Discussion in 'Dog Training Forum' started by Angelique, Nov 14, 2008.
Oh dear. :yikes:
well I would never think to teach THAT but Buffy sure seems to enjoy herself :yikes:
I suppose if your dog was ever in a TV show/movie that would be a behavior he might need to know.
Maybe there are just some things which should not be put on cue...or in plain view. :rofl1:
My thought exactly matches the title of the web page's accompanying article:
Uhh....I would like to hear Jean's side of it.
Kassie would LOVE for me to teach her this.....there's no way in heck! LOL
That was very odd to say the least. It didn't look like it was a behavior she was asking for, it was a "reward". Why on God's green earth would you allow a dog to hump your leg till they were finished as a reward?? and why would you put it on the internet?
Because it's rewarding. Remember, a reward is anything a dog likes - treats, toys, attention, chew bones, dinner, water, game of fetch, anything. The three most powerful reinforcers? Food, water, sex.
As long as it's on good stimulus control - the dog doesn't do the behavior unless cued, and only does the behavior when cued - I see nothing wrong with it. The dog sure enjoyed it, and it looks like a good energy release.
I was discussing the video with someone else a few days ago.
Here's my (suspected) take on it.
The behavior is a reward, not a 'command'.
When I was first learning about rewards, the trainer described primary and secondary rewards. Primary are basically the things needed for survival - air, food, water, sex. Maybe one or two more, but basically a very small number of things that every species needs to survive. Secondary are things like play, attention, etc. I remember the class discussing that obviously it is cruel to take control of an animals air or water to use them as rewards, and you can't use sex (until now?), so food is the primary reinforcer that is easiest to train with.
I assume, this is a behavior the dog greatly enjoys, probably touches (pardon the pun) on the sexual desires, and therefore is a very high-value reward for the dog.
Not one I would ever use, but as I said, that is my take on the situation. I would love to hear Jean Donaldson's response.
I have to say that I get the concept of allowing it as a reward. Bizarre, but I get it.
But all the "She's going to faint," "she looks like she's blacking out," "her tongue is losing colour," is VERY bizarre. Why would you continue to allow a reward that gets a dog to the point of fainting?
Umm. I get the reward thing.
BUT WHY would you allow a dog to "finish" on your leg? And WHY would you post it and show it to people?
Also, not sure if I would want my black heels rubbing against a dog butthole, but that's just me I guess?:yikes:
I guess this is really nothing when you compare it to that site that was anti-neutering and told you how to um....satisfy your dog, anyone remember that thread?: http://www.chazhound.com/forums/showthread.php?t=76953&highlight=gentling
After the gentling page on that site, humping is really nothing. I don't think it is the kind of reward I'd give but who knows, maybe buffy is not a fan of treats or toys? Maybe the behavior was put on cue so it could be extinguished, I don't know, I suppose she'd need to answer that.
No. To me, it looks like Jean was clearly exploring the use of sex as a reward. Probably would work even better with an unaltered male dog.
In a strictly Skinner context (while trying to avoid the personal gross-out factor), the instant gratification of food or sex can be powerful (selfish) motivators.
But social interactions require social boundaries, manners, and behaviors which are acceptable to other social beings...which we all know were not part of Skinner's "in the box" experiments.
ETA: Maxy, I did notice (unless I'm mistaken) this was an HSUS site.
That's true. But I still think it can be used in a constructive way if the behavior's under true stimulus control. Although it kinda strikes me as odd at first, I even agree with letting the behavior "finish" as the reward.
Think about it - say my dog LOVES chasing birds. Like, more than anything in the world. But I need to be able to walk through the park without him chasing every bird he sees. So I work on "leave it" with the birds, and I work on getting a good duration of eye contact, and any number of other behaviors he can do besides chasing the birds. Does he forget the birds are there? No. Is chasing the birds less reinforcing because he's been reinforced for all these other behaviors? No, probably not. So, my dog's doing really well not chasing the birds, and I want to reward him - so I cue him to go chase the birds, and he has the time of his life. Then when he's had enough fun with the birds and can focus on me again, we go back to training. Are the birds slightly more interesting now? Probably. Does that mean it'll be impossible to get my training back to par? No, and the more you use the birds as a reinforcer, the easier it'll be for the dog to ignore the birds. He's learning, 'all I have to do is ignore them for now, but soon I'll get to go chase them again!'
You're right, it probably would work better with an intact male. But my spayed, 1-year old female sure enjoyed humping me when I first got her, I have no doubt that was a very reinforcing behavior!
I would add to that --
And if you do train it, why would you video it and post it on youtube?
yeah, i get that it is rewarding, my question is why? Is that the dogs "only" motivation? Just because something can be done, should it be? I know if "sex" was my only reinforcer I would certainly be better at those things asked of me than that dog was. I saw pretty shakey basic obedience at best. I just find the whole thing very odd.
Its on such good control that she's trying to hump her when she gets up and walks away?
One more possible reason to train such a thing- say you have a dog who humps everything, everyone who comes into the house, while there are many ways to address the problem one way to fix it would be to put the undersirable behaviour on cue, and once it's under stimulus control we know the dog would only offer the behaviour when cued, perhaps buying a big stuffed dog to allow the dog to er get those urges out in a acceptable way when noone is around.
The behavior wasn't put on cue, it wasn't stopped on cue either, it was a reward. The day I let a dog hump me till they're done to teach them not to hump is the day I quit training dogs.
Did you read my "chasing birds" example? Let the dog chase the birds as a reward for not chasing the birds. It works there, why would it not work here?
I'm not saying I'd ever do it, I'm just saying that I understand how it can be used. No, the dog's obedience wasn't great, no, the stimulus control wasn't great, but we don't know what it looked like when she first started doing this. Maybe it's all improved a lot and continues to improve, who knows.
I understand how it can be used to, my question is why? I could think of many ways to teach a dog not to hump, or a thousand other rewards besides allowing a dog to finish off on my leg to motivate them. Couple that with the comments about grabbing the head for "better traction" and passing out comments, then making a video and putting on the net, call me crazy but it just strikes me as very very odd.
I get letting dogs chase birds as a reward for not chasing them, its the basis of any trainer using cynopraxic methods. it's why sometimes I make my dogs heel, sometimes run free. Sometimes sit to down and then down to sit or recall to front then heel, the heel to front, or let them chase whatever I throw or watch me throw it and then wait for the signal to chase. Sometimes they have to not eat the food in front of them to be able to eat the food. All very normal things to do with a dog and efficient ways to teach communication and understanding between dog and handler. I would really like to hear her response. I can't help but wonder if this was something Cesar Millan did on his TV show he'd be drawn, quartered, and burned at the stake by now.