Staranais

Could someone please explaint this to me? If you give a command, then correct, the dog cannot avoid the correction even with speedy compliance. So aren't you just classically conditioning the dog to dislike the command? In fact, aren't you practically teaching him that speedy compliance is pointless, since it does not stop the correction? I'd personally still call this positive punishment, I think. The aversive is only being applied when the dog moves out of position, right? So you're still only applying it to decrease the behaviour of being out of heel position, right? That's positive punishment. Though I see Erny's point too. Once the dog understands that punishment will be applied if he moves out of heel position, I guess there is an element of negative reinforcement, since the very absense of punishment is in itself reinforcing. ;) My dog taught me everything I need to know. Incidentally, he runs correspondance courses too - he says $199.99 + GST, if anyone's interested? :D That's so true. But the one benefit of knowing these types of theories and terminologies is that when you talk to other trainers, you can understand each other. If we both have different definitions for "punishment", for example, communication will pretty much grind to a halt between us. :D

That's perfectly fine, there may be a small fee however... :D (ETA: where are my manners today? thanks for the complement!)

No worries

I'd probably call it both positive punishment and negative reinforcement, depending on how you look at it. The dog feels discomfort whenever he pulls, so dog pulls less - that's positive punishment. When he stops pulling and starts walking nicely, he stops feeling uncomfortable - that's negative reinforcement. Those two quadrants often go hand in hand, since normally you have to apply aversive (i.e P+) in order to remove it (i.e R-). More importantly, IMO, halters work by letting people physically control their dog using less force, since they have more leverage than a collar. (Edited for accuracy, sorry! )

I don't know if you are being funny or serious, Erny, but I just nearly spat coffee all over my keyboard. I promise I wasn't trying to be poetic! :D

Of course you are welcome to. Is there much negative reinforcement used in dog training? That depends who is doing the training! Some people prefer to only train using positive reinforcement and negative punishment only, and will not use positive punishment or negative reinforcement at all. Other trainers use all four quadrants, to varying degrees. Personally, I prefer to teach my dog new behaviours using positive reinforcement (R+) and negative punishment (P-) only. When I am certain my dog fully understands what is required of him, I will introduce positive punishment (P+) and negative reinforcement (R-) as a means of 'proofing' his behaviour. (This is done to ensure reliability, by showing him there are unpleasant consequences to disobeying commands, as well as good consequences for complying with commands.) In both the teaching and proofing phases, I try to make sure he earns a reward far more often than he earns a punishment, so that he enjoys the training and looks forward to it (this is a kind of classical conditioning, I guess). However, like I have said, some trainers use P+ and R- right from the start. Others refuse to use P+ and R- at all. Different strokes for different folks, right?

http://www.wagntrain.com/OC/

Haha, yes. Basically, punishment is anything that decreases the chance of the behaviour happening again, whereas reinforcement is anything that increases the chance of the behaviour being performed again. Negative means you take something away from the situation, positive means you add something to the situation. So positive punishment is adding something to a situation, to reduce the chance the behaviour will happen again. For example, growling at a dog who jumps up is positive punishment, since you're adding a verbal aversive. Negative punishment is taking something away, to reduce the chance the behaviour will be performed again. If you ignore a dog who jumps up, that's negative punishment, since you're removing a reinforcer (attention). Then there's positive reinforcement, and negative reinforcement. These four are termed the four quadrants of operant conditioning. Add extinction and classical conditioning, and you've got all the behaviourist theory you really need. Make sense?

IMO you're adding something to the situation (discomfort) to decrease the chance of the dog leaving heel position in future. So I'd call it positive punishment. If you choked the dog with the chain at all times, except when he was in position, I'd call that negative reinforcement. (You're taking something away, in order to increase the chance the behaviour recurs.) Just my opinion.

Oh Erny, wouldn't we all?

Slightly OT, but I just want to throw out the opinion that this particular incidence is, IMO, acceptable aggression. It's very hard to train a dog to be completely non aggressive, nor do I think this would be a good thing. Most well adjusted dogs will respond if provoked - the unacceptable thing is growling and posturing when not provoked (and it sounds like your dog has unfortunately learned to do this, possibly from this very incident). Don't know if you've seen this article - it's food for thought. http://www.flyingdogpress.com/sayhi.html

How are you doing, Zero and Tank?

Seems that way to me, too. Perhaps ask him why he did it? Well, personally I don't think you should let him off leash if there's the least chance he could attack another dog. Sorry if you don't like that idea, but it would only take one serious fight for him to be reported to the city council as a dangerous dog and have his life severely restricted. If you're seriously worried about him hurting another dog, I would get him to a good behaviourist pronto. If I have the wrong end of the stick, and he's merely being a little bit of a bully (instead of truly dangerous), then I apologise for being harsh. In this case, I'd have to wonder why he was behaving this way. Is he under-socialised, and does he just not know how to behave appropriately towards other dog? Is this perhaps learned behaviour - has his bullying inadvertantly been reinforced in the past? I'd question why your corrections obviously aren't working - they obviously are not, since if they were the behaviour would have lessened by now. Perhaps your corrections are insignificant compared to the satisfaction he gains from intimidating the other dogs. Or perhaps he has just worked out that you can't correct him off leash, so he can do whatever he likes once he's off leash? Just a few things to think about.

Another good idea when choosing a trainer (either qualified or non-qualified) is to ask for references from past clients who owned dogs of the same breed and/or who came to the trainer with similar problems. If the trainer is experienced and takes pride in their work, they should have no problem providing you with a few references for you to check up. And by having a chat to their former customers, you can get an idea of the types of training methods employed, and the degree of effectiveness, before you put your money down on the table. :D

Zero, you're in good hands with Haven and Erny. :D I just wanted to second their advice to see a behaviourist. Dogs can be dog-aggression for any one of a number of different reasons, and before you fix the problem you really do have to diagnose the cause. An experienced behaviourist is invaluable when doing this. This depends why he's aggressive. If he's fearful or defensive, then IMO there's every possibility that over time you could desensitise him to the presence of strange dogs. If he's merely displaying the dominant 'gamey' dog aggression that's inherent in some bull terriers, the best you may be able to do is teach him that when he is working, he must focus on you and ignore strange dogs. Best you get yourself to that behaviourist for a competent diagnosis of the problem. :D Let us know how you go!

Miranda's right, Gossco. There is already a whole heap of carbs in most dog foods - why add more fresh ones? If you're going to add some fresh food to a kibble diet, IMO it's of more value to add quality protein sources: meat, bones, fish, dairy and egg. Hold the rice and pasta. :p

Mine has two, but I know lots of dogs that get by just fine on just one. And I know a couple of people who believe in fasting, so don't even feed that often (they feed 6 times a week instead of 7). I like feeding two meals, since it means I can give him his RMBs in the morning to keep him occupied while I'm at work, then use his kibble ration to train him with at night. Are there any health advantages to feeding once a day instead of twice?

Cooked bones = bad, because they are much more likely than raw bones to splinter and hurt your dog.

Thanks!

I understood most of it - but do need to ask one dumb question! How do you use your body language to make the dog pivot his hindquarters, Packsapunch? I'm assuming you're standing there facing him at this point, so do you just mean leaning in on either side so he feels crowded and shuffles away?

Very gracious. My point being, of course, that a mere 15 000 years separation doesn't exactly make wolves a "distant ancestor". (To put that 15 000 years into perspective, the modern human species has been around for at least 5 times as long as that.) So whether or not you like BARF, I think you have to admit that wolves and dogs are still very close kin indeed - in fact, many reputable sources consider these two animals just different forms of the same species.

Here's a review and a recent paper from the peer reviewed journal "Science", that say it's actually more like 15,000 years ago. They use fossil evidence as well as mtDNA dating to establish this date. A Shaggy Dog History, Pennisi. E., Science 298:5598 (2002). Genetic Evidence for an East Asian Origin of Domestic Dogs , Savolainen. P. et al, Science 298:5598 (2002). Just in the interests of scientific accuracy.

Each to their own. My dog loves his breakfasts of chicken carcasses, brisket bones, raw egg and lamb hearts, and they certainly don't seem to do him any harm.

Hey Jim, When I had a cat I used to leave biscuits out for her, but put them up in a high place (either on top of a cupboard, or on a high stable shelf, depending on where we were living.) Since she was much more agile than the dog, she could reach the shelf and bowl of biscuits easily, whereas the dog couldn't even see them let alone reach them. Could something like that work for you? ETA - sorry Nadia, just saw you suggested something similar.

Double post - sorry.