Taking The Easy Way Out

[Cosmolo]

I see people talk about taking the easy way out with many different things relation to dog training. Using food or a toy has been described to me as the easy way out as has giving a correction. It always seems to have a negative connotation and i am not sure why?

If a problem can be resolved or start to progress quickly- why is that a bad thing. Why should we select methods for dog X that require months of 'hard yards' if there is a better alternative?

[Erny]

I have read and heard this also Cosmolo ..... enough times to have lost count.

IMO, its use is supposedly to support argument and is implied as though doing things easy is lazy.

"Easy" is good for the dog too ..... some tend to forget that.

[JulesP]

Trying to teach one of my dogs to retrieve, used the shirley method. Took ages. Didn't work. Would the ear pinch have worked in a short time?? Perhaps. Not a method I wanted to use so dog doesn't retrieve. Oh well not the end of the earth.

[corvus]

I think Erny is right and it is largely an argument that can be used to back up pretty much any point of view. From my perspective, I don't like the "easy way" if it's one that I think involves more aversives than necessary. Like the ear pinch example. You can achieve a lot of things with dogs and many of them very quickly if you use certain methods, but just because it's quick doesn't mean that it is necessarily best for the dog. Fear is a very powerful tool, for example, but one that can be easily misused. I would rather dogs weren't afraid of their owners for the sake of quick training. I would generally err on the side of caution and avoid aversives if I could, even if that did mean it took longer. That's how I see the world. Other people might see the world another way and feel that it's better to be quick than less aversive.

[Cosmolo]

Don't want this to turn into an aversives vs no aversives debate but oen thing i would like to discuss is whether taking more time in itself can actually be aversive to the dog? Lets say i have a dog who loves food but i consider using food as a lure to be taking the easy way out so i teach another way using a pat to reward. A pat is not aversive but with this particular dog will take longer to teach the exercise- is the very fact that it takes longer aversive/ loading/ stressful to the dog? Does it mean the dog is confused for longer?

[m-j]

Using food or a toy has been described to me as the easy way out as has giving a correction.

Not sure if I have misunderstood but the dog is always working for a reward, to gain a treat or to avoid a correction which is rewarding. I'm interested in how else you can communicate to a dog what it is you want. To me this is what training is all about, communicating your desires to the dog, not sorting out leadership or anything else.

As Erny said why make life difficult for yourself and the dog.

Lets say i have a dog who loves food but i consider using food as a lure to be taking the easy way out so i teach another way using a pat to reward. A pat is not aversive but with this particular dog will take longer to teach the exercise- is the very fact that it takes longer aversive/ loading/ stressful to the dog? Does it mean the dog is confused for longer?

I think so. Motivation is the key to learning (learning being the opperative word), my dogs and my Autistic son have taught me that (my son has taught a couple of his teachers that also). Find an interest and they work their brains very hard to gain the reward. If they don't gain the reward equivalent to effort they perceive to have put in, they will blow you off.

cheers

M-J

Edited December 29, 2008 by m-j

[SkySoaringMagpie]

I see people talk about taking the easy way out with many different things relation to dog training. Using food or a toy has been described to me as the easy way out as has giving a correction. It always seems to have a negative connotation and i am not sure why?

If a problem can be resolved or start to progress quickly- why is that a bad thing. Why should we select methods for dog X that require months of 'hard yards' if there is a better alternative?

Hope my post into the "what's important" thread wasn't one of these. I'm not against easy, just lazy, where lazy is about half-arsing something at the dog's expense when you know how to do it better.

I agree that it's not an aversive vs non-aversive discussion because I've heard "the easy way out" about check chains and food rewards too.

Four observations:

1 - There are a lot of people out there who want a magic fix without putting any work in. I think trainers get jaded with this, and get cranky with people always looking for the easy way out where there is no easy way out. You know the ones who do the "that won't work" whine at everything you suggest purely because it sounds like they'll have to spend a bit of time with their dog. So perhaps it's the public's never ending search for the easy way out that has transferred a negative connotation onto training methods that appear easy (but usually aren't anyway, not for a novice - both food and check chains require good timing).

2 - Human hang-ups - whether about food, work and duty or self-esteem. People are crazy, and no amount of science will convince someone who is very emotionally attached to an idea about how their dog "should" be and what it "should do" just because they are carrying major personal baggage. Some of the stuff people do to their dogs is just Orwellian. If I had my way, I would fling some of these people into the sun.

3 - Some of us would prefer to take the long way around if, in our judgment, it reduces the risk of damaging our relationship with our dogs. JulesP's retrieve is a good example, unlike a recall, it's not essential to a dog's safety that it learn how to retrieve a dumbell so why not try an alternative that doesn't involve hurting your dog - even tho' it might take longer. Let's not debate this again, unlike #2, this is not a situation where people are being unrealistic about what dogs are capable of.

4 - Sometimes the "better" alternative depends what you are shooting for in the long run. If you just want a polite pet then lure away as long as you fade it later. If you want a dog with well developed shaping skills, and you have the patience and skill, it might be better to shape what you want. Horses for courses, and it depends a bit what engages the dog too.

[Bisart Dobes]

Your dog chooses the reward not you and not a trainer.

If my dog is motivated by food and that is his reward then thats what he gets - I couldn't give two hoots what anyone thinks of the way I train my dogs so long as my dogs love working with me and do not suffer a level of stress that inhibits their learning ability.

An example: my young male puppy (12 mth dobermann & about 40 kgs) decided last week that he wasn't going to drop. NUP NUP NUP - shove that up ya _ _ _ _ _ _ .

Now, he is food and toy motivated - neither of these were a bit enough incentive for him to drop, but yet he is extremely sensitive to collars and leads so I know that a correction will only serve to make him dig his heels in more and me physically fighting a 40kg boy - I think not ..... After making it a big game with heaps of 'laughs' he dropped - yah, that was it for him, reward, had a play and back in the trailer.

The plan from then was to get him to drop for every morsel of his dinner every night until he auto drops on voice and signal only. We are a week down the track and he can't drop quick enough for his dinner and thinks it is all a great fun game (this attitude I want in the ring when he gets to trial level). I will test him tonight when they've all had their runs, see where he's up to.

With this dog this is the way to go, with his aunty however she can be corrected and will smile at me, quick kiss on the hand and it's 'what's next then'. Her brother is softer - correction must be warranted and if he doesn't see that it was he will 'tell' you.

Training takes you on a different journey with each dog - they are as different as we are - I love watching them learn to learn and my end goal is to have a happy working dog who clearly knows what is expected of them and has the confidence in me and us as a team to carry it out in any environment. The proof is in the pudding - as they say.

[kyliegirl]

I think everything requires work, and I think how easy or hard it is depends on you and your dog.. Some children excell at learning maths, others struggle so different methods are given to them to help them learn faster and they excel that way.. I used to do my times tables with my fingers, others could just do it with their brains.. Its all a different way of working but all take effort.

I am looking forward to doing clicker training on my pup, I know it will be hard because I wont be allowed to use any corrections, but its also considered easy because some dogs pick up the click so fast they learn new tricks easier.. For example the trick play dead.. You can either push the dog into position and teach him that way, or you can shape him into it by waiting for him to offer you the position.. Depending on your ability to communicate and your dogs ability to solve the problem or learn why your pushing him into it will depend how quickly he picks up that is what you want him to do.. Both methods could either take 5 minutes or 5 days.

I will admit clicker training seems to get dogs going a bit faster than traditional methods.. But again most dogs I see with clicker training are collies, which are great problem solvers and are heavily motivated by work.

[Kavik]

I didn't teach play dead either of those ways ;) - I lured it and then faded the lure and made a modified hand signal out of the lure position - taking the easy way out - maybe but it worked

[kyliegirl]

I didn't teach play dead either of those ways ;) - I lured it and then faded the lure and made a modified hand signal out of the lure position - taking the easy way out - maybe but it worked

I forgot about luring you can use lures also ^_^ but again it could be either easy or hard.. some dogs sometimes cannot do it without a lure so they arent learning the actual trick your after.

Edited December 29, 2008 by kyliegirl

[Tonymc]

I too have come across many many times what Cosmolo is talking about in the Dog,Horse and Human Psychology Fields.

Many factors and variables to this topic.

Some feel threatened by change so will hang onto inefficient ways or methods.

Some carry the fallacy that quick change is not lasting change.

Some irrationally believe quick change can be harmful.

Some know no better than slow and possibly inefficient ways.

Some have the mindset like" Well Grandad always did it this way and so will I"

Some are fearful inregard to methods they have not taken the trouble to explore,learn and understand.

Some are ego driven and like to believe they have all the answers.

I do not believe it is the easy way out,I believe it is the natural and smart way to go.I think some use the term easy in a derogatory manner.

In a positive way yes it is the easy way and the natural way putting things to a dog in a manner that an individual dog will grasp easiest.

I cannot see why you would take a long way around training a Horse or Dog if there is a more natural and easier manner!!!!

If the Dog is food motivated, then food is the key for that dog and likewise is the dog is prey motivated then for him thats the natural way to go.

I have seen in some case's where shonky Professionals hung onto old slow methods inorder to milk more money out of the client.

Tony

[Reddii]

I think anyone who is prepared to put in the time and effort to have a well trained animal has not taken the 'easy way' out. Sure, some methods are plain quicker with some animals becasue they respond differently to different techniques, but let's be honest none of it is 'easy' compared to the alternative of leaving the dog in the back yard and ignoring that it exists.

I think anyone, regardless of what method they use should be congratulated on the result, as long as they are willing to see that when their next animal comes along that method a won't work so they have to be stronger or more positively focussed than with their last.

I've come full circle from really harsh corrections to realising that with my current dogs a balance is needed. My girl needs more correction than my boy who is lucky he didn't have to endure that 'learning phase' I went through - it would have broken him, no question. The girl on the other hand benefitted from the experience with me and is now a better dog as a result.

[Just Midol]

From what I've seen, those who often claim others use the "lazy" or "easy" way out are training their dogs in a way that is less efficient, ie, taking longer so they feel the need to insult methods which are quicker.

[Akitaowner]

i'm all for easy methods but i dont necessarily think this is what is often described by people as 'easy or lazy way out'

for example there is a club here on the coast who ONLY allow the use for food as a motivator - expect you to show up every week and shove heaps of food down their throat - now i know for a fact that both my dogs prefer pack praise as a motivator and i tend to use a prong to enforce what i want as they wont lure off my property.

so im not allowed to train at that club...coz i wont use their methods. i also see little use in training solely with 1 reward i cant give instantly - if the dog will work for praise i would always choose that over food. in the event 1 went for a wander i would want to be able to reward on return no matter what - not wait until i had some food later.

it greatly depends what you want from your dog and what your expectations are from your training...

for most well mannered pet dogs - the simple food motivator techniques are very good and often overlooked, altho i tend to be of the opinion for more advanced stuff like trialling etc something else is required - what, will depend on the individual dog and their drives

[luvsdogs]

If you love your dog, why would you want to use physical punishment every time it does something wrong. I use food lure rewards to train a new behaviour & fade the food when the dog has learned that behaviour. By using food rewards with patting, the pats soon replace the food.

[Just Midol]

If you love your dog, why would you want to use physical punishment every time it does something wrong. I use food lure rewards to train a new behaviour & fade the food when the dog has learned that behaviour. By using food rewards with patting, the pats soon replace the food.

Fantastic for simple tricks and food driven dogs.

Very narrow minded view of dog training though. Notice you specify physical punishment, in some cases, psychological punishments (time out, ignoring, with holding treats) would probably cause more stress than a physical punishment.

[Cosmolo]

This thread was not about using physical punishments? It was about the negative connotation that comes with the phrase 'taking the easy way out' whether that be using a correction, a food lure etc etc.

But please don't imply that people who use corrections musn't love their dogs- thats just so very wrong.

Edited January 1, 2009 by Cosmolo

[WoofnHoof]

It depends on which method they are referring to when they say someone is taking the 'easy way out', in the horse world this is almost always referring to the use of 'gadgets' to achieve a forced submission or achieve an instant outline. This is negative because the point of achieving the desired outline is that it comes from the understanding of the horse and the way it carries itself, many people think that head down = submission but if it is forced with the use of a gadget or incorrect use of the bit it results in a tense horse and no true submission. I would think that the doggy equivalent would be the use of a halti or similar device in unskilled hands as a means of controlling a pulling dog, as opposed to the longer method of training the dog not to pull, if that makes sense. It has a negative connotation because of the long term possible damage and the fact that it may not necessarily 'fix' the problem as the problem could be rooted in the training rather than the symptom of the dog pulling - ie not listening to the handler. That's the way I see it anyway.

[Erny]

This is negative because the point of achieving the desired outline is that it comes from the understanding of the horse and the way it carries itself, many people think that head down = submission but if it is forced with the use of a gadget or incorrect use of the bit it results in a tense horse and no true submission.

I've never thought of the horse coming up under the saddle and accepting the bit as "submission". Have to think on that one some more.