Purely Positive - A Few Questions

[Purpley]

Hi there,

I am thinking that I am going to train my pup is as positive way as I can. I am currently reading a book and I have a couple of questions and need some advise.

My question relates mainly to tone of voice. Now as I see it - its punishment and positive depending on how it is used. And that I should possibly replace the bad tone of voice with negative punishment (so ignoring or witholding reward) but how do you do this is a scenario such as:

**Puppy is stalking my 14mth old son for food that he is carrying around. I would normally in a gruff voice say 'Ah Ah' and puppy would retreat. I would then drop or sit puppy until my son has finished the food and then release him, with heaps of praise etc.

So how do I do this in a purely positive way?? 14mth old can't do it, as he is too little, and usually I am a distance away?

Thanks in advance,

Suz

[Cosmolo]

Do you want the dog not to follow the child? Or just not to try to take the food?

[Tonymc]

In the real world,I am not a fan of the purely positive crowd.One only has to look to nature for the answer.Watch the behaviour in a pack of wild dogs, interacting with each other.Dogs in a pack do not conduct themselves on a purely positive manner. Tony

[poodlefan]

Hi there,

I am thinking that I am going to train my pup is as positive way as I can. I am currently reading a book and I have a couple of questions and need some advise.

My question relates mainly to tone of voice. Now as I see it - its punishment and positive depending on how it is used. And that I should possibly replace the bad tone of voice with negative punishment (so ignoring or witholding reward) but how do you do this is a scenario such as:

**Puppy is stalking my 14mth old son for food that he is carrying around. I would normally in a gruff voice say 'Ah Ah' and puppy would retreat. I would then drop or sit puppy until my son has finished the food and then release him, with heaps of praise etc.

So how do I do this in a purely positive way?? 14mth old can't do it, as he is too little, and usually I am a distance away?

Thanks in advance,

Suz

It's very challenging to teach dogs not to do something without any kind of negative reinforcement, and that's what "purely positive" training is. Personally, I think its important that dogs learn that some behaviours are associated with negative reinforcement because only that will diminish or extinguish them.

You would either need to distract the dog (eg call it to you) or ask it to give another, more desireable behaviour (eg. drop or sit) on cue. Neither of those would be effective if you aren't there to see it and intervene.

[Purpley]

Cosmolo - Not take the food.

Tonymc - I do tend to agree with you and am wondering if positive can be used in conjunction - or does it have to be purely positive for it to work. Its all new to me. I have always been of the old school, and trained this way.

At the moment puppy responds greatly to tone of voice, and I don't really see this as a punishment as such.

[poodlefan]

Issis:

At the moment puppy responds greatly to tone of voice, and I don't really see this as a punishment as such.

None the less, if it's being used to discourage unwanted behaviour, it is not positive reinforcement.

If you set the goal of encouraging as much desireable behaviour as you can, and only using correction where necessary (rather than as standard teaching tool) you won't go too far wrong.

Most "positive" trainers aren't "purely positive" for the simple reason that dogs learn faster with an appropriate mix of positive and negative reinforcement.

"Negative" in that context does not have to be physical or harsh.

[Cosmolo]

I have actually found that (usually with older children though) teaching a target can be a good way to start to teach a dog not to snatch/ take food because it teaches the dog to go away from the food to actually get it. Thats the only positive way i could think to do it apart from redirecting which i think could be somewhat unreliable.

In saying that- i must say that i would be likely to correct verbally. Is there any particular reason why you would like to do everything positively?

[Cosmolo]

Just to add- i always use a combination of positive R and positive P and/ or negative R and i find dogs learn most quickly this way. JMO

[Purpley]

Cosmolo - Nah its just an option I was looking at and the book that I am reading basically says it has to be purely positive, and that's is why I have asked.

I am all new to this, so am at that 'confused' stage at the moment, as to what is considered which.

[poodlefan]

Susan Garrett says it best.

"Positive" shouldn't be equated with "permissive". Undesireable behaviour does require correction.

[Cosmolo]

Great quote PF

[poodlefan]

Great quote PF

I agree.. it's a very common misconception about "positive" training.

From Susan Garrett:

POSITIVE does not equal PERMISSIVE. This is the guiding principle of Say Yes Dog Training. You must be consistent. If a behaviour is acceptable at home (example the dog choosing not to lie down when told) it is also acceptable during work. Approach training and home life with a patient disposition and a strict application of what is and isn’t acceptable. Training happens 24 hours a day 7 days a week; your dog is always learning regardless if you are actively training or not!

Edited September 30, 2008 by poodlefan

[Purpley]

Just to add- i always use a combination of positive R and positive P and/ or negative R and i find dogs learn most quickly this way. JMO

Pos R reinforces behaviour by adding good - Pos P decreases behaviour and Neg R takes away to reinforce behaviour.

Is that right??

[leopuppy04]

I would either - give in a neutral tone an 'ah ah' or something like that - So I wouldn't growl it - but I'd give the dog a gentle command to tell it to leave (and yes, the leave will need to be trained)

As you then say - I would bring the dog to me (or call it back) - reward the dog for coming and for maintaining a position (sit or down) and keep the rewards flowing... I will then release with a bit of a game/ pat once you are ready to release the pup.

So it learns listening to your 'leave' or 'ah ah' is actually REALLY worthwhile

Agree with PF (now that I've read the thread) esp with the SG quote

At the same time - a 'correction' does not mean you have to correct the dog into the middle of next year for it to be effective

Edited September 30, 2008 by leopuppy04

[Purpley]

That's pretty much what we are doing at the moment Leopuppy04. He responds to the 'ah ah' and leave and then comes to me, where I make him sit or drop etc and then I release when I am ready. So basically the initial 'ah ah' is to take his attention away from the food involved.

[Janba]

- Not take the food.

The behaviour you are trying to stop is in itself rewarding as I assume the pup is sometimes successful in getting the food off your son and a behavour that is intermittently rewarded can be hard to extinguish by purely positive training.

If you were going to be purely positive you would have to make the reward for not trying to get the food of a greater value than trying to get the food.

I would tend to do very much what leopuppy described.

[Luke W]

I'm a newby to this training caper.

You'd need to be Gandhi or Mother Theresa to be purely positive!

Off the top of my head - if you wanted to be purely positive in this scenario.

While not absolutely accurate the following would give you an idea of the appoach that might be taken.

You've got to manage the behaviour so that dog CAN'T follow the child.

This means crating, tethering etc.

Then you introduce the child with the food at a distance of 20m.

The second that dog looks at the child without moving towards the child - Click, treat. Click, treat, click treat, cliack treat, click treat. End session.

Repeat, repeat, repeat.

Move child to 18m.

The second that dog looks at the child without moving towards the child - Click, treat. Click, treat, click treat, cliack treat, click treat. End session.

Move child to 15m.

Etc, etc

In the unlikely event the dog moves toward the child...unlikely. Simply move the child further away and end the session.

????

How does that sound?

Another alternative is to train an incompatible behavior.

Train the dog that whenever the child appears, the dog runs to it's mat for a treat.

Or you could train the dog to run away from the child!

??

Edited September 30, 2008 by Luke W

[Staff'n'Toller]

What book are you reading?

I have to say I don't know any purely positive trainers....whatever the definition of purely positive is anyway...

I assume food is not happening all the time in your house? You could mat train your dog whenever kids are around with food, and release the dog once the food is gone.

I was shown a video at a seminar of a person starting food preparation in a kitchen and that was the 3 dogs cue to 'get out of the kitchen'. Obviously you have to reward it though until the behaviour is quite strong, and generalise it to all sorts of kitchen type human behaviours, but it can certainly be done.

Mel.

[Lablover]

Its all new to me. I have always been of the old school, and trained this way.

Isiss, These two sentences have me laughing, abet in a rather manic way, as it hit a nerve in my training enlightment.

There seems to be more training books than cook books nowadays!!!!!! We all want to bake a cake in the "fairess" way.

I think this link virtually covers IT all? There is really nothing new in dog training, at least since 1940's. I think the bottom line is KNOWING what WE want the end result to be, choosing a dog who is hardwired for the job, sound temperament, good health, reading our dogs and consistency.

Does everyone agree this link basically covers IT ALL?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning

Edited September 30, 2008 by Lablover

[Leema]

I have taught Clover to refuse food from an open hand from me... She generalises it to most people but we're still getting it down to ALL people.

We did this with negative punishment - with holding the food from her. This was simply a matter of offering her the food and, if she went it, we'd quickly remove it so she didn't have a chance to grab it.

And then positive reward for when she did leave the food for a second. This was simply a matter of marking her leaving the food with "yes", and then rewarding with the food from my finger tips instead. But you could change this to rewarding with the food on the ground.

The reason I taught this was so she'd not take food unless offered between fingertips. Also, in the show ring, sometimes I need to have the food near her face/head as I adjust her collar or mouth her for the judge (rarely). In these instances, she ignores the food in my hand because it is not being offered to her inbetween fingertips.

She does not have a cue for this behaviour. It is default. She is only allowed food in fingertips.

Here is a picture when we were beginning to 'get' this behaviour - 6 months old:

Edited September 30, 2008 by Leema