Correctional Training

[Gempress]

First of all, kudos for you! I know a lot of people out there who don't do any training at all with they small dogs. *applause*

Scientifically, Doberluv, operant conditioning involves BOTH positive and negative reinforcers.

I agree 100%. If animals (humans included) did not learn from negative associations, then they would not be born with the ability to feel pain, both physical and mental. And if they did not learn from the negative, all those trainers who rely almost entirely on correction/punishment (Leerbug comes to mind) would not be able to teach their dogs a thing.

That being said, I am all for positive reinforcement. I honestly feel that there are times correction is a valid option, but I don't see you needing it to teach a 4-month-old puppy. I think that your Petsmart trainer is just not well-versed on the subject. Petsmart is a mixed bag when it comes to trainers: sometimes you get a good one, sometimes you get an okay one, and sometimes you get an utter moron.

I am glad to hear that your pup is learning through this new training! But I wouldn't give up on positive training yet. Perhaps down the road, you can try to find a trainer that is well-versed on the subject.

 

[Doberluv]

For example, let's say a dog gets out of the house and refuses to come when called and instead goes after that squirrel crossing the road. Dead dog.

I am not opposed to something like that either. You do what you have to do. But if the dog, all along was not reinforced for making incorrect responses, they wouldn't be happening now. Somewhere in his training he was reinforced somehow for non-compliance.

In other words, I have a very solid recall with my Doberman. He HAS come when called on several occasions where he was chasing a deer, a group of deer, a dog (a few times) and squirrels. He comes when called. He was never given an option. It became an ingrained habit to come when called from very early on. Training without corrections does not mean giving a dog options. I practiced him in all kinds of situations to proof him. It still doesn't mean that he's 100% reliable. They never can be. But he's close.

The fact is that if they don't obey because of an environmental motivator, punishing them with harshness doesn't really mean much to them. They don't possess the morals that we do and so they don't understand that they did "wrong." All they know is that their owner is angry and scary and all the more reason to not be too sure about coming. I'm not talking about mild corrections, but then I'm not so sure what they're suppose to convey either. I'm talking about harshness which is done a lot. I don't see what the benefit is with corrections when training.

I've got a very obedient dog and I train without collar yanks or roughness. But I've always given him a better reason to comply than not to. There's no question in his mind, no option as to what to do. It's always been much better to come than not to. The way a dog's brain pathways work is once something becomes habit from a sufficient volume of training, there aren't too many options left. The pathways for those behaviors and neurons get pretty well formed.

Once when Lyric was in mid chase (aggressive looking) after a dog in our pasture, I was quite some distance away. I hollered out so he could hear me, "Halt!" then "down." He stopped at once and dropped to a down. He stayed there watching that dog (so intently, like he'd love to go after him) until I got to him with a leash. I practiced these things without corrections. It was all reward or nothing.

Dogs do what works. If it works better to comply than not to, they will. When training is sufficient and there's a strong history of reinforcements for a given behavior, corrections; yanks, scoldings, harshness are not needed at all.

This has been shown and tested and researched and done by lots of trainers, researchers and scientists. Do you think a dolphin gets corrected if he doesn't obey? How? You can't put a choke collar on a dolphin. And half the time they're way down deep in the water. No, it's all done with motivation and reward. Period. Dolphins are also social animals. Dogs are no different. They're trained in many, many venues without yanking on their collar or other aversives.

 

[silverpawz]

Yes, but every dog is different. Purely positive may work for some (and it seems like it has for your dog) but it may not for others. I've worked with a few dogs that would give you the doggie version of the finger if you didn't correct for no response. They'd be outta there and flying down the road after that squirrel, screw the reward. Some dogs are just like that plain and simple and I'd rather correct if needed then end up with a pancake dog.

I'm a big believer in using only the least amount of force needed, I don't yank dogs around and I don't get harsh with them. Corrections if given are unemotional and simply another way of conveying information to the dog. Do this and you'll get rewarded, don't do this and you'll get corrected. Very black and white and so far that's been working for me and has produced some very happy, well-trained dogs.

Doesn't mean it works for everyone or for every dog, but as of right now I'm sticking with it. If you're getting success with your way then good for you and by all means keep at it.

 

[Doberluv]

That "every dog is different" cliche doesn't pan out though because trainers all over the world now use the methods I describe with all kinds of dogs as well as other animals....exotic animals. If it isn't working, there's something being left out...some factor.

I've worked with a few dogs that would give you the doggie version of the finger if you didn't correct for no response. They'd be outta there and flying down the road after that squirrel, screw the reward. Some dogs are just like that plain and simple

See....dogs aren't like that. That is really anthropomorphizing them. They don't do things to spite you.

And I am for sure not accusing you of using harsh corrections and I realize that certain corrections are not the same as making a dog miserable. I'm just saying that the science of learning theory and the practice of training dogs using motivation and reward, showing them what you do want and handling in other ways the behaviors you don't want does work on all sorts of temperaments...when it is done correctly.

 

[silverpawz]

See....dogs aren't like that. That is really anthropomorphizing them. They don't do things to spite you.

LOL, I know they don't do things to spite us. I didn't mean it like that, I was simply being creative with my description.

 

[Doberluv]

LOL, I know they don't do things to spite us. I didn't mean it like that, I was simply being creative with my description.

LOL. Don't tease me like that. I believe anything anyone tells me when they're joking. LOL. This gets me into trouble all the time with men.

Actually, I make jokes all the time about what they might be thinking if they were a little closer yet to humans. It's fun.
edited to add: (Dogs, not men)

Some dogs are just like that plain and simple and I'd rather correct if needed then end up with a pancake dog.

Hey, I don't fault you with that at all. I wouldn't like a pancake for a dog either. LOL. You should have heard me a couple of summers ago when Jose ran a bear off my property. That bear was freaked. They could have heard me miles away. That dog isn't so well trained like Lyric (don't work with him as much) and I was really yelling, "JOSE!!! NO!!!!! COME!!!!" Actually, I'm probably the one who scared the livin' ****** out of that poor bear.


I know what you mean though and we, being primates....well, we're different. I don't use any corrections when training specifically, I have all kinds of patience then and other ways to get what I want.... but with certain behavior type stuff around the house. I'll be the first one to admit that I let them know.."Hey! Quit!" if they're getting too roudy or whatever. This new addition of a dog and Lyric....whew! What a combination. So, I open the door and tell them, "Be gone! Make haste!" LOL. Or I'll take the cotton pickin time to show them what I want...."you lie down here with your toy. You lie down there and chill for a minute." Then I'll let them out.

I use my trained singing voice and tell them to knock it off or chill. So, I don't want anyone to think I'm some kind of wussy. I'm just like Clint Eastwood...."make my day." LOL. But, I wouldn't have to if I followed what I do when training skills and applied it to everything. But I have old school habits and I'm a human and you put those together and you've got one big walking correction.

But no....like you, I don't do anything more than their sensativity level will take. I do not want them nervous, startled out of their wits, afraid, distrustful in any way shape or form. And I definitely don't use corrections, collar yanks or the like when walking with them, training obedience skills etc. If they don't get it or they get distracted, I figure it's something I need to do better or differently.

So, while I do act plenty bossy, I don't think I'd have to if I followed through with everything the way I do with regular training. I just don't take the time always.

 

[stags14]

Corrections have no place in training, IMO. What is the point of training if it's all about avoiding a yank on the leash? The dog doesn't learn easily that way.

If corrections are to be used, they are best used as proofing for commands that the dog already knows.

How do dogs learn from their mothers? Don't the mothers correct them?

 

[Doberluv]

How do dogs learn from their mothers? Don't the mothers correct them?

Yes, but their mothers are dogs and we're humans. We can't IMO emulate closely enough dog to dog communication. We have other tools to teach our dogs based on human-dog relationships, not dog to dog relationships.

 

[GSDlover_4ever]

Yes, but their mothers are dogs and we're humans. We can't IMO emulate closely enough dog to dog communication. We have other tools to teach our dogs based on human-dog relationships, not dog to dog relationships.

But the point being dogs are equipped to handle and deal with a correction.

Again, I go back to the WHOLE idea of operant conditioning. And if all these "positive" trainers do not use negative reinforcers then yall need to find a new word for that kind of training because operant conditioning aint it.

 

[dr2little]

But the point being dogs are equipped to handle and deal with a correction.

Again, I go back to the WHOLE idea of operant conditioning. And if all these "positive" trainers do not use negative reinforcers then yall need to find a new word for that kind of training because operant conditioning aint it.

Why, if positive methods work, do some still hang on "for dear life" to positive punishment?
Yes, it (operant conditioning) does by definintion include punishment (both positive and negative), and reinforcement (both positive and negative), BUT does not require all 4 elements in order to exist. Operant conditioning CAN and IS successfully done every day but many educated professionals VOID of POSITIVE PUNISHMENT. A new born human baby is also equipped to handle physical pain...doesn't make it right for a human, capable of reasoning and higher intelligence, to resort to such acts.

 

[GSDlover_4ever]

Why, if positive methods work, do some still hang on "for dear life" to positive punishment?
Yes, it (operant conditioning) does by definintion include punishment (both positive and negative), and reinforcement (both positive and negative), BUT does not require all 4 elements in order to exist. Operant conditioning CAN and IS successfully done every day but many educated professionals VOID of POSITIVE PUNISHMENT. A new born human baby is also equipped to handle physical pain...doesn't make it right for a human, capable of reasoning and higher intelligence, to resort to such acts.

Then by definition I am using the technique of all these "wonderful" trainers. Find a new word, is all I'm saying.

 

[dr2little]

Then by definition I am using the technique of all these "wonderful" trainers. Find a new word, is all I'm saying.

Did you read my post? Find a new word...why what's that all about?? You are using operant conditioning but choosing to apply the positive punishment part that has been proven unnecessary. I don't believe that I or anyone else has ever said that OP (by definition) excluded positive punishment but rather BY DEFINITION can be accomplished void of any of the 4 components, positive punishment included.....as in you don't "smack a whale" , it's not only unnecessary, but down right crazy!

Operant conditioning is the only method used by zoo's to get large capable animals to co-operate with handling necessities such as needles, foot care, dental and the like....Operant condition VOID of the positive punishment element in it's extreme and all it's GLORY!

 

[Roxy's CD]

I like the last part of your post dr2little. I think we use negative reinforcers so much with our dogs because we *can*. We're "bigger" than them.

When it comes to working with other animals/mammals that are bigger than us you see 100% positive to get them to comply with what we want.

Yes, I'm sure there are some that use negatives (electrical prods) but I'm also sure there have been some bad accidents that could be directly related.

I'm an Animal Planet addict, and I've watched many a documentary on elephants (which is what it seemed like you were referring to kind of), and they purely use positive reinforcement to get the elephants to do those behaviours that you mentioned.

 

[whatszmatter]

Oh boy, here we go again.

First Dr. Luv these things that you're saying have been proven ineffectivce and blah blah blah, is false, flat out, FALSE.

When all I see quoted over and over is to read Patricia McConnel, who by the way knows when positive punishment is needed and should be applied, and just how effective and appropriate it can be, Jean donaldson, and Karen Pryor, of course you think everyone else is a Neanderthal in their training.

There are other books out there you know, and lots of other research, you do realize right?? Do I need to go back and post them again?? Just because Karen goes off in every chapter of her book reinforcing HER viewpoint does not make every other thing out there invalid. She has lots of good info, tons of it, but some of her comparisons to why punishment (positive punishment) is ineffective, in her book are so loaded with emotional connotations that most readers breeze right thru it and agree 100% without stepping back to think about what she is saying. Some of them are BS and have zero relevance to what she is talking about. ANyway, we've been thru it before

But what I don't get, why regardless of what Jean, or Ian, or anyone else says can't people realize that everything is about balance. You can take a dog a long ways yanking and cranking along, you can take a dog a long ways reinforcing the crap out of everything, but in the end, it always takes a piece of the other extreme to move even further. Its that way with everything, why would dog training be any different. I dare you to deny it.

These posts about being enlightened and advanced all the time are getting quite old. When its time to put up or shut up, the best trained dogs in the world, the ones that must focus or somebody could die, the ones that must work or someone could die, ones that perform tasks for hours have all been trained using all aspects of learning. I guess even the dogs that do back flips and immediately look to the handler for a treat have learned a few things that way too, but some people would never admit to it.

And back to the OP, no yanking a 4 month old is probably not a good way to start out training, but a few little tugs here and there on the leash are not going to ruin your dog either.

 

[stags14]

Why, if positive methods work, do some still hang on "for dear life" to positive punishment?
Yes, it (operant conditioning) does by definintion include punishment (both positive and negative), and reinforcement (both positive and negative), BUT does not require all 4 elements in order to exist. Operant conditioning CAN and IS successfully done every day but many educated professionals VOID of POSITIVE PUNISHMENT. A new born human baby is also equipped to handle physical pain...doesn't make it right for a human, capable of reasoning and higher intelligence, to resort to such acts.

Have you ever verbally corrected your own child? Have you ever told them NOT to do something?

I guess I am failing to see what the issues are in giving a leash correction combined with a firm NO when your dog tries to "go his own way" while on a walk. I fully understand that when the dog is doing the correct behavior, you need to gives praise/rewards/treats. A combination of both seems like the way to go in my opinion.

I certainly do not at all condone hitting/slapping/kicking/rolling your dog. That is something I would never ever even dream of doing. But a simple leash correction combined with a stern NO when he tries to jump up on the counter seems fine to me. And then when he is sitting calmly by the counter and not trying to jump up, some praise and treats are in order.

What am I missing? I am a new dog owner and I am trying to learn as much as I can. I have read a few books on the subject (one is Cesar's way, the others are in the "positive only" camp). I just don't see how positive only can work. I also don't see how negative only can work. Somebody enlighten me.

 

[dr2little]

Have you ever verbally corrected your own child? Have you ever told them NOT to do something?
Of course. Have I verbally corrected my child with a firm no AND physical punishment...NO.

I guess I am failing to see what the issues are in giving a leash correction combined with a firm NO when your dog tries to "go his own way" while on a walk. I fully understand that when the dog is doing the correct behavior, you need to gives praise/rewards/treats. A combination of both seems like the way to go in my opinion.

I certainly do not at all condone hitting/slapping/kicking/rolling your dog. That is something I would never ever even dream of doing. But a simple leash correction combined with a stern NO when he tries to jump up on the counter seems fine to me. And then when he is sitting calmly by the counter and not trying to jump up, some praise and treats are in order.

What am I missing? I am a new dog owner and I am trying to learn as much as I can. I have read a few books on the subject (one is Cesar's way, the others are in the "positive only" camp). I just don't see how positive only can work. I also don't see how negative only can work. Somebody enlighten me.

Would I grab a puppies collar to steer them away from danger, of course I would but I do not use collar corrections...I used to and found that when I learned more, I did better. I no longer use physical correction when training. It doesn't matter what the issue or age/breed of dog and I train everything from puppies to severe aggression cases without physical means. Why would I choose this if it has been scientifically, and in my case proven in the field to be unnecessary? No one like's to hear that I don't physically correct, not sure why it bothers people? (not referring to you stag). I'm simply stating the fact that it can be done with out yanking or any other physical methods and is done all the time.
Cesar Milan was a dog walker, then a dog groomer (self taught), and now with still no education, calls himself a dog psychologist....should be enough to at least send up smoke signals..red flag even
He uses methods that others USED to use before the science proved them unnecessary.
I'm sure it's hard to decipher all this stuff as a new dog owner/handler. I absolutely understand that, that's why it's so frustrating to Cesar so "out there" for the general public. He's not the role model that anyone should aspire to follow.

 

[silverpawz]

Somebody enlighten me.

I don't think you need to be enlightened. Let your dog tell you what works.

There's a saying that the only thing two trainers can agree on is what the third trainer is doing wrong. And that is SO true.

We can go on forever about what method is 'better' but in reality none of that matters. What matters is what the dog is telling you. If you use a combonation of praise, rewards and corrections for unacceptable behavior and your dog is happy, confident and well-trained then I say stick with what works. Likewise if your dog is happy, confident and well-trained using positive only, then stick with that.

No one can tell you the 'right way' to train. You have to take bits and pieces from everything you read/hear and make you're own conclusions.

 

[stags14]

I don't think you need to be enlightened. Let your dog tell you what works.

There's a saying that the only thing two trainers can agree on is what the third trainer is doing wrong. And that is SO true.

We can go on forever about what method is 'better' but in reality none of that matters. What matters is what the dog is telling you. If you use a combonation of praise, rewards and corrections for unacceptable behavior and your dog is happy, confident and well-trained then I say stick with what works. Likewise if your dog is happy, confident and well-trained using positive only, then stick with that.

No one can tell you the 'right way' to train. You have to take bits and pieces from everything you read/hear and make you're own conclusions.

How does a dog owner truly know if his dog is happy & confident?

 

[stags14]

Would I grab a puppies collar to steer them away from danger, of course I would but I do not use collar corrections...I used to and found that when I learned more, I did better. I no longer use physical correction when training. It doesn't matter what the issue or age/breed of dog and I train everything from puppies to severe aggression cases without physical means. Why would I choose this if it has been scientifically, and in my case proven in the field to be unnecessary? No one like's to hear that I don't physically correct, not sure why it bothers people? (not referring to you stag). I'm simply stating the fact that it can be done with out yanking or any other physical methods and is done all the time.
Cesar Milan was a dog walker, then a dog groomer (self taught), and now with still no education, calls himself a dog psychologist....should be enough to at least send up smoke signals..red flag even
He uses methods that others USED to use before the science proved them unnecessary.
I'm sure it's hard to decipher all this stuff as a new dog owner/handler. I absolutely understand that, that's why it's so frustrating to Cesar so "out there" for the general public. He's not the role model that anyone should aspire to follow.

So you have used corrections on your child. Then why wouldn't you tell your dog "No" in a firm voice?

Here is one of my biggest questions. I have been on here only one day and I have read multiple times by positive only proponents that a gentle but firm leash correction does not really teach your dog anything. Correcting is human psychology - not dog psychology. OK - but isn't a puppy corrected by its mother when it does something wrong? Of course it is. Is a puppy given tons of praise and treats from its mother when it does something right? Of course it is NOT.

It seems to me that corrections are a natural way of learning for the dog and that tons of praise/treats/affection is a huminization of the dog to make overly sensitive people feel better about little fluffy. What am I missing??

Also - please explain to me in detail how you would handle your dog walking into the kitchen, jumping up on the counter and stealing food. Would you just stand there and let the dog eat your chicken dinner? Would you take it away without saying a word? Would you give a gentle leash correction and a firm no when he tried to jump up on the counter? Would you give a firm no when he jumped up on the counter if you were not holding a leash? Would you let him continue to walk in the kitchen and grab food as he saw fit, and reward him on the rare occasion that he didn't jump up on the counter to grab food? Please explain to me in very specific details how you would handle this situation.

 

[Roxy's CD]

OK, I see a lot "hating" go on right now, and I don't quite understand why.

Some dogs do OK with corrections. Some do not. Different mixes of positive/negative work better/worse with different dogs.

I believe what dr2little is saying is that, purely motivational (negative verbal "guidlines" eh eh, wrong, no etc) works on ANY dog.

Of course these other methods work. But there is no need for physical correction to get your dog to do what you want.

stags14- That situation would never happen. Let's say it did. Hades has jumped on the counter is eating/sniffing human food. He would run to his kennel with his tail between his legs if he SAW me. He would take off like a bullet if he I said very firmly, "HADES! WRONG!".

I used the "balanced training" method with my dog, Roxy. (for basic obedience) IT WORKED! IT REALLY WORKED! FAST! BUUUUUUUUUT, we are now having serious motivational problems that since being pointed out to me are DIRECTLY related to the methods that were used to train her.

Things that were taught with purely motivational methods are FUN for her, she enjoys them I enjoy them. But like flicking a light switch off, when we switch to the things that were taught with leash corrections combined with verbal praise and treats, the DOG SHUTS DOWN. Quite literally, and no longer wants to work.

For only a few days, I have stopped using leash corrections and the only negative thing in our repetroire has been "Verbal guidlines", when she's headed the wrong way "Ah ah" or "wrong". And already I have seen a difference.

We will begin purely motivational training tonight, and I will post how it goes. I am confident that I WILL SEE CHANGE in her. Not a huge difference, but I will se a happier dog in school tonight.

If not, I'll eat all those words and start looking for another method.