# Clicker training?



## Mal (Apr 21, 2010)

I've been thinking about switching my traditional training methods for Gus and giving clicker training a try. I've seen a lot of people on here post about how great it is and how it has helped train their dogs. My question is: What makes clicker training so much...is better the right word? I've been looking for articles and books on learning the how-to's and what-not but I can't really find a straight answer for what makes it so different from traditional training. Any information and advice would be greatly appreciated!


----------



## RedDogs (Jan 30, 2010)

Clicker training allows you to be very precise. Clicker training helps separate food/reinforcer from the behavior. Clicker training encourages you to do things that are "good training" in general; have good timing, have a plan, reinforce frequently, use appropriate reinforcers, work at the level your animal is at now, view the animal as an individual and that his responses are -just- behavior, nothing more nothing less.


----------



## HiTideGoldens (Dec 29, 2009)

We are just starting clicker training with Jack. This week we are working to condition him to the clicker by rewarding things we like but not with commands...i.e. rewarding when he looks us in the eye, when he goes on his bed, etc. It seems to be working very well to condition him since he's extremely food motivated. Now he hears the click and immediately looks at the other hand for a treat. I'll let you know how class goes on sunday and how we progress with it. But so far I like it.


----------



## IowaGold (Nov 3, 2009)

I like clicking puppies because when clicker training there is no chance of being too harsh with the puppy. If it doesn't do what you want, it just doesn't get a click/treat. I'm not trying to imply that one would definitely be harsh with a puppy if training without a clicker, but if you are physically putting a pup in a sit or a down and you get frustrated, you might be a little more physical than you intend.

I also LOVE that a clicker puppy learns from the get-go to continue to offer new/different behaviors until it figures out what you want.


----------



## HiTideGoldens (Dec 29, 2009)

IowaGold said:


> I like clicking puppies because when clicker training there is no chance of being too harsh with the puppy. If it doesn't do what you want, it just doesn't get a click/treat. I'm not trying to imply that one would definitely be harsh with a puppy if training without a clicker, but if you are physically putting a pup in a sit or a down and you get frustrated, you might be a little more physical than you intend.
> 
> I also LOVE that a clicker puppy learns from the get-go to continue to offer new/different behaviors until it figures out what you want.


Totally! That's exactly why we decided to do a positive reinforcement/clicker training class. I think goldens are really eager to please and very food motivated (generally) so it seems like a great training method for them.


----------



## lovealways_jami (Apr 17, 2007)

I LOVE LOVE LOVE IT! Started last week. My dogs have never been happier to train.


----------



## Jinxter (Jan 24, 2010)

I have a very very poor memory and I can't ever explain anything right but there is a girl on youtube that teaches a lot about clicker training and has a lot and I mean a lot of videos. Just look up "Kikopup" on youtube. She has tought me a lot on how to train my golden.


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

One of my trainers (happened to be agility) taught us that you can "clicker train" your dog without a clicker, and if you plan to show your dog in any venue I really prefer her method. 
She uses the word "yes" where traditional clicker people would use the click. Teaches it identical to how people teach the clicker. It's a little harder to coordinate at first, but you get used to it pretty fast.
The nice thing about it is you can ALWAYS say "yes" to your dog for a good performance, any time, any where. Even if you're not showing, if they've come to understand "yes" the way you are teaching the clicker, you can use it around the neighborhood, at the pet store, etc. rather than carrying a clicker with you all the time.
JMO of course, I like her way better.


----------



## RedDogs (Jan 30, 2010)

hotel4dogs said:


> One of my trainers (happened to be agility) taught us that you can "clicker train" your dog without a clicker, and if you plan to show your dog in any venue I really prefer her method.


Any noise, sight, or touch can be used as a marker. If you will be showing, there is no extreme difference to use a verbal/visual maker over another noise/item. The marker ----always--- is followed by the food and is (for the most part) only used if teaching something new or increasing criteria. If someone still feels they are needing it by the time they're in a trial....they've possible entered before being prepared. 

I use verbal markers at times. There's some anecdotal evidence that the metal processing, the timing, and the overall effectiveness is not the same, esp with beginning students. 

I know people who use light or a hand signal as markers for deaf dogs. I have a visual and verbal marker for my dog as well as several different noises. Variety can be good!


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

This is one area that I think needs better naming. You would think that the term clicker training would mean using a clicker in training. But I've read several times that it's not just using the tool, it's the whole method of training when someone refers to "clicker training." (For example, if you use corrections you're not clicker training).

I've never heard someone say that it's not e-collar training if you use food along with an ecollar.

Is "clicker training" really the technical name of this style of training, or is it just a term that people have begun to adopt.

I use a clicker in training, but I also tell my dogs when they're wrong, I touch my dogs when teaching, and I correct them, so I've been told I don't clicker train. Seems confusing to me and misleading to those that don't know.


----------



## GoldenSail (Dec 30, 2008)

Loisiana said:


> This is one area that I think needs better naming. You would think that the term clicker training would mean using a clicker in training. But I've read several times that it's not just using the tool, it's the whole method of training when someone refers to "clicker training." (For example, if you use corrections you're not clicker training).
> 
> I've never heard someone say that it's not e-collar training if you use food along with an ecollar.
> 
> ...


Personally, if you use a clicker/marker word and are shaping I would consider it clicker training. I think what happens is strict clicker trainers are also generally positive only based trainers and so I think when they see someone use a clicker and corrections they don't want to call it 'clicker training' because that is what they do.

But even Morgan Spector's clicker obedience book uses a verbal correction of 'wrong' (which I think is silly, just say 'no' people!).

I think clicker training is pretty fun and cool, but definitely not necessary and not always better. It just depends on so many factors. The thing I had about purist clicker training is that it is not very interactive or hands on with the dog. Basically you are a food dispenser--you say or do nothing else and let the dog figure out the rest. Some of this is good and fun, but I don't think all the time and I think it depends on what you are training and your goals.


----------



## RedDogs (Jan 30, 2010)

Loisiana said:


> Seems confusing to me and misleading to those that don't know.


It IS a very unfortunate name and is often very misleading. 

While I can appreciate and understand people using food/toys/play as well as punishment... it makes my life really difficult!

Karen Pryor and many others really do wish it had a better name.... it's not what was intended and somehow just caught on. I'm tempted to call it something else in my classes but I'm never sure what would make the most sense, etc. Some people are using other names but I don't know...'clicker training' might be stuck.

It's also interesting to see the misconceptions and interpretations of clicker training... I am a food dispenser at times... petting, talk, etc would interupt the flow of the training session and it isn't appreciated by every animal. But I DO love my dog and cuddle with him and pet him and play and all those things, as do all the other clicker-training-using people I've met and with my students. 

Kathy Sdao has great article about "Training with a Clicker and Clicker Training" that is available on clickertraining.com


----------



## GoldenSail (Dec 30, 2008)

RedDogs said:


> It's also interesting to see the misconceptions and interpretations of clicker training... I am a food dispenser at times... petting, talk, etc would interupt the flow of the training session and it isn't appreciated by every animal. But I DO love my dog and cuddle with him and pet him and play and all those things, as do all the other clicker-training-using people I've met and with my students.


Yes, but you are not a 'purist' clicker trainer  I think very few people are. Purists are hands off and will not even lure to speed up a behavior.


----------



## RedDogs (Jan 30, 2010)

Hahh.... what gives you that impression?

I strongly dislike the term "purist"... it really feels derogatory. It's not descriptive in what happens and the associations with it are really pretty awful on many competition lists/classes/etc...

I very rarely lures, no NRM, mostly free shaping, I rarely use targeting to teach behaviors.... I have my training plans and charts and calculate ROR and correct responses and .... and and....I don't use luring to teach behavior, ONLY use it to speed up a behavior in the context of "Race to Reward" (per _Agilty Right from the Start_). I do teach dogs to follow a lure for emergency situations.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

RedDogs said:


> mostly free shaping


One thing I have learned about myself is that I have no patience for free shaping. I always end up (or just start out) doing something to speed up the process. But then again, I also don't like when my dogs start offering a million different behaviors to me. Just a personal quirk of mine.


----------



## GoldenSail (Dec 30, 2008)

RedDogs, ok, maybe you are. Kikopup on youtube was mentioned earlier. While I think she is a fantastic trainer (and I love her videos) I do not agree with her philosophy and she is someone I would consider as a purist. From her video, not even an 'eh-eh' or 'no' is acceptable. The mere use of those words and you are not clicker training.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyVjj7GhZbM

And I do like clicker training--purist or not but I don't think it is the end all be all. Nor would I personally use it exclusively, for various reasons.


----------



## RedDogs (Jan 30, 2010)

Hahh.. I recommended her recently and was hesitant to do so as she does stuff that I would absolutely not do! She's not as science-based as I tend to be. But she does a great job with the videos, way better than I could do. 

Wording is tricky...I'm always careful about how I refer to clicker training based on perceptions of what it is and isn't.


----------



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

I used clicker training while I was a stay at home mom...to teach Lucky to pick up laundry and put it in the basket. I thought he needed a "job"....and it was a fun endeaver. I had a hard time with it because my household was a tad bit cayotic and I am a tad bit disorganized...so the clicker process was hard for me to be consitant on..

But clicker training is what I would use for a dog to go over and beyond the simple "house rules".

It can train very exact, detailed behavior (go to laundry, pick it up, take it to basket, drop it.) It can mentally stimulate the mind (yours and the dogs). Its good stuff.

Give it a shot...its fun.


----------



## Blondie (Oct 10, 2009)

Is this clicker a trend? I mean, people have been training and having dog competitions for many years before clicker ever came along.


----------



## GoldenJona (Apr 3, 2010)

I don't understand the concept...So you click when he does something you want and then you follow that click with a treat? So the click is substituting saying "Yes good boy"

I dont understand why they would be more eager to please when the clicker is involved? The click doesnt come until after the command.

I'm confused


----------



## RedDogs (Jan 30, 2010)

The type of training has been used since the 40/50's for various tasks and some types of military work: (Ignore the title...the content is more important!) : 
http://clickersolutions.com/articles/2002/skeptics.htm

The key is the training has been formalized, the Brelands/Baileys conducted a lot of their own research on how to get behaviors as fast as possible and as reliably as possible. They typically did not use punishment due to it just not being as efficient for what they were doing.

It was termed as "clicker training" in the 90's and at that point directed towards pet training (previous attempts just didn't catch on). Yes people have trained animals for a really long time before all of this, but the people who have been good at animal training have used many of the same principles (good timing, have a training plan, adjust criteria). People who are really good and REALLY get clicker type training have very elegant training plans and it's really quite impressive.

The click happens at the exact moment of your desired behavior and is followed by a reinforcer, typically food. It does not substitute for verbal/physical contact. A clicker/marker is more precise. A simple example: You ask a dog to sit. The dog does. You say "good down and start to reach to feed a treat. He jumps up. Do you give him the treat or not? He DID sit. But he jumped up. If you are using a clicker/marker, you can click for the sit and the drop/toss the treat. 

We can mark tiny muscle movements or intents/choices. Verbal 'praise' can tend to disrupt the flow of the training session if you are teaching a novel behavior. But precision is a key benefit! 

"eager to please" I don't know anything about. I don't often use phrases like that...too anthropomorphic! Possibly this is in reference to activity/choices being desirable rather than inhibited behavior? (Wanting the dog to DO things rather than to NOT do things?)a

The click would come at the behavior you want. This may be after a cue, but by the time you add the cue, the behavior is very well trained and very fluent (performed to a high level under a variety of circumstances).


----------



## GoldenJona (Apr 3, 2010)

^^^ 

Thank you for that, I never quite got it or thought it was that important but once I get my puppy I might start with the clicker.

Can the clicker be used when he is learning to use the bathroom outside? or will the click make him think that he is getting praised for pooping in general?


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

RedDogs said:


> A simple example: You ask a dog to sit. The dog does. You say "good down" and start to reach to feed a treat. He jumps up. Do you give him the treat or not? He DID sit. But he jumped up. If you are using a clicker/marker, you can click for the sit and the drop/toss the treat.


 I understand the benefits of using a clicker over using a verbal, but I don't get what you're trying to explain here in this specific example. You can also drop/toss a treat to a dog after a verbal marker, and a dog can still jump up after a click.


----------



## RedDogs (Jan 30, 2010)

Jodie:

The example was more for "general praise" v marker rather than a click v. verbal marker. but obviously it's not a very good example. Drawn out verbal praise is not very precise, a lot can happen in the 2-4 seconds. A marker is more precise. Is that better?

Edwin:

I don't typically use it for house training, we aren't generally looking for anything super specific. just feed a few treats after your puppy eliminates.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

Loisiana said:


> I understand the benefits of using a clicker over using a verbal, but I don't get what you're trying to explain here in this specific example. You can also drop/toss a treat to a dog after a verbal marker, and a dog can still jump up after a click.


I believe what she's saying is that if you use a well-times, properly conditioned marker, it doesn't matter what the dog does after the marker and before consuming the treat. SO - a dog who sits and is marked properly for the sit, will still understand that the cookie is for sitting even if he happens to stand up right before eating the treat. On the other hand, w/o a conditioned marker, if you ask a dog to sit, you say "good sit" and he stands up as you feed, he's likely to think the treat was for standing, or doing a sit-stand combo.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

BTW - regarding verbal marker vs. clicker, I believe there been studies that now show that the clicker registers in a deeper part of the dog's brain than a verbal, which can make it more effective.

I definitely see the difference in my own dogs. I use, and they learn with both, but my clicker-trained behaviors are stronger. And that's not even using the clicker as a tool for pure shaping. I shape very little. I mostly lure or prompt and still click, which gets me off the lure or prompt quickly and results in a very strong behavior.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

That makes more sense. I agree a click usually makes a better marker initially than a verbal, I just wasn't sure what you were trying to say in that post.

So for all you that have trained with a clicker, do you have a favorite kind of clicker? 

I'm not sure why, but I've always preferred the one that Triple Crown (brand called something like Starmark now) makes. Blue circle with the orange button in the center. I've used others but I always go back to good old triple crown clicker. I keep a clip on it and usually clip it to a belt loop while I'm using it (depending on what I'm using it for).


----------



## RedDogs (Jan 30, 2010)

I click by far. The button sticks up further and takes less pressure to depress (press?). The triple crown one makes my wrist hurt...(what? I should talk to the doctor about those problems?). 

The box clickers are nice and loud for outside but the "click time" is longer than with an i click. I wish the iclick (or any) could do just one click instead of the double click-click. At the same time, the iclicks have had a few bad batches lately that are just odd. 

I'd love to be able to just use a super short whistle... but gotta preserve those as cues for field stuff!


----------



## Blondie (Oct 10, 2009)

My neighbor just finished her first clicker basic obedience level I class and didn't like it. I don't think clicker is for everyone. Just like we all feed our dogs what we feel is best for them and agrees with them. I'm not saying the clicker is bad, it's just not for me. It just seems like "one more thing."


----------



## Cowtown (Sep 23, 2009)

Blondie said:


> My neighbor just finished her first clicker basic obedience level I class and didn't like it. I don't think clicker is for everyone. Just like we all feed our dogs what we feel is best for them and agrees with them. I'm not saying the clicker is bad, it's just not for me. It just seems like "one more thing."


But it might be for your dog! You shouldn't discount it because your neighbor didn't like it. Give it a shot, you never know how your dog might respond.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

Blondie said:


> My neighbor just finished her first clicker basic obedience level I class and didn't like it. I don't think clicker is for everyone. Just like we all feed our dogs what we feel is best for them and agrees with them. I'm not saying the clicker is bad, it's just not for me. It just seems like "one more thing."


I don't use the clicker for very many things, but I do find it useful when timing is important to let the dog know exactly what behavior you're rewarding. Things like training a touch, where it's a very quick short behavior or a specific part of the body you need to reward. I recently used it on Flip because he kept going into a sphinx position on his down stay. He couldn't understand that I wanted him to roll on a hip. So I put him in a sphinx down, then pushed his hip over and clicked. Repeated several times. Never used the clicker again after that first night for that. He now has an understanding of what part of the body it is that I'm trying to get him to adjust.

Of course, I don't "clicker train," I "train with a clicker."


----------



## GoldenSail (Dec 30, 2008)

Blondie said:


> My neighbor just finished her first clicker basic obedience level I class and didn't like it. I don't think clicker is for everyone. Just like we all feed our dogs what we feel is best for them and agrees with them. I'm not saying the clicker is bad, it's just not for me. It just seems like "one more thing."


That's ok. I really think for the average dog owner a clicker is more than you need--I personally just like to use it for tricks or more advanced stuff where timing is more important. I never use it for stuff like sit, down, come, etc. 

BTW--I use the cheap, box clicker I got from PetSmart years and years ago. I guess I just can't get into the fancy kind--but then, I am not a super clicker either.


----------



## Maya's Mom (Apr 13, 2009)

This is how we trained Maya. It seemed easier for us than trying to remember to always have a clicker with us. We learned this strategy in our puppy K class. The trainer recommended that people either use a clicker or a word to mark behaviors. It has worked well for us. 



hotel4dogs said:


> One of my trainers (happened to be agility) taught us that you can "clicker train" your dog without a clicker, and if you plan to show your dog in any venue I really prefer her method.
> She uses the word "yes" where traditional clicker people would use the click. Teaches it identical to how people teach the clicker. It's a little harder to coordinate at first, but you get used to it pretty fast.
> The nice thing about it is you can ALWAYS say "yes" to your dog for a good performance, any time, any where. Even if you're not showing, if they've come to understand "yes" the way you are teaching the clicker, you can use it around the neighborhood, at the pet store, etc. rather than carrying a clicker with you all the time.
> JMO of course, I like her way better.


----------



## Golden River of Dreams (Feb 25, 2010)

Here is one of the studies that concludes that when free shaping shelter dogs a clicker will improve the learning over a verbal "good".

http://www.clickertraining.com/files/Wood_Lindsay_CLICKER_BRIDGING_STIMULUS_EFFICACY.pdf

I was trying to find out how the verbal was said. I wasn't sure if it was one or multiple trainers, but I am sure they tried to make it consistent. I don't know if they used any emotion when using a verbal.

There was no interaction with the dog, just clicking/ saying yes and then tossing the treat. Some dogs were taken out of the study for various reasons. The sample size ended with 20 dogs of various breeds (although they tried to get them as close as possible). 

I would be curios to see this study redone with dogs that have a fair amount of training, and a strong bond with people. 
I would also like to see clicker training vs. interactive training.
I would be curious to see if the results would vary. 

I personally don't use clicker training very often, and I've only had my dog for four months, but I don't know how much more he possibly could have learned if I had used the clicker. I guess I will never know!


----------



## RedDogs (Jan 30, 2010)

There is no real study saying clicker is better than x, y, z. There is no perfectly controlled study.

That said, here's one looking at different types of markers:
http://www.clickertraining.com/files/Wood_Lindsay_CLICKER_BRIDGING_STIMULUS_EFFICACY.pdf

and you will find quite a few studies done at the university of north texas looking at various events ("poisoned cue", variations, etc.)


----------



## GoldenSail (Dec 30, 2008)

It is hard for me to be too much merit in studies--especially when training is involved. There are so many complicated variables--temperament of the dog, skill of the handler, etc, etc, etc.

I can see why click would be stronger than 'good' though because we throw the word around when working with our dogs all the time and probably do not follow up with reinforcement 100% of the time. If you have a clicker in your hand, I think you are more aware that click = treat.


----------

