|
Location: Edinburgh, UK
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 91
|
|
Originally Posted by
scarter
That sounds reasonable to me.
So in your opinion....(And I'm not grilling you - feel free to ignore my questions if my line of reasoning is boring you
)
All that follows is purely my opinion, blah, blah, blah
Originally Posted by
scarter
1. If a dog doesn't like it when you tell him 'no' and you continue to use it regardless because it works then this would be positive punishment?
Hmmm. Interesting. I guess it would depend on what was going on in the dog's head specifically. If he associated it with lack of treats it would be negative punishment but if he associated it with punishment or actually really didn't like the noise it would probably be positive punishment. Personally I think a lot of the noises trainers use are just to get attention and not positive/negative reward/punishment loaded at all. In my opinion of course.
Originally Posted by
scarter
Our trainer once mentioned training discs to us. As I understand it it's like a 'clicker' but it is used as a negative marker. She said that they can work with some dogs but others (such as one of her rescues) were quite frightened by them. Are training discs a form of positive punishment?
Well if a dog is scared of them it is a positive punishment. Personally I wouldn't think about it any differently than hitting the dog and it being scared. It may be more socially acceptable but if the outcome is the same does it really matter how it is obtained?
To be honest I've never seen the point of training discs. We can make a huge variety of sounds as humans. I use a whistle sometimes because it carries further than my voice. Noise is just noise after all.
Originally Posted by
scarter
Always? Only if the dog doesn't like them? Only if you use them to frighten the dog into doing what you want?
My personal view has and always been that it is not what you do it is how it is perceived and the intent under which you carry it out that is important. I'll go back to the martial arts example (again
). As an instructor I would have no problem yelling at the top of my lungs and giving pressups to some student who could "take it" (and we'd go down the pub and laugh about it afterwards). However other people you need to encourage gently and build up confidence they'd turn into a wreck if you shouted at them. It didn't mean they could never get shouted at. They just weren't there yet. Different strokes work for different folks.
Originally Posted by
scarter
2. If a dog is 'brought into line' by a stern voice (so for example, the dog is doing something you don't like - barking say. You issue a command that the dog knows which is ignored. So you use a stern voice and say "stop that now!". Not necessarily shouting - just 'I mean business'. The dog stops immediately because he knows the stern voice means you expect him to do as he's told. He really doesn't want to...but knows he has to. This would be positive punishment?
Not necessarily. Basically the same as above. If only the stern command works then why don't you use that all the time? It seems a waste to use a command your dog isn't responding to (mind I do have a biddable breed
)
Originally Posted by
scarter
When people say things like "When I tell my dogs to do something I expect them to obey - if they don't I just use a certain tone and they know i mean business", they're probably using positive punishment?
Another tricky one. I think it's more of a reminder. The problem about categorisation is that the world just doesn't fit in nicely. If my dog won't do something that I know he can do I will firmly but gently get him to comply. When I can get anywhere near him he is now perfectly behaved
And no. He doesn't cower. He just does it.
Originally Posted by
scarter
3. Here's an interesting one. We're looking to buy a field for our dogs. Some that we've looked at have secure sheep fencing (very important for beagles) but also an electric wire running along the top. I've commented that we'd need to remove that and most people respond by saying "Leave it - if the dog does try to jump the fence he'll get a harmless jolt and won't try it again.". Is that positive punishment if you haven't actually put the electric fence there to contain the dog...you've just neglected to remove it?
Personally I'd probably leave it. However I would (yes I know I'm a bit mad) test it first to see how bad it was. If you are going to do this use the back of your hand - otherwise your muscles can contract and it's difficult to let go. Most electric fences aren't continuously charged mind. They just send an intermittent jolt through. It usually isn't too bad. But as I say I'd probably check.
In this case I think you could even argue that it's a safety measure if you aren't actually going to encourage your dog to attempt to scale the fence to "learn it" that it would hurt.
Originally Posted by
scarter
And if you think it is, then to what degree could you describe 'failure to protect the dog from it's environment' as positive punishment? Letting a puppy pester an older dog because you know she'll eventually tell it off? (You often hear dog owners saying - "that's OK - he needs to learn" when someone appologises for their dog telling off the pup).
One of the best things that ever happened to my dog was him getting told off by an older dog. She pinned him and growled right in his face. After that he was much better behaved. To be honest it was probably my fault for not teaching my pup how to approach dogs, but hey he's my first. Failure to protect a dog from the terminal environment we create is I feel unforgivable (ie traffic) everything else - well what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. We used to tell people at Jitsu to man the fu*k up (off the mat, no swearing on the mat). I now tell Jet to dog the fu*k up
Originally Posted by
scarter
Is it healthy to let the dog learn about what's good AND bad from it's environment or is the owner using positive punishment if they don't ensure the dog only has good experiences?
The owner is there to protect the dog. I will protect my dog from attacks. However I expect him to be able to cope with minor altercations himself. I helped more when he was a puppy and now he's older I expect him to manage more situations by himself. Incedently what I expect him to do in minor altercations is what I would do - walk away. As he did yesterday in fact.
Originally Posted by
scarter
4. Here's a very common one that we've used. As youngsters, when our dogs ran off and didn't respond to commands or pay attention to where we were we'd often hide from them. They'd really be quite frantic for a moment when they realised we were gone. But it did make them more careful to pay attention to us in future. Would you class that as us simply withrdawing something they like (our presence) or is it positive punishment? The aim was to frighten the dog and make it more carefull to pay attention to where we are in future.
That's a classic negative punishment. Glad it worked for you. My little sod is so confident and always has been that he doesn't worry when I'm out of sight. It's great in some ways but god do we have to work on his recall.
Originally Posted by
scarter
5. What about a shock collar. If the handler uses it purely to get attention or as a negative marker and the dog is very comfortable with it does it then cease to become a form of positive punishment?
Ah shock collars. Generally I think they should be banned as most people are numptys. Also have you ever had an electric shock? I had one in the dark when I was 9. I still remember it, I was terrified. I didn't know what had happened or what was going on. The front of the light switch had fallen off and every time I tried to turn it on I shocked myself.
There is something wholly unnatural about electric shocks. Electricity is wholly man made and I don't think it's fair to use it routinely on a dog. Certainly I wouldn't do it without trying it on myself first.
Aditionally I believe there was a study done on shock collars that found that unless your timing is perfect you created very confused scared dogs and even if it was the dogs were fairly scared. I don't know where it is now. I think they had even used a sensible number of dogs (the number of studies I have read through to find it was all based on 5 dogs)
I have used a spray collar. Jet gets very focussed sometimes and a spray collar snaps him out of it. I only really keep it for emergencies and haven't actually used it recently. It doesn't bother him but it does make him jump. When I pour him water outside he always gets his nose under it and reacts exactly the same way. It functions intermittently and you can only use it about 5 times per outing but it has been good for getting the idea through that yes, even when he's far away he's meant to follow commands. I get the feeling he really didn't understand this before!
Oh and yes, I did try it on myself before I used it on my dog.
Additionally I don't agree with training a dog using a spray collar. That's unfair. Only when a dog really knows what you are asking should you distract it. Interestingly I know a lot of positive trainers who throw tennis balls at the dogs to distract them when they have gone AWOL. The dog's generally stop and play with the ball. The spray collar is much the same thing, however my aim is lousy.