Dog Site - Dog Stuff
Dog Forum | Dog Pictures

Go Back   Chazhound Dog Forum > Dog Discussions and Dog Talk Forums > Dog Training Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 08-01-2008, 08:47 PM
Sch3Dana Sch3Dana is offline
Workin' Dog
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 391
Default

Quote:
This is a good way to teach a dog to resource guard.

I'm seriously not trying to be unkind but so much of what I'm reading in your posts are huge red flags. It would be great if you could enroll in a puppy class in your area, one that uses current methods.
I think you just misunderstood what a.baker meant. Didn't she mean she withholds the rewards and scolds? Not that she takes food away from the dog once it's given?
__________________
Sch3Dana
TheHousebreakingBible.com
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-01-2008, 09:04 PM
Sch3Dana Sch3Dana is offline
Workin' Dog
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 391
Default

Quote:
Another thing, an animal whether it be a dog, horse, human etc, that isn't worried about making a mistake will learn faster. They are much more willing to try something, to see if that is what we wanted.
I would much rather have an animal offer a behaviour and not do the one I was seeking, than an animal do nothing or be worried about its choice.
I think this is one of the really interesting differences between positive methods and compulsive/punitive methods. Positive methods develop intelligence, problem solving, activity and confidence. Punishment suppresses dogs, reducing activity, exploration, problem solving and confidence.

People raising sport dogs generally want a lot more of the former and very little of the latter, especially in sports with lots of variety in expectations, like agility. But, in patterned or precise sports that punish "creativity" (think competition obedience), purely positive methods often lead to excessive offering and anticipation. I'm not saying it's impossible to train for seriously competitive obedience with only positive methods, the common problem I see from purely positive trainers is a lack of patterned, consistent behavior. The dogs are happy- but they don't concentrate on perfection, bc doing it again is generally an option.

Now, think what most people want in a housedog- reliability, politeness (aka suppression), quietness (aka suppression), patience (aka reduced activity and offering) and a following mindset (aka not overly confident). I totally get raising a sport dog with very positive methods- I do so myself. What I don't understand is raising a house dog (that is never meant to do sport) without correction. People's natural instinct is to scold a dog who gets in the trash, steals food, etc. This generally works really well and is so much easier than jumping through a thousand hoops to teach a "wait". "Stop" is simple, "wait" is complicated. And, "wait" isn't what people want. People just want the house dog never to put his head in the trash. Is it really such a bad idea to teach them that? And would anyone really want to live in a house 24/7 with a super confident, drivey, offering, creative dog?
__________________
Sch3Dana
TheHousebreakingBible.com
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-01-2008, 11:41 PM
adojrts's Avatar
adojrts adojrts is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 4,089
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sch3Dana View Post
I think this is one of the really interesting differences between positive methods and compulsive/punitive methods. Positive methods develop intelligence, problem solving, activity and confidence. Punishment suppresses dogs, reducing activity, exploration, problem solving and confidence.

People raising sport dogs generally want a lot more of the former and very little of the latter, especially in sports with lots of variety in expectations, like agility. But, in patterned or precise sports that punish "creativity" (think competition obedience), purely positive methods often lead to excessive offering and anticipation. I'm not saying it's impossible to train for seriously competitive obedience with only positive methods, the common problem I see from purely positive trainers is a lack of patterned, consistent behavior. The dogs are happy- but they don't concentrate on perfection, bc doing it again is generally an option.

Now, think what most people want in a housedog- reliability, politeness (aka suppression), quietness (aka suppression), patience (aka reduced activity and offering) and a following mindset (aka not overly confident). I totally get raising a sport dog with very positive methods- I do so myself. What I don't understand is raising a house dog (that is never meant to do sport) without correction. People's natural instinct is to scold a dog who gets in the trash, steals food, etc. This generally works really well and is so much easier than jumping through a thousand hoops to teach a "wait". "Stop" is simple, "wait" is complicated. And, "wait" isn't what people want. People just want the house dog never to put his head in the trash. Is it really such a bad idea to teach them that? And would anyone really want to live in a house 24/7 with a super confident, drivey, offering, creative dog?
Dana;
My dogs are house dogs, I don't have kennels, they sleep in our beds and the only time they are crated is when we are gone. And I do that because of same sex aggression issues that can be a problem within my breed, not because I am worried that they will destroy the house. I don't have a problem with chewing nor with trash raiding.
Now to give you a little history, one dog is very well trained in agility, another has a bit and has competed in the lowest levels to earn some Q's. One bitch has had almost no training for anything, not obedience, agility or other sports but she does hunt (all my dogs are required to hunt). One bitch (our oldest) didn't have a career in any ring either. And I have a young adult.
I don't have dogs jumping around me offering behaviours nor is that what we want to the degree that you seem to think we do. I have very confident dogs, but their activity levels is generally sleeping their days away until I want to do somethng with them, at that time they do rise to the occassion but by no means hyper. I want and expect dogs to wait at doors, even an open door while I leave whether the door is open or not, the dogs (except my husbands dog) will sit until asked to come out or released with a done.
So in short I have super confident, drivey, laid back dogs that have an off switch which they use all the time. About the only time they throwing (offering) behaviours at me is when I play the clicker game of 101 Ones Things You Can Do With Your Dog.
For agility the LAST thing anyone should want their dog doing is offering behaviours, that would mean we would have dogs running amuck doing equipment in hopes of getting a reward, which is not wanted nor is it allowed.
In agility the clicker or a marker is used in the very beginning of learning behaviours and is quickly faded.
If clicker training was as you think it is especially with me having a breed that is very high drive and to many are considered to be over the top and hyper I should have been in some serious trouble this past year. Especially if my dogs were offering behaviours at random, been trained to think for themselves and be creative. Nothing could be further from the truth, my poor dogs have been on house arrest, a tree limb had destroyed my backyard fence and my dogs had a pitiful yard to go out in (I ve seen horse stalls larger). They didn't get daily runs or even walks, they were house bound. Fall, winter and spring. It was bordering on cruel as far as I was concerned but there was little I could do about it, especially since the dogs seemed to be fine.
I had a new jrt puppy, got her at 5 1/2 months old last fall, she had been kenneled all summer (at the breeders until I got her), never been on leash and certainly didn't have a recall, no training on her except to be crate trained. In the two weeks before I became ill I had started training her with a clicker, she learned an off leash heel and an on leash heel, sit, down and a lovely recall, and to wait in an open crate until asked to come out, in those two weeks.
Then my world crashed when I became so very ill. So in short, by your theroy my dogs shouldn't have been all that they have been this past year because certain behaviours had been taught with a marker/clicker.
And a lot of the training services that I offer is inhome training by me for people that can't deal with problems, don't have the time or just want some else to do the job for and are more than willing to pay for it.
All these people want is for their pet to behave, to have nice manners and to walk on a leash without pulling them along whether it be a puppy or an adult doesn't matter. I use a clicker because I can get those behaviours very quickly and with results that stay with the dog. I fade the clicker quickly and certainly don't have those clients purchase one. Hell if they are paying me to train the dog, they usually are not interested in how I get the results (although most don't want harsh corrections), as long as I get results that last. Last step is to train them how to keep the behaviours. Had no complaints yet but I often see people (lol I usually meet them at Walmart) who continue to be happy with the results, even years later.
Luckily for me, meds have started to work and I can now start back at a bit of training again. Competing too!!! Gezz I ve missed it.

Wow, I got rambling again.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-02-2008, 08:19 AM
Maxy24's Avatar
Maxy24 Maxy24 is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 7,713
Default

Quote:
reliability, politeness (aka suppression), quietness (aka suppression), patience (aka reduced activity and offering) and a following mindset (aka not overly confident).
Perhaps you are forgetting that these things do not need to be seen as suppression, they can be the dog changing his mind. Politeness such as not jumping up, although I train it with punishment (turn my back and ignore), can also be trained by asking the dog to sit and praising when he does, until he makes the choice to sit because that works best at getting attention and then later is continues out of habit and because doing so has always been so positive. I don't know what behaviors you were thinking of when you mentioned politeness but it does not have to be suppression, it can be redirection.

Quietness can also be the dog's choice. Have someone ring the bell (or put him in any other situation that elicits barking), wait for the dog to stop barking, click and treat. Then continue clicking and treating for continued silence. OR put quiet and speak on command.

I don't know what exactly is meant by patience. If someone wants reduced activity they need to exercise their dogs and choose a dog with a lesser energy level. If they need to punish the dog for being active then they got the wrong dog. As far as reduced offering I don't understand what that has to do with patience, do you mean while training? I mean if you are not training the dog does not walk around the house smacking things with her paws, poking with her nose and jumping over them in hopes their owner will click, they offer behaviors during training so you can stand there and wait for what you want and offer encouragement to keep the dog offering during the session. Self control can be taught/practiced and I do not consider that suppression (like not barking, not pulling on the leash etc.).

A dog can be confident and still do what he is told, he is given the choice between obeying and not obeying but amazingly dogs really like when good things happen so they begin to LOVE obeying you. Generally it is also important that when the do makes the choice not to obey you that he can get no reward from it, so yes prevention is very important when using this type of training, but guess what, it's not that hard.

But as I said I do use punishment by removing good things (negative punishment) so I guess some would say I use fear (the dog is afraid he will not get what he wants) but I must say it's a very different fear. I doubt they feel that feeling of fear that they get when being hit, yelled at, leash popped, scruffed, rolled or otherwise physically pushed around while their owner is all upset. The reason i don't think they feel that is because they don't react in that manner, their ears don't go back, they don't crouch, they don't start giving whale eye or moving slower avoiding eye contact. I think they get more frustrated.

But whatever, I'm not saying you need to stop your methods, I'm simply defending mine because you seem to have many misconceptions or are thinking in a very narrow-minded way about clicker training. Even if this is not to prove it to you I need to make sure that others, lurkers and new members, who read this thread are not misled into thinking clicker training/positive training is not for the average owner and dog, that could not be farther from the truth.
__________________
~Erin~



Thank you ~Dixie's Mom~ for my awesome siggy!
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-02-2008, 09:27 AM
dr2little's Avatar
dr2little dr2little is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,402
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sch3Dana View Post
I think this is one of the really interesting differences between positive methods and compulsive/punitive methods. Positive methods develop intelligence, problem solving, activity and confidence. Punishment suppresses dogs, reducing activity, exploration, problem solving and confidence.

People raising sport dogs generally want a lot more of the former and very little of the latter, especially in sports with lots of variety in expectations, like agility. But, in patterned or precise sports that punish "creativity" (think competition obedience), purely positive methods often lead to excessive offering and anticipation. I'm not saying it's impossible to train for seriously competitive obedience with only positive methods, the common problem I see from purely positive trainers is a lack of patterned, consistent behavior. The dogs are happy- but they don't concentrate on perfection, bc doing it again is generally an option.

I'm not sure that you completely understand that positive trainers also train using consequences. There is no such thing as training without consequence... There is such a misconception that positive means either 'if you feel like it right now', or that there must be something visible coaxing the dog along. Of course consequence is a huge part of how I and other 'positive' trainers train, just as it was when I was a more punitive trainer (my start in this industry, 30 years ago, may surprise you). Just as I don't assume that people who still hang onto physical means to control a dog, don't praise and reinforce the things that the dogs does right.

As for reliability and precision, I've never seen reliability and precision like I see now with dogs who are trained this way. I don't even know what to say about that last statement because you are simply wrong. Examples are everywhere..you just have to open your eyes and if you think that using the other methods ENSURE compliance, you know that's simply not factual.

While I don't physically coerce my dogs, which is actually more likely to suppress behaviour, I use many other consequences that are just as powerful but do not risk things like behaviour suppression, fear, shut down, and loss of enthusiasm. The dogs that I train now are much more reliable, certainly trained rather than suppressed.


Now, think what most people want in a housedog- reliability, politeness (aka suppression), quietness (aka suppression), patience (aka reduced activity and offering) and a following mindset (aka not overly confident). I totally get raising a sport dog with very positive methods- I do so myself. What I don't understand is raising a house dog (that is never meant to do sport) without correction. People's natural instinct is to scold a dog who gets in the trash, steals food, etc. This generally works really well and is so much easier than jumping through a thousand hoops to teach a "wait". "Stop" is simple, "wait" is complicated. And, "wait" isn't what people want. People just want the house dog never to put his head in the trash. Is it really such a bad idea to teach them that? And would anyone really want to live in a house 24/7 with a super confident, drivey, offering, creative dog?
Since when does training an incompatible behaviour simply suppress the original behaviour. Behaviour suppression comes when punishment is used to directly zone in on what was done wrong (to suppress an action) but gives little information about what to do right in place of an unwanted behaviour. What HAS been proven is that it is much more confusing for a dog when a positive (wanted) behaviour is rewarded right after a correction was delivered for something unwanted.

My 11:00 session today is a great example. Unfortunately this dog (a very big, beautiful blood hound boy) has been punished for two very serious behavious, growling, snapping...(when resource guarding), and reactivity to other dogs. The first has caused this dog of course to guard harder and he has now delivered level one's to most of the family and the very predictable level 2 finally came the other night.

The second, reactivity to other dogs has been punished using both a shock collar and various swift physical corrections for any indication that he was about to lunge. This did nothing but increase his anxiety and desire to squash whatever causing him to be corrected (though he appeared "cured")..... but what's much worse, this ignorance gave the owners false confidence about his actual "training". The fight that was inevitable caused his ear to be torn almost in half and the other dog to spend many days in ICU.

Both of these HUGE errors in judgement on the part of the last trainer have left these folks with an enormous dog that they're afraid of.
I will NOT be supressing the symptom of the issues (resource growling and dog reactivity) but rather addressing what actually causes those actions so as not to further supress behaviour and create a bigger time bomb for the owners and a bleek future for the dog. And yes, I will be using positive methods....
__________________


I LOVE my new siggy Baxter'smybaby, THANK YOU SO MUCH....you're the BEST!!!!!!!

http://www.diamondintheruffcalgary.com/
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-02-2008, 09:36 AM
adojrts's Avatar
adojrts adojrts is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 4,089
Default

Maxy great post ^^^^

Something came to mind this morning that should be pointed out and made clear. There is a difference between Shaping a behaviour and Marking a behaviour.
It is during Shaping that a dog learns to start offering behaviours. So if you never do any Shaping, the dog shouldn't start throwing behaviours at you.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-02-2008, 09:47 AM
dr2little's Avatar
dr2little dr2little is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,402
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by adojrts View Post
Maxy great post ^^^^

Something came to mind this morning that should be pointed out and made clear. There is a difference between Shaping a behaviour and Marking a behaviour.
It is during Shaping that a dog learns to start offering behaviours. So if you never do any Shaping, the dog shouldn't start throwing behaviours at you.
That's what one would think but I see dogs who are happy and confident offering behaviour all the time..who are completely new to the concept.

Actually, we proved this to some in the Nicole Wilde seminar this weekend (which wasn't all that great..). Dogs who had previously been trained with lure, or were a pretty clean slate, would still offer behaviours, certainly not the way that dogs who are used to shapping did but it happens often. There are of course dogs who give up really quickly and do not offer behaviours if they haven't been given a clear direction of what was expected. It really depends a lot on the trainer though and your idea of what your session should look like.

I guess it comes down to what behaviour you consider an 'offering'. I tend to break behaviours down quite a bit so any step in the right direction get a mark. To some a head turn is an offering, others may expect something more obvious.
__________________


I LOVE my new siggy Baxter'smybaby, THANK YOU SO MUCH....you're the BEST!!!!!!!

http://www.diamondintheruffcalgary.com/
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-02-2008, 01:03 PM
Sch3Dana Sch3Dana is offline
Workin' Dog
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 391
Default

Quote:
I totally get raising a sport dog with very positive methods- I do so myself. What I don't understand is raising a house dog (that is never meant to do sport) without correction.
As soon as anyone talks about methods that utilize R- and P+ there is a whole group of people ready to jump in and defend the perfection of their R+ and P- and the ignorance that is R- and P+. The funny thing- I'm mostly a trainer who uses R+ and P-. I'm with you 90% of the time. But isn't it possible that some of the time there are other tools that work well? Do I become the enemy bc I've noticed that sometimes P+ and R- actually work well? I've never said it was necessary. All I've suggested is that it does work and that it does give a different result and then I come back to multiple replies about people who don't use it and their dogs came out fine. So what? That wasn't the point. I don't doubt you or challenge you. I'm glad you enjoy your training and that it is working for you.

A person starts this thread by asking about scolding a dog, something 99% of dog owners do, at least occassionally. Is this person really so crazy for using a tool that has been used for thousands of years with quite a bit of success? What is it that is so terrible about scolding anyway? I get that many of you train without it. That's fine. But why should we convince everyone that they should train without it? Are you arguing that it doesn't work? Or that it's unspeakably cruel?

I'm arguing that it gives a different result. And that the common side effects of both training styles are very different. That's something I would think most of you agree with. And, I never said every dog trained with purely positive methods has dancing feet and reliability problems. I said that was a common side effect. Just like hand shyness is a common side effect in dogs that people hit. Some people hit their dogs without creating this side effect.

But if you're choosing methods, you should know what tends to happen when that method is applied imperfectly, as most of us train imperfectly. And, some of those side effects are unavoidable. Like, dogs trained with more positive methods tend to have more varied behavior bc they are not afraid to try new things and they have learned how to learn. Making them much more likely to manipulate visitors into sharing food. Or, like my Marco- more likely to learn how to open doors. My old dogs trained with much more compulsive methods didn't do that sort of stuff. Haven't you all noticed this too? Isn't it one of the reasons you fight against more compulsive methods? Because you don't like to see inhibited dogs?
__________________
Sch3Dana
TheHousebreakingBible.com
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:03 PM.


1997-2013 Chazhound Dog Site