One Method Training

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

whatszmatter

Guest
#21
Hi
Can you please explain this post..as you can see by the number of my posts I can't be on it all the time ;) Also I asked a question, I am curious. Do those who use aversive do so because it is what has worked for them in the past, and don't care to learn something new (the it worked for my grandfather so its good enough for me..) or have they read the science and disagree, don't care etc.

To me its kinda like meeting ppl who say the earth is still flat or that dinosaurs never walked the earth. To me its pretty obvious, but to others its not. No judgement call, just trying to figure out where ppl are coming from.
Certainly, go back on my posts and find some, I've been thru it all a hundred times before and don't care to type it all out again. It wasn't just directed at you. There are referenced "science" in some posts, there's training scenerios where an aversive (physical) is used whether intended or not, but it's there, yet certain groups on this forum either bow out at that time or go back to the party line about "science" "better ways" "educated ways" etc. Sorry, but the "science" isn't a one way street, because some have a moral hang up about using something physical doesn't make the other half of that science go away. and there isn't anything on this earth that doesn't learn from good and bad experiences, why would a dog be any different? That would be like me trying to tell you the earth isn't round, it isn't flat, but more of a trapezoid.

To me its simple, there isn't hardly a dog on the face of this earth that hasn't had physical aversives used on it, intended or not, to do a simple thing like walk on a leash, yet certain groups want to dismiss it. Well if it workds with things like walking on a leash, why wouldn't it work for other things? and why must the extreme always be brought out make aversives look "bad"? yeah, everyone that uses an e-collar shaves their dog down and puts water over it to get a better "shock" or puts burn marks on their necks, or hangs their dogs by the neck etc??
 
W

whatszmatter

Guest
#22
Jean Donaldson has Chows or a Chow and she doesn't use aversives. But she really knows behavior and has lots of tricks up her sleeve, something that most people who depend on a lot of "corrections" haven't learned because they're too stuck on the belief that you have to get stern and tough with dogs to "make" them behave. The idea is that you don't MAKE them. You "brainwash" them into WANTING to. LOL. There are ways to "brainwash" without the dog even knowing it.
what exactly has she trained her dog to do? any competition, any shows up against other dogs? any OB titles? can she let them off leash in the wilderness around other animals 100 feet away?
 

Saje

Island dweller
Joined
Dec 26, 2004
Messages
23,932
Likes
1
Points
38
#23
Ah so much to say and it's all jumbled up in my brain.

First of all, what do people mean by method? Seems to me that 'method' is a rather limited word and implies that someone who uses positive reinforcement (or any other approach) is quite limited in what they can do. But really, it's just an umbrella under which many, many, many methods fall.

And second of all, what does 'all positive training' mean? To some people it seems to mean that dogs get to have control and push owners around. To others it simply means not hurting an animal. And to others it means not using any kind of foce (with or without pain) to make an animal do something. I think by some definitions pushing a dog into a sit would not fall into positive training. So what's the answer?

Mostly, I think that all positive training does work. It works wonderfully but only for trainers who have that special gift. They are able to be creative even with the most problematic dog and something in their gut helps them find a way to work through any situation. Thankfully, these people are able to teach both dogs and people and share what they know.

AND I personally believe that quite often the only way to do this is through demonstration. I learned a world more from my trainers (horse) when I could watch them and mimic their enthusiasm or body language than I ever did from reading books or going to lectures.

I don't hold anything against people who don't use an all positive approach (in the strictist definition) if they are trying to help their dogs have a safe, happy life. I am not perfect and I am certainly no trainer. I would use an electric fence to keep my dogs safe but only if I knew they wouldn't get hurt worse in the long run. And only after exhausting all other positive options.

Bottomline, the majority of people on this forum love their dogs and do the best they can for them. And I think almost everyone wants to use positive methods before anything else but exhaustion and frustration often make them look at other avenues.
 

Dekka

Just try me..
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
19,779
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
48
Location
Ontario
#24
actually its not considered all that extreem to shave the neck by many standards. I don't know anyone who condones burning or hanging though.

And I never said I never use aversives. I am just aware of fall out, and only use them when all else fails. So I would say I am 98% non aversive trainer :D. As I said before each to their own. My JRTs beat BC and goldens in obed, and go off leash, so ya positive training does work. Also positive training does not mean no consequences. I think many ppl think they can't do anything about bad behaviour if they want to be a positive trainer. There is always negative punishment which I use a fair bit. I just don't use positive punishment or negative reinforcement when training as for me the risks (its not even an ethical issue) are not worth the potential rewards. And the more I learn, the better I get, the less I get tempted to use them.
 
W

whatszmatter

Guest
#25
How many people have YOU known to shave the neck and put an ecollar on so they could get a better "fry" on their dog? I have yet to see it, only hear stories.
 

smkie

pointer/labrador/terrier
Joined
Dec 16, 2004
Messages
55,184
Likes
35
Points
48
#26
My old boss said you can always learn something new. Said he learned many good methods from novices then he cared to admit. AS long as their methods were not cruel or harmful. He laughed when i taught my labrador Charlie to trail using a superball.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 17, 2005
Messages
5,634
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
35
Location
Ontario, Canada
#27
Jean Donaldson has Chows or a Chow and she doesn't use aversives.
Statements like this bother me sometimes and I know it may make me sound like a hypocrit because I have probably said something along the very same lines before....Just because someone had owned or had experience with one example of a breed and has successfully trained that dog, doesnt mean they can have success with that very same method for every other member of that breed that falls into their hands. There are so many variables! The biggest of them being where did this Chow come from? Show lines? Without trying to start a debate, on average dogs bred for show have in a sense been "bred down" to make them more manageable and more accepting of strangers (judges) touching and handling them in order to up the breeders chances in the ring. This is true of Chows for I have seen examples of it. Heck we even have an amazing example of true Chows right here on the forum - IQ's Chows. They are amazing both in physical structure and, from what she says, their temperments.

I myself observe a very clear difference between the Sibes I work with that come from racing lines and those that come from show lines. You can even see it in pups who's temperments are still pretty much only influenced by genetics and their mothers as opposed to individual owners and trainers. The working line Sibes on average are, to put it simply, "wilder" and more difficult to train whereas the show line Sibes on average are calmer and easier to train.

BTW, I'm not trying to point fingers at you or anything, it just happened to be your statement LOL

Dekka, as I have explained many times before, I conducted my own studies, did my own research and "tested" all kinds of methods in order to come up with the way of training that made the most sense to me and worked for me. Of course I keep an open mind though and if I come across a dog that I just can't seem to get through to, I am not too proud to ask for help and try something new. After all, we are always learing new things! It certainly isnt a training method that has simply "always been" because I was not born into a family of dog lovers. We did not own dogs while I grew up so I had to learn and discover everything on my own.
 

Rosefern

New Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2007
Messages
669
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Midwest
#28
There's a reason why you don't see many chows in competition performance, because they aren't the type of dog who lives to please their people. Their level of respect depends in part on knowing that people are tougher than they are. They demand a high level of leadership. Done correctly, you have a loving, bonded, well-mannered and respectful dog. Done wrong, and you have a dog that runs the household and bites the vet. And those "done wrong" chows are almost always ones that are not disciplined properly.
We used to own/breed/show/train Rhodesian Ridgebacks, IQ, and the description you just gave is almost identical to a ridgeback's personality. :) They're stubborn, they have a mind of their own, they're strong willed, they need an assertive owner. I would give Hero (our dominant male) a firm "NO", when he'd go after something on leash. What would he do? He'd look at me like "Ok, I get that you don't want me to do this. I really do not care. I'm going to do it anyway. Watch me."

I would never train Flicka the same way that we trained the ridgebacks. Different dog, different breed, different situation = different training.

The biggest of them being where did this Chow come from? Show lines? Without trying to start a debate, on average dogs bred for show have in a sense been "bred down" to make them more manageable and more accepting of strangers (judges) touching and handling them in order to up the breeders chances in the ring. This is true of Chows for I have seen examples of it. Heck we even have an amazing example of true Chows right here on the forum - IQ's Chows. They are amazing both in physical structure and, from what she says, their temperments.
Great post, OC. I've noticed this, too. I don't deal much in the show/breeding world anymore, just talking to the few breeder friends I have...all but one of the ridgebacks we had were from working lines...the one that wasn't was the most docile of the bunch. And I agree, IQ's chows are gorgeous...I don't see many chows, but I know enough to know that they are an amazing representation of their breed.

I myself observe a very clear difference between the Sibes I work with that come from racing lines and those that come from show lines. You can even see it in pups who's temperments are still pretty much only influenced by genetics and their mothers as opposed to individual owners and trainers. The working line Sibes on average are, to put it simply, "wilder" and more difficult to train whereas the show line Sibes on average are calmer and easier to train.
I've got a friend that has four sibes - two males, two females. Two (one male, one female) are from working lines, and the other two are from show lines...it's amazing how different they are!!!

Dekka, as I have explained many times before, I conducted my own studies, did my own research and "tested" all kinds of methods in order to come up with the way of training that made the most sense to me and worked for me. Of course I keep an open mind though and if I come across a dog that I just can't seem to get through to, I am not too proud to ask for help and try something new. After all, we are always learing new things! It certainly isnt a training method that has simply "always been" because I was not born into a family of dog lovers. We did not own dogs while I grew up so I had to learn and discover everything on my own.
As did I. I was born into a family of dog lovers, however, my training methods vary greatly from my fathers. They also vary greatly from dog to dog, depending on the personality of the dog, and the amount of training the dog has had (if any)...

So sorry that you didn't own dogs growing up...one of the best experiences you can have...there's nothing like growing up together...no stronger bond.

-Rosefern
 

Doberluv

Active Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Messages
22,038
Likes
2
Points
38
Location
western Wa
#29
O.C! I know that. I know as well as you know that there are variables. That is precisely why I made that statement. What bothers me and what prompted me to write that are statements about breeds implying that they are almost like another species, as if they're soooooooo unique that they aren't subject to the laws of learning behavior. Of course, not every single aspect of training will be the same with every dog. But dogs are still dogs. Sometimes it takes more understanding of training techniques and some unusual creativity. Jean Donaldson, among many others have trained oodles of dogs of various breeds with various hang-ups without using harsh aversives. They don't believe in it. They don't need it. To each their own.
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2005
Messages
5,634
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
35
Location
Ontario, Canada
#30
Rosefern, as much as I wish I could have grown up with a dog at my side, in a way I'm almost glad I didn't. It forced me to do everything on my own and the best part is that I dont have a certain method of training dogs already instilled in me. I entered the dog world with an open mind because I knew next to nothing and I have maintained that open mind up until now and will continue to.

Its sad, in the Siberian Husky (and I'm sure it is true in the other breeds that have the very diverse split between working dogs and show dogs) the split between working line and show line is so great both in physical make up and temperment that they are pretty much two seperate breeds! There has even been talk about formerly seperating the two into different breed however that just sets it up for another split -- the show version of the working line Siberian Husky >_<
 

Rosefern

New Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2007
Messages
669
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Midwest
#31
Labs are one breed that have very different show/working lines...both in temperament and appearance.

Jay's (my friend) huskies don't look all that different from each other, but they sure act differently...

-Rosefern
 

otch1

New Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2006
Messages
1,497
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
washington
#32
If I were to pick a handful of trainers I know and describe their "methods", it would go like this... Trainer A, "I do not use adversive equipment, prongs, e-collars, choke chains and I find that I am successful in finding alternative methods to achieve obedience." Trainer B, "I use what I feel is appropriate in order to obtain "obedience" and I feel I'm educated and experienced enough to use adversives without doing damage to the dog or our relationship." Trainer C, "I have to be the "pack leader" and will use whatever means I have to to achieve this, while teaching owners how to "control" their dogs, as well." Trainer D, "I've watched a few videos, read books and trained when I was a kid and a dog needs to know his place. I will teach you where that is." While there've been some extreme opinions here since I've joined Chaz, (ususally the debates I've had with one or two teenage boys. Lol) I find everyone that trains for a living here, sounds like they're successful in their own right. I personally feel that a trainer I'd be comfortable handing my dog over to would be one with years of "hands-on" experience, a solid educational background in training as well as behavioral and health issues, someone who has competed with thier own dogs and is capable of achieving advanced obedience levels, and has great people skills. First and foremost, they have to treat my dog with kindness, patience and treat me in a respectful, proffessional manner.
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
7,402
Likes
0
Points
0
#33
If physical aversive are really so necessary for "some" dogs, why then are so many other much more powerful species reliably trained without them?

"Oh this killer whale needs a good smack because positive reinforcement just won't work with him" - "Better strap a shock collar on that on hard headed hippo so that he knows who to respect"...it's just comical. I'd love to see a tusk dental done on a hippo trained using aversives.:D

It'd be rather amusing to have seen some of you who think that "some" dogs "need" physical correction come into our primatology program and use your best on a "stubborn" silver back to get him to offer an arm for ANY REASON let alone for a needle poke.

I just shake my head when I think about all these statements about chows and other breeds like they're some enigma. Any of us who train for a living, particularly those of us specializing in behvior modification, train all breeds and most of us see many of the breeds that so many here think are "different" simply because people do have trouble with them.

Of course there are breed specific traits, but there are at least as many training options that do not include physical punishment that DO WORK.
 
Last edited:

Doberluv

Active Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Messages
22,038
Likes
2
Points
38
Location
western Wa
#34
If physical aversive are really so necessary for "some" dogs, why then are so many other much more powerful species reliably trained without them?

"Oh this killer whale needs a good smack because positive reinforcement just won't work with him" - "Better strap a shock collar on that on hard headed hippo so that he knows who to respect"...it's just comical. I'd love to see a tusk dental done on a hippo trained using aversives.

It'd be rather amusing to have seen some of you who think that "some" dogs "need" physical correction come into our primatology program and use your best on a "stubborn" silver back to get him to offer an arm for ANY REASON let alone for a needle poke.

I just shake my head when I think about all these statements about chows and other breeds like they're some enigma. Any of us who train for a living, particularly those of us specializing in behvior modification, train all breeds and most of us see many of the breeds that so many here think are "different" simply because people do have trouble with them.

Of course their are breed specific traits, but there are at least as many training options that do not include physical punishment that DO WORK.
Yes! Exactly. Yes Mr. Tiger in the zoo who needs to be moved to the other adjacent pen so your pen can be cleaned. Oh, you don't want to move? Then I'll just strap on the e-collar and zap you into moving.

Wild animals....not even domestic dogs who, through evolution are wired to get along with people and relate to people...are trained using clicker training...no collar yanks, scruffs, electric collars, stern voices. I read a whole thing about how they train zoo animals for medical exams and other management needs. They do not have to anesthesize them or tranquilize them. They can't or it upsets the blood tests. They're clicker trained, no aversives.
 
W

whatszmatter

Guest
#35
very few lions or tigers are trained to do very few things, and they use a fair bit of "learned" helplessness" to get them to be so passive as well. Don't act like they all click to treat and all is happy and smiles. Sorry, it ain't reality.

the next therapy tiger, or SAR tiger, or Police Tiger they train, or one that does anything other than move cages, lay down to have blood drawn, or stand on its hind legs, let me know. Sorry, just cause a chicken can be taught to turn in a cirlce doesn't some how make it the best and only way.
 

IliamnasQuest

Loves off-leash training!
Joined
Feb 28, 2006
Messages
1,083
Likes
0
Points
0
#36
I, too, would like to know what level of consistency and obedience Jean Donaldson trained her chow to. Can she have it off-leash with moose in the area? Does it have obedience titles? Or is this another case of "it's trained to do all sorts of tricks as long as it's on-leash and you have a treat in your hand"?

Yes, dogs are dogs. People are people. Do all people learn the same? Do they all have the same personalities? No, of course not. Do all dogs learn the same? Do they all have the same personalities? Of course not! Dogs are individuals and to train to the same reliable level of consistency in every dog requires the use of various techniques. Some dogs are very willing to work directly with their humans regardless of distractions, just because the desire for interaction with the human is part of their core personality. These dogs are VERY easy to shape with positive reinforcement. Other dogs have a high level of independence. Can they learn to work with humans? Yes, of course. But the means of compliance - whether it be by treats or aversion - has to be much more intense than with a dog that just plain wants to be with its person.

So for those trainers who say aversives (other than a simple verbal) are NEVER needed - can you take each and every dog you've worked with outdoors, off-leash, and have the same reliable response? Of course not! The vast majority of dogs a trainer works with are under control on a leash. The reinforcers/rewards are nearby. Anyone with decent timing can get a HUGE number of behaviors from a dog that is confined and who wants the reward that is obviously available.

My chows follow me everywhere as if I'm a pied piper of chows. I have three little shadows at my heels. If I'm in the bathroom, they're in the bathroom! If I'm upstairs and the door is closed between the levels, they're at the top of the lower stairs - at the door - waiting for me. If I walk around the garage, they follow me. THIS is a result of a high level of reinforcement. I built a desire to be with me by using rewards for being with me and focusing on me.

But this IS a breed that is not as easily controlled as others. It's not nearly as easy to get inside their heads and "own" them in the face of other desirable distractions. Some breeds are SO easy - every German shepherd I've worked with has been so eager to learn that it's almost scary .. *L* .. chows are not that way. Yes, you can get a huge number of behaviors from them. Khana can heel forward, backwards, sideways, pivot 360° left all the way around me, AND do all of that on the right side as well as the left. She weaves through my legs, she covers her face with one paw, she shakes her head "no", she points her nose at the ceiling on command, she high-steps with her front feet. She also retrieves, does jumps, and can do (beautifully) ALL the excellent rally behaviors as well as most of the open obedience behaviors. This is a two year old chow. Most of this has been nearly 100% positive training. But to gain her respect - to have her focus on me AS the one she must listen to, I have used some corrections. I am a good enough trainer to know when that's appropriate, and it shows in my dogs.

I watch my dogs play and there is NOTHING that I do as far as corrections that is as harsh as what they do to each other. Maybe many of you have dogs that play nicely .. *LOL* .. my dogs are wild little h*llions when they play! They leap on each other, bite, grab legs, knock each other over - extremely physical playing. They make each other yelp at times. Does it ruin their relationship?? NO, of course not! They continue to play, but they also ease up a bit for awhile.

Dekka - I have had many JRT's in class and have found them to be extremely bright, easily trained dogs. Maybe yours are more difficult to train. I would expect a typical JRT to give goldens and BC's a run for their money in competitive events. I'm glad you're doing so well. At this point my chows have earned 13 titles. In obedience they are typically in the ribbons. My first chow beat goldens and BC's and others in Open obedience in classes of up to 25 or so dogs. In Open A, she took seven firsts and a couple of seconds in all-breed competitions. Chows are not seen much in the obedience ring and for good reason. They're not easy to train.

OC and Rosefern - thank you for your comments on my chows. I firmly believe that this is a breed that should be versatile (as they once were) and mine do a bit of everything. I'm currently trying to set up a training session on sheep for my young chow to assess her herding instinct (my first chow was an amazing little herding dog). Khana may look like a princess but she's easily one of the most confident, toughest dogs I've ever been around. She's also extremely sweet - just yesterday I was working her outside the local grocery store and two little boys asked to pet her. I told them "yes" and then had to keep a finger in her collar so that she wouldn't lick their faces .. *L* .. she just LOVES people and I have worked hard to keep that temperament in her.

Melanie and the gang in Alaska
... not sure about anyone else, but my dogs are not tigers or whales or hippos .. *LOL* .. they are expected to live in my home, next to me, day and night, ride in my vehicle, interact often with strangers, and to respond predictably under a large variety of distractions.
 

ToscasMom

Harumph™©®
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
6,211
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Mother Ship
#37
That's a sweeping statement. Apart from the whole angle of breed influence on how dogs learn, individual personality means all dogs learn things differently. Of course, no dog learns by reading or writing, but they do have different styles of taking in and understanding instructions. That, of course, is just a personal feeling based on experience on my part. Logically, though, it makes little sense to say that individual humans vary widely in reasoning ability but dogs don't. Why would the members of one species be varied and members of another identical?
Humans go thru several different levels of cognitive development phases in their lifetime. They pass thru these phases at roughly the same age level in their intellectual and achievement growth--for example the concrete operational phase. There are certain things that must be taught before they pass that phase, for example, spelling. Dogs on the other hand do not have the IQ to process these varying phases, nor do they have the same development process as humans. If they did, they would be able to learn to spell during their concrete operational phase. Humans have to evolve in their learning processes during these phases and are able to acquire varying skills and learning potential that pets cannot achieve. We are talking development of language stills, writing skills, and various other processes by which we grow. Thus, they are able to absorb information at several different high levels, and some people prefer one to the other. Surely you cannot compare the two in the learning process except on the crudest level, else more dogs would be scientists and engineers. A dog can achieve miraculous things....for a dog. That's not to say I don't think my dog is smarter than some humans I know. But that goes back to IQ and ability.

Edit: P.S I gave you my lazy answer, because I think I read where you have a BA in Education, and you might have learned what I did at the graduate level, as my BA was in English. So I am assuming that you are aware of these theories and application of human learning in various levels of teaching.
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
7,402
Likes
0
Points
0
#38
This has been asked too many times to count but I'll try one more time.

If in fact the shock collar only gives a low level stimulation and you (anyone who has used one) have NEVER used anything higher than a low level stimulation....what is making the dog respond when NOTHING else worked?
 

ToscasMom

Harumph™©®
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
6,211
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Mother Ship
#39
Perhaps a Piaget link would better explain cognitive development and what separates the human learning process and preferences from other species. He believed that what distinguishes human beings from other animals is our ability to do "abstract symbolic reasoning." It is this reasoning and how humans individually process it that makes it impossible to use 30 kids in a classroom as an analogy to the subtle differences in training (not educating) dogs.
http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/cogsys/piaget.html
 

ToscasMom

Harumph™©®
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
6,211
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Mother Ship
#40
If in fact the shock collar only gives a low level stimulation and you (anyone who has used one) have NEVER used anything higher than a low level stimulation....what is making the dog respond when NOTHING else worked?
Ok I'll give it a shot. It's a miracle!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

No members online now.
Top