Craig Murray Dog Training

[corvus]

Most of the time I reward for every cue successfully followed, but sometimes I guess we string them together. I honestly don't know. I just tell 'em to do stuff and they do it and I reward them. If I have food handy, I reward them with food. :rolleyes: It's about the easiest reward schedule possible.

[lovemesideways]

Thank you for the reply Nekhbet!!!

Really interesting

[huski]

Hmm, interesting. I don't use treats for every day stuff but when we are training in drive Daisy knows she will always get a food reward, just like a dog who trains in prey drive knows they will always get a prey reward. She never knows when the reward is coming, but that complying with my commands will get it, although it could come at any time from anywhere.

I find that if I am too predictable with my rewards she is more likely to lose interest. Keeping the reward 'schedule' unpredictable helps keep her hanging on. Overall she knows when we are TID she will definitely get a food reward, but she never knows when that will be.

[corvus]

Dogs losing interest in training?? Can't say I have that problem.

You know, what you've done, Huski, is set up a strong sense of anticipation mixed with a bit of safe uncertainty. That's basically why we pay money to go on roller coasters. And why you can't tickle yourself, interestingly. It's a good way to get a mean dopamine hit.

My dogs have the anticipation, but with more certainty. That's a dopamine hit as well, but probably not as strong. That's why they don't lose interest. They know they are going to win sooner or later. They like knowing what to do to win, but because we do shaping they don't always know. For all I know that creates a similar anticipation mixed with safe uncertainty scenario.

[huski]

Dogs losing interest in training?? Can't say I have that problem.

You've never had a dog get distracted or had an instance where you need to get their attention back on you because something else is more interesting?

Downside to owning a scent hound I guess... very easy for them to go 'meh scenting is way more fun!' and put their nose on the ground.

You know, what you've done, Huski, is set up a strong sense of anticipation mixed with a bit of safe uncertainty. That's basically why we pay money to go on roller coasters. And why you can't tickle yourself, interestingly. It's a good way to get a mean dopamine hit.

My dogs have the anticipation, but with more certainty. That's a dopamine hit as well, but probably not as strong. That's why they don't lose interest. They know they are going to win sooner or later. They like knowing what to do to win, but because we do shaping they don't always know. For all I know that creates a similar anticipation mixed with safe uncertainty scenario.

I wasn't talking about your dogs or what works with your dogs. I was just giving an example of why I mix up the delivery of the reward for my dog, because keeping her guessing and keeping the reward 'schedule' unpredictable makes it interesting and builds anticipation. It's probably not something you've had the need to do if you always carry treats and reward after every command, but if you needed to go some time without giving your dogs a reward, like you do in dog sports like obedience where the dogs will have to comply with multiple commands over a variety of exercises, then their attention waning if you become too predictable may be a problem you run into. How long my dog can go without a reward while still staying in drive (by my definition) is something I focus on a fair bit.

[corvus]

Er, Huski, I was offering an explanation for why what you do works so well and how it's different to what I do. I didn't realise you were only interested in talking about your dogs and your training method.

I think we're on different wavelengths. The point to me is to condition my dog to do what he's asked. As far as I'm concerned every time I reward is money in the bank for the day I forget my treat pouch or something. It shouldn't matter how many behaviours I ask for without treating in between, because if it's properly conditioned it will take a fair bit to convince them that they aren't getting a treat any moment. If their attention wanes then it's not properly conditioned and my reward rate is way too low.

[Staranais]

Perhaps it depends what you're training for? I feel that work/competition training is very different to just around-the-house type basic manners.

My girl gets good stuff when we're training specific behaviours where I want a very high level of reliability, attention, speed, focus or drive. There is always a bite toy at the end of the track. She gets food (usually lots of it) or play every obedience or trick training session. I try to reward every outdoor recall with something super. Because I want her to do these things with enthusiasm.

But for simple, well known commands around the house? I certainly don't give her a food treat for those. I personally find the idea a little repugnant. Things like go to your bed, be quiet, don't pull on your leash, come over here - once she knows these things, she does not get food for doing them. She gets praise, attention, or a life reward for doing them (and sometimes a mild correction or loss of the life reward if she doesn't).

Each to their own - if someone has a well trained dog, I would not criticise the way they do things. But for us, I feel there would be something missing in our relationship if she needed a food reward to do every simple little thing I asked.

To me, it would be just the same as if I had a son or daughter or partner who demanded money up front before they did anything I requested. I'd just feel there was something missing there, even if the other person did the required tasks reliably.

[corvus]

But for simple, well known commands around the house? I certainly don't give her a food treat for those. I personally find the idea a little repugnant. Things like go to your bed, be quiet, don't pull on your leash, come over here - once she knows these things, she does not get food for doing them. She gets praise, attention, or a life reward for doing them (and sometimes a mild correction or loss of the life reward if she doesn't).

Wow. I don't know where that came from. Repugnant?? For rewarding good behaviour? For basic good manners one would hope it doesn't need to be commanded because you rewarded it enough in the start that it's now a habit. I don't know why this is apparently such a hard concept to grasp. I am in the habit of rewarding behaviour I like (with food or whatever else is handy) and my dogs are in the habit of performing good behaviour as a result. We don't need the treats. I just keep banking because it only does good.

I would encourage anyone with a puppy to spend some time just rewarding them for good behaviour around the house and yard. It can only do good, surely.

Each to their own - if someone has a well trained dog, I would not criticise the way they do things. But for us, I feel there would be something missing in our relationship if she needed a food reward to do every simple little thing I asked.

Oh. I see. You wouldn't criticise but you find the idea repugnant. Fair enough.

To me, it would be just the same as if I had a son or daughter or partner who demanded money up front before they did anything I requested. I'd just feel there was something missing there, even if the other person did the required tasks reliably.

You have a working dog. Some people don't have dogs that automatically care about them. What are they supposed to think when people say things like the above? It's no help for anyone. It just makes people feel like they are somehow inferior owners if they don't have a dog that worships the ground they walk on.

Even social animals only ever act in their own best interests. Dogs are no different. They do what is rewarding to them. Some dogs find a good word to be very rewarding. Some couldn't care less. That should not be taken as some sort of litmus test for the owner's relationship with their dog. People should not be made to feel that if they have one of those dogs that don't care much for praise that there is some mysterious "something" missing from their relationship. The relationship is built on rewards. The more you reward them the more they want to interact with you.

[Staranais]

Oh. I see. You wouldn't criticise but you find the idea repugnant. Fair enough.

Oh, get over yourself corvus, please do. I worded that as carefully as I could to explain how I feel about it, without trying to insinuate that you or anyone else had to feel the same way. If you insist on taking offence regardless, that's really not my problem.

You have a working dog. Some people don't have dogs that automatically care about them.

You know what they say about assumptions? My last dog was not a working breed, and I felt just the same about my relationship with him.

Even social animals only ever act in their own best interests. Dogs are no different. They do what is rewarding to them. Some dogs find a good word to be very rewarding. Some couldn't care less.

As you say, dogs are social animals. If your dog doesn't feel that your attention or praise is at all reinforcing, then I would question your ability to praise effectively. "A good word" doesn't cut it as praise, as far as I'm concerned. I have met few dogs that did not like excited physical & verbal praise - I have, however, met lots of owners that praise ineffectively and non contingently. I know that dogs that can't be made to give a crap about their owners do exist, but suspect this is rarer than people think.

I have also never met a dog that will not show basic house manners in return for life rewards. Even my cats will show basic manners in return for life rewards.

However, when praise and life rewards doesn't cut the mustard, I prefer to correct a dog than become a constant treat dispenser for basic house manners. Once again, in case you missed it, this is how I feel about my dogs. If you're happy to organise your life so you carry treats on you constantly and never have to correct, why would I criticise?

[Erny]

Good post, Staranais. I agree with your thoughts, philosophy and expectations.

[corvus]

Sorry, I got a bit heated. ;) I mean, repugnant?? I was like I knew on some level you weren't being personal, but I just couldn't quite find that level. It's a strong word.

My message still stands, though. I don't see why praise should be held up as a particularly good reward any more than any other reward. Rewards are just rewards. Some are better suited to particular situations than others. Some are better suited to particular dogs than others.

[sas]

LOL @ repugnant....I didn't know anyone felt so strongely about training in that manner!

[bedazzledx2]

The voice of reason!!!!

I know a lot of pet owners who don't want to use food because, rightly or wrongly, they believe that their dog will only "perform" when given a treat.

I very rarely have food on me. I teach just about everything with food. My dogs are better than most pets. One way or another, without actually going into too much technical guff, I think it helps if we can give good instruction in the absolute basics of learning theory along the way.

[Staranais]

Sorry, I got a bit heated. ;) I mean, repugnant?? I was like I knew on some level you weren't being personal, but I just couldn't quite find that level. It's a strong word.

My message still stands, though. I don't see why praise should be held up as a particularly good reward any more than any other reward. Rewards are just rewards. Some are better suited to particular situations than others. Some are better suited to particular dogs than others.

Well, in my defence, I did say only mildly repugnant. As in, you know, slightly offensive. And I honestly do feel like that, I'm not just saying it to wind you up, Corvus (not that I would ever do that). ;)

I think praise (including non-toy play) and life rewards are the best reward for casual day-to-day obedience for several reasons. You can never forget it, & it doesn't stink up your back pocket. IMO, working on making yourself interesting enough that you can reward the dog just with yourself makes you a better trainer. Plus, if you can save your big gun rewards (food, toys) up for when you really need them instead of using them fifty times a day, I think they have more impact when you do actually use them.

But mostly, I refuse to constantly use food at home for simple, well known every-day behaviours simply because I feel it's offensive. I really do. If my dog's not willing to do anything for me if I don't regularly hand over treats, then I think there is a problem in our relationship. Either I'm being boring, or the dog doesn't respect me. Either way, I feel that food would just be a quick fix that didn't cure the underlying issue.

As an aside, I've always been very pro-praise, but have probably gotten even more so since attending a couple of search dog camps last year & having them critique our praise & play (yes, they called us up in front of the whole group, made us praise our dogs & play with them, and then ripped us to shreds). Watching grown men shamelessly squeal and dance around like they have just won lotto is rather amusing, but I was amazed how well the dogs responded to the attention and the energy.

[bedazzledx2]

Totally agree. People have different needs and different definitions of training. Mine is competition obedience training and to that end I will use lots of different types of rewards. When shaping behaviours I'll use lots of food in quick succession. Once the behaviour is taught we need to work on duration and that's where a lot of people don't understand the concept of food in training. We also need to teach the dog to work for different rewards including verbal and physical praise which you can use in the ring.

As a by product of competition training, my dogs are obedient in everyday life as they know many commands along with self control games. I do not use aversives other than an occasional 'oye' if they are doing what dogs do and it doesn't coincide with what I want (raiding the rubbish bin comes to mind!) I expect my dogs to obey regardless of reward but that is in the training.

Perhaps it depends what you're training for? I feel that work/competition training is very different to just around-the-house type basic manners.

My girl gets good stuff when we're training specific behaviours where I want a very high level of reliability, attention, speed, focus or drive. There is always a bite toy at the end of the track. She gets food (usually lots of it) or play every obedience or trick training session. I try to reward every outdoor recall with something super. Because I want her to do these things with enthusiasm.

But for simple, well known commands around the house? I certainly don't give her a food treat for those. I personally find the idea a little repugnant. Things like go to your bed, be quiet, don't pull on your leash, come over here - once she knows these things, she does not get food for doing them. She gets praise, attention, or a life reward for doing them (and sometimes a mild correction or loss of the life reward if she doesn't).

Each to their own - if someone has a well trained dog, I would not criticise the way they do things. But for us, I feel there would be something missing in our relationship if she needed a food reward to do every simple little thing I asked.

To me, it would be just the same as if I had a son or daughter or partner who demanded money up front before they did anything I requested. I'd just feel there was something missing there, even if the other person did the required tasks reliably.

[corvus]

I think praise (including non-toy play) and life rewards are the best reward for casual day-to-day obedience for several reasons. You can never forget it, & it doesn't stink up your back pocket. IMO, working on making yourself interesting enough that you can reward the dog just with yourself makes you a better trainer. Plus, if you can save your big gun rewards (food, toys) up for when you really need them instead of using them fifty times a day, I think they have more impact when you do actually use them.

I guess I'm kind of the other way. I use praise when I don't have anything else handy. I'm a bit wary of over-using it because with Kivi at least it loses impact very quickly. He doesn't get very excited by it. You can see in his face each time he's like "Was that all? I guess it'll do." Where Erik is wherever I am making himself a part of everything I do, Kivi is wherever I am lying on the ground watching. I don't think that this should be a flag that something is awry with our relationship. He just has different priorities to Erik. He gets animated if I dance around, but only if he thinks it's going to be followed by a game or some training. That's fine by me. It makes sense to me. He doesn't get up unless he thinks there's a good reason to and me squealing and dancing is not an activity he particularly wants to be involved in, so why get up? He would happily be involved in cuddles on the ground, but he doesn't have to get up for them.

I thought using food a lot would diminish the impact of it as a reward, but I have not yet found that to be the case. I keep waiting for a plateau, but I don't think I train enough to reach one. Or else the expectation of food has become more rewarding than the food itself.

If my dog's not willing to do anything for me if I don't regularly hand over treats, then I think there is a problem in our relationship. Either I'm being boring, or the dog doesn't respect me. Either way, I feel that food would just be a quick fix that didn't cure the underlying issue.

I wrote out something and then I realised I'm talking about something slightly different to you. If Kivi didn't work when there wasn't food present, then I would consider that a problem with my cues rather than a problem with our relationship. He does what I teach him. If I teach him that he needn't do anything unless he knows I'm going to give him a treat then how is that a relationship issue? It's a training issue, surely.

Edited July 22, 2010 by corvus

[Staranais]

If my dog's not willing to do anything for me if I don't regularly hand over treats, then I think there is a problem in our relationship. Either I'm being boring, or the dog doesn't respect me. Either way, I feel that food would just be a quick fix that didn't cure the underlying issue.

I wrote out something and then I realised I'm talking about something slightly different to you. If Kivi didn't work when there wasn't food present, then I would consider that a problem with my cues rather than a problem with our relationship. He does what I teach him. If I teach him that he needn't do anything unless he knows I'm going to give him a treat then how is that a relationship issue? It's a training issue, surely.

I'm not talking about having food physically present before your dog obeys your command, obviously - I hope that's clear, although from your post above I'm now not sure if it is. I'm talking about needing to regularly reinforce the dog with food to keep it performing simple, well known tasks around the house, since the animal will not work for attention or praise or life rewards. To me, having to do this is unacceptable.

I would not personally be satisfied having the type of training relationship with my dogs where the animal needed to be regularly reinforced with food in order to do simple jobs around the home. If the animal will not work at all for attention or praise from me, then this indicates that my attention and praise is not valued at all by the animal. If the animal will not work for life rewards, it suggests to me that the animal feels I am irrelevant (or worse, an impediment) when it is trying to access rewards. To me, these are both huge relationship issues that need to be fixed.

[corvus]

I'm not talking about having food physically present before your dog obeys your command, obviously - I hope that's clear, although from your post above I'm now not sure if it is. I'm talking about needing to regularly reinforce the dog with food to keep it performing simple, well known tasks around the house, since the animal will not work for attention or praise or life rewards. To me, having to do this is unacceptable.

Oh. It wasn't. Is now.

Although I think I'm still confused. We're not talking about teaching them, right? I take it for granted that my dogs will do whatever I've taught them to do regardless of what reward they get because they have a strong reward history for performing those behaviours. A lot of things we don't have commands for because we established habits early. So the boys don't need to be told to lie down when we are eating because they do it anyway. They don't get rewarded for it, either, but they did when they were puppies and first learning to not pester people when they are eating.

There's more than one way to maintain behaviours. Some folks like to fade out rewards and others keep rewarding. I don't think one is necessarily related to a good relationship more than the other. I'm sure I sound obstinate, but it's just behaviour. To me, the relationship comes from clear communication and reward history and just plain old habit. If you train enough with a dog using rewards they tend to think you're amazing. If you spend a lot of time with them they tend to pay attention to what you are doing. If you spend a lot of time rewarding them for things they tend to expect that any time you look at them or say their name you could potentially be about to give them an opportunity to earn a reward. If they won't perform simple, known tasks around the house unless you keep rewarding it with food in particular, then surely you must have included a stronger cue into the training, like a food lure. Why else would the dog refuse to perform the task? If the dog isn't performing for life rewards, then it's the same thing. Surely there must be an extra cue that you have trained in unknowingly. In Erik's case, it may be an environmental cue I wasn't even aware of.

[Staranais]

Although I think I'm still confused. We're not talking about teaching them, right?

I've taught with praise alone, but don't mind teaching with food since I feel that the focus required in learning is asking a lot of the dog & they deserved an extrinsic reward, and it's not a major hassle for me to carry food to a training session.

There's more than one way to maintain behaviours. Some folks like to fade out rewards and others keep rewarding. I don't think one is necessarily related to a good relationship more than the other. I'm sure I sound obstinate, but it's just behaviour. To me, the relationship comes from clear communication and reward history and just plain old habit.

So... if you had to periodically reward your boyfriend or child with cash to do things for you around the house, since praise (etc) from you wasn't enough, would that be a healthy relationship? I would feel there was something missing. Now, granted dogs are obviously not human (had to get that in before someone saw this thread & jumped in and accused me of the "a-word"), but I feel the principle is similar. If your praise or attention has no value for the other party, then to me, that's a relationship that needs work.

If they won't perform simple, known tasks around the house unless you keep rewarding it with food in particular, then surely you must have included a stronger cue into the training, like a food lure. Why else would the dog refuse to perform the task?

If you stop rewarding your dogs with food and only praise them for compliance, will they keep performing the cue to a satisfactory standard indefinitely? I thought you were indicating they wouldn't, and needed regular reinforcement with food to keep performing. If you get the same results without food, then why use food, since you are getting the same results without it? Can't have it both ways, either you need the food, or you don't.

[corvus]

So... if you had to periodically reward your boyfriend or child with cash to do things for you around the house, since praise (etc) from you wasn't enough, would that be a healthy relationship?

I reward him with... a primary reinforcer that isn't food, water or shelter.

Seriously though, I think that's a problematic analogy because we don't know what a dog-human relationship IS to the dog. We don't know, so how can we say what constitutes a healthy or unhealthy relationship? We only have their behaviour to go by. I feel like a traitor to my cause because I'm the first one to consider animal emotions in behaviour, but saying that a dog should do things for you because you offer them a social reward afterwards is to me just making the assumption that the dog should value that social reward as much as you value a social reward. You can't dictate to an animal how much they will value a reward. You can reasonably assume that most dogs will value praise enough to get them by in low distraction situations when they weren't that fussed about doing it or not doing it, but you just don't know. You can improve the value of praise by pairing it with other rewards, even a stronger social reward, but only the dog can say what they find inherently rewarding and to what extent.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing against the use of praise or saying it won't work to maintain behaviour, I'm questioning the idea that a dog should find it inherently rewarding enough to maintain known behaviours in low distraction environments. Why should it? What's so great about praise? It's a lot of squeaky noise and excited energy. Many dogs find that exciting, but if you don't have a dog that gets excited by that why should that mean they don't find you exciting or rewarding to be with? Maybe they just aren't into dancing and squeaky noises. Kivi isn't. ;) He likes a good cuddle, though. He'll perform for a chest rub.

If you stop rewarding your dogs with food and only praise them for compliance, will they keep performing the cue to a satisfactory standard indefinitely? I thought you were indicating they wouldn't, and needed regular reinforcement with food to keep performing. If you get the same results without food, then why use food, since you are getting the same results without it? Can't have it both ways, either you need the food, or you don't.

I dunno! Obviously I haven't tried it. I expect they would, but I don't know and I never will. It doesn't matter, though, as my point is what makes simple, known behaviours in a low distraction environment different to every other training scenario? Aren't you just offering a low level reward in an environment that is sufficiently boring to allow it to be enough to maintain an easy behaviour the dog barely cares about anyway?

I reward because I'm in the habit of rewarding, and because my dogs don't get much for free. :p If I'm gonna hand out meaty off cuts I may as well at least ask for a sit or a hand shake or a target or a down-stay or something. They get meals twice a day. I could maintain all the things they know around the house with that, let alone the myriad other things the dogs want or like to have that I will give them if they perform for it. They do know some things they don't get rewarded for or are rewarded only with praise or cuddles, but almost everything they know can be asked for in a NILIF situation, so inevitably they get rewarded with something other than praise, and usually out of the yard as well as in it.