Curious

[leopuppy04]

Just curious and not willing to spark a huge debacle .

I know there are a few 'traditionalist' trainers on here. For those of you that are - have you used positive methods (I know many of you have)?

Why have you chosen to continue with 'traditional' methods?

Have you ever 'trained' any animal other than a dog?

Now - I am not talking about general 'correcting' - ie: manners and general 'bad behaviour'.... i'm talking about correcting while in 'training' mode.

To me, correcting a dog while they are working for you in my mind is like slapping a kid across the wrists if they get a maths question wrong. Sure it works, because they have the 'fear' instilled, but they only do it out of fear.

Also - why do we feel that we *can* correct a dog.... I mean - train any other animal and correction gets you nowhere but frustrated (not talking wild animals here ). Dogs are so malleable that they will let us do literally *anything* to them.

Would you correct a dog while teaching a complex behaviour (eg: getting a drink out of the fridge)... from what i've always been taught - that is a complete no-no as the dog will shut-down/ get confused.... so why do the rules change?

Again - i'd like to point out that NO I am not saying that you should never correct your dog - because I do firmly believe that when a dog is misbehaving they need to be 'corrected'. I'm also not saying that whatever method is right or wrong - just merely trying to gain understanding. But this is what I struggle with - how can we correct an animal that is 'working' for us.... ie - obedience training..... NOT jumping up on the bench and stealing food

I hope I have explained it properly :D

[poodlefan]

Why must "corrections" involve creating fear?

Not all corrections need to be physical or painful.

A "no reward" is a correction. A verbal "ahhh" is a correction. Correcting for position by body language or verbal cue, is a correction.

I am a positive trainer but I will do all of those. Purely positive trainers are few and far between... some people just don't think what they are doing is "correcting" their dogs.

[leopuppy04]

Why must "corrections" involve creating fear?

Not all corrections need to be physical or painful.

A "no reward" is a correction. A verbal "ahhh" is a correction. Correcting for position by body language or verbal cue, is a correction.

I am a positive trainer but I will do all of those. Purely positive trainers are few and far between... some people just don't think what they are doing is "correcting" their dogs.

Sorry - it is my terminology again.

I'm talking more of corrections - as in a loud and threatening "Ahh" or a physical correction :D.

Of course - in training I will use a 'no reward' or a 'nup' if the dog has done it wrong - otherwise you will get nowhere in your training.

I don't see myself as a 'purely positive' trainer as there are consequences for behaviour.

[MonElite]

I do all sorts of things. Fear isnt really part of my training reigime, but corrections are. So is a lot of rewards in all sorts of forms. I use clicker to teach tricks and some new behaviours, I use toys for training in drive, I use food for teaching obedience. I use an ecollar as the escape/avoidance method as well as corrections if the dog knows the drill and ignores the command. I say argh as a verbal correction. I use a prong collar for teaching the loose lead walking if I have no sucess with other methods.

I do not correct the dog when Im teaching the new behaviour, but once the dogs knows the command and chooses not to do what I want it to do I will correct.

A friend of mine that used to compete at the highest levels in obedicne used a lot of corrections, never gave a piece of food, never gave a toy as a reward and her dogs worked beautifully, happy, never chewed a dumbell (she tought them the forced method) - all that for a pet and a good word from her.

I have seen a video from many yers ago of her competing at the state titles and winning them, and it was just a pleasure to watch. This is in my opinion a heavy handed owner/handler. Funniest thing was when she finished the routine gave a break command to the dog (dobermann) the dog jumped up really happy into her arms and she carried the dog out on her shoulder out of the ring. Today her dobermanns are the best behaved dogs around the show ring (she only shows these days)

[MrsD]

I do all sorts of things. Fear isnt really part of my training reigime, but corrections are. So is a lot of rewards in all sorts of forms. I use clicker to teach tricks and some new behaviours, I use toys for training in drive, I use food for teaching obedience. I use an ecollar as the escape/avoidance method as well as corrections if the dog knows the drill and ignores the command. I say argh as a verbal correction. I use a prong collar for teaching the loose lead walking if I have no sucess with other methods.

I do not correct the dog when Im teaching the new behaviour, but once the dogs knows the command and chooses not to do what I want it to do I will correct.

A friend of mine that used to compete at the highest levels in obedicne used a lot of corrections, never gave a piece of food, never gave a toy as a reward and her dogs worked beautifully, happy, never chewed a dumbell (she tought them the forced method) - all that for a pet and a good word from her.

I have seen a video from many yers ago of her competing at the state titles and winning them, and it was just a pleasure to watch. This is in my opinion a heavy handed owner/handler. Funniest thing was when she finished the routine gave a break command to the dog (dobermann) the dog jumped up really happy into her arms and she carried the dog out on her shoulder out of the ring. Today her dobermanns are the best behaved dogs around the show ring (she only shows these days)

What she said ^^^^^^^^. (except for the prong collar, I've never used one of those :D )

[leopuppy04]

Thanks for your response Myszka.

Of course - I am in no way insinuating that if you correct you certainly don't reward.... LOL - that would be the same as reward with no 'consequence'.

I guess if you have a hard headed dog maybe you may need to correct.... I'm just surmising from my own experience, my own views etc,etc.

So - rather than correcting if you were to 'no reward' the dog, pack up and go inside - do you think that your dogs would get the message or simply say 'hmph - who cares anyway?'

It is still confusing to me as to why we feel that we can 'correct' a dog, yet obviously can't any other animal....

Edited June 12, 2007 by leopuppy04

[ness]

Not going to argue the point but I just want to say that is because for correction trained dogs the absence of the correction can in fact become rewarding to the dog. Also the feeling of relief that the dog hasn't experienced a correction can also be rewarding. Besides which there are a few dogs out there for whom social interaction is the most rewarding or highly rewarding BUT there are millions of others for whom it means very little. I believe it would be possible to train such a dog without the use of food or toy rewards. I would question whether the standard of work would be as high as a dog trained using all three - praise, food and toy however.

[MrsD]

I guess that is why I have such difficulty grasping 'why'.....

Because it works for us & our dogs?

Dunno why we have to always have these threads - it's like the old saying goes, the only thing that trainer A & trainer B will agree on is that trainer C is doing the wrong thing. You say you don't want to spark a debate, but then you question methods that other people use in a way that implies that you don't think they would (or should) work & imply that any trainer who has the audacity to use a correction owns dogs who are sh*t scared of them & won't work because of that fear. And that is just rubbish.

If training the way youdo works for your dogs then that's fine, good for you, Im happy for you. But don't criticise the way other people train - it's their decision.

Sorry, I wont comment any more, but I just wanted you to know how much it sh*ts me .

[leopuppy04]

Dunno why we have to always have these threads - it's like the old saying goes, the only thing that trainer A & trainer B will agree on is that trainer C is doing the wrong thing. You say you don't want to spark a debate, but then you question methods that other people use in a way that implies that you don't think they would (or should) work & imply that any trainer who has the audacity to use a correction owns dogs who are sh*t scared of them & won't work because of that fear. And that is just rubbish.

I think you have misunderstood me Mrs D. I am not saying that it is wrong. I am not saying that the dogs that are correction trained are scared of their owners. I am most certainly not saying that the way I train is the only way to. I just want to understand 'why' and the reasoning behind why particular trainers choose whatever method they do. I also certainly don't think that the methods don't work.... I know for a fact that they do.

The door swings both ways - I constantly get the same questions about my methods also.

I guess I ask these questions because I like to know as to the reasonings behind the methods chosen. I am also under no means saying that anybody who 'corrects' has a fearful dog either!!!!! I know that that would be so far from the truth it is just ridiculous.

[MonElite]

I guess if you have a hard headed dog maybe you may need to correct.... I'm just surmising from my own experience, my own views etc,etc.

My female is far from being hard headed, she does receive corrections tho, if I need to apply one.

I know that if I were 'corrected' for making silly mistakes in my schoolwork - I would have worked less than if I weren't.

Id say this would be the case if the corrections you received were too harsh for the situation and you were to shut down and reach the learned helplessness stage.

This is far from what I would ever want in my training.

So - rather than correcting if you were to 'no reward' the dog, pack up and go inside - do you think that your dogs would get the message or simply say 'hmph - who cares anyway?'

lets say my dog loves to chase ducks, I call the dog doesnt respond, so I pack up and go home, - yes my dog will go home and will chase ducks each and every time we are out.

You might say - keep the dog on lead - ok, the dog will lunge towards the duck and will get corrected, will it not?

It is still confusing to me as to why we feel that we can 'correct' a dog, yet obviously can't any other animal....

Ive got no idea, I have never trained another animal. What other highly domesticated animals are you talking about? Horses? pigs, cats? or did you mean non domesticated ones like dolfins?

[leopuppy04]

So - rather than correcting if you were to 'no reward' the dog, pack up and go inside - do you think that your dogs would get the message or simply say 'hmph - who cares anyway?'

lets say my dog loves to chase ducks, I call the dog doesnt respond, so I pack up and go home, - yes my dog will go home and will chase ducks each and every time we are out.

You might say - keep the dog on lead - ok, the dog will lunge towards the duck and will get corrected, will it not?

Which is why I highlighted at the start of my thread that I was talking specifically about 'work' mode only. At this point, the dog is not working for you - so yes, it is HIGHLY likely that i'd do exactly the same as what you would do to correct the dog for this mis-behaviour. I'm specifically talking about if you ask for a 'sit' and the dog doesn't etc....

It is still confusing to me as to why we feel that we can 'correct' a dog, yet obviously can't any other animal....

Ive got no idea, I have never trained another animal. What other highly domesticated animals are you talking about? Horses? pigs, cats? or did you mean non domesticated ones like dolfins?

Cats, pigs, horses, chickens, rats etc. Domesticated animals .

Again - I do want to point out that IN NO WAY am I insinuating that if you correct a dog it will be scared of you/ unwilling to work/ traumatised for life.

Many 'traditional' trainers have said to me that they correct when the dog doesn't 'sit' because they want the dog to 'know' what happens if they don't do what is told (yes, I agree with that!), but they also want the dog to 'fear' what happens if they don't do it.

I earnestly hope that no-one thinks I am bagging their training methods - i'm honestly trying to gain further understanding.

[MonElite]

How domesticated and how pack driven are chickens and rats we keep as pets, on average?

The friend that I have mentioned earlier is this type of a trainer

they also want the dog to 'fear' what happens if they don't do it.

and her dogs do not show any signs of FEAR.

I earnestly hope that no-one thinks I am bagging their training methods - i'm honestly trying to gain further understanding

You can bagg my methods all you like, I actually dont care. If your methods work better and faster than mine Im willing to learn and apply.

Which is why I highlighted at the start of my thread that I was talking specifically about 'work' mode only. At this point, the dog is not working for you - so yes, it is HIGHLY likely that i'd do exactly the same as what you would do to correct the dog for this mis-behaviour. I'm specifically talking about if you ask for a 'sit' and the dog doesn't etc....

I sort of dont understand the above.

My dogs are pet, they are taken for walks, they are to perfomr basic stuff of come,stay, sit etc. I also do some obedience - is this what you have in mind?

Than I ask - how is the dog to know the difference of a sit at home before I open the door as oppose to sit in the ob ring.

Or better still - why would I want to bother teaching this separatelly.

Edited to add - many people have different comands for drive tought excercises v's non drive excercises.

is this what you are on about?

Edited June 12, 2007 by myszka

[Arya]

This is a good thread with lots of opinions Here's mine... I am happy to use a really really good correction for unwanted behaviour outside of training, like dogs aggressing at other dogs (where appropriate, depends on the situation and dog and has to be thought about wisely before entering into). In training, it depends on the dog's temperament and lots of other stuff. Do they know the exercise really well? Am I SURE they know it well? If so, are they misbehaving/ refusing to do the behaviour because they are throwing down a challenge or are they refusing to do it because of some other factor, like fear? Or simply can't be bothered as the reward isn't good enough? A really hard dog who is arcing up and being a s!@#t as a challenge, yes, a beauty. A dog who doesn't know what they are doing yet, never. A dog who does know what they are doing but isn't doing it for fear or nerves - like K9 said, don't add pressure to pressure. A dog who is unproofed and needs to know they must concentrate - sometimes. They can be given a choice. Do it and all is great fun and lots of treats, rewards etc. Don't do it and you get a little cxn on the chain. Appropriate behaviours chosen wisely for each dog. It's all good. The only thing I can't tolerate is extremes either way. Too positive or too negative. I've seen examples of both at times. I try to be wise and make the choice based on lots of factors ( I hope I get it right but am still learning! LOL). My aim as a trainer is to make the training so good I don't need to correct during it because the dog is loving it. Of course, with different dogs this just doesn't work all the time. I hope it's a good aim though. But they do need to know there's a consequence imho if we are sure they are just being disobedient and it's not something else, whether verbal or physical whatever depending on the dog.

[leopuppy04]

How domesticated and how pack driven are chickens and rats we keep as pets, on average?

oops - missed this bit. Horses - definitely pack driven.... cats - IMO yes, in a way. I think certain species show their pack drive slightly differently to a dog though....

The friend that I have mentioned earlier is this type of a trainer

they also want the dog to 'fear' what happens if they don't do it.

and her dogs do not show any signs of FEAR.

I do not mean 'fear' as in running away and hiding.... but I would guess that the dog would 'fear' the unknown - just not show it.... play on the concept of a little bit of stress is good.... does that make more sense?

Which is why I highlighted at the start of my thread that I was talking specifically about 'work' mode only. At this point, the dog is not working for you - so yes, it is HIGHLY likely that i'd do exactly the same as what you would do to correct the dog for this mis-behaviour. I'm specifically talking about if you ask for a 'sit' and the dog doesn't etc....

I sort of dont understand the above.

My dogs are pet, they are taken for walks, they are to perfomr basic stuff of come,stay, sit etc. I also do some obedience - is this what you have in mind?

Than I ask - how is the dog to know the difference of a sit at home before I open the door as oppose to sit in the ob ring.

Or better still - why would I want to bother teaching this separatelly.

Lets see if I can explain better - for general manners - ie: jumping up on the table/ jumping up on people/ pulling on the lead I will instill verbal corrections. but for things such as 'obedience' - come, sit, stay etc - whether in the house or in the obedience ring I don't correct as it involves the dog 'engaging' with us and doing what we ask.... the rest IMO is teaching boundaries.... If I asked my dog to sit before coming inside and they didn't - the consequence is simple - you don't get to come in. If my dogs don't sit for their dinner - simple - they don't get their dinner.... but I won't verbally correct etc.... does that make more sense???

Edited June 12, 2007 by leopuppy04

[MrsD]

I am not saying that the dogs that are correction trained are scared of their owners.

.

.

. I am also under no means saying that anybody who 'corrects' has a fearful dog either!!!!! I know that that would be so far from the truth it is just ridiculous.

then why say this?

To me, correcting a dog while they are working for you in my mind is like slapping a kid across the wrists if they get a maths question wrong. Sure it works, because they have the 'fear' instilled, but they only do it out of fear.

You know the funny thing is that there are plenty of "traditional method" trainers out there who probably don't even give much praise or positive reinforcement like Myszka mentioned with the person she knows. I also know people who have trained like that. I probably give as much if not more "positive" reinforcement when I train my dogs as you do LP, but I choose to also correct the dog when it does the wrong thing.

Really poor analogy but take your example above about the child doing the maths question. Imagine the child does the maths question wrong & the parents say "No! Do it again". The child goes "Ooops " then does it again & does it right & the parent says "That's fantastic!!! Lets go out for a milkshake & I'll take you to the movies!". Do you think that the child would try hard to do the maths right the next time or not?

My answer to your question of "Why?" is simply that it works for my dogs .

(BTW, horses are taught a whole range of things using "corrections" or adversities, can't comment on any others as I've never trained any other animals )

EFS

Edited June 12, 2007 by MrsD

[MrsD]

Lets see if I can explain better - for general manners - ie: jumping up on the table/ jumping up on people/ pulling on the lead I will instill verbal corrections. but for things such as 'obedience' - come, sit, stay etc - whether in the house or in the obedience ring I don't correct as it involves the dog 'engaging' with us and doing what we ask.... the rest IMO is teaching boundaries.... If I asked my dog to sit before coming inside and they didn't - the consequence is simple - you don't get to come in. If my dogs don't sit for their dinner - simple - they don't get their dinner.... but I won't verbally correct etc.... does that make more sense???

And if your dog doesnt come back when he runs off across a road the consequence is simple too .

[MrsD]

This is a good thread with lots of opinions Here's mine... I am happy to use a really really good correction for unwanted behaviour outside of training, like dogs aggressing at other dogs (where appropriate, depends on the situation and dog and has to be thought about wisely before entering into). In training, it depends on the dog's temperament and lots of other stuff. Do they know the exercise really well? Am I SURE they know it well? If so, are they misbehaving/ refusing to do the behaviour because they are throwing down a challenge or are they refusing to do it because of some other factor, like fear? Or simply can't be bothered as the reward isn't good enough? A really hard dog who is arcing up and being a s!@#t as a challenge, yes, a beauty. A dog who doesn't know what they are doing yet, never. A dog who does know what they are doing but isn't doing it for fear or nerves - like K9 said, don't add pressure to pressure. A dog who is unproofed and needs to know they must concentrate - sometimes. They can be given a choice. Do it and all is great fun and lots of treats, rewards etc. Don't do it and you get a little cxn on the chain. Appropriate behaviours chosen wisely for each dog. It's all good. The only thing I can't tolerate is extremes either way. Too positive or too negative. I've seen examples of both at times. I try to be wise and make the choice based on lots of factors ( I hope I get it right but am still learning! LOL). My aim as a trainer is to make the training so good I don't need to correct during it because the dog is loving it. Of course, with different dogs this just doesn't work all the time. I hope it's a good aim though. But they do need to know there's a consequence imho if we are sure they are just being disobedient and it's not something else, whether verbal or physical whatever depending on the dog.

Arya - great post, couldn't have said it better myself :rofl: .

[MonElite]

You know the funny thing is that there are plenty of "traditional method" trainers out there who probably don't even give much praise or positive reinforcement like Myszka mentioned with the person she knows.

The person I know gives a lot of praise, pets, kisses etc. Never a piece of food, never a play with a toy after, never a tug.

Corrections with an excellent timing.

Excellent body language.

She gets dogs prancing next to her, ultra speed about tight turns, dops that sound like an earth quake.

Forced retrieve and no chewing on the dumbell, and no slowing down on the come back.

How - I have no idea.

The only thing I can't tolerate is extremes either way. Too positive or too negative. I've seen examples of both at times.

DITTO!!!

Edited June 12, 2007 by myszka

[leopuppy04]

I am not saying that the dogs that are correction trained are scared of their owners.

.

.

. I am also under no means saying that anybody who 'corrects' has a fearful dog either!!!!! I know that that would be so far from the truth it is just ridiculous.

then why say this?

To me, correcting a dog while they are working for you in my mind is like slapping a kid across the wrists if they get a maths question wrong. Sure it works, because they have the 'fear' instilled, but they only do it out of fear.

Because I was trying to highlight that I don't mean fear as in running away and hiding, but merely having a 'fear of the unknown'...

Really poor analogy but take your example above about the child doing the maths question. Imagine the child does the maths question wrong & the parents say "No! Do it again". The child goes "Ooops " then does it again & does it right & the parent says "That's fantastic!!! Lets go out for a milkshake & I'll take you to the movies!". Do you think that the child would try hard to do the maths right the next time or not?

Because i'm not talking about the child being told 'no, do it again' - in which case I completely agree with. I'm talking about a child getting smacked for getting a question wrong.....

And if your dog doesnt come back when he runs off across a road the consequence is simple too tongue.gif wink.gif .

Too true - and that could happen no matter what method you use .

Again - please - i'm trying to not make this a heated topic. Just merely fishing for opinions

Arya:

This is a good thread with lots of opinions smile.gif Here's mine... I am happy to use a really really good correction for unwanted behaviour outside of training, like dogs aggressing at other dogs (where appropriate, depends on the situation and dog and has to be thought about wisely before entering into). In training, it depends on the dog's temperament and lots of other stuff. Do they know the exercise really well? Am I SURE they know it well? If so, are they misbehaving/ refusing to do the behaviour because they are throwing down a challenge or are they refusing to do it because of some other factor, like fear? Or simply can't be bothered as the reward isn't good enough?

Agree completely

A dog who does know what they are doing but isn't doing it for fear or nerves - like K9 said, don't add pressure to pressure.

Exactly what i'm trying to articulate but not getting out properly

A dog who is unproofed and needs to know they must concentrate - sometimes. They can be given a choice. Do it and all is great fun and lots of treats, rewards etc. Don't do it and you get a little cxn on the chain. Appropriate behaviours chosen wisely for each dog. It's all good. The only thing I can't tolerate is extremes either way. Too positive or too negative. I've seen examples of both at times. I try to be wise and make the choice based on lots of factors ( I hope I get it right but am still learning! LOL). My aim as a trainer is to make the training so good I don't need to correct during it because the dog is loving it. Of course, with different dogs this just doesn't work all the time. I hope it's a good aim though. But they do need to know there's a consequence imho if we are sure they are just being disobedient and it's not something else, whether verbal or physical whatever depending on the dog.

Again - I agree completely. I'd try walking away first and if that doesn't work - perhaps a correction is warranted as the dog isn't engaging with you.....

Edited June 12, 2007 by leopuppy04

[MonElite]

Because i'm not talking about the child being told 'no, do it again' - in which case I completely agree with. I'm talking about a child getting smacked for getting a question wrong.....

Well how is it going to get it right if it doesnt get an opportunity to do it again and be told that is right?

In child terms v's dog terms in a pure positive training concept.

A child gets the answer wrong, we pack up and go home,

Next day the child gets the answer wrong we pack up and go hone

the next day .... you get the point now I hope.

What if there is an exam on Thursday?

Im my opinion it would be

I will show you how to do it.

You do it I tell you when its right. and Ill see few itmes you got it right. Ill tell you you are doing great.

You refuse to do it, you get a smack, than you get to do it again and you will get rewarded for doing it right

You dont get a smack for not understanding it, I get one for not showing you how to do it properly.

Edited June 12, 2007 by myszka