|
Location: Glasgow, UK
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 810
|
|
Originally Posted by
Wysiwyg
Ah, this isn't correct, sorry Scarter
.
Clicker people
don't often advise the dog owner to hide the clicker so the dog doesn't associate it with you. There is no reason to.
Was this advice given to you? if so, do you know why?
It certainly isn't across the board advice given by clicker trainers generally - although you've kind of suggested that it is
Sorry to bring it up, but I don't want anyone reading this and thinking that is the norm.
Wys
x
Hey - don't keep apologising for disagreeing. There would be something very weird (and discussion would be somewhat pointless) if we all had the same experiences
Yes, this advise was given to me and yes I will be happy to explain why.
First the background as to why this line of reasoning came up:
We were talking about the use of negative markers and Ben (Pam), pointed out that Mia gets stressed when she doesn't succeed first time during training. We had a similar problem with Beanie. Whereas some dogs get stressed and 'shut down' when a negative marker is used, this happens to our dogs simply because they don't get their treat first time!
For differing reasons, our dogs were impatient and this was holding back training. Use of negative markers were out of the question. Now I personally don't feel the need to use them in most situations, but sometimes they can be very useful. So it's helpful to me to think about how they might be used successfully if needed.
One line of reasoning is to consider whether it might help if the marker isn't associated with the handler. Why do I think this is worth perusing, well...
When we first started agility Beanie wasn't interested in toys. Carol (our agility teacher) strongly advised us to get her interested - she said that dogs that were toy motivated learned faster and did better in agility. For us this certainly proved to be true. When we used treats (which Beanie adores) she was SO focused on them that it distracted her from the task in hand. She knew that she had to please me to get the treat, but was so desperate that too much of her attention was on me and not enough on figuring out what she was supposed to be doing.
When we got her interested in a ball she was very focused on the task in hand. The ball was in fact a kind of 'marker' (one that was thrown or placed a distance away from me) - when she got the ball a treat would soon follow. This resulted in her being less focused on me and the treats. She learned faster and was therefore less stressed and frustrated. It really did work wonders.
Something similar would happen when clicker training. The clicker magnified her love of treats by 1000! She would die to hear that click. She'd try so hard that her brain would short-circuit - although the clicker was a tremendous motivator it was also a distraction. At a clicker training workshop we were advised not to keep the treats on our person and swap the tasty treats for kibble. It helped a little. At another we were told to keep the clicker behind our back. That worked instantly to a degree and things continued to improve over time. I didn't understand why at the time. Later, we had one to one lessons with a clicker trainer who was also a behaviorist. She explained that whilst Beanie was very intelligent and patient when it came to learning from her environment, it all went pear shaped when a trainer was involved. When she was aware that it was the trainer that decided when she got the click she focused on them almost exclusively. Because she wasn't focusing on what she was supposed to be doing she didn't get the click and it all became stressful and frustrating for her. And this, she explained, was why people often tell you to hide the clicker behind your back or subtly concealed in your hand.
If you watch a dog (my dog at least) when it's not interacting with a human it's very clear that it has a tremendous ability to learn from both positive and negative outcomes. It's patient and doesn't get stressed easily. A reasonable goal might therefore be to harness that learning ability and not do anything to short-circuit it. If we're going to use markers in a kind of "hot" and "cold" way to help the dog to learn then it could well be more 'natural' for the dog if the marker itself seems to come from the environment rather than from us. It certainly works that way with positive markers for mine - I haven't yet tried negative markers. But my thinking is that it could work better if it isn't associated with the handler. Different reasons that with the positive marker though. And of course, the added benefit is that if the dog associates me with the marker he/she might just decide that he/she doesn't need to bother if I'm not there!!!!
And it's no problem pointing out that this is not the norm if that's what you believe to be the case - stop apologising. You have every right to express your opinions whether I agree with them or not!