Just to say
That the golden rule of training a behaviour, that if a dog is getting it /wrong /frustrated then you have moved on too fast, so 3 gos, then make it easier

Sorry but its not negative reinforcement, You reward a behaviour that you WANT. if it was neg reinforcement you would be looking for the dog to continue NOT doing anything, hence the word REINFORCEMENT.
If you want to label it it would have to be negative punishment; i.e you punish by withholding, but there is no reinforcement there, the reinforcement is the reward! you REINFORCE something you WANT.
Besides we're talking about e collars here which deliver physical PAIN which is not even on par with using negative punishment!

I'd like to ask Adam if, after all this time he has considered that a shock collar in particular is perhaps not the best method of training a dog?

Agree. I think most people who use rewards see their dog's body language as joyful, anticipatory, excited, hopeful, etc. There can be some frustration (e.g. when shaping behaviour with a clicker) but my view is that dogs love to do this - as you say, frustration can be an element in natural world - for example when hunting for a meal. It is not necessarily stressful in a bad way unless there is always frustration adn never an end to it (e.g.. teasing with food with pure intent to tease for a period of time).

The original annoying claim was that negative punishment was occurring all the time during positive reinforcement training, just because a dog knew a toy or sausage was i the trainer's pocket! I just don't agree with that.

I emailed Bob Bailey about it, who actually worked with the Brelands, who worked with Skinner (who was the guy who brought all this into the public view) and he (BB) said that the claim that negative punishment occurs in this way is just wrong. We exchanged some good emails and he also said that most people who talk about this a lot should just go out and get training!

Of course, reward trainers do use negative punishment but this tends to be the withholding of something to actually get a behaviour. Done correctly, it is very instructive and helps the dog understand what is required. Not just shoving something in the pocket and wandering around sort of thing


Wys
x

Mmm that sounds pretty typical....

Wys
x

Well said Wys .

In the context of dog training, frustration is may a negative emotion, but people that try to use pos R for the majority of their training, especially in the context of training NEW behaviours, will do their best to ensure that there is minimal frustration. The whole point of using something like clicker training or other forms of pos R is to set things up for the dog to succeed by using shaping techniques, incremental steps &, most importantly IMO, being aware of the context in which you are doing the training.

In the context of dog training, the temporary witholding of a reinforcer can be used to up the ante & ask the dog to perform “better”. But also in the context of dog training, anyone trying to use pos R would ensure that the frustration is minimised by not asking too much too soon ~ allowing the dog to succeed. Provided that the ante is upped slowly & gradually, any frustration would soon be overcome by the opportunity to succeed. Dogs that have been taught using pos R are not only being taught to do a certain behaviour, or not do another behaviour, but have also learned that training is fun, that the whole “learning” session is fun, they are eager to learn & clearly enjoy the whole process.

Clealy using OC principles there will be some frustration if the reinforcer is witheld when you are trying to get more accurate & instant behaviour etc. Similarly if you want to stop a behaviour that was previously reinforced there will be an extinction burst while the dog tries harder to get the reinforcer. But pos R trainers will do their best to minimise this by teaching an alternative & incompatible behaviour.

I am currently witnessing an extinction burst at home with one of my cats. The cat makes a piteous sounding miaow (just the way she sounds, the “piteous” bit is husband’s anthropomorphic interpretation of the noise!) so husband gives her attention which shuts her up. When he stops the attention, she miaows again ~ cat has learned that this gets her attention. Husband moans that he can’t understand why the cat keeps miaowing, what it is that she wants & he hates the noise, but still continually rewards the cat by giving her attention. I told him to ignore the noise & give her attention when she’s quietened down & is sleeping in her bed. Husband tried this & says she just miaows even more when he ignores her. I explained about extinction bursts .

So in the context of my cat, she may be experiencing negative punishment inasmuch as she’s frustrated by not getting the attention she wants & used to get. But in the context of her whole life experience, this is hardly a major event. She gets plenty of attention at other times, just not when she’s sitting in her bed in the sitting room, while we’re eating or watching TV. IMO this is not anywhere near the same as using pos punishment by shouting at her, or hitting her, or picking her up & removing her from the room, or shutting her away. Inevitably there’s a bit of neg pun at the start ~ I don’t think any of us that profess to be use pos R in animal training would deny that there can be an element of neg pun now & again. But what we try to do is minimise that side of things & try to find alternatives.

I love this quote from Kay Laurence in “Learning About Dogs”. It sets out quite clearly the ethos of pos R training. But more than that, it makes it quite clear that relying purely on the science of OC principles is not what dog training is all about. OC principles are just a small part of the process, just a tool in the trainer’s tool box.

"If I am teaching a dog, I avoid every atom of punishment or removal of something good to get the behaviour. It is not a question of how aversive, it is the thought that aversive is a method to get a behaviour. The actions are an indication of the thought process that aversives are part of the teaching process. I will say, 'Let's just find another way.

We all think we're "positive" trainers. But training with reinforcement involves more than just being nice, and more than using reinforcers. It involves creating a climate of security in which it is safe to learn new things, and safe to rely on what you've already learned. In this climate an animal can learn to control itself, rather than being controlled by you. In this climate, rather than just reacting to the environment like an untutored shelter dog, barking at every noise, plunging towards every attraction, jumping on everyone and everything, mouthing and smelling and grabbing—an animal becomes confident and calm. In this climate, having confidence that your cues are meaningful and will lead toward pleasant goals, the dog is trusting and—this is very unscientific—the dog is happy."

IMO the use of harsh punishment such as electric shocks, prong collars, lead jerks etc says far more about the person using them, & not in a good way! If they try to convince others that using these methods is kinder because it’s quicker, or it’s kinder because the alternative is euthanasia, then they clearly don’t have the ability to empathise with animals, to consider the emotional element of training, or to consider the welfare impact on the animal as a whole.

JEEZ .....adam is a girl!!!!!!

WHAAAAAAAATTTTTT?! What utter codswallop, complete and utter *inster swear words here*. I've honestly never heard so much drivel in my life. You must be one heck of a dog trainer if you can "solve a dog's deep emotional problems" with just two sessions and a few zaps with an e-collar! With skills like that you should go into human psychology, you'd make a mint.

Now I have managed to stay out of most of these e-collar threads as they get dull, circular an you'll never change your mind, however I just can't let this rubbish pass without comment.

Please PLEASE explain to me how the fact that the dog isn't DISPLAYING the behaviour means that you've actually dealt with it's emotions?

Say that I'm reeeeeally angry about something so I go around in a rage shouting and hitting people. Then you strap an e-collar on me and zap me until I stop aggressing - what would happen? Well at first, you'd just make me feel even angrier, hurt and confused about the pain I didn't really understand. Eventually I might by chance lapse into silence and the pain stops. I learn not to make noise as it hurts even more. However how do I feel inside? Well I'm pretty sure I'd still be feeling angry, in fact I'd probably be feeling even more angry. Just because I've learned to sit quietly on a chair and not display my angry, doesn't mean I'm not still feeling it. All I have learned is to hide and REPRESS my feelings, nothing in solved. I have no learned that I cannot display my emotions, it'll get worse the longer the angry builds and I repress it and finally I'd probably snap and it'd all come out in one dangerous rush. Now imagine if this happens to a large, powerful dog, it could have disasterous consquences.

I feel that, aside from it being wrong, it's actually dangerous to supress a dog's emotions in this way. On the outside you may have acheived results but you cannot possibly claimed to have dealt with the underlying emotions! *shakes head* you are a dangerous, deluded man.

Just to add, that although I've posted, I probably shouldn't have and I'm personally all for the "effectively ban Adam by ignoring him" tactic, he'll never change and we can finally claim our training section back.

I don't even see frustration as necessarily a "negative" emotion. It depends on what you do with it that makes it negative or positive. If it makes you try harder, then I see that as a positive emotion. It drove you on to work harder and get it right. If you shut down and refuse to keep trying, then it becomes negative.

It's much like anger. If you lash out and hurt someone, it's negative. If you decide to get a grassroots movement going to make some change to something because you were angry about it, then you're acting in a positive way.

yep, if they arent getting it - you missed a bit!

You go back to what they DO get and move on from there - still not getting it then you need to break it down into smaller steps......it really cant fail, thats why I really dont understand using a collar to teach a behaviour....but AP seems to only care about getting it done in 5 mins and then taking the money, no regard for the dogs at all. Its the only reason I can see.