Curious

[Guest rhapsodical78]

You may be getting confused with 'Compulsion Training', which involves physically manouvering the dog into position.

I have done the NDTF course .... and I am familiar with the matrix you refer to. I am thinking beyond the basic foundations of what the course teaches though, and I don't believe I am conflicting with it.

"Compulsion" training method is what I was referring to in my post above. If you can clarify where you believe that what I am saying conflicts with what NDTF teaches, perhaps I can work out where you don't understand what I am saying. ;)

My contention was that the terms I'm using are correct and commonly used terms. There shouldn't anything terribly confusing about them. Your contention was that my terminology was incorrect. The matrix indicates otherwise. I tend to think we're on the same side here.

[Kelpie-i]

rhapsodical78, yes I did do the NDTF course way back when Jesus was a lad and I too have those notes. I do understand how it can all become confusing, especially when the example adds training methodologies as examples to the quadrant.

The current discussion was about the use of corrections (either verbal or physical), not about the various quadrants of training. ;)

[Erny]

Your contention was that my terminology was incorrect.

I didn't say anything about your terminology, Rhapsodical78.

To be honest, I didn't really read it that closely.

[Kelpie-i]

I didn't say anything about your terminology, Rhapsodical78

That was me!!

Here is something that may help clear things up.

Inducement means to "bring on" or to pursuade. Under the "banner" of Inducement are a number of techniques which are designed to "bring on" or pursuade the behaviour ie. luring, shaping/marking etc. These particular techniques imply that the dog offers these behaviours from his own free will. Which is the difference between inducement and compuslion. However, this is where the training matrix comes in....once the dog has been "induced" or pursuaded into doing something you want/like, then you apply R+ (which is part of the 4 quadrants) ie. give a treat, pat, praise etc to encourage the behaviour to occur more often. Once the dog knows the exercise/skill/behaviour very well and chooses not to comply, you can "correct" using either verbal or physical punishment which is also part of the four quadrants.

The act of removing/withholding food treats or giving a physical punisher etc forms part of the practice of maintaining or removing a behaviour or action that either does or does not meet your criteria. The teaching matrix is designed to make you aware of the quadrants of reinforcement and is somewhat irrelevant to the actual "teachings" of a new behaviour which is what both Inducement and compulsion methods are used for.

Hope this helps.

[Lablover]

Have we finished yet? (Cringing but with a smile on my face). Husband away tonight, no cooking!!!!

I do not think we are ever going to agree.

I should imagine: how dogs learn BEST will always be open to debate. Just as the human education/school system. Along this line of thought, every dog is different.

ie:

Do our personalities affect how we train our dogs?

Do your dog's "personality" affect how you train?

Does your required level of behaviour affect how you train?

All further posts would still be interesting.

[Erny]

Have we finished yet? (Cringing but with a smile on my face). Husband away tonight, no cooking!!!!

I do not think we are ever going to agree.

Hi LL .... long time no catch up. Must fix that. ;)

I don't know what you mean by the above. From what I gather, we have agreed. Different training methods suit different dogs. Different training methods suit different applications for which we are training.

At least, that's the gist of what I have gleened from the conversation as it stands.

LL :

Do our personalities affect how we train our dogs?

I think they do. Although knowing this, we should be able to adjust to suit each individual dog.

LL :

Do your dog's "personality" affect how you train?

Again, yes. Which is why different training methods suit different dogs. I am assuming you mean "temperament" in your interpretation of "personality". I would also take into account any prior learning history as well.

LL :

Does your required level of behaviour affect how you train?

Referring to my signature quote ie "If you fail to plan you plan to fail. Train with your end goal in mind", I think the answer to this one is yes as well. However, I don't think one can lose sight of the big picture as regardless, the dog's (using your word) "personality" and any other contributing existing behaviours still needs to be taken into account.

[Kavik]

Hi LL you always ask good questions ;)

Do our personalities affect how we train our dogs? Yes I think so. The methods we prefer to use and tools as well as idiosyncracies, and issues we may have due to past experience.

Does your dog's personality affect how we train? Yes again. The amount of prey, pack and food drive, motivation and energy levels, what they were bred to do.

Does your required level of behaviour affect how you train? Yes. Since I would like to compete, I try to train to achieve this. I have yet to actually compete with my dogs though, so I guess I have a good deal of work left :D Probably more from me than them!

[Lablover]

Hi LL .... long time no catch up. Must fix that. ;)

I don't know what you mean by the above. From what I gather, we have agreed.

At least, that's the gist of what I have gleened from the conversation as it stands.

O, we have agreed. Good, lovely.......perfect!!!!.

[Lablover]

Hi LL you always ask good questions ;)

Good questions, probably not .....simply become confused with all the various replies. Hard to keep track who's who also.

I am training my 4 dogs, and every one is soooooooo different, two as tough as old boots, two sensitive but high desire.

All love obedience with no rewards, nowdays. Operant? Theory 101 perhaps??? :D

[JulesP]

I think it is a good idea to also pick a breed of dog that's personality also fits your personality! I.e. If you like a really obedient 'yes master, straight away' type dog then it would be rather frustrating to have breeds that are of more the 'umm yeah, ok, in a minute, maybe' type attitude. You might say that it would be challenging but I think it would lead to frustration!

[Lablover]

I think it is a good idea to also pick a breed of dog that's personality also fits your personality! I.e. If you like a really obedient 'yes master, straight away' type dog then it would be rather frustrating to have breeds that are of more the 'umm yeah, ok, in a minute, maybe' type attitude. You might say that it would be challenging but I think it would lead to frustration!

For sure. Otherwise they can sleep on someone else's couch.

But with my lot, a little less desire would sometimes be easier.

Talking to a friend and they are thinking about importing a US working line labrador. Woo hoooooo.

[Working_Setters]

Congrats Cosmo, Erny, Jeff and Myszka excellent posts There's probably no need for me to add anything, but here’s a couple of thoughts anyway

I know there are a few 'traditionalist' trainers on here.

That would include me, although I prefer the term “balanced trainer”. I think of it this way, as an open minded balanced trainer I have a tool box full of dog training tools and techniques, it includes tasty treats, clickers, praise, body language, NILF, TOT, check chains, e-collars, jealously and pack inclusion/exclusion. As a trainer, why would I want to open that box and toss away everything that wasn't purely positive? How would that make me a better/more effective trainer??

For those of you that are - have you used positive methods (I know many of you have)?

Yes, of course!! Traditional/Balanced trainers use plenty of praise (and possibly treats) in their training. I've also attended a clicker training classes. The classes were good, I learnt a lot and this method suited the young spaniel pup I was training at the time. The instructor had a GSD that was very well behaved, would do all sorts of tricks for the class and looked like a great advert for clicker training. However after awhile I got to know the trainer and her GSD, turns out she couldn't let the GSD off-leash outside her backyard. I was living the USA at the time, there are heaps of deer in rural Virginia and this GSD loved to chase them. The trainer had been working for TWO YEARS to try and build a reliable recall so she could let her dog off leash!! Now she was a way better trainer than me, but I could have cured that dog of deer chasing in two days. That's why I'm a balanced trainer and will use all the tools and techniques in my dog training toolbox, it's just a more effective way to train.

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

B/c they work for me, with my dogs in the environments in which we work. Working gundogs have been trained by traditional methods for a couple of centuries, there's no doubt that these techniques are effective. I monitor the global working gundog world quite closely, I’ve travelled and met with working gundog folk in the USA, Canada and NZ. I read widely and spend time on the net, including moderating a working gundog list, AFAIK nobody anywhere in the world is getting better results from their working gundogs than balanced trainers. Believe me some of these folk are rich, smart and highly motivated, if they thought purely positive training would give their dogs an edge in competition, they'd be onto in a flash, but that just aint the case.

I think clicker and purely positive are great for teaching dogs all sorts of stuff in relatively uninteresting environments, where you, the activity you're training and the treat you're offering are the most interesting thing around for the dog. I find these techniques fall over in the face of high distractions (see the deer chasing part of my post).

Like Cosmo has stated much depends on the type of dog you're training. Working dogs need drive to do their work and bidability to work as a team, it's somewhat the ying and yang that need to be kept in balance. Working dogs that are so biddable they never leave your side, never get out and do their job are obviously not much use, neither are those that are so driven they wont work as the junior member of the team. I find balanced training works very well on these types of dogs. Pet dogs have no need of any drive to perform their work, they can be made a biddable as breeding can make them. I suspect these dogs are much better suited to purely positive training methods than working dogs. IMO it's no coincidence that the rise in the popularity of purely positive training has mirrored the rise in pet only dogs. It's a technique that works well on these super biddable dogs.

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.

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'.

To me these two statements are contradictory. To me if I say sit and the dog doesn't sit, then the dog is misbehaving (presuming of course that sit has be trained). If a dog chooses to disobey a known command, then IMO the dog is misbehaving

Also - why do we feel that we *can* correct a dog.... I mean - train any other animal and correction gets you nowhere but frustrated

This is incorrect. Scientists have trained rats, monkeys etc to do all sorts of exercises using negative stimulation. You "train" cows, sheep, horses etc not to touch an electric fence in a very short time.

[persephone]

""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. ""

I don't belive that correcting any other animal gets me nowhere....

ALL my trainable pets..from budgies to Horses have received corrections in one form or another...from a vocal to a physical.... goats, cats,even my duck many years ago....

Why do you think it doesn't work?

[Tangwyn]

Mrs D - in no relation to the thread - how would you correct a dog for not coming when called? I am genuinely interested as I find this hard to follow through as you can't obviously correct the dog once it has come back to you . Would you verbally correct it or what?

If the dog is off leash but still in teaching phase I would go to the dog, clip the lead on, say "come", guide the dog in and praise. If the dog has completed the teaching phase and I am positive it is being disobedient then I will go to the dog, clip the lead on, give a leash correction at the appropriate level for the dog, guide it in and praise.

Once the first command is given I never give the dog a second chance to disobey regardless of what phase of learning it is in at the time.

As others have said, horse trainers obviously use corrections to train horses. What do you think a bit is on a bridle? A thin piece of metal over the bare bone of a horse's jaw is guaranteed to inflict pain. The narrower the piece of metal the more pain. Spurs? Leg pressure?

I'm going to go out on a fairly big, long and dangerously fragile limb here and say that I don't believe purely positive methods ever achieve 100% reliability. Sure, they may be used for some animals like dolphins but do you think it really matters to the trainer if that dolphin doesn't execute the exact type of manouvre that was requested?

Methods such as timing the dog out or going inside will obviously be more effective for dogs with very high pack drives. For dogs who don't then what?

I find it is often very easy for certain trainers to espouse a certain method which is successful with their one dog. Show me the trainer who has been successful with 10 or 20 different dogs and I'll show you the person I'm lending an ear to.

[Working_Setters]

Forgot to add that I think a combination of positive and negative is a completely natural/normal way for all animals to learn about the world. Do something "right" get a reward, food, warmth, companionship etc, do something "wrong" and go hungry, get eaten, some other physical/mental suffering. Think of a wild dog pack, how do those pups learn right and wrong, if not from a combination of positive and negative outcomes. Same with the way balanced trainers train.

[Tangwyn]

I agree whole-heartedly WS. You only have to watch a herd of horses to see some fairly spirited "corrections". Or check out my horse's hide (with various teeth marks and big chunks of hair and skin removed) when he's brought in from the mob.

Edited June 13, 2007 by Tangwyn

[persephone]

I agree whole-heartedly WS. You only have to watch a herd of horses to see some fairly spirited "corrections". Or check out my horse's hide (with various teeth marks and big chunks of hair and skin removed) when he's brought in from the mob.

Or watch mum/pack members in the dog family....pups are often sent squealing!! Our young Pat insists on eating with EVERYONE...most of them will roll him and send him packing with a lot of noise. He is taking a while to get the message ...so he will have a few more corrections from his family.

[Tonymc]

Working Setters,great post!!!!Who better to show us the way than Mother Nature!!! Tony

[leopuppy04]

I know there are a few 'traditionalist' trainers on here.

That would include me, although I prefer the term “balanced trainer”. I think of it this way, as an open minded balanced trainer I have a tool box full of dog training tools and techniques, it includes tasty treats, clickers, praise, body language, NILF, TOT, check chains, e-collars, jealously and pack inclusion/exclusion. As a trainer, why would I want to open that box and toss away everything that wasn't purely positive? How would that make me a better/more effective trainer??

For those of you that are - have you used positive methods (I know many of you have)?

Yes, of course!! Traditional/Balanced trainers use plenty of praise (and possibly treats) in their training. I've also attended a clicker training classes. The classes were good, I learnt a lot and this method suited the young spaniel pup I was training at the time. The instructor had a GSD that was very well behaved, would do all sorts of tricks for the class and looked like a great advert for clicker training. However after awhile I got to know the trainer and her GSD, turns out she couldn't let the GSD off-leash outside her backyard. I was living the USA at the time, there are heaps of deer in rural Virginia and this GSD loved to chase them. The trainer had been working for TWO YEARS to try and build a reliable recall so she could let her dog off leash!! Now she was a way better trainer than me, but I could have cured that dog of deer chasing in two days. That's why I'm a balanced trainer and will use all the tools and techniques in my dog training toolbox, it's just a more effective way to train.

Just out of curiosity (and to throw another tangent in the works :D ).

What do people think of as "Purely positive"??? Your little tool box sounds very similar to what I have in mine WS - hence the question

Also - what do you think 'purely positive' trainers think of when they speak of 'traditionalist' trainers? It seems that many here think that I have a very different picture in my head than what they actually are (eg: these evil green monsters who make their lives a living nightmare??)...

Just curious .

To me - Purely positive doesn't exist . You achieve nothing with always teaching your dog an alternative.

A "Positive trainer" is one that uses 'motivational' methods but doesn't have harsh aversives while training their dogs. Their are reprimands/consequences but not anything physical or 'harsh' ie: a deep growl "AHH" I won't use unless my dog is jumping up on the bench or something similar.... I won't use it if the dog is 'directly engaged' with me - eg: heeling and steps out of position.... A trainer of this sort also usually will not use a check chain, prong, e collar unless certain circumstances call for it... Positive trainers often work on "ignoring incorrect behaviour and rewarding good behaviour". Generally - there is 'no fuss' if the dog makes an error - just placed quietly into position...

To me - a traditionalist trainer is one that uses the 'traditional' methods. The dog is taught positions with compulsion rather than lures. The dog is corrected when it disobeys even in training ie: if it doesn't sit, or drops in a sit stay - rather than just being placed back in position, is corrected instead. If the dog gets it right there are still plenty of rewards - sometimes in the form of food, but usually in the form of toys/ pats/ praise.

for clarity - by correction I mean a physical correction or harsh verbal correction....

I think this is where much of the confusion comes from??

[poodlefan]

LeoPuppy:

What do people think of as "Purely positive"??? Your little tool box sounds very similar to what I have in mine WS - hence the question

I do know a few people who've tried the "purely positive" approach. There's a standing joke that goes around my dog training friends. We reckon you can always spot a purely positive trainer... they're the ones who can't let their dogs offlead because they can't control them.

The standard response mouthed by the purely positive brigade is that for any situation you simply need to give the dog a more positive motivation to do something than not to do it. Show me a motivator more "positive" for many dogs than chasing a kangaroo and I'll be very surprised.

Bottom line for me is that dogs need to know some behaviour has adverse consequences. You do need some negative reinforcement.