Neutralisation Vs Socialisation

[The Spotted Devil]

Just from my limited work experience with Guide Dogs Vic - the dogs in training at the centre (once they return from puppy raising at 12-18 months) are always kennelled in pairs and spend much of the day in a group of 4-6. They play with each other, play with toys, love going for walks/runs and will take as many cuddles as you give them. As soon as the harness goes on - different dog - unbelievable change - no mad Lab puppy behaviour but a suddenly mature dog beyond it's years.

I've tried to do the same thing with Zig - if we're "working" (has to be done at the off-leash park), focus is on me, tail wagging, alert and ready for action. When he is released one of his rewards is to tear around like a mad Dally, p!ssing on everything and saying hello to the dog he was just required to ignore completely during a recall or heel work. Best of both worlds and it's a good way for me to monitor how good his focus is. He is naturally fairly aloof with people and really is only keen to meet them so as he can see how much he can get away with

[Erny]

I've tried to do the same thing with Zig - if we're "working" (has to be done at the off-leash park), focus is on me, tail wagging, alert and ready for action. When he is released one of his rewards is to tear around like a mad Dally, p!ssing on everything and saying hello to the dog he was just required to ignore completely during a recall or heel work. Best of both worlds and it's a good way for me to monitor how good his focus is.

Sounds like TOT ..... except instead of the meal at the end, it's the "meet and greet".

[Cosmolo]

Jesomil- thats my exact question with the bad experience to a neutralised dog and one of the major reasons i don't do it. If someone who does neutralise could explain their thoughts on that situation that would be great!

[The Spotted Devil]

I've tried to do the same thing with Zig - if we're "working" (has to be done at the off-leash park), focus is on me, tail wagging, alert and ready for action. When he is released one of his rewards is to tear around like a mad Dally, p!ssing on everything and saying hello to the dog he was just required to ignore completely during a recall or heel work. Best of both worlds and it's a good way for me to monitor how good his focus is.

Sounds like TOT ..... except instead of the meal at the end, it's the "meet and greet".

Or simply positive reinforcement

[Erny]

Or simply positive reinforcement

Yep - I'd say it is that.

[Cosmolo]

Could someone who neutralises help out with jesomil's question? I'd like to know the answer too

[Kelpie-i]

I've tried to do the same thing with Zig - if we're "working" (has to be done at the off-leash park), focus is on me, tail wagging, alert and ready for action. When he is released one of his rewards is to tear around like a mad Dally, p!ssing on everything and saying hello to the dog he was just required to ignore completely during a recall or heel work. Best of both worlds and it's a good way for me to monitor how good his focus is. He is naturally fairly aloof with people and really is only keen to meet them so as he can see how much he can get away with

I once watched a training video with Patricia McConnel and a few others, sorry the names escape me...but they worked on this and called it "Life Reward Training". A life reward is anything that is within nature and its surrounds, basically something that we cannot simulate or control ie. the joy of butt sniffing, grass sniffing, playing with others etc. The idea was to have the dog sitting and focusing on the owner, regardless of how high the "life reward" temptation was, and then the dog would be released and allowed to and sniff or play. A good way to teach self control.

Back to neutralisation, I think the only time I would neutralise a dog (if I absolutely had to) would be for serious work purposes, such as for police dog work etc. I don't think it serves much benefit in our everyday lives with our dogs, especially the regular companion dog. It is best for these dogs to hold positive values to people and other things, rather than risk a bad experience which might see the dog place a minus negative value onto everything related to whatever frightened or hurt him.

IMO, it would be a much harder task to bring the value back to 0 with a neutralised dog who has had a bad experience, as opposed to a socialised dog who already has the positive (+) values well established.

Edited December 30, 2008 by Kelpie-i

[corvus]

I guess I don't really get it. Some people have said their dogs have become sort of naturally neutralised to people and other dogs as they grew older with continued exposure. This has been my experience as well. My old dog will often ignore dogs she doesn't know unless they approach her. I'm yet to see if Kivi will go this way as well as he is only 9 months old and is thoroughly in love with every other dog on the planet at the moment. My mother has a dog that was just like this as a youngster and now walks by most dogs with barely a glance, and she's a bit of a reactive dog. Even Kivi will leave other dogs to come hang out with me if he happens to look up during a play session and remember that he has an owner who is also often quite fun. It's not particularly hard to hold his attention and practice some things at the dog park while other dogs are gambolling all around him. So I have to admit I don't really see the benefit. I personally don't know many dogs over 2 years old that think other people or other dogs are worth ignoring their human to check out. Some, but generally they are dogs that aren't really trained and don't have much of a bond iwith their owners in the first place.

I have been thinking about attempting to neutralise a dog to my pet bunnies, though. It's too late for Kivi. Penny has neutralised herself and ignores them, but I'm wondering if you could do it with a prey driven pup.

[Just Midol]

Most people who neutralise their dogs (working dog owners) have dogs with very good nerves so are unlikely to be highly effected unless it happens in the fear period anyway.

[Cosmolo]

So you shouldn't neutralise a dog who does not have good nerves? Dogs with good nerves can and do still have bad experiences so it doesn't convince me that neutralisation doesn't make it easier for a dog to asign a negative value after a bad experience than if the dog was well socialised

[Steve K9Pro]

K9: All our training programs now advise neutralisation.

Some people are nervous of this as they feel it will be: -

More work - its not

Difficult - its not

Will cause their dog to be fearful - it wont

Will cause their dog to be unfriendly - it wont

Some think that no socialisation or lack of socialisation is neutralisation when in fact that is not true either.

Neutralisation is simply socialisation renamed to indicate the value we want dogs to have of certain things.

Socialisation to me is "showing your dog something new & assigning a value to it".

Neutralisation is just the same only the value is zero or close to zero.

This avoids the current problems of your dog being attacked in an off leash park whilst attempting generic socialisation programs & deals with dogs that would otherwise run off leaving their owners to go to something of greater value.

That something with greater value was probably given greater value through their socialisation program.

What some people don't understand is that values work in both positive & negatives.

EG: They get a pup with weak nerves that is concerned about meeting strangers for example. They don't realise that their dog has a value of strangers to the tune of possible negative 5. So it isn't neutral to begin with.

A program needs to be designed to achieve a neutral value of strangers for this dog would be to increase the positive value of strangers to this dog.

If they keep their dogs from interacting positively with strangers they wont make the problem worse, it just wont get any better.

[Steve K9Pro]

I am pretty confused about neutralisation and its purposes.

All the good working dogs I have had contact with have had positive values assigned to basically everything and then training has overridden it. So in the end, you get a dog who is happy and confident with everything but is fully switched on and in tune with its owner when in training mode.

K9: Ok, so one would ask, why train something you will have to over ride?

Do you neutralise and why? How do you neutralise and what do you choose to neutralise to?

K9: Yes because it reduces the chances of the dog gaining high end negative values for items such as dogs creating fear aggression etc as the dogs are not over exposed to many dogs & it also makes training flow a great deal smoother & faster.

The thing I dont understand is just say you have a dog who you have neutralised to people. It has been out and seen the world alot and is confident around lots of people but never seeks pats etc as it has never received them.

K9: correct. It can be patted it just doesn't die to be patted by other than the Alpha.

Just say this dog has one negative experience with a human (eg gets fallen on or gets a painful injury that needs treatment etc) how do you stop this dog then assigning a negative value to strangers.

K9: The values don't change, your looking at this like a mathematical equation such as: -

Socialised dog has met 4547 friendly people so it will take 4548 aggressive people to revert to fear aggressive, that's not how it works.

I personally, would like my dog to have many, many positive people experiences to fall back on in this situation.

K9: It wont have any effect if the dog is to take people negatively after a certain event.

Another example is: Someone may have been driving cars for ten years. In that time they have travelled through 20 000 sets of traffic lights without incident.

On the 20 001st time someone runs a red light & crashes into them. They are badly injured & when they recover & start to drive again, they are nervous around traffic lights.

20 000 good experiences & one bad = still have the value changed if the event is serious enough.

I think it is a training issue if you cant get your dogs focus off other people and dogs not how much value they place on their desires.

K9: Could be, could also be a waste of time to teach your dog to love something then teach it to ignore it...

[Kavik]

EG: They get a pup with weak nerves that is concerned about meeting strangers for example. They don't realise that their dog has a value of strangers to the tune of possible negative 5. So it isn't neutral to begin with.

A program needs to be designed to achieve a neutral value of strangers for this dog would be to increase the positive value of strangers to this dog.

If they keep their dogs from interacting positively with strangers they wont make the problem worse, it just wont get any better.

I think this is the bit that is difficult about neutralisation. Especially dealing with dogs with weak nerves or are fearful. I think you would have to be very knowledgeable to do this properly and not mess it up.

[Steve K9Pro]

K: I think this is the bit that is difficult about neutralisation. Especially dealing with dogs with weak nerves or are fearful. I think you would have to be very knowledgeable to do this properly and not mess it up.

K9: If you have a dog with weak nerves you will have to be very careful or you will mess it up, whether you neutralise or not.

[Quickasyoucan]

K: I think this is the bit that is difficult about neutralisation. Especially dealing with dogs with weak nerves or are fearful. I think you would have to be very knowledgeable to do this properly and not mess it up.

K9: If you have a dog with weak nerves you will have to be very careful or you will mess it up, whether you neutralise or not.

I would have thought it would be a good thing to actively seek to neutralise a dog with weak nerves actually rather than trying to "socialise it" as the inexperienced might. Better to get it to assign a neutral value than risk flooding it negatively by what is commonly perceived as "socialisation".

For example take a weak nerved pup to the park, give it a couple of bad uncontrolled experiences and surely you would be in for a whole heap of trouble. Just my uneducated opinion.

K9: as I mentioned before, Jake seems to now naturally to have assigned a relatively low value to strangers, as he has got older (which I am really happy about, suits our lifestyle well), if say a dog is at a stage where they will stand and accept a pat from a stranger but not actively seek them out does that qualify as being neutralised? I guess if I had to assign a value for him it would be around a 1 or a 2, but no more.

Would you expect more from a working dog than from a pet?

[Kavik]

I don't mean taking the dog to the park and letting it get into a free for all

But to try to increase its value from negative to zero? That could be difficult if you don't know what you are doing.

What about my question earlier - how do you teach the dog to accept things like bouncy friendly dogs or people or kids that come up noisily (or perhaps roughly) for a pat etc if they have only experienced those that give no reaction?

ETA: because they would think all people/dogs give no reaction and how would they know how to act when one acts differently to their experience?

Edited January 5, 2009 by Kavik

[Cosmolo]

I don't understand how a neutral value to people doesn't make a bad experience more likely to push the dog into negative than a dog with a positive value. A dog that has a positive value of 2 for other people is very different to a dog that has a positive value of 10 which is very different to a dog which has a negative value of -1.

[Just Midol]

I don't understand how a neutral value to people doesn't make a bad experience more likely to push the dog into negative than a dog with a positive value. A dog that has a positive value of 2 for other people is very different to a dog that has a positive value of 10 which is very different to a dog which has a negative value of -1.

Definitely.

But why is -1 a bad thing?

When is my dog going to have a bad experience with someone? When he is biting them and they kick him in the head? Police dogs have many "bad" experiences (Not entirely sure I believe this would be a bad experience) with people (beating, stabbing) yet they don't turn aggressive.

[Steve K9Pro]

I would have thought it would be a good thing to actively seek to neutralise a dog with weak nerves actually rather than trying to "socialise it" as the inexperienced might. Better to get it to assign a neutral value than risk flooding it negatively by what is commonly perceived as "socialisation".

K9: Yes I believe that too. Not as concerned about flooding as much as I am concerned that when trying to seek out dogs to socialise the weak nerved dog with, your probably going to come out with a worse outcome attempting to get a positive value.

For example take a weak nerved pup to the park, give it a couple of bad uncontrolled experiences and surely you would be in for a whole heap of trouble. Just my uneducated opinion.

K9: This will happen if you take any pup, weak nerved or not to a park & it gets a hard time by other dogs, weak nerved dogs are just more prevalent to becoming fear aggressive without much help.

K9: as I mentioned before, Jake seems to now naturally to have assigned a relatively low value to strangers, as he has got older (which I am really happy about, suits our lifestyle well), if say a dog is at a stage where they will stand and accept a pat from a stranger but not actively seek them out does that qualify as being neutralised?

K9: yes most likely but neutralised to strangers of course, not neutral to everything.

I guess if I had to assign a value for him it would be around a 1 or a 2, but no more.

K9: I draw a circle around the zero in a graph, that circle will encompass -3 to +3, anything in these ranges is ok to me. Just nothing over the top.

Would you expect more from a working dog than from a pet?

K9: I used to only neutralise working dogs but with such risks completing generic socialisation methods & higher demands existing now on pets, I prescribe it to all dogs working ir not now.

Working dogs to me need to able to comply with a known command under a higher level of distraction, of course neutralisation reduces distraction so this comes easier.

[Steve K9Pro]

K: But to try to increase its value from negative to zero? That could be difficult if you don't know what you are doing.

K9: If one has a weak nerved dog, they will probably need help in any case, & making the transition from say negative 4 to zero is always going to be easier than positive 8.

With those dogs that are born with weaker than desirable nerves, I prescribe more leadership than socialisation so the dog can rely on the Alpha, that's a more bankable "rock" than variable experiences.

K: What about my question earlier - how do you teach the dog to accept things like bouncy friendly dogs or people or kids that come up noisily (or perhaps roughly) for a pat etc if they have only experienced those that give no reaction?

K9: first there is no reason to only teach a dog that other dogs will be calm, not bouncy, just teach the dog how to recat in al cases (that are common) and for those not common, look to the Alpha.

Also neutralising does not mean you need a dog that has no reaction to yours, just conttrol the outcomes.

K: ETA: because they would think all people/dogs give no reaction and how would they know how to act when one acts differently to their experience?

K9: This would be an incomplete program, regardless of whether the goal was to socialise or neutralise.

C: I don't understand how a neutral value to people doesn't make a bad experience more likely to push the dog into negative than a dog with a positive value. A dog that has a positive value of 2 for other people is very different to a dog that has a positive value of 10 which is very different to a dog which has a negative value of -1.

K9: if you have a dog with a high positivbe valuye for people, & it goes into high drive to interact with those people & a bad experience is the pitcome, your unlikley to change the value dog has of those people, but you also have a dog that goes into high drive for people which really isnt desireable.

In most cases however, a neutralised dog doesnt interact by desire with strangers, less interaction less problems really.

The positive 2's & negative 5's are just my way of adding a value so people can understand.

To look at a dog that falls into the realms of - 3 to + 3 is like looking at the same dog.

I explain it that bway so were not trying to train dogs by decimal point if you know what I mean.

J: Well I'm half struggling with the definition of socialization and neutralisation. But generally in my experience many owners and people visiting that dog dont want dogs jumping over excited all over them for a pat, which would be the dog trying to "socialize" and yet we teach the dog good manners to sit calmly and wait no matter how excited the other person is for a pat (of course you would teach dogs this with every type of behaviour) which you would class as training neutralisation?.

K9: I think thats the idea but it is the long way around, but lets say you have set the value of strangers to zero, neutral. A stranger turns up at your home, your dog neither wants to go to the or walk away from them, it just has no interest.

The reward of interacting with strangers never was presented so you never have to train to sit before a pat. The whole program is un nccessery.

J: But yet the dog would still be "socializing" when on your terms and with the dog being calm the person gives the dog a pat.

To me it seems the two overlap each other and to me "socializing" a dog wouldnt be just let it go and play but to teach it the right manners to behave in every certain situation. Say, yes that dog can play with that dog, but on a leash the dog must ignore and sit/walk calmly beside you.

K9: no, the neutralised dog would not desire to play. Your looking at the same results (desires by dog owner), but achieved through training.

When you say the dog "must" ignore when on leash, must or what? Be dealt a correction such as removal of the reward or physical correction? Some would distract the dog with a motivator, which is competing between the distraction & the reward, all to hard. There is no need for corrections when your dog isnt by your side because it "must", it just wants to be there.