*Like* and thought I'd share :)

Discussion in 'Dog Training Forum' started by Danefied, Oct 8, 2011.

  1. Danefied

    Danefied New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2010
    Messages:
    1,722
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    One husband of 15 years
    Location:
    Southeast
  2. Danefied

    Danefied New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2010
    Messages:
    1,722
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    One husband of 15 years
    Location:
    Southeast
    **crickets**

    Anyone?
    Was the video too long? Was it preaching to the choir? Bad link? Is Chaz acting up again?
     
  3. Barb04

    Barb04 Love my pets Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Messages:
    27,408
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Tennessee
    I just finished watching it. I thought it was a very well thought out and produced video. I enjoyed it. Thanks for posting.
     
  4. AliciaD

    AliciaD On second thought...

    Joined:
    May 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,560
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    2 dogs, 2 cats, a rabbit, and hermit crabs.
    I like it, all though if I were to give a critique it would be to remove the background music, :)

    It was interesting seeing Dr. Ian Dunbar using timeouts- I used them, I just didn't know that he did.

    EDIT: Oh, the "stopped offering behaviors" things is spot on. Cameron would shut down or leave, that isn't "happy, submissive behavior".
     
  5. Brattina88

    Brattina88 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2004
    Messages:
    12,953
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    OH
    I won't be able to watch it until Monday :(
    anyone want to recap? :D
     
  6. Kat09Tails

    Kat09Tails *Now with Snark*

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,453
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    6 + finches
    Location:
    Upper Left hand corner, USA
    Same crap ... different day would be my recap, which is fine. It all works, some of it works better/consistently better than others.

    To be clear I didn't see Ian Dunbar use a timeout, although the person editing the video did imply that he did - personally I see timeouts as super ineffective "punishment" because by the time you actually get the dog to the crate, kennel, leash, or whatever it's long forgotten what the problem was. Are we educating the dog or giving the human being involved a sanity break?
     
  7. Danefied

    Danefied New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2010
    Messages:
    1,722
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    One husband of 15 years
    Location:
    Southeast
    "Crap" is a relative term, just ask Bates, he thinks deer crap is manna from heaven :rolleyes:
    Though I would agree that there is a lot of crap out there masquerading as dog training.

    I don't use time outs either, find them totally ineffective with my dogs. But that doesn't mean that my only other choice is pain or intimidation. Besides, the video was not about using time-outs or not, that was like the first 30 seconds.
    The video had different folks in the dog world discussing how to effectively affect dog behavior without using force, fear or pain. Which I find to be a valid discussion given how many dog trainers still rely almost exclusively on some sort of intimidation or threat of pain to gain compliance.

    So back to the time outs - they have to be motivating to the dog. If they're not, its ineffective punishment and you're wasting your time. Take the time to understand your dogs' motivations and work from there.
     
  8. Brattina88

    Brattina88 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2004
    Messages:
    12,953
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    OH
    Agreed - for a dog who loves nothing more than to be around his people, time outs are very effective and sort of like a 'reality check' for some dogs. But for others, like you said, totally uneffective.

    To me its just about the same as when a behavior you don't like = the human leaving the room and shutting the dog in. Or jumping = back turned and zero attention. When paired with teaching the dog a more appropraite behavior in its place (like sitting for attention), it's completely effective - IMO ;)
     
  9. Danefied

    Danefied New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2010
    Messages:
    1,722
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    One husband of 15 years
    Location:
    Southeast
    Donaldson (paraphrased):
    I am currently motivating my dogs with rewards. My concern, when I first began adopting this type of training was that my dogs would not be as "sharp" or as reliable without an "or else". Over time, I have come to realize that not only were my concerns unfounded, but that I can create *more* reliability using a reward that is meaningful to the dog than an equally meaningful punishment.

    When I teach Bates heel by essentially saying "in this position and you will be rewarded" it creates a much different behavior than telling him "outside of this position you will be corrected" It seems like you're telling the dog the dog the same thing, but the behavior is much more reliable when paired with a properly timed reward.
     
  10. AliciaD

    AliciaD On second thought...

    Joined:
    May 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,560
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    2 dogs, 2 cats, a rabbit, and hermit crabs.
    For my old foster in particular it was the best (worst?) thing ever. She was an AmStaff that loved to be with me, and timeouts helped a lot with her.
     
  11. smeagle

    smeagle New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    I use time out/ending a game coupled with a NRM to mark the behaviour that led to the game finishing and my dog being put away.

    I find it works so well - nothing more devastating to my dog than losing the chance to get the reward.
     
  12. smeagle

    smeagle New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    For me it's not just about the reliability but the attitude in the dog. A dog that is corrected heavily in heelwork will never work with the same 'spark' that a dog trained in drive or other reward based methods works like. They may do the exercise, but where is the joy?
     
  13. Danefied

    Danefied New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2010
    Messages:
    1,722
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    One husband of 15 years
    Location:
    Southeast
    Actually, some breeds, and some lines within the breed have been selectively bred for tremendous resilience to corrections. This was done on purpose so you could not only get a great protection trained dog who would push forward despite the decoy's "corrections". This also creates a dog who is particularly resilient with escape/avoidance training methods.

    Doesn't mean you HAVE to train them with escape/avoidance methods though ;)

    And you can't escape the fact that a correction, no matter how mild, and no matter how "appropriate", will still "poison" the cue:
    from
    The Poisoned Cue: Positive and Negative Discriminative Stimuli | Karen Pryor Clickertraining
     
  14. smeagle

    smeagle New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    LOL. Sure, some dogs are bred to have exceptionally solid nerve but I still am yet to see a dog who has been taught heelwork with heavy correction based methods who work with as good an attitude as dogs who have been taught heelwork with reward based methods. Just because the dog can still do it after heavy corrections does not mean it will still maintain a great attitude. And besides which - those dogs would be the minority compared to the number of dogs in general obedience that I see who work without any real joy because they've been trained with old fashioned methods. It's sad.

    I disagree with the idea that incorporating any kind of aversive "poisons" a cue or command. One of the most aversive things I could do to my dog is end a game/remove reward and I do this following a NRM marker in training all the time. Yet it makes her work harder and improves her reliability and response to commands.
     
  15. Danefied

    Danefied New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2010
    Messages:
    1,722
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    One husband of 15 years
    Location:
    Southeast
    I felt the same way for the longest time too.
    But a NRM or removing a reward is not the same thing as applying a punishment or an aversive.

    With every command we teach, we also create an emotional association. In the same way Pavlov got dogs to salivate at the sound of a bell, you can get a dog to feel good (or feel apprehensive) at the sound of a certain command. If you create a positive enough association with the command, eventually the command itself becomes a reward for the dog.
    BUT, say you have a dog who is conditioned that "no" is a predictor as something unpleasant (as most dogs are). Now ask for a down, and the dog sits instead, and you say "no" DOWN, (instead of NRM). Rinse and repeat enough times and You create a negative association with the cue - both the sit cue (because there will be a time when "sit" is the right answer, but you just corrected it), and with the down cue because if the dog is "wrong" he gets a reprimand. This creates the hesitation of the dog not wanting to guess wrong.

    NRM are not predictors of anything other than no reward. Unless you're like me and you suck at keeping frustration and/or disappointment out of the NRM, then it *can* become a predictor of frustrated mom. If your dog is sensitive enough it becomes the same thing as a "no". Which is why if the dog misses a cue I just mulligan.
     
  16. smeagle

    smeagle New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    Hmmm, I think we will have to agree to disagree. In some instances in training I want to create some frustration, I don't actually see it as a bad thing as it increases my dogs desire for the reward and makes her work harder especially when she knows I will relieve that frustration.

    Another example I can think of is (probably controversial but oh well) the way we use low stim e-collar training to train something like a recall. The stim on the lowest perceivable level becomes a cue and can increase the dogs confidence when they know they have the power to turn it off, I've only ever seen the end result be a dog with a confident and super fast recall. Its not something I would call highly aversive - that level of stim is probably one of if not the least aversive sensation you could use - but I doubt anyone could tell when looking at the end result that the dog was trained with an e-collar. The response to the command is solid, reliable and the dog maintains a good attitude. I am sure that aversives applied incorrectly have a negative effect (see my earlier posts about hard corrections in heel work) but I don't agree that's always the case.
     
  17. Greenmagick

    Greenmagick New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    Messages:
    3,199
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    9 not counting ducks, chickens, and fish
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    Well, the whole point of an aversive is to stop a behavior. It has to be aversive enough for the dog to WANT it to stop. So, yeah, while low level aversives may not cause issues in many dogs, that is still how they work
     
  18. smeagle

    smeagle New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    Sure but then the argument becomes whether you think aversives of any kind should be used in training and that would have to include things dogs find aversive like reward removal. With the e-collar example, working on the lowest perceivable level only works if you put the ground work in to conditioning a stim that low as a cue. It's so low that dogs will ignore it around even mild distractions Unless it's been proofed otherwise

    IMO - results are the most important thing for me. If something works well and produces good results I can't really argue with it.
     
  19. Greenmagick

    Greenmagick New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    Messages:
    3,199
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    9 not counting ducks, chickens, and fish
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    Yeah, we differ there. To me its about why and how something works, not the results.
     
  20. smeagle

    smeagle New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    How are the results not the most important part of training?

    If Im using a method that isnt working why continue with it? Why use a method you aren't getting GOOD results with?

    This attitude really baffles me. When I look for a reputable trainer the thing I'm most interested in is how good their results are with the dogs they work with. If their methods are ineffective or don't produce good results I'm not interested.
     

Share This Page