Images Of Dogs "in Drive"

[Steve K9Pro]

N: So do we get a list of these provide at the seminar (hurry up May ).

K9: Yep perhaps!

I am curious as to some of the reasons you don't recommend it. I can think of a number of trainers who would recommend rewarding a dog in position and sometimes that position isn't necessarily within close proximity to you so wonder how this fits in but do also note that you mention in your response in early stages of training

K9: Nothing wrong with rewarding the dog in position but, it rarely comes out reinforcing the position you were happy with, but rather the position the dog receives the reward in, think about it.

I prefer better communication to act as an encourager which in time becomes a secondary reward.

. So I guess its possibly more an issue while in the drive building phase then it might be later on down the track once you have already built drive and the drive object (whether that is food or toy) is no longer required to be on you to get the dog to switch on to the level you require. Is that a fair comment?

K9: Pretty close.

N: Well yes she is prey driven and I could just as easily exchange the ball with a frisbee, with her tug toy, with whatever I have on hand, a lead if that is all I have on me.

K9: Yep but this also tells me your dog also prefers to gain the reward away from you, this is not what I try & achieve, I want the dog to earn reward with me. Right with me.

N: Waiting for a throw never earns the throw unless I am having a pure energy burn off session (and lets not get started sometimes my motivation to train is low and having a dog who isn't at me is of priority - hmm sounds like a bit of an excuse to me but sometimes you have to live with a dog outside of training

K9: Good TID means a dog is in drive only when you want them to be.

N: I also use specific toys for these types of sessions and there are some rules like toy always comes back to me straight away and occasionally you might be asked to sit and hold a stay while I throw it. In a training context often the toy is hidden and the first reward will be placed/dropped into position. So if we are doing heelwork I would reward the same way people would with a treat.

K9: I like to think of the reward as the release, not how good the toy is, or which toy it is. I find when I have different rules for different toys, I dont create a clear headed dog that works well, I fill the dogs head with rules on toys.

QUOTE (K9 Force @ 21st Jan 2010 - 03:40 PM) One major problem is that, the dog often focuses on where it thinks the ball will land, then it starts to field & wait for the throw. None of this will benefit training in most cases.

K: While I don't want my dog to field, in agility I sometimes actually want my dog to focus on where he thinks the ball will land instead of on me - as I want my dog to drive ahead of me, and complete obstacles regardless of what I am doing, and know where the reward will land.

K9: The key is (and I have highlighted it now) I said most cases. there are other ways to train the moves without throwing the ball, so when the whole picture is considered, we can decide which is best in that situation.

I guess that's why I tailor make my TID programs to the goal.

N: They were my thoughts to Kavik - agility was one field I was thinking of, also things like send aways where you want the dog driving hard away from you.

K9: If you taught a dog to send away by throwing the ball to where you want to send the dog, how to you get the dog to come back in drive??

There is no need to throw a ball to teach a send away in fact it can slow the process down.

[ness]

K9: Nothing wrong with rewarding the dog in position but, it rarely comes out reinforcing the position you were happy with, but rather the position the dog receives the reward in, think about it.

Oh sorry didn't clarify reward follows bridge (either clicker or verbal but mostly verbal bridge) and then reward in position. Best of both worlds I hope .

I prefer better communication to act as an encourager which in time becomes a secondary reward.

K9: Yep but this also tells me your dog also prefers to gain the reward away from you, this is not what I try & achieve, I want the dog to earn reward with me. Right with me.

Dog couldn't ultimately care where she is rewarded as long as she is rewarded. If that was the case then she would shoot off when we get somewhere rather than stay within touching distance on the hope that she might get a chance to work.

K9: Good TID means a dog is in drive only when you want them to be.

- says she who's dog is presently downstairs being a pest because its to hot for her otherwise scheduled evening playing. Yep that is the thing I don't seem to get. Both of mine are on when it suits them but in different ways. My older one is only on sporadically, the younger one is pretty much on with any sideways glance in her direction.

K9: If you taught a dog to send away by throwing the ball to where you want to send the dog, how to you get the dog to come back in drive??

Oh god that came out wrong - I guess I didn't spell out exactly and presumed it would be taken as given . Its not used to teach its used to reward but I will bridge and throw the reward to her to catch while she is sitting in the box and then go and meet her at the box and we would usually tug on the ball. You obviously don't teach the going away and the returning in the same exercise to start that would be lumping. You would teach the returning (whether that is by way of recall/over a jump as per UD) as a separate component to running out to the box. Also lots of dogs seem to find the jumping part more exciting then the box part so come back with more enthusiasm then they go out. Not ideal (and obviously not if you trained it right) but you hardly have an issue getting the dog to leave the box to take a jump (unless they are in pain) then the battle you have getting them to go out to the box WITHOUT taking a jump.

[corvus]

Dogs without natural drive never get it, dogs with just short of the requirements or perhaps nerve levels just short of desirable can be trained in drive these days were in the old days they would fail.

The problem with that is that it assumes a dog without natural drive can't be taught to anticipate a reward. You don't need drive to be tickled (by the right person). You just need the tickler to be someone you know and trust, the tickling to be unexpected and uncontrollable, and a hefty dash of anticipation of being tickled. Science has very thoroughly and elegantly proven this.

There's a paper about using tickling as an establishing operation for mentally disabled children. A bit of tickling before a lesson and all the kiddies learnt better. But what I thought was much cooler was the spike of dopamine an animal gets when they anticipate a reward coming their way. It explains beautifully why my low drive dog gets so excited about recalls, and why he gets so excited about clicker training (until he can't work out why he's winning).

iMovie finally decided to acknowledge my latest uploads, so here is a short video of Erik clicker training: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=melsta...u/0/7ecVdvYcaA4

You guys tell me if he's "in drive" and why or why not.

Apologies for the quality. The still camera doesn't like indoor light. The video camera is back in action, thankfully.

[Staranais]

Dogs without natural drive never get it, dogs with just short of the requirements or perhaps nerve levels just short of desirable can be trained in drive these days were in the old days they would fail.

The problem with that is that it assumes a dog without natural drive can't be taught to anticipate a reward.

I don't really understand the argument?

You don't need natural drive to anticipate a reward, or to experience dopamine release, that's true, I agree.

But noone's arguing that you can't train a low drive dog (I don't think so, anyway). I think they're just arguing that you often can't train a low drive dog in drive. The low drive dog that anticipates a reward might get trained, but it still isn't working in drive. So it will still fail at training in drive, and at any working discipline that requires the intensity of drive.

Dopamine isn't adrenaline.

(I honestly don't get the argument, by the way, I'm not just being picky).

[corvus]

I'm arguing that drive is a high level anticipation for a reward. I expect that includes adrenaline AND dopamine. I am also arguing that a low drive dog can be taught to anticipate a reward so much that the signal for the imminent delivery of that reward stimulates that dog to otherwise unseen levels of arousal. Lee Charles Kelley tells me any dog has that in them somewhere, and he's found it in any number of unlikely candidates. I didn't believe it for ages, but he kept saying it and adding more and more examples and the more I learn about drive the more likely it seems. I haven't met a dog yet that doesn't get drivey about something in the world. If it gets drivey about something I don't see why you wouldn't be able to build that drive, link it to a cue, and get a nice, anticipatory state

Although, it might be more trouble than it's worth. And it might be that while you get a very high level of anticipation you don't get adrenaline. I'm not entirely convinced about the adrenaline. I was before, but the more I think about it the more it bothers me on some level... I think it's the establishing operations thing. I am really starting to dislike the whole concept of EOs. It seems unnecessarily complicated and kind of missing the point. I think anticipation is the point. If drive is an EO, and an EO is about anticipation rather than adrenaline, then does drive need adrenaline to be called drive? I'm getting all tangled up in terminology and whether things always go hand-in-hand or whether they are mutually exclusive or only haphazardly related in the first place.

For that matter, EOs aren't really about anticipation. That's just my simplification of it.

[haven]

This one was taken by Tess32:

[huski]

LOL Haven, I have the same orbee ball! Great pic

[Erny]

Wow Haven. That is a lovely shot of your girl. Good work Tess32.

[Longcoat]

'K9 Force' date='21st Jan 2010 - 04:06 PM' post='4273740']

LC: Sometimes to me, the exercises used to intitiate vigor (drive) in modern training systems seems like a device to energise dogs that don't really have the natural desires if that makes sense to anyone

K9: Dogs without natural drive never get it, dogs with just short of the requirements or perhaps nerve levels just short of desirable can be trained in drive these days were in the old days they would fail.

You have identifed "exactly" what I was trying to say K9 When I first ever saw drive training conducted, some of the dogs participating I though from experience with the old training methods, were not good prospects. But although they weren't brilliant dogs, they could work reasonably well trained in newer methods. You are absolutely correct saying these same dogs in the old days would have definitely failed without question. The newer methods do extract a dogs full potential much more easily than it used to be.

[Longcoat]

I'm arguing that drive is a high level anticipation for a reward. I expect that includes adrenaline AND dopamine. I am also arguing that a low drive dog can be taught to anticipate a reward so much that the signal for the imminent delivery of that reward stimulates that dog to otherwise unseen levels of arousal. Lee Charles Kelley tells me any dog has that in them somewhere, and he's found it in any number of unlikely candidates. I didn't believe it for ages, but he kept saying it and adding more and more examples and the more I learn about drive the more likely it seems. I haven't met a dog yet that doesn't get drivey about something in the world. If it gets drivey about something I don't see why you wouldn't be able to build that drive, link it to a cue, and get a nice, anticipatory state

Although, it might be more trouble than it's worth. And it might be that while you get a very high level of anticipation you don't get adrenaline. I'm not entirely convinced about the adrenaline. I was before, but the more I think about it the more it bothers me on some level... I think it's the establishing operations thing. I am really starting to dislike the whole concept of EOs. It seems unnecessarily complicated and kind of missing the point. I think anticipation is the point. If drive is an EO, and an EO is about anticipation rather than adrenaline, then does drive need adrenaline to be called drive? I'm getting all tangled up in terminology and whether things always go hand-in-hand or whether they are mutually exclusive or only haphazardly related in the first place.

For that matter, EOs aren't really about anticipation. That's just my simplification of it.

The modern training systems do enable training of low drive dogs which is a tremendous advantage to the owners of those dogs where they can now participate and enjoy training their dog, but having said that, far more time is spent training low drive dogs where years ago the low drive dogs were rejected. I still believe although the modern training systems do extract the potential of low drive dogs, a high drive dog remains the choice for any serious work or sport required of a dog. Using a low drive dog in my "old school" mentality I think is still an option of compromise.

Edited January 21, 2010 by Longcoat

[Kavik]

I'm arguing that drive is a high level anticipation for a reward. I expect that includes adrenaline AND dopamine. I am also arguing that a low drive dog can be taught to anticipate a reward so much that the signal for the imminent delivery of that reward stimulates that dog to otherwise unseen levels of arousal. Lee Charles Kelley tells me any dog has that in them somewhere, and he's found it in any number of unlikely candidates. I didn't believe it for ages, but he kept saying it and adding more and more examples and the more I learn about drive the more likely it seems. I haven't met a dog yet that doesn't get drivey about something in the world. If it gets drivey about something I don't see why you wouldn't be able to build that drive, link it to a cue, and get a nice, anticipatory state

Although, it might be more trouble than it's worth. And it might be that while you get a very high level of anticipation you don't get adrenaline. I'm not entirely convinced about the adrenaline. I was before, but the more I think about it the more it bothers me on some level... I think it's the establishing operations thing. I am really starting to dislike the whole concept of EOs. It seems unnecessarily complicated and kind of missing the point. I think anticipation is the point. If drive is an EO, and an EO is about anticipation rather than adrenaline, then does drive need adrenaline to be called drive? I'm getting all tangled up in terminology and whether things always go hand-in-hand or whether they are mutually exclusive or only haphazardly related in the first place.

For that matter, EOs aren't really about anticipation. That's just my simplification of it.

I have a reasonably low drive dog and two high drive dogs. My low drive dog CAN get excited to the point where he works well, but it is unreliable, he will only do it sometimes in locations where he is comfortable and that are not too distracting. Which is pretty useless for competing.

[Staranais]

I'm arguing that drive is a high level anticipation for a reward. I expect that includes adrenaline AND dopamine. I am also arguing that a low drive dog can be taught to anticipate a reward so much that the signal for the imminent delivery of that reward stimulates that dog to otherwise unseen levels of arousal. Lee Charles Kelley tells me any dog has that in them somewhere, and he's found it in any number of unlikely candidates.

Oh, I see what you're saying now, I think.

If you are redefining drive to be "any time a dog anticipates a reward", then yes, any dog can be in "drive", but I think you're just muddying the waters, since that's not how people here use the term.

I can clearly see the difference in my girl - she's keen and happy when we're doing tricks with the clicker, she definately anticipates a reward, she's relaxed and focused and clearly enjoying herself working with me. Pleasure pathways activated! But her intensity jumps to a whole 'nother level when we do drive work. She breaths faster, heart speeds up, muscles go tense ready to go, and she's intensely focused. My old boy got so jacked up in drive that it was often hard to teach him detailed or accurate behaviours when he was in that state (or perhaps I'm just not a skilled enough trainer), so I sometimes taught new things with food/marker and then tried to incorporate them into the drive game when he already kind of understood them.

It's clearly a different state than just anticipating a reward. If you came and visited us, I could easily show you the difference. I'm not sure I could in a video or photo.

I guess you could argue that anticipating a reward is being in drive, just a lower level of drive, but I'm not sure that I buy that. I don't think it's a continuum. I suspect that drive and anticipation are actually qualitatively different states on a physiological level. Drive = always involves adrenaline release. Anticipation = as you say, probably always involves dopamine release. Dogs can be in both states at once, in drive, and anticipating drive satisfaction = adrenaline and dopamine. But not every dog that is anticipating a reward is in drive. And not every dog in drive is anticipating a reward - there are negative drives as well as positive ones!

Ready to be proven wrong by people that know more, of course. But that's my guess based on the dogs I've trained and seen trained, and the physiology I've done.

[MonElite]

Corvus - to me that dog in the video is not really in drive. A little bit but not much. More with the box.

When my dog is being trained in drive she virtually wants to jump out of her skin, she often cant control herself and will jump up, bark, tremble, do circles, etc.

When I ask for a heel (flip finish) and she is in high drive I never get her just to move her bum into position, I get a smack on the face as she jumps into position, I get slobbered all over and usually if she anticipetes the reward she will put her paw on my foot (undesireable, but cute)

When she is heeling and high in drive she not only prances but she jumps up with her front feet, again undesireable but I rather that then not enough enthusiasm.

When she fetches a ball she goes so fast and she wants to get the ball so much that 80% of the time she does a summersault when she grabs the ball. I need to put that on cue

Edited January 21, 2010 by MonElite

[Steve K9Pro]

K9: Nothing wrong with rewarding the dog in position but, it rarely comes out reinforcing the position you were happy with, but rather the position the dog receives the reward in, think about it.

Oh sorry didn't clarify reward follows bridge (either clicker or verbal but mostly verbal bridge) and then reward in position. Best of both worlds I hope .

K9: In actual operation, I find that remote rewards that are in a fixed position & not flying or moving allow the dog to focus better on the task until the release. When the dog expects you to throw the ball, they sign track looking for the first change in bosy language that will alert them to the throw, so their major focus is on that rather than any of your goals.

I prefer better communication to act as an encourager which in time becomes a secondary reward.

K9: Yep but this also tells me your dog also prefers to gain the reward away from you, this is not what I try & achieve, I want the dog to earn reward with me. Right with me.

Dog couldn't ultimately care where she is rewarded as long as she is rewarded. If that was the case then she would shoot off when we get somewhere rather than stay within touching distance on the hope that she might get a chance to work.

K9: This is the establishing operations as mentioned though, its learned exercise but it may not be what the dog wants to do.

K9: If you taught a dog to send away by throwing the ball to where you want to send the dog, how to you get the dog to come back in drive??

Oh god that came out wrong - I guess I didn't spell out exactly and presumed it would be taken as given . Its not used to teach its used to reward but I will bridge and throw the reward to her to catch while she is sitting in the box and then go and meet her at the box and we would usually tug on the ball. You obviously don't teach the going away and the returning in the same exercise to start that would be lumping. You would teach the returning (whether that is by way of recall/over a jump as per UD) as a separate component to running out to the box. Also lots of dogs seem to find the jumping part more exciting then the box part so come back with more enthusiasm then they go out. Not ideal (and obviously not if you trained it right) but you hardly have an issue getting the dog to leave the box to take a jump (unless they are in pain) then the battle you have getting them to go out to the box WITHOUT taking a jump.

K9: I find though that, when you throw the ball to the dog in the box & then train a recall separate, you do get a slower send away & often you get none when the dog thinks the throwing has stopped. I train the box in a line which is a flow on exercise, a stop on a full circle exercise if you like.

[ness]

Maybe I should apologise for asking to many questions .

But just one more on this bit:

K9: In actual operation, I find that remote rewards that are in a fixed position & not flying or moving allow the dog to focus better on the task until the release. When the dog expects you to throw the ball, they sign track looking for the first change in bosy language that will alert them to the throw, so their major focus is on that rather than any of your goals.

Wouldn't that be an issue if your only method of reward is to always throw the item. If your method of reward is variable - sometimes you go and meet the dog at the box and tug, sometimes you release them to a toy that is laying somewhere near the box - I will often stick them out when we are training and just leave toys on the ground and release her to get them when she has done as I want, sometimes you bridge and release them to come back and tug with you. Because she has had a ton of reinforcement history for jumping a jump and jumps are inherently rewarding there is always going to be motivation to come back to you. And her natural desire when she fetches a toy is to drive as hard back to me as she can anyway.

All very interesting and sorry for asking so many questions.

Edited January 22, 2010 by ness

[Steve K9Pro]

The problem with that is that it assumes a dog without natural drive can't be taught to anticipate a reward.

K9: No it doesnt?

You don't need drive to be tickled (by the right person). You just need the tickler to be someone you know and trust, the tickling to be unexpected and uncontrollable, and a hefty dash of anticipation of being tickled. Science has very thoroughly and elegantly proven this.

K9: I never met a scientist who could train a dog worth a dam.

There's a paper about using tickling as an establishing operation for mentally disabled children. A bit of tickling before a lesson and all the kiddies learnt better. But what I thought was much cooler was the spike of dopamine an animal gets when they anticipate a reward coming their way. It explains beautifully why my low drive dog gets so excited about recalls, and why he gets so excited about clicker training (until he can't work out why he's winning).

K9: I have noticed that, any time someone questions you you strive off onto another species, if it isn't your Wild Hare its the Zebras in Africa.

Children, Zebras, Hares & Dogs will all have similarities, but they are not the same.

Instead of reading paper, as I have mentioned, if you really are keen to learn, grab a leash & go work with many dogs, the answers aren't written on paper, what is written is someone else's answers to their questions.

iMovie finally decided to acknowledge my latest uploads, so here is a short video of Erik clicker training: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=melsta...u/0/7ecVdvYcaA4

You guys tell me if he's "in drive" and why or why not.

K9: There are moments of drive but your letting (in this clip) the dog decide if it is in drive or not, this will suffer in reliablity I would suggest based on hunger.

C: I'm arguing that drive is a high level anticipation for a reward.

K9: Whilst this is the foundation for drive there is a lot more to it.

C: I expect that includes adrenaline AND dopamine.

K9: Ok what makes you expect that? It also means there will be some noise, but it isnt a contributing factor.

C: I am also arguing that a low drive dog can be taught to anticipate a reward so much that the signal for the imminent delivery of that reward stimulates that dog to otherwise unseen levels of arousal.

K9: Ok but in other words, thats what I said to Long Coat, but low drive isnt no drive.

C: Lee Charles Kelley tells me any dog has that in them somewhere, and he's found it in any number of unlikely candidates. I didn't believe it for ages, but he kept saying it and adding more and more examples and the more I learn about drive the more likely it seems. I haven't met a dog yet that doesn't get drivey about something in the world. If it gets drivey about something I don't see why you wouldn't be able to build that drive, link it to a cue, and get a nice, anticipatory state

K9: Every single dog in the world (living) has drive, they all stem from one species so they all operate on the same principles. Some dogs have very high thresholds to drives, = no usable drive. Some dogs have very weak nerves & the inhibitions this creates makes it impossible to trigger drives in certain circumstances, = no usable drive again.

LC: You have identifed "exactly" what I was trying to say K9 When I first ever saw drive training conducted, some of the dogs participating I though from experience with the old training methods, were not good prospects. But although they weren't brilliant dogs, they could work reasonably well trained in newer methods. You are absolutely correct saying these same dogs in the old days would have definitely failed without question. The newer methods do extract a dogs full potential much more easily than it used to be.

K9: I too when started training dogs in drive was schooled in a method that required dogs with massive drives & nerves of steel to (survive) succeed.

But over many years I have been able to soften some of the steps & maximise drive through modified methods. Learned to sepate the drive model & focus on specifics to gain results.

Looking at Huskis Daisy the Beagle for example, her natural desire was to be scent driven & ignore all else, where other training aspects pailed, Traing in drive has worked, but 10 years ago, we would have given up when she didnt blast out full of drive every time we looked at her.

We know so much more now it opens up exciting new channels that were not possible before.

[Are You Serious Jo]

Some scientists are practical as well, I am a sad panda now Some of us combine real life experience with scientific literature and do quite well, but I can understand why you think some scientists are as useful as tits on a bull when some topics come up.

All the years of real life experience I had with animals actually made me a better scientist

[Steve K9Pro]

Maybe I should apologise for asking to many questions .

K9: Lol no one else does...

But just one more on this bit:

K9: In actual operation, I find that remote rewards that are in a fixed position & not flying or moving allow the dog to focus better on the task until the release. When the dog expects you to throw the ball, they sign track looking for the first change in bosy language that will alert them to the throw, so their major focus is on that rather than any of your goals.

Wouldn't that be an issue if your only method of reward is to always throw the item.

K9: It becomes an issues when the dog thinks opposite to your goal and this happens this way sometimes.

If your method of reward is variable - sometimes you go and meet the dog at the box and tug, sometimes you release them to a toy that is laying somewhere near the box -

I will often stick them out when we are training and just leave toys on the ground and release her to get them when she has done as I want, sometimes you bridge and release them to come back and tug with you. Because she has had a ton of reinforcement history for jumping a jump and jumps are inherently rewarding there is always going to be motivation to come back to you. And her natural desire when she fetches a toy is to drive as hard back to me as she can anyway.

K9: I will answer this leaving you a base rule.

I have seen dogs work & compete from all over the world, all the top workers & competitors alwats have one thing in common.

They are clear headed.

To a dog that means it knows what it has to do, when & how it will be paid.

If sometimes the toy is on the ground, sometimes you go to the dog, sometimes the dog comes to you & sometimes yo throw the toy, the dog will have a hierarchy of which one of these reward systems it finds more rewarding.

So it prepares for that one & fears and or considers the others, on top of these thoughts, I guess it has to run commands right?

[Diva]

K9: I will answer this leaving you a base rule.

I have seen dogs work & compete from all over the world, all the top workers & competitors alwats have one thing in common.

They are clear headed.

To a dog that means it knows what it has to do, when & how it will be paid.

I think this is very important. I'm not a 'serious' trainer but I have experienced how much of a difference that kind of certainty makes. Some dogs are not as good at/as willing as others at 'filling in the gaps' and I have no trouble believing that even those driven and bred to work with people (which is not what I have now, LOL) give their all more readily in those circumstances.

Edited January 22, 2010 by Diva

[Steve K9Pro]

Some scientists are practical as well,

K9: I am sure there are, I just haven't come across someone who has mastered both when only practised theory.

Some of us combine real life experience with scientific literature and do quite well,

K9: Yep that would be me too! research & development is part of my every day life when working with dogs, if you heavily rely though on one & not the other, you don't get a true picture.

but I can understand why you think some scientists are as useful as tits on a bull when some topics come up.

K9: In my experience with clinicians that are heavily theory based on a wide variety of species, when given a problem to solve with one species, they always seem to quote another & rarely come up with any useful usable information.

A professor I studied under only ever answered questions on new material, when someone asked a question on an animal that was more behaviourally driven, he sent them into the field.

He said "go and ask a dog, ask many dogs, the answers all come from the source."

All the years of real life experience I had with animals actually made me a better scientist

K9: I agree, when I work with new trainers, they often spend time translating the practical steps I give them into scientific jargon, they stop doing this when their practical experience tells them information their theory doesn't.

Sorry no offence was meant to Scientists, maybe I should have used the term theorists.