The Surprising Science Of Motivation

[corvus]

OK, there are antecedents there (the treatment, the flyblown sheep in the mob) but to put all that together so quickly and get it right, you have to wonder about the level of cognition? You also have to wonder, had the dog not found the work reinforcing, would he have put this together? So there definitely needs to be some instinct.

The above sounds like the heart of the matter to me. I tend to think of animals thinking in terms of rules. Where there's this situation, react in this way. But that can't be all of it. Life is too dynamic and unpredictable and behaviour itself is quite messy at an individual basis. In behavioural ecology we would try to observe what an entire population or species does and then find reasons for it, but on the ground, it didn't take me long to learn that there's always some individual flying in the face of what everyone else is doing and you just can't figure out why. Why do all first year female fairy-wrens build crap nests? Why do some of them get better at it and some never improve? Most of the time you just never have answers to these things. You can only say that behaviour is complex and highly variable and just like genetics, you're only ever looking at a snapshot. It's in a constant state of adaptation. Sometimes I think that there's no accounting for these dogs that just deeply care about gaining the approval of the humans in their lives. I've got nothing, except that they were bred to care about it.

Kivi is scared of large balls. It would be interesting to see how he went with something like that, though. He's not stupid and sometimes he does some surprising things. Yesterday a little dog started something with Erik for getting too close to his new best friend, Kivi. Erik was not going to let this newcomer dictate his access to Kivi, and he got right pissed off and was going to end it right there. Kivi put himself between the two dogs, gave the newcomer a bit of a nuzzle, then started pouring affection on the newcomer's owner all the while shifting his body this way and that to block the other two dogs from getting to each other and thoroughly ignoring Erik, who was very worked up. I was holding Erik, and the other dog was on leash so everything was safe, but it was a big help to have Kivi blocking them both and ignoring them. I wonder what his motivation for acting was, though. Was he protecting Erik? Was he trying to calm the newcomer? Was he just reacting to the tension around him with placating gestures? Why did he focus his attention on the new dog, who started the altercation? Did he turn to the new dog's owner for a reason, or was he just conveniently close for a cuddle and sought out affection to ease his own feelings of tension? I've no idea.

Erik responds to the phone ringing by running from wherever he is into the phone in the lounge room because normally that's what I do. He knows what happens when phones ring. It wouldn't especially surprise me if he came and barked at me if I didn't follow his understanding of the phone rules. He is sensitive to these things. One night my partner had a late one at work. Erik was fine until I went to bed without turning the hall light off. He became very restless and seemed to be at a loss for what activity we were doing now. It couldn't be sleeping, because the light was still on and my partner wasn't in bed. He woke me up every hour barking at things until my partner came home at 2:30am. I think that he has a set of criteria for what defines the routine things we do. Before bedtime, I let him out to toilet, feed the rabbits, clean my teeth, turn all the lights off and go to bed. He watched me do all but the second last thing, and it wasn't until I was actually in bed with the light still on that he started to behave strangely. I became convinced a few years ago that my hare knew me by several different criteria as well. I suspect he knows what my footsteps sound like, knows how I move, the gestures I make, the tones I use around him, and the way I react to him, and no doubt the way I smell. All these things come together to form me. When one is different, like I'm wearing strange shoes, maybe it all falls apart and he's not sure it's even me anymore. Just a thought.

[Vickie]

I am fascinated by examples of intelligent disobedience and how the thought processes can work with domestic dogs to do this. As a cognitive researcher it is a challenge to try to fit these anecdotes into what we know about the way dogs think. Herding is a huge draw to me and one of the things that developed my love of research into how animals think. So keep up the stories as they help guide experimental design for the future and are great to read.

But in terms of learning in drive, some of the techniques individual herding dogs learn they have learned while in a high drive state, but I suspect that the range might be limited to behaviours that are linked to the activity they were selected for, e.g. working with stock, which is obvious really. I can see how operant conditioning would hinder a dog of lower intelligence when working, but a dog that somehow does recognise when it is essential to disobey would still do so, as seen by all the examples over time. I guess my take on it when training would be to teach the basics and allow the dog to explore the boundaries a bit more if you feel your dog does have the ability to think for itself.

I think sometimes what is classed at intelligent disobedience in herding dogs is nothing more than pure instinct. Herding people talk about command over instinct all the time. Those of us who are crap handlers have all been in a situation countless times where we give the dog a command it knows based on what we see the sheep are doing. The dog often knows better, since it has a far better idea of what the sheep will do & will comply with our command, once it has done what it feels it needs to do first. Trim is the master of this, she reads sheep well, much better than I ever will.

It is confusing, there are handlers (good handlers) who give their dogs some credit & permission to think for themselves and there are good handlers who insist their dogs do exactly as they ask, micromanaging every move.

On the agility field where there is no instinct involved, she is 100% compliant, I don't believe she makes choices out there, she does exactly what she thinks I want.

[Kelpie-i]

Australian Working Dog stories has quite a few anecdotes where dogs have done things where there is no direct reward in it for them but has been beneficial to something/one else

Oooh I love that book. Read it ages ago, must pick it up again!

Would you say that apart from instinct and cognition that the reason some of these dogs exhibit mimicry and/or intelligent disobedience is because they have 'learned to learn' as young pups? With the brain growing at 80% capacity in the first 16 weeks, if a pup was allowed to experiment with various behaviours and was then reinforced (whether purposely or inadvertently) that this would lend itself to the ability to problem solving in a much higher capacity, taking into consideration the breed and the dog's instinct? Therefore it might be a case of : brain growth + learning to learn (cognition) + reinforcers/motivation + instinct + experimentation = behaviour? I hope this question makes sense as I am thinking aloud.

[sas]

Just watched the video and read through your responses but I still don't get how this is relevant to dogs especially the ROWE theory?

Not everything on the video is relevant to dogs. Dogs don't work for Google, for e.g, but they do herd sheep, use the ATM, and retrieve pheasant in thick cover.

I suppose the fundamental relevance is that not everything that dogs do is what Dan Pink refers to as "mechanical", and that behavioural science has shown that "if/then" rewards are sometimes poor motivators for cognitive tasks that require you (or the dog) to think outside the box.

Still doesn't make things that relevant to what we already know?

Edited February 28, 2010 by sas

[Are You Serious Jo]

Australian Working Dog stories has quite a few anecdotes where dogs have done things where there is no direct reward in it for them but has been beneficial to something/one else

Oooh I love that book. Read it ages ago, must pick it up again!

Would you say that apart from instinct and cognition that the reason some of these dogs exhibit mimicry and/or intelligent disobedience is because they have 'learned to learn' as young pups? With the brain growing at 80% capacity in the first 16 weeks, if a pup was allowed to experiment with various behaviours and was then reinforced (whether purposely or inadvertently) that this would lend itself to the ability to problem solving in a much higher capacity, taking into consideration the breed and the dog's instinct? Therefore it might be a case of : brain growth + learning to learn (cognition) + reinforcers/motivation + instinct + experimentation = behaviour? I hope this question makes sense as I am thinking aloud.

An early enriched rearing environment leads to adults that bounce back from stress faster and are more exploratory. So animals give the opportunity to manipulate their environment and make choices are better equipped to deal with a dynamic environment. An impoverished rearing environment may mask some of the instinct and ability to problem solve. Animals (except cats) do take the opportunity to work for food when given a choice and the basis of this is probably gaining experience, it's called contrafreeloading.

The stockman have the right idea, they expose the pups to lots of things and in turn probably is the reason we have so many cool working dog stories.

[corvus]

Cats work for food. You just have to find the right one. Cottage cheese often works. It's harder with herbivores, though. They are not always opportunistic by nature the way carnivores and omnivores are. Their food doesn't hide from them, so you have to find something that really appeals to them to get them interested.

Sorry, that's a bit off topic. I'm doing my PhD on optimism and enriched environments. What Kelpie-i suggested is one of the reasons why a neutralisation approach to puppy rearing bothers me. I wonder if passive exposure does the job as well as interaction.

Having said that, at the moment I am feeling doubtful that you can increase a dog's problem-solving abilities through the way you teach them early in their life. That's only based on one dog, though. Kivi went from free shaping quite happily to wanting hints all the time. I mentioned it on a clicker training list and someone said they didn't think it was uncommon. I know a few people that dislike free shaping, and I don't blame them. I'm of the firm belief that it's not for every dog and shouldn't be held up as the pinnacle of positive training.

Rant aside, I think it's a bit of a red herring to get caught up in how a dog is brought up. Certainly it plays a big role the way the dog can cope with their environment as jdavis has outlined, but as long as the puppy wasn't so messed with that they just don't know what's going on most of the time, I think you can recover a lot. Especially with the right motivators and reward histories. Maybe I'm wrong, though. Hopefully I'll find out over the next 3 years.

[Are You Serious Jo]

I wasn't talking about operant conditioning, I was talking about contrafreeloading, it is different and cats are the only species tested (since my last lit search on it) that haven't demonstrated it.

[Aidan]

Still doesn't make things that relevant to what we already know?

Had you previously considered "functional fixedness" in relation to dog training and behaviour?

[m-j]

Oooh I love that book. Read it ages ago, must pick it up again!

Yes after reading my respect for the Kelpie skyrocketed. Working in 2 rural hotels I get told many stories about dogs that have done things they haven't conscientiously been trained for. Some of these stories you could probably take with a grain of salt but when others verify the stories they aren't all alcohol, pride induced fables

Therefore it might be a case of : brain growth + learning to learn (cognition) + reinforcers/motivation + instinct + experimentation = behaviour? I hope this question makes sense as I am thinking aloud.

I think this is very probable as most of the shearers, drovers and farmers I have talked to do let their pups work and use their instinct with no or very little interference (they only interfere if the pup sis too pushy, on lambs ducks etc at this age. As the dog gets a little older they start directing and utilising that instinct and teaching the other things that don't come instinctively. They say it makes better working dogs.

ETA At the Greyhound kennels I work at the difference in adult dogs chasing if I teach the pups to chase (a toy) at 5-6 weeks old compared to 12 + weeks is amazing.

cheers

M-J

Edited February 28, 2010 by m-j

[Aidan]

On the agility field where there is no instinct involved, she is 100% compliant, I don't believe she makes choices out there, she does exactly what she thinks I want.

Just to clarify, Vickie, has this same bitch displayed examples of "intelligent disobedience" while herding?

[Aidan]

Animals (except cats) do take the opportunity to work for food when given a choice and the basis of this is probably gaining experience, it's called contrafreeloading.

Yes! Contra-freeloading, I noticed this in one of my dogs before I knew that it was a studied phenomenon.

I actually have an hypothesis that not "earning" your resources contributes to anxiety disorders and mild depression. It is unnatural. Every organism on this planet has evolved to work for food in one way or another.

These days we, and many of our dogs, are so far removed from our ancestral patterns of resource acquisition that many of the little boxes in our brain aren't being ticked off.

[The Spotted Devil]

I wasn't talking about operant conditioning, I was talking about contrafreeloading, it is different and cats are the only species tested (since my last lit search on it) that haven't demonstrated it.

Why doesn't that surprise me That's why I love cats. Just had a quick lit search and couldn't find anything - do you remember the paper?

[Are You Serious Jo]

I should have it somewhere. But don't get too excited, cats as a species are not all that bright. They can't pass tasks at the same level of dogs, it's not that they choose not to, they just can't do it That's what happens when you don't evolve in a social group!

[Aidan]

I should have it somewhere. But don't get too excited, cats as a species are not all that bright. They can't pass tasks at the same level of dogs, it's not that they choose not to, they just can't do it That's what happens when you don't evolve in a social group!

I mentioned previously that one of my cats observed me training one of my dogs to perform a task. The dog had not performed the task, but the cat just wandered over and completed it perfectly, over and over. I have observed this same cat attempting to manipulate a dead-bolt and then jump up and attempt to pull the door handle down. Opening doors and locks is not unusual for dogs though, and dogs frequently succeed due to their physical attributes.

I think cats are quite good at the "thumbtacks inside the box" type problems (e.g figuring out how to open a one-way cat door from the locked side), not very suitable for being trained to perform mechanical tasks though.

Is the study you are referring to Osborne "The free food (contrafreeloading) phenomenon: a review and analysis"?

[Are You Serious Jo]

Some cats are good problem solvers, and I suspect that over time they'll evolve to be better at it as a species the longer they are domesticated. But the species averages on tasks are nothing to write home about compared to dogs.

I have a feeling I read about cats in a review but can't remember if it is the Osbourne paper, I'll go see if I can find it in my PDFs.

[Are You Serious Jo]

Found it, it is in Inglis et. al., 1997, Free food or earned food? A review and fuzzy model of contrafreeloading, Animal Behaviour. 53, 1171–1191.

Edited March 1, 2010 by ijdavis 2.0

[The Spotted Devil]

I should have it somewhere. But don't get too excited, cats as a species are not all that bright. They can't pass tasks at the same level of dogs, it's not that they choose not to, they just can't do it That's what happens when you don't evolve in a social group!

You really do need to attend one of my cat behaviour sessions!!!!!!

[Are You Serious Jo]

Get some smart cats and we'll replicate, if we can show they have some brains in those crazy heads we'll get published for sure

[The Spotted Devil]

Found it, it is in Inglis et. al., 1997, Free food or earned food? A review and fuzzy model of contrafreeloading, Animal Behaviour. 53, 1171–1191.

Got it! Thanks

Some of the methodology for "working for food" is dodgy IMHO so it will be an interesting read. Got a million other things to read and write (just for a change!!!!) so will get back to this later.

[Are You Serious Jo]

I agree with the methodology concerns. I have also found that studies that purport to be looking at control and choice (my thesis topic) are really just finding contrafreeloading. It's a complicated area alright, I am sure it has contributed significantly to the number of grey hairs I have.