Article: Dog Psychology: The Effect Of Adverse Training Methods

[corvus]

Yet, you can impose boundaries and structure without using all four of the quadrants.

I think what you choose is more a reflection of your own values as a trainer than your dog's temperament. I value a positive approach much more than I my right to use aversives if I deem it necessary. I have two very different dogs, one of them laid back and gentle and the other very drivey, bold and outspoken. I certainly do approach training them differently when I choose my rewards and how to structure my training sessions and everyday activities with them and what I teach them, but I still rarely use aversives, compulsion or negative reinforcement. My bold little guy is not especially easy. He is persistent, determined, and pushy. He will try anything once, and usually he'll try it several times. If I'd got him a few years ago he'd be punished a lot more than he has been. But discovering that it is possible to have a well-mannered, well-trained, reliable dog without much in the way of aversives fuelled me to find ways to achieve it with other dogs as well, and improve on my positive techniques so I need even fewer aversives. I am not the only positive trainer I know who finds that if you are committed to it you can usually find a way to handle a dog without aversives.

[Greytmate]

Yet, you can impose boundaries and structure without using all four of the quadrants.

I think what you choose is more a reflection of your own values as a trainer than your dog's temperament. I value a positive approach much more than I my right to use aversives if I deem it necessary. I have two very different dogs, one of them laid back and gentle and the other very drivey, bold and outspoken. I certainly do approach training them differently when I choose my rewards and how to structure my training sessions and everyday activities with them and what I teach them, but I still rarely use aversives, compulsion or negative reinforcement. My bold little guy is not especially easy. He is persistent, determined, and pushy. He will try anything once, and usually he'll try it several times. If I'd got him a few years ago he'd be punished a lot more than he has been. But discovering that it is possible to have a well-mannered, well-trained, reliable dog without much in the way of aversives fuelled me to find ways to achieve it with other dogs as well, and improve on my positive techniques so I need even fewer aversives. I am not the only positive trainer I know who finds that if you are committed to it you can usually find a way to handle a dog without aversives.

Usually isn't good enough if dogs lives depend on it.

[corvus]

I didn't say it was. But who said we are talking about something life threatening?

If I said always I'd be lying because I'm not that good a trainer and it's hard to control the environment of a dog. My point was not that when "usually" isn't good enough I just let the dog put itself in danger. That is ridiculous. When we're facing an exception to the rule we act in UNusual ways.

Edited August 17, 2010 by corvus

[BJean]

Yet, you can impose boundaries and structure without using all four of the quadrants.

I think what you choose is more a reflection of your own values as a trainer than your dog's temperament. I value a positive approach much more than I my right to use aversives if I deem it necessary. I have two very different dogs, one of them laid back and gentle and the other very drivey, bold and outspoken. I certainly do approach training them differently when I choose my rewards and how to structure my training sessions and everyday activities with them and what I teach them, but I still rarely use aversives, compulsion or negative reinforcement. My bold little guy is not especially easy. He is persistent, determined, and pushy. He will try anything once, and usually he'll try it several times. If I'd got him a few years ago he'd be punished a lot more than he has been. But discovering that it is possible to have a well-mannered, well-trained, reliable dog without much in the way of aversives fuelled me to find ways to achieve it with other dogs as well, and improve on my positive techniques so I need even fewer aversives. I am not the only positive trainer I know who finds that if you are committed to it you can usually find a way to handle a dog without aversives.

Really, it's a matter of committment?

Seriously can you or anyone else recommend a purely positive trainer in victoria and I willl send them a dog that

if a purely positive trainer has success with relying on PP methods for the dog not to react or be a danger to other dogs or other people

then I will know that I am not committed and really need to look at what I think I know about my dogs.

[i currently walk the dog on a loose check chain (fur saver) when out in public]

I'm quite sincere.

I dont buy into the one size fits all as in reality (well in mine) you approach and work with each dog differently, but when a blanket rule is touted and written about in such ways, it makes me wonder that perhaps the blanket rule has merit.

So instead of reading about it, can we find out?

NB: Corvus, I can send him to you as long as you promise to send him back

You will have to keep him seperate from your other dogs though.

I'm going o/s for october, so instead of paying kennel boarding I can board him at your place

and you can let me know how you go after three weeks.

Edited August 17, 2010 by lilli

[Staranais]

I agree. I'm personally quite happy to use almost any sort of aversives to get the last few % of reliability for things like recall, stay, don't chase the cat, etc, since these are life threatening (to the cat, anyway!) And I'm happy to use mild aversives to squish really annoying behaviours (don't hump my auntie, don't nick my chocolate, don't pull on the lead). But tricks & competition, we train almost entirely positively, since they're just for fun.

I've talked to trainers who have told me point blank that they'd rather see a dog PTS than use a correction collar to stop a behaviour like stock chasing, which seems either cruel or ignorant to me. But I don't think Corvus is that type of trainer.

[aussielover]

I found it funny how they compared saying NO and tugging on the lead with kicking or slapping your dog.

I mean, I would imagine pretty much everyone would have said no or tugged on the leash of their dog at some point, whether it be on purpose or accidently.

For instance if you jerk or tug on the lead, use a choke or prong collar, or even your loud voice saying "NO!" or body parts to slap or kick.

[Aidan]

I found it funny how they compared saying NO and tugging on the lead with kicking or slapping your dog.

I mean, I would imagine pretty much everyone would have said no or tugged on the leash of their dog at some point, whether it be on purpose or accidently.

Pretty much everyone has used punishment at some point, whether it be on purpose or accidentally.

[corvus]

You know, it just gets really annoying that you can't say "If you are really committed to it you can usually have success with positive methods" or something similar without then getting pounced on and somehow have that comment translated to "If you are committed enough you never need punish any dog ever". They are two very different things and while I am perfectly happy saying the former over and over again, I would never say the latter. And I'm not going to sit around listing every possible case in which a positive approach might not cut it. It's kind of obvious, isn't it?

My observation is simply that since I have become more committed to finding positive ways of handling things I have found it easier and easier to achieve. Erik is frankly difficult sometimes and if I didn't give him a lot of structure he would walk all over me just through the sheer motivation and energy he applies to everything he does. He thinks the world is his oyster and is irritatingly prone to developing routines that take some lateral thinking and dedication to change. It is all too tempting to deal with the problems his personality presents by hitting out at the behaviour I don't like. Especially when it can be so difficult to counter a self-rewarding activity and take such persistence from me to change a habit. But when I hit on the right reward, the right signal, and the right timing, it becomes remarkably easy by comparison. I would like to say I can always find the right combination of reward, signal and timing, but I'm just not that good. I've made mistakes and had to resort to punishment and I've learnt from them and avoided the same mistake the next time. If I thought that punishment needn't be avoided I wouldn't have tried and found that it was possible.

Lilli, I would love to board your dog for the experience alone, but I have nothing to prove and no interest in bringing a dog that is undoubtedly unsuited to my small suburban yard with its pet rabbits and overly friendly dogs home just to rise to a challenge issued by someone who apparently does have something to prove and thinks this will prove it. Besides which, my dogs will be with my parents in October because we are going to be driving from Adelaide to Darwin that month.

[Aidan]

I don't equate seriousness of the behaviour problem with preference for aversives in modifying it.