Correctional Training

[whatszmatter]

again, you miss the point, how is putting a baby gate up, for a dog that will just jump it when you aren't watching it to get the food on the counter, or if you have young children that will surely leave something out, and leave the baby gate open. Jackpot for the dog, it just set you back weeks in your training. You don't want to admit it, i know, its OK.

It doesn't matter what age the dog is or if he has been reinforced for the unwanted behavior before. Behaviors can be elimintated by not being reinforced for a time.

It sounds so easy when you just type words, but come on, be real, it doesn't matter at what age, or if the dogs been reinforced for the unwanted behavior before??? Are you sure you really wanted to say that?? Any dog trainer/behaviorist/PhD worth a grain a salt will tell you that is a complete falsehood. YOu might want to go read Ms. Pryor's book again, i'm sure its outlined in there perfectly as well as in many other behavior and training books. Are you just covering your tracks by saying "by not being reinforced for a time." We all know that's true, but tell us Dober just how long?? Not everyone is at home 24/7 with their dogs just like you.

You say putting the baby gate up is a part of training, true. But you know as well as I do that it is, as Karen puts it, "shooting the dog" and she doesn't put that method any higher up, as a matter of fact I think its even lower than using compulsion on her list when it comes to behavior modification. But since it doesn't involve a leash and a collar you'll pass it off as "better" training just so you don't have to show a chink in your armor.

 

[Doberluv]

Are you sure you really wanted to say that??

Yes. I've been involved with dogs steadily for about 45-47 years, have trained and have experienced these things I type about. I've also had some education in canine behavior. If you want to continue this hostility, be my guest. I'm not interested in discussing matters of intellect with you. (No offense or anything.)

P.S. Perhaps you'd be interested in going back and reading about self rewarding behavior. Nowhere does Karen Pryor recommend aversive measures to eliminate unwanted behavior.

 

[whatszmatter]

call it hostiltiy, i don't think i was being hostile.

Don't care to comment on what ms Pryor says herself, just want to keep moving along with your agenda? Keep recommending others read her, but apparently you haven't, or didn't really understand?? I"m not getting it?

I don't really care at this point how much you've read or how long you've been doing it. I can assure you that you aren't the only one with an education or experience.

I'll say it again:

You say putting the baby gate up is a part of training, true. But you know as well as I do that it is, as Karen puts it, "shooting the dog" and she doesn't put that method any higher up, as a matter of fact I think its even lower than using compulsion on her list when it comes to behavior modification. But since it doesn't involve a leash and a collar you'll pass it off as "better" training just so you don't have to show a chink in your armor.

Still don't care to comment??

I'm not interested in discussing matters of intellect with you. No offense or anything.

That's too bad, you might learn something.

 

[IliamnasQuest]

A big part of training is management of the dog on the part of the handler/owner. If it wasn't, then we'd all be letting our dogs run loose without leash or collar or fences or anything. Management includes setting up the dog to succeed and that's where the gates and not leaving food out comes into play.

I think if a person is incapable of teaching their kids not to leave food out on the counter then maybe they shouldn't have dogs. Management of the kids is vital too and teaching them to not leave food out is really not that difficult. Granted, on rare occasion there will be food left out but if a person is having a PROBLEM with their dog getting on the counter it's because food is left out frequently. That's a people flaw, not a dog flaw.

I have five dogs who have all been capable of getting onto the counter and yet I have no problems and haven't had to be corrective with them. Why does it work for me and yet not for you (or whoever it is who is having the problem)? Could it be that I set my dogs up to succeed and that it works through management? Could it be that I have a strong leadership and my dogs respect me, so when I occasionally DO leave food out they don't get into it because I've set them up to understand that food on the counter is mine and not theirs?

I can take out a five pound package of hamburger (which is for them) and thaw it out on the edge of the sink and they have never gotten into it. Trick will go by and poke her nose up at it and sniff, but she doesn't touch it. This is the same dog who learned to flip up the lid on the dog biscuit container (when I forgot to fasten it down), and would put her nose into the container and smell the biscuits without ever taking one. The biscuits belonged to ME and she knew that.

The reality of it is that most dogs do not need the corrections that they get. People correct because they are either unwilling or incapable of setting things up so that the dog doesn't need correction. Why argue that a dog NEEDS to be corrected because some dumb human left food out?? Let's correct the human who failed to manage the situation, and not always blame the poor dog.

Melanie and the gang in Alaska
.. where the positive trained dogs earned two more performance titles this weekend .. and they said it couldn't be done .. *L*

 

[Doberluv]

Why argue that a dog NEEDS to be corrected because some dumb human left food out?? Let's correct the human who failed to manage the situation, and not always blame the poor dog.

Good post Melanie! I have no problems like that with my dogs. I had a 12 yr. old Lab mix once who wasn't trained until then. LOL. He was wonderful and his undesireable habits faded away while new and more rewarding ones replaced those. I had a Beagle mix who also learned a lot as an older dog.

 

[DanL]

Gunnar is the only one in our house who is physically capable of getting anything on the counter. His nose reaches over the edge without even jumping up. I thaw their food right there on a daily basis and he's never tried to get it. Even if I'm preparing his dinner and his nose comes a little too close, if I tell him "get your nose outta here" he gets the message. 99% of the time, when I'm preparing their dinner, he just lays down and patiently waits for me to finish. I never had to correct him, it was simply a habit that he never developed.

I agree with the points that if you threw an untrained dog into a situation with kids and possible chances of having the dog self reward bad habits, that you need to train the kids as much as you need to train the dog. I think if I were in that situation, the dog would have a leash on it all the time, and it would never have free run of the house until I could trust it. Trust is the main reason why Bruzer is still crated at 5 years old, but Gunnar gets the run of the house at only 18 months. He's never done anything to cause us to not trust him, while Bruzer has.

 

[GSDlover_4ever]

Good post Melanie! I have no problems like that with my dogs. I had a 12 yr. old Lab mix once who wasn't trained until then. LOL. He was wonderful and his undesireable habits faded away while new and more rewarding ones replaced those. I had a Beagle mix who also learned a lot as an older dog.

Of course its a good post. Anyone who agrees with you ALWAYS has a "good post".

 

[GSDlover_4ever]

The reality of it is that most dogs do not need the corrections that they get. People correct because they are either unwilling or incapable of setting things up so that the dog doesn't need correction. Why argue that a dog NEEDS to be corrected because some dumb human left food out?? Let's correct the human who failed to manage the situation, and not always blame the poor dog.

Excuse me, but I believe my house is MY HOUSE. I DO NOT work around my dogs, they work around me. I'm not going to hide the food every 2 seconds because my mother is calling me, or something happened and my dog will eat the food if I am not present. He WILL get corrected and know that that is unacceptable behavior. I can leave WHATEVER I want anywhere I want and my dogs are EXPECTED to leave it along. Again, I DO NOT work around my dogs.

 

[IliamnasQuest]

Excuse me, but I believe my house is MY HOUSE. I DO NOT work around my dogs, they work around me. I'm not going to hide the food every 2 seconds because my mother is calling me, or something happened and my dog will eat the food if I am not present. He WILL get corrected and know that that is unacceptable behavior. I can leave WHATEVER I want anywhere I want and my dogs are EXPECTED to leave it along. Again, I DO NOT work around my dogs.

Refresh my memory, please. You're the 17 year old with limited training experience, who is still living at home? I do believe that means the house is not YOUR HOUSE either .. *L* .. by the way, did your mother raise you by always setting you up to fail and then using correction?

The question on food on the counter was initially asked about a rescue dog that had no training - this was all initial training for the dog. There is certainly nothing wrong (and everything right) with setting a dog up to succeed, and that includes managing things so that there is not food laying around.

It's only fair to the dog to explain before you add corrections in. What you describe is much like the old way of teaching kids to play piano - the teacher sat there with a wooden ruler and slapped the knuckles every time the child hit a wrong note. Yes, kids learned to play, and they learned to hate the piano. Unfortunately people have the right to treat their dogs however they wish to treat them. I prefer that my dogs trust me and I train accordingly.

I remember those old days when I thought corrections were the way to go .. and I can state for an absolute fact that there is a higher level of trust and a higher level of bond between the dogs and myself then there was back when I used more corrections. The sad thing is that when you're in that style of training, you really THINK you have a wonderful bond and have no way of realizing that those corrections are compromising the relationship because you have nothing to compare it to.

What I find especially sad is that you have German shepherds - a breed I've had for YOUR entire life, and a breed that is so easy to train compared to so many other breeds. Yes, I understand dogs with a lot of drive because I've owned dogs with a lot of drive (putting this in there before you start in on how high drive your dogs are .. *RME*). I like a dog with a high energy level, which is what I've gone looking for and what I've gotten. Most of my dogs are very high in dominance and drive and I've found that use of corrections (especially physical corrections) are just not needed much because I'm capable of explaining to my dogs what I want - and they are intelligent enough to understand.

I rarely even put a leash on my shepherds these days. There's just no need to. Tonight I had Trick heel with me to the door of the store as I took the cart back, and left her on a sit-stay outside the door as I went inside and put the cart away. Oh - and this is a dog that learned to leave food alone (on the kitchen counter, on the floor, on the computer desk, wherever) without ever having to be physically corrected. I told her to leave things alone initially, rewarded her for not touching anything, and may have used an occasional "eht" along the way. But I have never had to physically correct any of my five dogs for getting into food. And I'm really good at bringing in the groceries, putting the bags on the floor and then forgetting to put the food away for awhile .. *L*

I realize that you are determined to defend your right to use corrections. What I don't understand is why - given two options, one of training the dog successfully without corrections and the other of training the dog successfully with corrections - a person would choose the corrective route. Again, I go back to the whole "lazy human" description. I know you have said you use positive reinforcement but in all honesty almost all of the posts I see you post are about how you correct your dogs. I get the distinct feeling that you are so adamant in your defense of these methods because you use them quite a bit. Otherwise, why bother? I've been straight-forward in saying that I think there are times to correct, but I do NOT think that time is during the training of a behavior.

I love my dogs too much to want to treat them anything but fairly. And those times when I slip and treat them unfairly I am angry at myself because I know that I FAILED, not them.

Melanie and the gang in Alaska
Trick AKC/CKC/ASCA CD, NAP NJP, RA (2/3 RE), HIC, CGC (GSD)
UCD Kylee AKC/CKC/ASCA CD, AKC CDX NA NAJ, NADAC NAC NJC, Schutzhund BH, HIC, CGC (Chow)
Dora NA NAJ (1/3 CD) CGC (Chow)
Khana RN (1/3 RA) (Chow)
Tori (GSD)
.. and always in my heart:
Dawson UD CGC, ASCA CD (GSD 1988-1999) and Lady UD CGC, ASCA CD STDs (Aussie 1987-1997)

 

[Rubylove]

Excuse me, but I believe my house is MY HOUSE. I DO NOT work around my dogs, they work around me. I'm not going to hide the food every 2 seconds because my mother is calling me, or something happened and my dog will eat the food if I am not present. He WILL get corrected and know that that is unacceptable behavior. I can leave WHATEVER I want anywhere I want and my dogs are EXPECTED to leave it along. Again, I DO NOT work around my dogs.

Unfortunately that just makes you sound like you have no understanding of dogs, and that you expect dogs, who live in a dog world with dog expectations and dog perspectives, to understand and live in a human way.

This is called anthropomorphising and is one of the most common errors that people who don't understand animals make.

I hope for your sake and your dogs' sake that your understanding increases as you get older and more experienced, because then your dogs will not only `behave' around you, but when left in the care of others, too.

What I don't understand is why - given two options, one of training the dog successfully without corrections and the other of training the dog successfully with corrections - a person would choose the corrective route.

Because this is easier and requires less effort on the part of the trainer. Because this is the way people, who do not understand how dogs think, train dogs. It is using an entirely human approach - when you're `naughty' as a human you get told off, you don't do it anymore and you are intelligent enough to make that connection. People don't understand that dogs just are wired differently from us, and use methods that are not appropriate for dogs' wiring. Dogs are not `naughty' or `well behaved'. They are misunderstood or understood. To them there is nothing morally wrong with stealing food off a counter - they are opportunists and there is no right or wrong in it. Its food, its an opportunity, they're going to eat it. They can easily learn not to get up on the counter, but they're not going to make the connection that taking food off the counter is wrong, because to them, its perfectly natural. They're not going to understand why getting up on the counter is not allowed, either, they're just going to learn that the response when they don't do it is more favourable than the response when they do do it - therefore they'll go with the option that benefits them the most.

Again, because its easier to punish rather than to understand, many people are not interested in learning a more correct way for the dog, but would rather use a more correct way for themselves.

 

[whatszmatter]

Again, because its easier to punish rather than to understand, many people are not interested in learning a more correct way for the dog, but would rather use a more correct way for themselves.

This is the attitude that doesn't sit very well with me. It can go both ways, maybe some of you are too "morally" tied up to try and understand that dogs learn using both negative and positive experiences so putting down one is easier for you?? Maybe some are lazy and just yank a collar, but there are many others out there that aren't

 

[Rubylove]

I never said dogs don't learn through negative reinforcement. My dogs are negatively reinforced - when they behave in an undesirable way they are corrected - by being put in `time out' for a minute or two, or something similar and NON-aggressive. Simply yanking on a chain (to me) is lazy and is not the most affective way of negative reinforcement. Simply my opinion - and not one based on moral considerations, but education, experience and knowledge of training and behaviour. Again - my own education, experience and knowledge, not that of others'. I would rather understand how dogs as a species operate, and train them with those considerations in mind, than just use physical punishment because its easier for me and what humans have (unfortunately) been raised to understand.

 

[GSDlover_4ever]

Yes dogs are opportunists, AND??? I dont care if a child is shoving an ice cream cone in my dogs face, leave it means leave it. Leaving it gives them an opportunity to avoid a correction, if thats how you want to put it. I love how I am constantly insulted and said to know nothing about dogs because I use corrections and am only 17 years old. Again AND??? You guys sure show your maturity for being so experienced. I have EXPECTATIONS of my dogs and one is not jumping on the counter. A turkey could be sitting up there and they are EXPECTED to leave it. I guess its terrible that I teach my dogs house manners.

 

[silverpawz]

The sad thing is that when you're in that style of training, you really THINK you have a wonderful bond and have no way of realizing that those corrections are compromising the relationship because you have nothing to compare it to.

Okay, I have three dogs of my own, one was trained purely positive because that was more suited to his personality, the other two were trained with a combonation of positve and corrections when needed. I feel I have an equal bond with all of them. They are ALL happy to train with me, they ALL get excited with the leash comes out, they ALL obey without fear of me. There are no tail tucks in my house, or flattened ears when I give a command, there's only wagging tails and an expecant look as if to say "what now, mom?"

I don't believe for a second that a dog trained using appropriate corrections as well as positives will have any less of a bond with their owner.

I've trained hundreds of dogs (450-ish was my last count after I went through all my paperwork for the year) and I can say with confidence that probably %80 of those dogs were trained with a mixture of positive and corrections up to the off leash level. The other %20 we're trained using pure postive because again thier personalities were suited for that. Not once did I ever see a dog training with me respond out of fear. And once they were returned to thier owners (who also got some training beforehand) they were just as happy to work for them with a wagging tail and doggy grin. They had fantastic bonds.

So I do have plenty of cases to compare this to and I'm pretty darn sure that each dog I've trained has bonded with me just as well when I use corrections.

I think it's comments like the one above that get some folks tails in a knot, because how can you say that someone elses dog isn't bonded with them as well as yours just becasue you've never experienced a happy, bonded and confident dog being trained with a balance of positives and corrections? Just because YOU haven't experienced it, does NOT mean it doesn't exsist.

Personally I couldn't care less how you or anyone else train. If you want to train your dog through a psychic connection, then by all means go for it. But when anyone, weather they use corrections or not, starts to say that people who don't train the way they do will never have a good relationship with their dogs or never be as bonded, then yes, I get my feathers ruffled.

You feel you have a better relationship with your dogs now since you use only postive methods. Good for you. Glad you've found something that works. However, there are PLENTY of other folks who do use corrections properly that have wonderful bonds with thier dogs too.

Again, it's like the air effect. Just because YOU can't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't exsist.

 

[casablanca1]

This thread is a disgrace. It's just the usual opponents spinning their wheels. Which is fine, if the OP was one of them looking to argue. But the OP was someone who just wanted an answer to a question, and as far as I see, they pretty much got ignored in the rush to start screaming over choke chains, Koehler, cookies and dolphins. And frankly, it was doubly ridiculous because the OP's new trainer isn't far from being a positive trainer - using the word "no" and tugging lightly on the leash may be corrections, but they're not abusive or violent, and they are both techniques used by people who train in mostly positive ways.

 

[DanL]

I never said dogs don't learn through negative reinforcement. My dogs are negatively reinforced - when they behave in an undesirable way they are corrected - by being put in `time out' for a minute or two, or something similar and NON-aggressive. Simply yanking on a chain (to me) is lazy and is not the most affective way of negative reinforcement. Simply my opinion - and not one based on moral considerations, but education, experience and knowledge of training and behaviour. Again - my own education, experience and knowledge, not that of others'. I would rather understand how dogs as a species operate, and train them with those considerations in mind, than just use physical punishment because its easier for me and what humans have (unfortunately) been raised to understand.

Let me know how time outs work with the dog on dog aggression you are experiencing in your other post.

Time outs are a completely human form of punishment. So your dog does something bad, you stop them and then put them in their crate? By the time you get them to the crate they have forgotten what they had done. A sharp verbal correction while you grab their collar and remove them from the situation will work too. There is far more to using a correction than jerking on a chain. The timing must be instant, the same as using a clicker or other positive method, or it serves no purpose. Just like with positive methods, you need to watch your dogs body language. My GSD loves to chase our one cat. I can see him tensing up and getting ready to lauch at her. As soon as I see him getting ready, he gets a verbal correction. Something as simple as an ACH! He looks at me like I ruined his day, but he doesn't chase the cat. Waiting for him to chase the cat, then telling him "no, no, Gunnar mustn't chase the kitty" and putting him in his crate isn't teaching him a thing. He already got his own reward, the chase.

People keep referring to how trainers of wild animals use positive methods to get a killer whale, dolphin or tiger to do tricks. Remember- those animals are in a consistant, controlled environment. Take that dolphin or killer whale into open water and see what it does. Ask Sigfreud about his trained tiger practically killing him, in the same controlled environment it was in every day. Yes, if our dogs were in the same controlled environment day in and day out, we could use nothing but positive methods. Unfortunately, some of us like to take our dogs to places where they have never been. They get excited, and we don't have a month or more to desensitize them to the new situation, so we use a correction to get their attention and remind them what they are supposed to be doing.

 

[GSDlover_4ever]

SilverPaws I agree with everything you said. What people dont understand or dont care to understand is that a person who uses corrections does not automatically yank and crank the dog around. My dogs LEARN through motivation. Hondo's heeling (competition heeling, when the dog is staring up at you the whole time) is unbelievable for his age. I baited him at first them started raising my hand and making him drive for the food instead of at it. All training is done through motivation and I dont use a leash most of the time for training so how am I correcting him when he is learning, oh wait I got it I DONT CORRECT WHILE TEACHING. but corrections are a part of life, and thats how its going to be. I KNOW, Melanie, that I have a VERY strong bond with my dogs and who are you to judge that?

 

[whatszmatter]

Thank you silver pawz, great post.

 

[Angelique]

IMO, training should never be correction based. Positive reinforcement should be the primary method used for a pleasant and healthy interaction between dog and owner when learning new tasks.

Outside of the controlled environtment where there is a varying social dynamic at work, the primary tool should be leadership and direction from the leader (owner), before training methods are used to shape desired behaviors. First things first.

The goal should always be to reduce the amount of confusion and/or stress in the dog while you are trying to communicate both where they fit into their social group, and what behavior (you want) has a pleasant association in the form of a reward for a job well done. A reward connects directly with the dog on a more primal, almost impulsive level. The social level is a higher form of communication which exists in higher forms of social mammals who must work together for survival. IMO.

Corrections have a broad application of techniques. Everything from the instruction of a before the behavior "don't go there" to stop a dog from escalating in a certain direction, to a leash-pop to both get the dog's attention and administer a "punishment" after the fact. The more instruction as the dog's leader you provide, the less need there will be for a physical or psychological correction...it's all about the "'tude".

Dogs do grasp and respond to direction before a behavior far better than when they are simply rewarded or punished after the behavior occurs.

The utimate goal should be to use any method(s) or philosophy(s) which can communicate with your dog clearly, set them up for success, and keep corrections to a minimum.

Or, maybe my view of things is just weird.

Although the use of setting boundaries and communicating what you want from the dog should always remain part of the equasion, the mark of a good leader and trainer is how few physical corrections you need to make your point.

It's mostly about attitude and communication, anyway.

 

[IliamnasQuest]

I don't believe for a second that a dog trained using appropriate corrections as well as positives will have any less of a bond with their owner.

Let me quote that entire paragraph, as you only took out the part that fueled what you wanted to say.

"I remember those old days when I thought corrections were the way to go .. and I can state for an absolute fact that there is a higher level of trust and a higher level of bond between the dogs and myself then there was back when I used more corrections. The sad thing is that when you're in that style of training, you really THINK you have a wonderful bond and have no way of realizing that those corrections are compromising the relationship because you have nothing to compare it to."

Please note the phrases "when I thought corrections were the way to go" and "back when I used more corrections".

Taken in its full context, it should make more sense. As I've said in other posts that you may not have read, I started out in a much more corrective way. I brought it up because the "GSDLover" is always talking about how she uses corrections and it makes it sound like she depends on those corrections for training. When you depend on corrections in training, you DO compromise the relationship you have with your dog - but you don't know it at the time.

I've trained hundreds of dogs too, and have observed thousands more. I have seen firsthand the difference between a motivationally trained dog and one trained primarily with corrections - there is a HUGE difference in the trust level. People who train with prong and shock collars often say "oh, my dog is so excited when I pick up the collar - so it must mean they like it" when the truth is that the dog is probably just plain excited to get to do SOMETHING. You just can't tell me that the dogs LIKE the corrections.

You mentioned "appropriate corrections" .. well, that's a very subjective term. To one person, an appropriate correction may be using a choke chain and choking the dog into submission because it failed to heel properly. To another, an appropriate correction may be a mild "eht" when the dog goes towards something it shouldn't have. People find it SO easy to use corrections and often find it so hard to use motivational training.

You feel you have a better relationship with your dogs now since you use only postive methods. Good for you.

You need to go back and read more of my posts. I have said over and over that I DON'T use "only positive" methods. I sure wish people would not try to attribute words to me that are not mine. You've made broad assumptions and taken my words out of context to try to prove your point - which is completely wrong. Please make an effort to read fully what's been said before you jump in to try to prove someone wrong.

But when anyone, weather [sic] they use corrections or not, starts to say that people who don't train the way they do will never have a good relationship with their dogs or never be as bonded, then yes, I get my feathers ruffled.

Well, you're ruffling your feathers because you like to ruffle, I guess. I never said that anyone not training my way will never have a good relationship with their dogs. My point was that people using corrections as a training technique do tend to compromise the relationship and a better bond is built with trust. This is COMMON SENSE. If a person is yanking a dog around on a prong collar, the dog IS going to have less of a trust of that person. Humans are the same way - if you are raised with a very corrective parent, you may still love that parent but the bond will NOT be as trusting as being raised with a parent who provides more guidance and less punishment.

I just have to wonder why people are so adamant about defending their use of corrections. I find it quite interesting that I keep seeing these people say "but I use motivational training" and yet they're willing to argue over and over that the corrections are needed and they have a right to use them. I find overall that people who use few corrections don't feel they have to justify the use of the corrections. So that leads me to believe that people are using more corrections than they want to say, and they defend those corrections because they want to feel good about what they're doing.

Just my opinion, of course .. *chuckles*

Melanie and the gang in Alaska