Could some dogs just need negative reinforcement?
- Thread starter Dreeza
- Start date
The front clip harness can be. It allows the owner more physical control of the dog, which can help take away some of the owner's worries about the dog's behavior. But it doesn't solve the issue at all. I stay away from haltis with reactive dogs because if they hit the end of the leash fast, they can get serious neck injuries.
Yea, that would be a problem. The one I like is the halti harness ~ http://www.dog-online.co.uk/images/halti_harness_1_03.jpg
Keep in mind that any equipment can be broken if the dog is determined and clever enough.
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2009
- Messages
- 156
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 0
wow! i like the look of those alot! but yes, definitly can get out of anything , i have a nice "Precision dog cage " . Its Very large , 2 doors.. i locked my boxer in their and close my room door , and went to take a shower , I came out of the shower and she was downstairs in the kitchen. Not getting into anything , but still ! sneaky!
Thanks for all the posts.
I was referring to both I guess...but mainly positive punishment (i.e. a shock to tell Oakley he has done something wrong). I have way more of an issue with pos. punishment than negative punishment, because unless I'm totally missing something, it is kinda necessary to use negative punishment with an over-reactive dog (this would be pulling him into another room & waiting until he has calmed down until he gets to greet a visitor that has unexpectedly knocked on my door??)
Anyways, I have had a new thought now...I am definitely thinking he is just confused by mixed signals. He was taught most of his commands through the use of the shock collar...especially 'come'. So maybe thats more of the root of the problem.
back to square one I guess...
I was referring to both I guess...but mainly positive punishment (i.e. a shock to tell Oakley he has done something wrong). I have way more of an issue with pos. punishment than negative punishment, because unless I'm totally missing something, it is kinda necessary to use negative punishment with an over-reactive dog (this would be pulling him into another room & waiting until he has calmed down until he gets to greet a visitor that has unexpectedly knocked on my door??)
Anyways, I have had a new thought now...I am definitely thinking he is just confused by mixed signals. He was taught most of his commands through the use of the shock collar...especially 'come'. So maybe thats more of the root of the problem.
back to square one I guess...
Punishment TOTALLY depends on the dog. For some dogs, The water bottle could be a reward! For some dogs, like that one, the spray bottle could be the scariest thing in the world. You have to judge any punishment on the dog. For some dogs, they're so used to being roughly jerked on the leash, it's nothing to them. Some dogs could be very damaged from such a harsh reprimand. You have to determine what kind of punishment, if any, is appropriate for any dog.
I don't mean to steal the thread but.... This is something that has ALWAYS bugged me about Petsmart trainers. "GL's and halti's are Humane! They don't hurt! It teaches dogs to walk on a leash!" I hate quick fixes. I think I'm the only Petsmart trainer I know that doesn't slap a quick-fix device on the dog the minute it walks through the door. Owners normally like it, though The only time I do recommend a device like that is a) the dog is too strong for the owner, so they need the device to use while training the dog; b) the dog has a behavior problem like reactivity, or c) the owner won't walk the dog anymore because of it's pulling, thus cutting off the dog's access to exercise. Even when I DO recommend things like that, I'll normally recommend the front-clipping harness first.
The only time I do recommend a device like that is a) the dog is too strong for the owner, so they need the device to use while training the dog; b) the dog has a behavior problem like reactivity, or c) the owner won't walk the dog anymore because of it's pulling, thus cutting off the dog's access to exercise. Even when I DO recommend things like that, I'll normally recommend the front-clipping harness first.
As to the topic started by the OP, I don't typically use much correction with dogs in general (I haven't met a dog yet that really needed much correction, although I HAVE met dogs who were a challenge because it was difficult to figure out their motivations). I will use correction if say, I have a large dog I'm walking for the first time at FOHA getting riled up about something, perhaps starting to mouth me hard, or perhaps wanting to go after another dog, and I need control NOW. This correction is usually a raised voice and a leash jerk just to get them to STOP. Once I've seen they will exhibit this behavior, I take steps to prevent/fix it in the future that include mostly positive reinforcement methods (treats, desensitization, redirection to appropriate chewing materials, etc).
The neg versus positive reinforment argument will be going on for years after i am gone. the funny thing about it is that most of what people call negative reinforcement is not that at all it is what they call positive punishment. Every trainer has there own idea on wether there method is better then another. the most important part of training is to know your dog and use the method that u feel the most comfortable. if u dont feel comf shocking ur dog then dont. In my experience positive might take alil longer but u will have a dog that is wagging his tail threw the whole training session
- Welcome to Good Dog, BRAD Dog!
- Welcome to Good Dog, BRAD Dog!
I think you're on to something here with the mixed signals. This is I think known as a "poisoned cue." If he's associating the "come" command with the shock collar, the command itself has negative associations which could be why he responds slowly/not at all. I'm by no means an expert
I've learned most of my positive/clicker training theory from the clickersolutions Yahoo group (an awesome resource BTW) but this is one of the things I've seen discussed.
It may help if you start over and retrain (a pain, I know) using different words, that he has no bad associations with.
Here's a decent article that explains better than I did
Poisoned Cues
I've learned most of my positive/clicker training theory from the clickersolutions Yahoo group (an awesome resource BTW) but this is one of the things I've seen discussed.
It may help if you start over and retrain (a pain, I know) using different words, that he has no bad associations with.
Here's a decent article that explains better than I did
Poisoned Cues
In my experience, emphasising positive reinforcement is infinitely more effective and quicker than using aversives. The dog who is experienced with positive reinforcement methods becomes a participant in his learning and learns HOW to learn much better. His future learning is accelerated. A dog trained with punishment tends to not throw new behaviors, which is not conducive to learning. I totally agree with the tail wagging and exuberance you see with little to no punishment.
The dog who is experienced with positive reinforcement methods becomes a participant in his learning and learns HOW to learn much better. His future learning is accelerated. A dog trained with punishment tends to not throw new behaviors, which is not conducive to learning. I totally agree with the tail wagging and exuberance you see with little to no punishment.
BUT using aversions, corrections and positive punishment in addition to a pos. reineforcment base does not mean the dog is unwilling to throw new behaviors, has not learned how to learn and doesn't enjoy training.
I will admit that when I first tried my hand at free shaping capturing behaviors with Kaylee I had a tough time because I trained her defult behavior to be sit and focus. But I also trained that using only +R and -P. The other problem was when that didn't work she just starts poking things....and will continue doing that for a good while before any other behavior is given .But she just loves poking things so it's self rewarding
I also want to say that Kaylee's heel is done with a bounce her step and her tail happily curved over her back. She has a very expressive tail so it's easy for me to tell her mood based on that. I also taught this heel using +P and +R. Actually, I pretty much taught it using all four quads.
She is happiest our training club where prongs and corrections are used in addition to reward.
I disagree with the idea that a dog is happy getting corrections from a choke or prong collar. How could a dog or anyone be happy receiving pain or corrections? It is well documented by numerous studies by veterinary behaviorists and behavioral scientists that punishment carries with it a lot of bad side effects, including learned helplessness. I think it's a real mistake to use choke or prong collars on the one hand, then on the other, use reward. Corrections make a dog do something to avoid something bad. His learning style is developed one way. Then on another occassion or context, you use rewards for correct responses. His learning style there is different because he's thinking about what to do to get a reward. Two different ways the brain is working. Confusing. I believe the studies and behaviorists who conclude that training based on reward prevents learned helplessness and promotes learning vastly more effectively than punishment or avoidance techniques, which have the potential to cause some serious issues. I believe it is inferior training to rely on corrections with collars at any time, rather than employ the many tools in the positive reinforcement tool box to get wanted behavior. When unwanted behavior is prevented in the first place (by sound training methods) there would be no "need" to use a choke or prong collar AT ALL.
Here's just one, the tip of the ice berg of many articles on the detriments of punishment and the evidence gathered.
http://vip.vetsci.usyd.edu.au/contentUpload/content_3065/briscoe_s.pdf
Here's just one, the tip of the ice berg of many articles on the detriments of punishment and the evidence gathered.
http://vip.vetsci.usyd.edu.au/contentUpload/content_3065/briscoe_s.pdf
I never said she was happy getting the correction. I said she was happiest at our training club where both correction and reward is used, and she is. She is a naturally very timid dog, terrified of men and most people. She does not solicit attention from strangers.At our training club she will approach men with ease, let others pet her and even attempt to get them to touch her. She does not startle at loud noises and feels comfortable enough to fall asleep there.
No dog, or any other animal is going to "enjoy" getting a correction or it would not be effective.
Enjoying a reward makes it work, not enjoying a correction is what makes it work also
I have read a good number of those studies and am no more impressed by them than I am by that e-collar one you posted.
You are of course allowed to think of using correction and reward as a mistake but I respectfully disagree rather vehemently. I also honestly don't understand your logic in the least bit.
If one is never told what is not wanted and only what is wanted then they are missing a big chunk of the puzzle the same way as if they were only told what was not wanted and never what was wanted. I'm not a fan of half information
Correcting the wrong behavior and rewarding the right one gives a more complete picture and allows for a better understanding in my opinion.
I have a tool box that contains positive reinforcement and the tools that go with it, it get's used very often. In fact, it's used most often. But that tool box contains other things like a prong that also get used. I don't limit myself to such a rigid training method and I find my dogs better for it.
If you choose not to do so that is fine for me and I respect positive only trainers that have well behaved and adjusted dogs. But I choose to use a more balanced approach and that works for my dogs and me.
You're right, in a perfect world there wouldn't be. Sadly we don't live in that utopia and not everyone ends up with a puppy that has never had the chance to do an unwanted behavior nor do we all live in a home where everyone does what they are supposed to to prevent unwanted behaviors from happening.
There are no perfect dogs and there are no perfect people. When there are then I'll be the first in line to throw away my prong.
No dog, or any other animal is going to "enjoy" getting a correction or it would not be effective.
Enjoying a reward makes it work, not enjoying a correction is what makes it work also
I have read a good number of those studies and am no more impressed by them than I am by that e-collar one you posted.
You are of course allowed to think of using correction and reward as a mistake but I respectfully disagree rather vehemently. I also honestly don't understand your logic in the least bit.
If one is never told what is not wanted and only what is wanted then they are missing a big chunk of the puzzle the same way as if they were only told what was not wanted and never what was wanted. I'm not a fan of half information
Correcting the wrong behavior and rewarding the right one gives a more complete picture and allows for a better understanding in my opinion.
I have a tool box that contains positive reinforcement and the tools that go with it, it get's used very often. In fact, it's used most often. But that tool box contains other things like a prong that also get used. I don't limit myself to such a rigid training method and I find my dogs better for it.
If you choose not to do so that is fine for me and I respect positive only trainers that have well behaved and adjusted dogs. But I choose to use a more balanced approach and that works for my dogs and me.
You're right, in a perfect world there wouldn't be. Sadly we don't live in that utopia and not everyone ends up with a puppy that has never had the chance to do an unwanted behavior nor do we all live in a home where everyone does what they are supposed to to prevent unwanted behaviors from happening.
There are no perfect dogs and there are no perfect people. When there are then I'll be the first in line to throw away my prong.
Behavior is a science. This is not "my" logic. There are behavioral laws, just as there are laws of physics. Gravity makes apples fall off trees. Reinforcement for wanted behaviors make them increase. Prevention of reinforcement for unwanted behaviors make them decrease. So, according to behavioral law, as well as my own long time experience training dogs, punishment is not needed to extinguish unwanted behaviors.
I work with dogs with a variety of behavior problems and train obedience and was into agility. (not now) And I have never come across a dog who couldn't be taught and taught to some fairly advanced levels without the use of harsh aversives; choke collars, collar pops etc...or relying on having to "tell" the dog what not to do. Re-directing, (if I've failed to prevent the reinforcement of an unwanted behavior, thus, allowing it to develop) giving alternative behaviors and reinforcing those will "squeeze" out the unwanted behavior. Reinforceable behaviors are much more attractive to the dog and he'll always do what is reinforcing for him and not do what is not reinforcing to him. (law)
I work with dogs with a variety of behavior problems and train obedience and was into agility. (not now) And I have never come across a dog who couldn't be taught and taught to some fairly advanced levels without the use of harsh aversives; choke collars, collar pops etc...or relying on having to "tell" the dog what not to do. Re-directing, (if I've failed to prevent the reinforcement of an unwanted behavior, thus, allowing it to develop) giving alternative behaviors and reinforcing those will "squeeze" out the unwanted behavior. Reinforceable behaviors are much more attractive to the dog and he'll always do what is reinforcing for him and not do what is not reinforcing to him. (law)
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2008
- Messages
- 2,242
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 0
if a dog "knows" that a behavior is going to be corrected.....consistantly corrected....why would the dog continue to offer that behavior? The only logical explaination is the dog is unclear on whats expected of him. If the dog is unclear...how is that fair to the dog?
Iam with Carrie 110%...but thats not a shock.
Iam with Carrie 110%...but thats not a shock.
And touching a flame burns. I could get rewarded till the cows come home for not touching that flame but the act of getting burned and hurt doing it is going to dissuade it from happening again any time soon.
Getting burned for touching that flame and then rewarded for not touching it would go even farther in stopping that behavior.
Positive reinforcement isn't "needed" train either. People have managed to train dogs using positive punishment and negative punishment with some success. Doesn't mean the addition of reward doesn't help the learning process.
But I'm pretty sure we differ on a much deeper level anyways. I don't buy the rigid Skinnerian behaviorist model that somehow was debunked for humans but fits perfectly for dogs. I don't deny my dogs cognitive abilities.
What it comes down to for me is not that my way of training is better. God no, I've got a ton to learn and look forward to it. But rather that training is an art as well as a science and to throw out any one idea does a great disservice and limits our abilities.
My dog is happy, she enjoys her training sessions and her favorite place is the petstore (where I do a lot of training) and her training club where correction is utilized.
I can't speak for your dogs, I can't speak for John Smiths dogs. I can only speak for mine and her enjoyment speaks pretty loudly
Getting burned for touching that flame and then rewarded for not touching it would go even farther in stopping that behavior.
Positive reinforcement isn't "needed" train either. People have managed to train dogs using positive punishment and negative punishment with some success. Doesn't mean the addition of reward doesn't help the learning process.
But I'm pretty sure we differ on a much deeper level anyways. I don't buy the rigid Skinnerian behaviorist model that somehow was debunked for humans but fits perfectly for dogs. I don't deny my dogs cognitive abilities.
What it comes down to for me is not that my way of training is better. God no, I've got a ton to learn and look forward to it. But rather that training is an art as well as a science and to throw out any one idea does a great disservice and limits our abilities.
My dog is happy, she enjoys her training sessions and her favorite place is the petstore (where I do a lot of training) and her training club where correction is utilized.
I can't speak for your dogs, I can't speak for John Smiths dogs. I can only speak for mine and her enjoyment speaks pretty loudly
No I dont' think dogs need it.
A wagging tail is NOT always an indication. NOW that said dogs can be happy who have been trained with aversives, dogs are nothing if not adaptable. We get away with things with canines we would not in other species.
This does not mean they wouldn't have been trained faster or happier with out them though. There are physiological stress (distress) responses to aversives. That has been pretty well documented. Whether you think that matters when training a dog to win ribbons is up to you, but to say they don't exist is to put your head in the sand.
Many roads lead to rome. Do you have take the road with aversives.. absolutely not. Can you take that road. Sure. But if I have to take a road trip with my dogs I want it to be a pleasant trip for all of us.
(for anyone who thinks dogs NEED aversives I suggest you read Shaping success.. the dog in that book is one that many people would say needs positive punishment and negative rewards)
A wagging tail is NOT always an indication. NOW that said dogs can be happy who have been trained with aversives, dogs are nothing if not adaptable. We get away with things with canines we would not in other species.
This does not mean they wouldn't have been trained faster or happier with out them though. There are physiological stress (distress) responses to aversives. That has been pretty well documented. Whether you think that matters when training a dog to win ribbons is up to you, but to say they don't exist is to put your head in the sand.
Many roads lead to rome. Do you have take the road with aversives.. absolutely not. Can you take that road. Sure. But if I have to take a road trip with my dogs I want it to be a pleasant trip for all of us.
(for anyone who thinks dogs NEED aversives I suggest you read Shaping success.. the dog in that book is one that many people would say needs positive punishment and negative rewards)