24 behaviors. 

You mentioned broken the chain. On the contrary. By randomly rewarding in the middle at various times, all you did was continue to build up the links in the chain. (rewarding 90% at the end, and 10% at different places in the sequence) 

Actually what you are saying will do the opposite. Your way, (rewarding 100% at the end) and becoming totally predictable, will create breakdown of the links. 

One simple example is a killer whale trained to swim the perimeter of the pool. As easy as that looks it is a hard thing to keep up. Why? It is a chain of many behaviors. The way it is trained is teaching the killer whale that there is a reward in certain areas on the outer edges of the pool, and that is what keeps him hugging the outside edges of the pool. He is intermittently rewarded at the edges. At certain times we hop off the whale and reward him. But if you only were to reward the killer whale for one revolution (at the end of the sequence) how tiny do you think his perimeter swims will be?

I know because I made the mistake of not rewarding at various times around the pool, and I had a killer whale swimming in little 10 foot circles.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

A pet dog and a stage dog may have different career paths, but their career path does not affect how the laws of learning come into play for their training, so yes, I definitely think you can compare them. The skills for one may take longer to train to fluency, but the way you'd teach a fluent "mark" behavior for a stage dog is no different than how you'd correctly train for a fluent "go to bed" behavior in a pet dog.

*RIR (random and interrupted reinforcement)*

Interrupted reinforcement? Will you define this, please? I'm pretty "up" on the science and lingo in dog training and am not familiar with this one. 

*You are saying if you only reward the animal at the end after 25 behaviors all the time, you will never have a breakdown in any of the first 24 behaviors.*

Well, you would only add an external reinforcer at the end of a back-chained sequence. Keep in mind, though, that the individual behaviors, when trained with +P ARE the reinforcers for behaviors within the chain that the animal gets along the way... the CUE for the next behavior is the reinforcer that keeps the animal going... toward the final reinforcement from the trainer at the end of the chain. Of coure, in training, you'd want to keep working and reinforcing the individual behaviors, but if you have a fluent back-chain and you randomly decide to, in the middle of executing the chain, reinforce the animal before the end, the chain, for that particular trial, has just been broken.

I think our difference of opinion is that you must do more forward chaining and I do more back-chaining. You do want to maintain the individual links of your forward chain to maintain the stability of the entire chain. Quiz has a short chain of chase and catch his tail, lie down, roll over... all chained on the verbal cue of "FIRE!". I can say "fire", he'll do all three, and earns a reward at the end. I also sometimes cue TAIL > DOWN and C/T that link... or cue DOWN > ROLL and click treat that link. That's not really needed as much in a fluent back chain b/c each behavior farther along the chain has been reinforced more than the previous one. Then, of course, I still have to cue all individual behaviors that are IN the chain and C/T them individually so that I don't get bits of a chain each time I ask for a down.

I'm fairly certain that technically the introduction of reinforcers mid-chain makes it a behavior sequence vs. a chain. Not saying that's a bad thing... I just personally like to keep the scientific technicalities straight in my own head! Kind of like how it bugs me to hear people say they are ALL POSITIVE trainers b/c to be a 100% positive trainer, sceintifically, that would mean you only ADD (the scientific def. of positive) things to the training program - and that would be both +R and +P!

_*Based on my experience as a marine mammal trainer and dog trainer, you cannot use straight 100% MM training in training dogs. Let me clarify that.. to train a dog to work on the set and to work reliably. *_

I have to respectfully disagree here. Perhaps it is not how you CHOOSE to train animals for setwork, but I do believe it can be done and know plenty of people who do it. And by do "it" I mean using a training program that is based mostly in +R and -P and that uses minimal -R and even less +P. I know people who have done set work that way, trained dolphins for open ocean work for the US Dept of Defense, trained police dogs, intelligence dogs for the CIA... the list is endless. I hate to rant on the topic, but it's a real downer to me when I hear somebody declare it "CAN'T" be done. I'd much rather people be honest and say, "I don't choose to do it that way" b/c that's a much more accurate statement, IMO.

Just my two cents. That and another $1.50 will get you a tall drip at Starbucks!


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

I like you!!! I have no idea what you are saying, but I like you!! and not a venti??


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> I like you!!! I have no idea what you are saying, but I like you!! and not a venti??


Joel I think it is *VERY CLEAR* what she is saying. She is saying Starbucks prices are out of whack and the price of a tall drip is going to *$1.52. :roflmao:*


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

I haven't read the thread so could be way off base... but I think it's important to be predictable about some things. For example, consistent expectations for house breaking, manners, etc. But, I like being unpredictable at times with rewards. It keeps my dogs' interest level very high. Also, I am not predictable about some things, ALWAYS, like meal times or walk times. I don't want a dog that goes bonkers if I am home an hour late, or we have to change a meal time because of medication or a road trip. So while I do have a routine, it's not something set in stone.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

String of commands- such as always saying sit before down?

I try to never do that. I make my dogs go down from a stand, even a walk, as often as I do from a sit. And up to a sit from a down, etc...


----------



## Lego&Jacub (Jul 18, 2006)

JoelSilverman said:


> I like you!!! I have no idea what you are saying, but I like you!! and not a venti??


hahaha... I'm glad I'm not the only one. I was sitting here reading thru the thread and, inside my head, heard (in a Homer Simpson Voice) "What the hell is she talking about??" :  :


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

It all makes sense in theory...


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Kimm said:


> It all makes sense in theory...


As well as in practice.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> As well as in practice.


Ah, but as in any situation one must consider variables.  I'm at work so my brain is thinking cause, effect, conditioning, variables... 

Don't pay attention to me. Sometimes I think too much and my thoughts don't always make sense to others. I'm pretty open minded and see things from many sides.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Gosh you are so right!!!! Aren't they so expensive???


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Kim.. you hit a great point. I speak all over the place at seminars, annual events, (I am actually booked next year for nearly every Pet Expo across America) and periodically a person will come up to me after a seminar and start speaking a language that I just don't understand. They are saying the same thing she is saying too. You are right... it is theory, and very scientific, and she knows her stuff. _Make no mistake...I have a great amount of respect for her and people that are scientific, even though I may not understand everything she, and they are saying._ But I just don't do things that way. 

The reason I have become successful at teaching people is that they always tell me when they see me that I make training simple to follow and easy to understand.

That is the great thing about forums like this!!


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Understanding the theory, and being able to communicate it in terms that the "average dog owner" (if there really is such a thing) understands makes a great dog trainer. I have many testamonials from people who have taken my classes over the years who love that my class is fun, informative, and effective. Sometimes it's just fun and interesting to talk about the theories and science in depth, with others who have knowledge about it.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

I totally agree!!!


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

Sometimes Less, is More! 

People have different learning styles. I for one sometimes work in black and white. I am also a visual learner, so I sometimes learn more by watching. I learned so much watching through a viewing window at our local training facility. Not just about how to train a dog, but watching the interactions between the owners, the trainers, and the dogs. It was truly a valuable experience.

I've come to learn when training or teaching in any arena you should assume they know nothing. Start with the basics and work your way up. This is sometimes frustrating to those who are beyond the basics, but to that one person in the room who is too embarrassed to ask a question because they may feel silly, you have just made them breathe a sigh of relief. 

I think I'm going off topic. I'm sorry...


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

JoelSilverman said:


> Kim.. you hit a great point. I speak all over the place at seminars, annual events, (I am actually booked next year for nearly every Pet Expo across America) and periodically a person will come up to me after a seminar and start speaking a language that I just don't understand. They are saying the same thing she is saying too. You are right... it is theory, and very scientific, and she knows her stuff. _Make no mistake...I have a great amount of respect for her and people that are scientific, even though I may not understand everything she, and they are saying._ But I just don't do things that way.
> 
> The reason I have become successful at teaching people is that they always tell me when they see me that I make training simple to follow and easy to understand.
> 
> That is the great thing about forums like this!!



To clarify, I certainly don't talk to pet owners that way... Most of my scientific "jargon" conversations are had with my MM friends. Forgive me if I assumed uncorrectly that you, with your MM background, would jump right in and continue with the "science talk". While I never do it in my classes, it is a fun and somewhat geeky pasttime of mine.

I do think, however, that when training, it's extremely important that trainers have a solid understanding of the science b/c the work of Pavlov and Skinner is affecting every animal they touch! 

By the way, Joel - what is interrupted reinforcement? You mentioned it earlier. I'm not familiar with that one and always eager to learn something new...


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

To Kim.. I agree.. and that is what is great about these forums...

Quiz...Thanks for speaking more of my language. I never really got into the whole MM lingo thing, even though I was heavily involved in it from 1980-1987. I actually won the I.M.A.T.A. award for _behavior of the year _in 1986 for a behavior I trained on two atlantic-bottlenosed dolphins. As I talk to you about MM, remember that much of my experience comes from training killer whales. Even though they are cousins of the dolphin, the training is the same, yet there are some differences. 

RIR was introduced actually before the random or varied reinforcement. I think the VR, and so on came from that. I think you will get a kick out of this. It's kind of funny because I remember when I was 16 years old picking up trash as Sea World in 1976 listening to the trainers every so often actually say the word "RIR", to each other when they were training the animal. I guess they were just communicating to each other, because so much of the training early was on bridging and feeding consistently. Remember that this was a big change from that.

The RIR is pretty much what it says by name. _Random reinforcement_ (which I am a huge fan of, and have been blasted for mentioning that in other forums) Using the bridge, but not always rewarding. 

_Interrupted reinforcement_... For example, giving the animal a cue, and just bridging his "take off" or response to the cue. You have interrupted the behavior. This is can also be applied to what I mentioned I do with _chains_. (I like this too, because it totally increases attitude and drive)​
And _varied reinforcement_ (which I love) The more rewards you can offer the animal, the more interesting and fun the training session is. I think that makes sense to most trainers.

I am huge fan of MOTIVATION!! So anything I can do to get the animal more excited about what is going on with the session and me, I am all over that. If it's standing on my head in the corner, hey.. whatever.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

The RIR is pretty much what it says by name. Random reinforcement (which I am a huge *fan of, and have been blasted for mentioning that in other forums) Using the bridge, but not always rewarding. 


And varied reinforcement (which I love) The more rewards you can offer the animal, the more interesting and fun the training session is. I think that makes sense to most trainers.*

So you're saying that Random Interrupted Reinforcement is using a bridge but not giving a reinforcer? And that was in practice at Sea World in the 70s? Please clarify... Want to make sure I'm getting it right... Thanks!


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Exactly.. it started in the late 70's. I will also tell you that it was interpreted differently by a variety of trainers. I remember that the trainers in the Florida park did things a little different than we did it in San Diego. My point of this and VR, and anything else, was it started making changes away from the constant bridging and feeding of the animal.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

It seems to me, however, that bridging a response with a conditioned reincorcer (clicker, whistle, etc.) and NOT giving a primary reinforcer (cookie, fish, whatever) will stand to weaken the bridge over time. That's quite different from bridging and *reinforcing* for a rapid "take off" as you call it, which yes, does build drive and energy in an animal.


----------



## LibertyME (Jan 6, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> _Interrupted reinforcement_... For example, giving the animal a cue, and just *bridging his "take off" or response to the cue*. You have interrupted the behavior. This is can also be applied to what I mentioned I do with _chains_. (I like this too, because it totally increases attitude and drive)
> [/LEFT]


Can you help me with this part by giving an example....(its been a long day and am having a moment*grin*)

Is this an example:
Dog is in a down - 
Cue the dog to SPIN
CLICK (bridge) as the dog begins to rise from the floor
Treat (primary reinforcer) as the dog completes the spin..versus TREATING for the quick rise itself...?????

Thanks for humoring me! :wave:


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

LibertyME said:


> Can you help me with this part by giving an example....(its been a long day and am having a moment*grin*)
> 
> Is this an example:
> Dog is in a down -
> ...


I've done that... but I wait until the dog is committed to the spin before I click... which is different from waiting until the spin is complete. I want to make sure I'm not just clicking for the rise. I like to do it with down... I cue down and will click a quick start-to-down and then feed in the down. In the words of Bob Bailey... click for movement, feed for position! In a series of trials, I have seen it build even more speed into subsequent downs. Have to use it intermittently, though, or else you end up shaping a new behavior you didn't want.

What Joel does different - that I've not heard of -- is clicking but not treating - and is calling that interrupted reinforcement. I'm certain that the click but no treat concept is quite controversial and I seem to recall even people like Ken Ramirez at a recent Clicker Expo saying it's not used in modern day training. Can't speak for Sea World in the 70s though....

Joel's take on your scenerio may be totally different.....


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

LibertyME said:


> Can you help me with this part by giving an example....(its been a long day and am having a moment*grin*)
> 
> Is this an example:
> Dog is in a down -
> ...


Long days get to ya sometimes, don't they. I spend my days with scientists and sometimes reading the posts is like being at work! :yuck: 

:yuck: The smilie isn't about the posts, but being in work while on the computer in my bedroom! :


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

FlyingQuizini said:


> It seems to me, however, that bridging a response with a conditioned reincorcer (clicker, whistle, etc.) and NOT giving a primary reinforcer (cookie, fish, whatever) will stand to weaken the bridge over time. That's quite different from bridging and *reinforcing* for a rapid "take off" as you call it, which yes, does build drive and energy in an animal.


You are absolutely correct. You would extinguish the behavior if that was done on a consistent basis. But we will do that once every 15 times we give the animal a cue. I still do that with dogs too. If you see Foster mailing a letter on my website, it is a chain of many behaviors which I mentioned. Once every 15 times, I will give him the letter and as he takes off to the mailbox I will bridge him and reward him. It is rewarding the attitude. That creates drive.

You mentioned about clicking (or bridging) and feeding. What I have done with all the animals that I have trained is use my voice or a clicker as a form of communication to the animal that he did the behavior correctly. With my style of training it is only a form of communication, and does not mean a reward is coming. What I do after I bridge is my decision, and 90% of the time I will reward with a treat. Sometimes a tactile reward.. and sometimes repeating right away. 

As far as modern day training, I am a modern day trainer, and I what I use works, and it is proven. I have sold 500,000 dog training videos, and my show has been airing for 10 years so I must be doing something right. If you want to see how this works I have 27 clips in the "retrieve" area of my site. Play any one of the clips. I use "out" as a bridge. You will see that I do not reward the animal every time.

I will give Ken a call tomorrow to get his take on it, but I would be very surprised if he did not do close to the same thing.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

JoelSilverman said:


> You are absolutely correct if that was done on a consistent basis. But we will do that once every 15 times we give the animal a cue. I still do that with dogs too. If you see Foster mailing a letter on my website, it is a chain of many behaviors which I mentioned. Once every 15 times, I will give him the letter and as he takes off to the mailbox I will bridge him and reward him. It is rewarding the attitude.


So how often do you bridge, but then not reinforce? B/C your example of C/T-ing Foster for a quick take off is differnt from how you defined RIR -- which was to bridge, but NOT reinforce.


----------



## Abbydabbydo (Jan 31, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> You are absolutely correct if that was done on a consistent basis. But we will do that once every 15 times we give the animal a cue. I still do that with dogs too. If you see Foster mailing a letter on my website, it is a chain of many behaviors which I mentioned. Once every 15 times, I will give him the letter and as he takes off to the mailbox I will bridge him and reward him. It is rewarding the attitude.


But did he write it? Then I will be impressed   !


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

LibertyME said:


> Can you help me with this part by giving an example....(its been a long day and am having a moment*grin*)
> 
> Is this an example:
> Dog is in a down -
> ...



I will continue to try to humor you. 
OK... You had said the dog was on a down on the floor. Let's say that you do this a lot..You give your dog the cue to spin and he jumps up and spins, and he is rewarded. What I am saying is that maybe once a week when you give your dog the cue, and he just jumps up with a great attitude, that before the spin I would bridge him and reward him. You are reinforcing that attitude, and it makes it interesting. 

If you consistently did this, you would extinguish the behavior, but doing it once a week, you will not. This is just something that I do to create energy and something different and unpredictable.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Abbydabbydo said:


> But did he write it? Then I will be impressed   !



The letter ?? Yes.. in handwriting.. can you believe it??


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

FlyingQuizini said:


> So how often do you bridge, but then not reinforce? B/C your example of C/T-ing Foster for a quick take off is differnt from how you defined RIR -- which was to bridge, but NOT reinforce.



I had mentioned in the other post, I will bridge and reinforce about 90% of the time. You are in So. Cal. I see....


----------



## Abbydabbydo (Jan 31, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> The letter ?? Yes.. in handwriting.. can you believe it??


Yep I do . I think Duke would have been more eloquent, though.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Abbydabbydo said:


> Yep I do . I think Duke would have been more eloquent, though.


You must have known Duke!! I love that picture by the way.. that Lab....wow...


----------



## LibertyME (Jan 6, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> I will continue to try to humor you.
> OK... You had said the dog was on a down on the floor. Let's say that you do this a lot..You give your dog the cue to spin and he jumps up and spins, and he is rewarded. What I am saying is that maybe once a week when you give your dog the cue, and he just jumps up with a great attitude, that before the spin I would bridge him and reward him. You are reinforcing that attitude, and it makes it interesting.
> 
> If you consistently did this, you would extinguish the behavior, but doing it once a week, you will not. This is just something that I do to create energy and something different and unpredictable.


Thank you 
I can see if I cue a SPIN and C/T the fast rise - that if repeated too often....the cue SPIN would no longer mean turn in a circle, but instead mean 'rise quickly'. But if done on occasion, would lend itself more like unpredictable surprise...


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Exactly... and I think some people misinterpret what I am saying. I was telling you before that I am new to this writing in forums, so my apologies to all if I sometimes do not get my point across.


----------



## marshab1 (Aug 28, 2006)

JoelSilverman said:


> Exactly... and I think some people misinterpret what I am saying. I was telling you before that I am new to this writing in forums, so my apologies to all if I sometimes do not get my point across.


It is so much harder to write what you mean than it is to just say it. I tend to speak with my hands quite a bit...doesn't work on here though.:doh:

Don't worry you'll get the hang of it.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> I had mentioned in the other post, I will bridge and reinforce about 90% of the time. You are in So. Cal. I see....


I'm sitting here nearly falling off my chair. After reading your post all I keep thinking is ~ are you goin' to go beat her up! LOL

I need to say Good night...just remember...I repect you both.


----------



## LibertyME (Jan 6, 2007)

Kimm said:


> Long days get to ya sometimes, don't they. I spend my days with scientists and sometimes reading the posts is like being at work! :yuck:
> :yuck: The smilie isn't about the posts, but being in work while on the computer in my bedroom! :


Exactly - for me, it is engineers and customers that ask me to help them build their greenhouse via telephone - I love doing it, but there are days when I get 'worded out'


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

JoelSilverman said:


> If you want to see how this works I have 27 clips in the "retrieve" area of my site. Play any one of the clips. I use "out" as a bridge. You will see that I do not reward the animal every time.


I did look at a couple of the retrieve videos. The dog is letting go when you say "out", so "out" is the cue to release, there is no traditional bridge and the reward is praise and petting and sometimes you add a food treat.

Perhaps you do have your "own way" of training and if it's working for you and the animals, rock on!


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

FlyingQuizini said:


> I did look at a couple of the retrieve videos. The dog is letting go when you say "out", so "out" is the cue to release, there is no traditional bridge and the reward is praise and petting and sometimes you add a food treat.
> 
> Perhaps you do have your "own way" of training and if it's working for you and the animals, rock on!


Traditional bridge? Out is the bridge.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

JoelSilverman said:


> Traditional bridge? Out is the bridge.


How is it not the cue? When you say it, the dog opens his mouth. 

What is your cue, then?


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Joel's Basic Training _(as well as every trainer I know)_

1. The Cue
2. The Response (the dog is right or wrong)
3. The Reward (for doing it right) *or* the correction (for doing it wrong)
4. The Release

The "out" (bridge) comes after the response. (when I am happy and jolly with what he did)

1. The Cue - I tell Foster to "pick it up" 
2. The Response - He picks it up and holds it
*I bridge the response with "out"*
3. He is rewarded 
4. He is then released at the end of the session.

Can you define what a bridge is? Because I don't think you know.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

JoelSilverman said:


> Joel's Basic Training _(as well as every trainer I know)_
> 
> 1. The Cue
> 2. The Response (the dog is right or wrong)
> ...


A bridge is a conditioned stimulus that lets the animal know he's on the right track or has done the task correctly. It's used to "bridge" the gap in time between the behavior and the delivery of reinforcement.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

FlyingQuizini said:


> A bridge is a conditioned stimulus that lets the animal know he's on the right track or has done the task correctly. It's used to "bridge" the gap in time between the behavior and the delivery of reinforcement.



You got it partly right, but you are missing a huge part.. It "bridges" the gap of time between the *end *of the behavior and the reinforcement. The bridge signifies the end of the behavior. 

The end of the behavior is when I say "out". I am content with him taking it, and how long he held it. 

What do think a CUE is? You mentioned that me taking the object was a CUE. How do you figure that? A Cue begins the whole sequence.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

JoelSilverman said:


> Joel's Basic Training _(as well as every trainer I know)_
> 
> Can you define what a bridge is? Because I don't think you know.


Joel, Now I am confused. What I learned about bridges is exactly what Stephanie explained. A bridge tells the dog he is getting warmer, getting warmer??


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

> In addition to the bridge which marks the instant an animal successfully completes a behavior, Kayce outlined an intermediate bridge which she describes as, " . . . a tertiary reinforcer (in that it is a reinforcer conditioned through its association with a secondary reinforcer), that allows a trainer to give continuous and instantaneous feedback to an animal working to complete a requested behavior.


"Introducing the Intermediate Bridge" by Kayce Cover in the Oct-Dec 2002 issue of American Animal Trainer Magazine. 

Maybe both are termed "bridges"?


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

JoelSilverman said:


> You got it partly right, but you are missing a huge part.. It "bridges" the gap of time between the *end *of the behavior and the reinforcement. The bridge signifies the end of the behavior.
> 
> The end of the behavior is when I say "out". I am content with him taking it, and how long he held it.
> 
> What do think a CUE is? You mentioned that me taking the object was a CUE. How do you figure that? A Cue begins the whole sequence.


I said that I thought that the cue for the release was the word "out". He's not releasing until you say "out"... so how is "out" not the cue for the release?
(With "cue" being defined as a discriminitive stimulus that indicates to the dog that reinforcement is available should the cued behavior be performed correctly.)

Here's the thing -- I guess it comes down to my questioning the use of "out" as a bridge in the scenerio. Do you never use "out" to mean "dog, please release what's in your mouth"? If sometimes it serves as a cue to let go, it's hard to see it as a bridge in other situations. At least in the "traditional sense" of a bridge - like a clicker or a whistle, etc.

If you has said "good" or "clicked" and the dog let go, it would make perfect sense to me that the "good" or click or whatever was a bridge.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

... and in modern day training circles, I believe it's controversial to say that the bridge "ends" the behavior. Top minds have differing opinions on that one. I'll have to look up some of the current writings on the topic, as I find it quite fascinating.


----------



## LibertyME (Jan 6, 2007)

I too have always understood a bridge (click or verbal marker) as a way to mark the moment in time when they were responding correctly - thereby 'bridging' that moment with the reward/reinforcement....

I understand a cue to be the physical or verbal signal to the dog to perform a certain task/trick/behavior....the task may have one piece or ten+ pieces from start to end....

When teaching a chain there may initially be several cues and as the chain is backchained (my personal preference) and strengthened....the final cue learned becomes the only cue used to trigger the chain...


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

FlyingQuizini said:


> ... and in modern day training circles, I believe it's controversial to say that the bridge "ends" the behavior. Top minds have differing opinions on that one. I'll have to look up some of the current writings on the topic, as I find it quite fascinating.


Please, share what you find. I'd be interested in seeing if what I've always understood the bridge to be has been somehow revised.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

Pointgold said:


> Please, share what you find. I'd be interested in seeing if what I've always understood the bridge to be has been somehow revised.


Will do. I'm actually off to train now, but will try and find them later tonignt. -S


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

FlyingQuizini said:


> ... and in modern day training circles, I believe it's controversial to say that the bridge "ends" the behavior. Top minds have differing opinions on that one. I'll have to look up some of the current writings on the topic, as I find it quite fascinating.


Ok - just want to toss out there that this is probably another entire can of worms on its own... Don't want to derail the current thread, so if it's okay with everyone, when I find what I think I'm looking for, I'll post it as another topic for its own discussion.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

FlyingQuizini said:


> Ok - just want to toss out there that this is probably another entire can of worms on its own... Don't want to derail the current thread, so if it's okay with everyone, when I find what I think I'm looking for, I'll post it as another topic for its own discussion.



I am going to start a new thread on this. I think it will help everyone understand where I am coming from.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

FlyingQuizini said:


> I said that I thought that the cue for the release was the word "out". He's not releasing until you say "out"... so how is "out" not the cue for the release?
> (With "cue" being defined as a discriminitive stimulus that indicates to the dog that reinforcement is available should the cued behavior be performed correctly.)
> 
> Here's the thing -- I guess it comes down to my questioning the use of "out" as a bridge in the scenerio. Do you never use "out" to mean "dog, please release what's in your mouth"? If sometimes it serves as a cue to let go, it's hard to see it as a bridge in other situations. At least in the "traditional sense" of a bridge - like a clicker or a whistle, etc.
> ...


Bumping up b.c I'd really like to see this addressed.

If you're telling me that the word "out" truly is a conditioned reinforcer or bridge, then it makes sense. (A conditioned reinforcer being short, unique, reliable, evident and clearly linked to a primary reinforcer in the dog's mind.)

But it would have to mean that you don't say "out" when you just want him to let go of something, b/c then it would be a cue. How can it sometimes be a cue and sometimes be a bridge? It can't and remain effective. Do you use "out" as a bridge for other things? 

Also, please clarify then, what is getting the dog to open his mouth and release the object if it's not you saying 'out"?

I'm not trying to beat the dead horse - I just want to understand what you say you're doing.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

LibertyME said:


> I too have always understood a bridge (click or verbal marker) as a way to mark the moment in time when they were responding correctly - thereby 'bridging' that moment with the reward/reinforcement....
> 
> I understand a cue to be the physical or verbal signal to the dog to perform a certain task/trick/behavior....the task may have one piece or ten+ pieces from start to end....
> 
> When teaching a chain there may initially be several cues and as the chain is backchained (my personal preference) and strengthened....the final cue learned becomes the only cue used to trigger the chain...


The CUE is exactly what you said .. "the visual or verbal signal for the dog to perform the behavior." It initiates it. You are right too about the chain of behaviors. When teaching a chain early on, there may be many CUES.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

FlyingQuizini said:


> Bumping up b.c I'd really like to see this addressed.
> 
> If you're telling me that the word "out" truly is a conditioned reinforcer or bridge, then it makes sense. (A conditioned reinforcer being short, unique, reliable, evident and clearly linked to a primary reinforcer in the dog's mind.)
> 
> ...


I understand what you are saying. The "out" is never used in any other way other then when I am training the retrieve.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

JoelSilverman said:


> I understand what you are saying. The "out" is never used in any other way other then when I am training the retrieve.


Is "out" the command/cue to release/drop, or a marker between dropping and reward? I am confused about that one distinction. Also, I learned in agility class that the word "bridge" means the time period during which the dog is actively on the right track. A bridge tells the dog he's getting warmer and doing the right things but isnt finished yet. I did some research today in the library. and I see the word is used two different ways. It also means the time between finishing a command and being rewarded. No wonder it's hard to converse using the term. The vocabulary itself isnt quite specific enough yet.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Ljilly28 said:


> Is "out" the command/cue to release/drop, or a marker between dropping and reward? I am confused about that one distinction. Also, I learned in agility class that the word "bridge" means the time period during which the dog is actively on the right track. A bridge tells the dog he's getting warmer and doing the right things but isnt finished yet. I did some research today in the library. and I see the word is used two different ways. It also means the time between finishing a command and being rewarded. No wonder it's hard to converse using the term. The vocabulary itself isnt quite specific enough yet.


First of all, I _feel_ your confusion. Here are the ways I use a "bridge". A "bridge" simply means "yes". _Out is the "bridge"_.

For me, the "bridge" might be used to train a behavior. There are going to be times I want to let the dog know he is on the right track or as you said, _"you are getting warmer"_.

But also for me, I will use it to end a behavior too, even once the behavior is trained. That is the way it is used in the "retrieve".

I will tell you that I hear people use the word "marker". That is a very confusing word, and not even a part of my training system.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

JoelSilverman said:


> I understand what you are saying. The "out" is never used in any other way other then when I am training the retrieve.


So you've actually conditioned "out" to be a secondary reinforcer? 

Just curious - why choose to use something that is so easily confused with a common cue for a release behavior? Especially when targeting pet owners with your website?

Sure, I *could* condition the word "down" as my CR so long as I never also used the word to mean "dog, please move your body floorward" but how confusing would that be to people to see me work a dog in a sit, I bridge with "down" and then pet, praise or give a treat!


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

FlyingQuizini said:


> So you've actually conditioned "out" to be a secondary reinforcer?
> 
> Just curious - why choose to use something that is so easily confused with a common cue for a release behavior? Especially when targeting pet owners with your website?
> 
> Sure, I *could* condition the word "down" as my CR so long as I never also used the word to mean "dog, please move your body floorward" but how confusing would that be to people to see me work a dog in a sit, I bridge with "down" and then pet, praise or give a treat!


I'm evidently not as smart as the dogs being trained, because I'M confused...







(I know...I'm ready for it)


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> I'm evidently not as smart as the dogs being trained, because I'M confused...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


PG.. me too.. 

Again, I will repeat it again, the "out" is a bridge. It is not a secondary reinforcer. You are totally confusing everyone including me. You are making a simple thing really complicated.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> PG.. me too..
> 
> Again, I will repeat it again, the "out" is a bridge. It is not a secondary reinforcer. You are totally confusing everyone including me. You are making a simple thing really complicated.


 
Flying Quizini is not confusing me - she's asking the same questions that I have. What is confusing me is reading your initial answers and trying to keep up with their evolutions in able to get the answers to the question. :doh:


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> Flying Quizini is not confusing me - she's asking the same questions that I have. What is confusing me is reading your initial answers and trying to keep up with their evolutions in able to get the answers to the question. :doh:


One more time....Here you go: 

1. The Cue
2. The Response (the dog is right or wrong)
3. The Reward (for doing it right) *or* the correction (for doing it wrong)
4. The Release

The "out" (bridge) comes after the response. (when I am happy and jolly with what he did)

1. The Cue - I tell Foster to "pick it up" 
2. The Response - He picks it up and holds it
*I bridge the response with "out"*
3. He is rewarded 
4. He is then released at the end of the session.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Well... I could have gone back to post #76 and re-read it (again) but then I still have the same questions as in #77, so I think that i'll just go watch some mindless sitcom with my moronic dogs and not even try to think about this anymore.:bowl:


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

JoelSilverman said:


> PG.. me too..
> 
> Again, I will repeat it again, the "out" is a bridge. It is not a secondary reinforcer. You are totally confusing everyone including me. You are making a simple thing really complicated.


Well, a bridge, or actually, "bridiging stimulus" is the same as a conditioned reinforcer, which is the same as a secondary reinforcer. They are synonymous... at least according to the work of Keller Breland and Bob and Marion Bailey... which was done in accordance with the work of B.F. Skinner.

If it's good enough for Skinner, it's good enough for me.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

FlyingQuizini said:


> So you've actually conditioned "out" to be a secondary reinforcer?
> 
> Just curious - why choose to use something that is so easily confused with a common cue for a release behavior? Especially when targeting pet owners with your website?
> 
> Sure, I *could* condition the word "down" as my CR so long as I never also used the word to mean "dog, please move your body floorward" but how confusing would that be to people to see me work a dog in a sit, I bridge with "down" and then pet, praise or give a treat!


I think this will help you guys. Number 3 below says "he is rewarded". Because I do not _always_ use a bridge in my training, you will never see it there. It will always say _he is rewarded_. When I do use a bridge, of course it would come before the animal is rewarded, which you see below. I wrote that in for you. For example:


If I tell the dog to STAY, I will walk to him and reward him. There is no bridge involved with that.
If I tell the dog to lie down from 20 feet away and walk to him to reward him, there is no bridge involved with that.
But if I tell Foster to lift his back leg like he is peeing (which he is trained to do), I will "bridge" that, because even with a finished behavior like that, timing is huge.
Same thing when I tell him to cover his eyes with his paw. I will bridge that too because timing is so important.
 
1. The Cue - I tell Foster to "pick it up" 
2. The Response - He picks it up and holds it
*I bridge the response with "out"*
3. He is rewarded 
4. He is then released at the end of the session. __________________


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

When is your tv show on? Maybe if I watched it I'd see this better. I'm still looking at it literally and interpreting things with the technical definitions as defined by others in the behavioral sciences.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> When is your tv show on? Maybe if I watched it I'd see this better. I'm still looking at it literally and interpreting things with the technical definitions as defined by others in the behavioral sciences.


It's on weekends, but I think you will get more info here. Just do me a favor. Just one person ask me something at a time. So go ahead and ask, and I will be more than happy to explain anything.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> It's on weekends, but I think you will get more info here. Just do me a favor. Just one person ask me something at a time. So go ahead and ask, and I will be more than happy to explain anything.


Maybe my area doesn't carry you, I'm not seeing anything scheduled. 

That's difficult to do on a forum like this. It's an "open" conversation. A question and the resulting dialog fosters more questions from others. Think of it as a class rather than a private lesson.


----------



## LibertyME (Jan 6, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> I think this will help you guys. Number 3 below says "he is rewarded". Because I do not _always_ use a bridge in my training, you will never see it there. It will always say _he is rewarded_. When I do use a bridge, of course it would come before the animal is rewarded, which you see below. I wrote that in for you. For example:
> 
> 
> If I tell the dog to STAY, I will walk to him and reward him. There is no bridge involved with that.
> ...


In your "pick it up" example...
In your vocabulary, does "out" = "release your grip from the object in your mouth"?
If so, I see two cues: "pick it up" and "out". I also see that the duration of the hold has been well taught...

I still dont see a 'bridge' as I understand a bridge to be....
_An event marker (i.e. click/other sound/specific word/flash of light) that identifies the desired response and "bridges" the time between the response and the delivery of the primary reinforcer (i.e. treat, playtime/pats/opening the door to the car). _

If "out" *does not* mean "release your jaws from the object in your mouth"...but is indeed your event marker - then that is fine, if it fits in your vocabulary...
It wouldnt be my choice of an event marker because of the frequent, familiar meaning, and use of the word "out" in my house (i.e. Do you goobers wanna go out?)


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

LibertyME said:


> In your "pick it up" example...
> In your vocabulary, does "out" = "release your grip from the object in your mouth"?
> If so, I see two cues: "pick it up" and "out". I also see that the duration of the hold has been well taught...
> 
> ...



What she said. This post is not confusing but nice and clear to me. Out is a second command/cue,and not a "bridge" as that term is used in common parlance.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

I have checked the Animal Planet and Discovery sites and am not seeing anything for you.
What is the name of the show, and am I looking at the wrong network?


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

LibertyME said:


> In your "pick it up" example...
> In your vocabulary, does "out" = "release your grip from the object in your mouth"?
> If so, I see two cues: "pick it up" and "out". I also see that the duration of the hold has been well taught...
> 
> ...


''

*You are confusing CUE.. The only thing a CUE does does is begin the sequence.* It is either visual or verbal. Out is the bridge that ends what I asked the animal to do. It is not a CUE. You guys keep on calling it a CUE. A bridge does not have to be a click or a flash of light. It can be a specific word, as is written in the quote. It is anything you do that will tell the animal at a defined time that what he did was correct, and that will most often be followed be a reward. In this case it is the word "out".

Every trainer I know uses a word, many use out. I will guarantee you what word you use will not confuse your dog if you use it other times just around the house NOT in a training session. In your example it will not confuse your dog, because it is being used in a whole different arena. _I ask Foster every day if he wants to go out. Are you telling me that is going to mess up the behavior when I say out? 

_If so, you are not giving your dogs enough credibility in being able to discriminate. It is a controlled training session. You guys need to remember your dogs are smart and discriminate very well. And they know what a training session is.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> Maybe my area doesn't carry you, I'm not seeing anything scheduled.
> 
> That's difficult to do on a forum like this. It's an "open" conversation. A question and the resulting dialog fosters more questions from others. Think of it as a class rather than a private lesson.


OK, :wave:I'll do my best to think of it that way.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> I have checked the Animal Planet and Discovery sites and am not seeing anything for you.
> What is the name of the show, and am I looking at the wrong network?


 
Okay, can SOMEone please tell what/where his television show is found?


----------



## Abbydabbydo (Jan 31, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> Okay, can SOMEone please tell what/where his television show is found?


Nov 2nd, 7:30 AM, but check for your time zone. It is listed on the Animal Planet Website.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> Okay, can SOMEone please tell what/where his television show is found?


Hi Laura
The name is "Good Dog U" and I do not believe it is current. I believe they are now showing reruns, but I may be wrong.


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> Okay, can SOMEone please tell what/where his television show is found?


I did the first season, and another trainer name Jay did the second season.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Abbydabbydo said:


> Nov 2nd, 7:30 AM, but check for your time zone. It is listed on the Animal Planet Website.


I checked the Animal Planet schedule on the website and didn't see it on any time zone. 
Are they showing reruns from 1999?


----------



## JoelSilverman (Oct 21, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> I checked the Animal Planet schedule on the website and didn't see it on any time zone.
> Are they showing reruns from 1999?



Here is a link:

http://animal.discovery.com/tv-schedules/series.html?paid=15.8598.77872.14198.1


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

JoelSilverman said:


> Here is a link:
> 
> http://animal.discovery.com/tv-schedules/series.html?paid=15.8598.77872.14198.1


 
I was looking here http://animal.discovery.com/tv-schedules/daily.html?date=20081102.307. It was just updated to include this show. I thought it was your show.


----------

