Aidan3

Well, I can't imagine any situation you'd need to know the dance (or the component receptors) to train a dog. I'm studying behavioural science, including neuropsychology. It certainly wasn't my intention for us to go that far down that path, I was just pointing out that the head turning was not classically conditioned. I have seen people say they taught a good recall using classical conditioning, and certainly there would be some classical conditioning in a good recall, but the criteria people will reinforce in a good recall will normally always be operants, subject to operant conditioning. I think that is very relevant to the discussion. If you want the dog to respond quickly, selectively reinforce the most immediate responses.

Well, by definition, anything involving the ANS either involves the sympathetic or parasympathetic nervous systems (these are the two component arms of the CNS), and these necessarily involve the release of catecholamines (adrenaline and noradrenaline) and/or acetylcholine. If classical conditioning always involves the ANS, then it must always involve either catecholamine or acetylcholine release, and their action at certain receptor types on certain nerves in the periphery. (Incidentally, to lighten the mood, I should mention that I can do a dance describing all of these receptor subtypes - oh the joys of vet school!) Video or it didn't happen :-) You've gone well beyond anything I need to know, perhaps all respondent behaviour does involve catecholamines or acetylcholine? I do actually have to study this but not for a little while. I'll have to learn your dance :D Although it's probably different for non-mammals and very simple organisms. <- ETA: I meant what happens in the brain and nervous system, not the dance! I may be a very simple organism, but I am definitely a mammal :D No, I agree it's not, and sorry if I lead you to believe I thought it was. The only part I think is classically conditioned is the orienting. The perception, what that does in the brain and nervous impulses, yes, those are respondents.

Um, hello, I didn't disagree with a word you said. Covertly, you did, by presenting other methods. From a platform of nil experience Well I have a platform of experience clicker training Boxers to walk on a loose leash using something similar to the 'silky leash' method. No complaints so far. So unless someone has specific experience with a particular breed they shouldn't present an idea because it would automatically be an unhelpful, irrelevant, covert disagreement? No breed is that unique, Jed, certainly not the Boxer.

If I had to guess at motivations I would say she was uncomfortable with those other dogs and was seeking refuge with you, maybe even hoping you might leave. But I don't like to guess and there is every chance that I am wrong, so let's just say that barking and chasing served to drive off the other dogs and the behaviour increased, so successfully driving off the other dogs was a reinforcing consequence. If she is normally quite happy to interact with other dogs then stick with those situations where she has good interactions with other dogs. The beach may be OK if she was happy with all dogs except those two, just pick a quieter time and be prepared to move on if dogs she doesn't like are bothering her (rather than letting her sort the problem out on her own). A good recall will be very handy.

My replies and the article spoke in broad terms and I think you've taken a more black and white view than was intended. I wasn't trying to give the impression that any part of the nervous system stopped functioning at any time, and I certainly didn't imply that all classical conditioning involved adrenaline release (but adrenaline release is respondent behaviour). Yes! That is it, and I thought I had made a reasonable attempt to convey that, you'll get both operant conditioning and respondent conditioning and the two are interdependent but "turning the head" is an operant. If you've conditioned head turning as part of a 3-term contingency, it's not a classically conditioned response. OK, that'll do I guess Burch and Bailey describe respondent conditioning as affecting "the reflexive actions of the glands and smooth muscles" which I think is probably adequate.

In that case I've not explained it very well! The distinction is that the stuff the ANS takes care of are Respondents. If you use classical conditioning, that's the sort of thing you are working with. The ANS does not take care of head-turning, it might do something that causes the dog to turn it's head but the ANS does not do the head turning. I'm not convinced I'm doing a very good job of explaining this (which may be a problem for me with exams coming up!) so I've turned to Google and uncovered this: http://www.psywww.com/intropsych/ch05_cond...nditioning.html

I start recalls just using the dog's name, I put another cue on later. Once the dog understands to come to you when you call his name the next two criteria I work on set the tone for anything you work on after that: 1. Latency - the time taken to respond to the cue, don't reinforce the slowest responses 2. Speed - don't reinforce the slowest returns, some tips include tossing the reinforcer (be it ball, or food) behind you so the dog does not anticipate slowing down as he gets closer I like the response to be so quick, so automatic, that the dog ends up at your feet thinking "How the hell did I get here?" Minimum latency and maximum speed tend to blow through distractions.

You could probably mention the latin roots of the word "terrier" and also go into more detail about the traditional work of gundogs and how those traits make them useful or desirable in more common modern settings (e.g service, guide, SAR, pet etc) I'm not sure what you are being marked on or which academic standards apply, but it may pay to include some references - other sources to back up what you have written. Also, don't forget to use the spell-checker, something that can mistakenly be overlooked in the rush to hand in an assignment.

Timing is the main advantage. I cannot do some of the things that I do as efficiently with a verbal bridge, no contest for me. I've tried a whistle also, I was more comfortable with the clicker.

Young pups are often pretty good about just being put in the crate with the door closed. One of the best applications for the crate is to have pup crated in the bedroom with you. Set your alarm for, say, 2:00am. Wake up and take pup out to toilet. The next night, set the alarm 5 min later. After a little while you can have a young pup sleeping right through with no accidents. For this to work the crate must be the right size, not too big (and not too small either).

You can buy non-lethal traps but the common mouse trap kills very quickly. Dispose of over your least favoured neighbour's fence, or bury if you like all of your neighbours.

I use a towel, on a hard floor surface you would be surprised how long it takes them to find all the food.

Everything I teach dogs like this has to be quiet or there is no reward. Quiet is the most fundamental criterion, so it might have been a really great recall off a live rabbit beside a highway but the dog barked so there is no reward. Also, just sitting beside you or hanging out is behaviour, so if it's quiet - reward it. Reward for appropriate duration of quietness. In other words, don't wait so long the dog starts barking again. If the dog can only go a second or two without barking, you reward every second until you can stretch out the duration. The first couple of training sessions will look ridiculous and you'll feel like you didn't work on anything but doling out food every couple of seconds. Don't despair, if you actually do it consistently the dog often figures out very quickly that barking isn't part of the deal. As Erny has suggested, this can be a very good place for the use of conditioned No Reward Markers.

Yes, well, very close at least! We want the dog to bark a couple of times then shut up, this is two responses. So the dog starts to bark, this is correct so we click, a clicker-trained dog who hasn't been deliberately trained to continue after hearing the click will usually stop, anticipating the food. Then while still eating they are definitely not barking, so we click again and toss another treat.

Sure, for those who have good general obedience there is no sense in reinventing the wheel. I use a trained "shush" myself. I don't know a lot of people who teach a trained "shush" unless they actually have a problem like this (or compete in obedience) so I'm not sure whether it's any less work, probably more if anything.

I can't see anything wrong with that, but I agree that a NILIF approach might sort a few broader issues out. Upon reviewing the OP's most recent post I would like to see much faster results, actually I would like to see almost immediate cessation of nipping. There could be a timing issue. MM, have a look at controlled tug games. Pup needs to learn how to play appropriately.

The OP had admitted feeling guilty about using the tool. The suggestions were that a different name "might sit better with you" and that the collar isn't used to choke the dog. Of course no-one intends to "strangle" or "asphyxiate" the dog, but the initial (at a minimum) sensation is that of "choking" and this is what the sound becomes paired with. No sense in hiding from that fact, doesn't matter what you want to call the collar. How about this? If you clearly link the correction with the response that you seek to correct and the dog feels that they can CONTROL the consequence (in this case, avoid it entirely) through their behaviour then there will be very little stress. Any measures that we can take that indicate physiological stress will peak around the time of the correction then return to normal, baseline levels very quickly and remain there even in similar situations in future. Do you still feel guilty? I hope not. The other thing you can do to avoid any nasty side-effects is to take the opportunity to teach the dog what you do want (sounds like you can check that box off too), because otherwise punished behaviours do have a nasty habit of turning up again when you least expect them if you neglect this step.

My "Calming Yo Yo" exercise found in this article: http://www.clickertraining.com/node/1556 ...will teach your foster dog how to be calm while apart from you. It is very effective when done exactly according to the instructions.

Similar to my question about the stress of reinforcement being withheld -vs- use of an aversive instead. No one has answered that one either. Most of the empirical data, which mostly looks at salivary cortisol levels (a fairly reliable indicator of stress) seems to suggest that stress and frustration are highest when the animal does not feel that it can CONTROL the consequences. It would probably be a leap to generalise from this observation, but it makes good sense to avoid letting the dog feel that they do not have any way to control the consequences whether that be through an extinction procedure or a punishment procedure. For the record (to correct an assertion commonly made on DOL and made earlier in this thread) WITHOLDING a treat is not a punisher. It would be an extinction procedure. There was a thread I started some time back entitled "-P vs extinction" which explains the differences. So essentially Cosmolo and Erny asked the same (excellent) question. I can't say what Delta would teach, but I would hope it was best practice for positive reinforcement training which is to minimise extinction bursts by setting the animal up for success to do something other than the response under extinction. This should almost always be the case when working with particular types of aggression, where an extinction burst can become a dangerous situation, although I'm of the understanding that Delta trainers refer on aggression cases unless they have extra training or experience that enables them to deal with it (as would NDTF trainers I would hope). Something that I think about, perhaps a bit too philosophical, but just because fear, pain and stress are a normal and even necessary part of a dog's existence does not mean that we SHOULD use fear, pain or stress in teaching them. It is no justification for it (on it's own, there are better arguments out there and some have been represented in this thread) But as others have said, in the main dogs are fairly resilient. I'm not sure that I'd pay any attention to dogs or wolves who use physical force to control other dogs though (full contact as opposed to merely ritualised aggression), if I were to use them as a model (and to some extent I do) I would be looking at the ones who really don't need to. Those are the ones who really get things humming along nicely in a group.