register for free
View our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
spottycayuse
New Member!
spottycayuse is offline  
Location: Ayrshire, Scotland
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 12
Female 
 
11-08-2011, 09:49 AM
Originally Posted by waggytail View Post
Ok, let me give some clarification....


I use a mixture of postive and negative but I am never harsh or unfair. I do not use choke collars, shock collars or "Alpha rolls" I always prefer to use positive reward based techniques where possible but also I see no harm in using methods such as Aversion therapy (Loud distracting noises) or verbal reprimands where appropiate.

It is important to assess each dog and each situation and find which approach is most suitable. It all depends on the dog, and the behaviour you are dealing with.
I agree completely with this. What works with one dog may not work with another. Whilst I don't want to be viewed as "alpha" by my nine dogs I also like to be respected and their leader, which I am. I've achieved this through a variety of means, positive rewards (food, fun or praise) and verbal reprimands if necessary (a sharp "ah" often suffices).
Reply With Quote
Hieronymus
New Member!
Hieronymus is offline  
Location: Glasgow, UK
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 17
Male 
 
12-08-2011, 11:19 AM
There is a difference between non aversive and positive and there is a difference between non physically aversive and non aversive. I think until we understand these distinctions we are going to become unstuck on a regular basis.

This is an excellent article:-

http://www.michaelbaugh.com/?p=248

Using extinction protocols in training or behaviour alteration causes stress in dogs and can be classed as aversive. It's not physically aversive but causes stress so we should avoid using it unless we have to. Spraying a dog with water or shaking rattle chains or cans at it causes a physiological effect on the dog so could probably be classed as physically aversive so we shouldn't do it or promote it to clients as it breaks down our relationship with our dogs. Good dog trainers might have the ability to apply well timed punishers which have an appropriate punishing effect on the behaviour but the majority don't so all we succeed in doing is physically or mentally abusing abusing our dogs.

The author of the quoted article makes an interesting point in that we wouldn't accept actually hurting a dog's mind or body in any other instance but we seem to be very ready sometimes to do it in the name of training.

i don't think a more balanced approach is necessary as there is actually no real balance to be had in using more aversive techniques. More education and a greater understanding of how animals and dogs in particular learn is what is needed and Victoria Stillwell is a massive step in the right direction because it is a huge step away from Cesar Milan.
Reply With Quote
JazzMan
Dogsey Junior
JazzMan is offline  
Location: LaLa Land
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 54
Male 
 
12-08-2011, 01:02 PM
Originally Posted by waggytail View Post
I regulary pick up a copy of one of the many Dog magazines available. I have noticed that increasingly these magazines appear to be filled with articles to promote "purely positive" training methods. a typical example is the recent issue of "Dog today" which has a 2 page spread from Victoria Stillwell on this subject.

My concern is that Dog training appears to be going from one extreme to another, Of course it is unacceptable for a dog to be beaten but is it really any better to exessively reward a dog to the overall detriment of their learning?

If the media continue to represent only one side of the debate then it will make it increasingly difficult for owners and trainers to have a balanced view on this issue. even organisations such as APDT are now taking this line, banning their members from using a number of techniques and products.

As a trainer and Behaviourist myself, I have seen both ends of the spectrum and I feel what is missing is a balanced approach. in order to teach fairly, surely dogs they need a mixture of both postive and negative consequences? I also feel that certain aspects of Dog psychology have been pushed aside to suit this new regime, Watch any pack of dogs and then ask yourself wether "leadership" is important or not.

I am interested to know what others feel about the representation of Dog training/trainers in the media? Have TV shows and magazines warped our sense of reality? is there now an increasing pressure on how we train our dogs? The methods we use, even the words we use (Don't say "Dominance!!")

As people are becoming more aware there are more questions being asked, more expectation of trainers and clubs and divided opinion on what is the right way to train a dog. I feel people have the right to learn from both sides of the camp but more importantly to find the acceptable middle ground.
Personally, I don't think there is a middle ground and given the nature of the two extremes I cannot see how combining the two could ever provide any form of 'balance' whatsoever. I also think that so called 'purely positive' training is something of a misnomer, purely positive implies that it is all just treat the good and ignore the bad, but that can never be true. Even in reward based training, failure to provide the correct response results in the witholding of the reward, which in itself becomes an aversive.

I think what is really needed is not so much 'balance' but more consistency instead. People need to educate themselves on how dogs learn and then work the rest out for themselves. Once you understand how they tick then the rest really is not rocket science. If you know how dogs think then it is easy to see why reward based training works so well, while at the same time you can also see why aversive methods work, but choosing which method to employ is a personal matter and the fact is that by their very nature, the two methods are mutually exclusive and are not compatible.

In my experience, using the two different methods results in two different dogs. All dog training is based on consequences and all dogs do what works, whether that is getting a treat or avoiding a punishment. No dog works merely to please its owner and anyone that believes they do is setting themselves up for failure. Dogs that are trained using aversives tend to be more reactive, they react to the owners direction in order to avoid the consequence that they have been conditioned to expect (ie the aversive) while dogs that have been positively trained are more proactive, they respond to direction because they have learnt that doing so makes something good happen, even if it doesn't happen everytime.
Reply With Quote
Wysiwyg
Dogsey Veteran
Wysiwyg is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,551
Female 
 
12-08-2011, 02:45 PM
Originally Posted by JazzMan View Post
......

I think what is really needed is not so much 'balance' but more consistency instead. People need to educate themselves on how dogs learn and then work the rest out for themselves. Once you understand how they tick then the rest really is not rocket science. If you know how dogs think then it is easy to see why reward based training works so well, while at the same time you can also see why aversive methods work, but choosing which method to employ is a personal matter and the fact is that by their very nature, the two methods are mutually exclusive and are not compatible.

In my experience, using the two different methods results in two different dogs. All dog training is based on consequences and all dogs do what works, whether that is getting a treat or avoiding a punishment. No dog works merely to please its owner and anyone that believes they do is setting themselves up for failure. Dogs that are trained using aversives tend to be more reactive, they react to the owners direction in order to avoid the consequence that they have been conditioned to expect (ie the aversive) while dogs that have been positively trained are more proactive, they respond to direction because they have learnt that doing so makes something good happen, even if it doesn't happen everytime.
Good post there

Wys
x
Reply With Quote
Miriam John
New Member!
Miriam John is offline  
Location: Vermont, USA
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 13
Female 
 
26-03-2017, 03:47 PM
I don't believe in "programming" a dog to do what we want them to do. I feel that both the extreme end of positive reinforcement and the extreme end of negative reinforcement can take away a dog's sovereign way of seeing life and replace it with the human's orders for how the dog is supposed to live.

I do not use many treats in my training, because I want my dog to respect me from his heart, not his stomach. I do not use force either, for I don't want the dog to feel manipulated into obeying me. When my puppy was little, I would simply explain to him what I wanted him to do and he would do it. I would thank him when he did the right thing, genuinely grateful that he wants to live in harmony with me and respect my rules. He has grown into a calm, respectful, sovereign yet cooperative being.

I feel that many dog trainers have gotten confused into thinking that dogs only do what we want if we take away their own inclinations, focusing all their attention on us either by force or by temptation. This is not true. Dogs and wolves in the wild learn about life through observation, experience, and finding harmony with nature rather than "obeying" nature. Dogs do not need some higher force programming them how to behave, they just need the ability to explore their surroundings and expand their minds, and they need connection and mutual respect with their human companions.
Reply With Quote
muddymoodymoo
Dogsey Senior
muddymoodymoo is offline  
Location: Sirius
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 660
Female 
 
17-04-2017, 12:55 PM
Originally Posted by Miriam John View Post
I do not use many treats in my training, because I want my dog to respect me from his heart, not his stomach. I do not use force either, for I don't want the dog to feel manipulated into obeying me. When my puppy was little, I would simply explain to him what I wanted him to do and he would do it. I would thank him when he did the right thing, genuinely grateful that he wants to live in harmony with me and respect my rules. He has grown into a calm, respectful, sovereign yet cooperative.
Wow! Can you please share with us how you explain things to your puppy so that he knows what to do? That is, before you market your idea and become a multi millionairess?
Reply With Quote
Chris
Dogsey Veteran
Chris is offline  
Location: Lincolnshire
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,921
Female 
 
17-04-2017, 02:13 PM
I have to say, how that reads is that your puppy has taken a giant leap in evolution and fully understands language.

Ah, if only
Reply With Quote
Besoeker
Dogsey Veteran
Besoeker is offline  
Location: Dunstable UK
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 1,957
Male 
 
19-04-2017, 08:01 PM
Originally Posted by waggytail View Post
It all depends on the dog, and the behaviour you are dealing with.
I think it is a two way street - it depends on both the dog and the owner.
Reply With Quote
Miriam John
New Member!
Miriam John is offline  
Location: Vermont, USA
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 13
Female 
 
18-07-2017, 01:09 AM
Originally Posted by muddymoodymoo View Post
Wow! Can you please share with us how you explain things to your puppy so that he knows what to do? That is, before you market your idea and become a multi millionairess?
Well, it just comes down to respect. When I respect him for who he is and speak to him with respect, he understands me. As a sovereign being, he doesn't follow my lead blindly and sometimes needs to find his own way in the world. But part of the process is respecting that as much as possible, that he is a sovereign being. He feels that and gives me his respect, and when we are in that place together we are most aligned. When I find myself talking to him like he is unable to understand anything, when I speak to him in an authoritarian voice or as though he is a little child, then we are disconnected and I find have to resort to either force or temptation to get his attention.

Respecting a dog, or anyone for that matter, is a process of recognizing them for who they are and seeing the whole of them, not just trying to make them who we want them to be. I always try to get back to that place with Chante and when I am in that way he responds well. He can connect with me in a mutual bonded way. There is no exact formula for respect, it is just a matter of finding your way to bond with your individual dog. Everyone is different and whole in their own way, that is what sovereignty means.
Reply With Quote
Miriam John
New Member!
Miriam John is offline  
Location: Vermont, USA
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 13
Female 
 
18-07-2017, 01:12 AM
Originally Posted by Chris View Post
I have to say, how that reads is that your puppy has taken a giant leap in evolution and fully understands language.

Ah, if only
He is like any other dog. They all are capable of more than we think they are, we just would need to give them the space they need to grow and be who they are.
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 19 of 21 « First < 9 16 17 18 19 20 21 >


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)
 
Thread Tools


© Copyright 2016, Dogsey   Contact Us - Dogsey - Top Contact us | Archive | Privacy | Terms of use | Top