Dog-friendly Anti Bark Training Device

[critters]

Hi DOL people,

I've long had an idea for a device to train dogs to stop nuisance barking, even when nobody is home, using purely dog-friendly methods. Basically it is a device that spits out treats so long as the dog is quiet, and stops when the dog barks. It is a little more complex than that to ensure it is full effective.

I've recently submitted this idea to quirky.com. That is a website where anybody can submit invention ideas, and if the idea gets enough support and is viable, they manufacture and sell it. But first... it needs lots of votes!

So I'm calling on you to check out my idea at: http://www.quirky.com/ideations/72577 and if you like it, vote for it - if you don't, leave some comments with how you think it could be improved (the end product is a collaborative effort so all the comments are taken into account).

There are just three days til voting ends so get onto it, and share it around to anybody else you think might be interested.

If this product gets to market, just think of how many dogs may be saved from being rehomed because of nuisance barking, or made to wear aversive shock collars for the rest of their lives!

[Steve K9Pro]

And the ones that will be laying around grossly overweight from eating the endless supply of treats lol

[poodlefan]

I'll confess I don't really understand how this will work?

How can you reward the absence ofa behaviour??

If the dog barks for a few minutes (and few dogs bark constantly) then returns to the treat dispenser, how will that lower the rate of barking?

And how will it assist households with more than one dog.

[Kavik]

I don't understand how it will work either

[critters]

If you haven't already, please read the full description of how the device works on the link in the OP.

It works via negative punishment; taking away a good thing to reduce the frequency or intensity of a behaviour (barking). The treats are dispensed at fixed intervals, so the dog can reliably expect them to pop out at a steady rate. When the treats stop, the immediately preceding behaviour is punished. Visual and auditory cues will allow the dog to associate barking with the treats stopping.

As for fat dogs, the device will be designed to be loaded with the dog's meal kibble or general diet, so no fatties!

[DobieMum]

If you haven't already, please read the full description of how the device works on the link in the OP.

It works via negative punishment; taking away a good thing to reduce the frequency or intensity of a behaviour (barking). The treats are dispensed at fixed intervals, so the dog can reliably expect them to pop out at a steady rate. When the treats stop, the immediately preceding behaviour is punished. Visual and auditory cues will allow the dog to associate barking with the treats stopping.

As for fat dogs, the device will be designed to be loaded with the dog's meal kibble or general diet, so no fatties!

Voted!! Just one querie for the OP. The house next door to mine is really close, I could probably use this for my dogs, but the dog next door is a CRONIC barker, the minute we step outside it starts up. Is there a way that your invention can distinguish between next doors dog and mine?

[critters]

I am hoping that quirky could make the bark detector the same collar-style as is used on shock and spray collars, but wirelessly linked to the device. That would make distinguishing between dogs simple. Alternatively the device might be programable to certain sensitivities and frequencies that match your dog, but that's tricky and prone to be less reliable. The only other option would be to get your neighbour to use one to train their dog first

For multi-dog households it may be necessary to separate dogs during initial training. It may still work with one device between many dogs, but less reliably, and it might only be one dog that gets any of the treats

[Kavik]

I wouldn't want my dog to get treats all day long. I have read your explanation and still not sure it would work. sorry.

[**Super_Dogs**]

I wouldn't want my dog to get treats all day long. I have read your explanation and still not sure it would work. sorry.

I have to agree sorry. I like the general concept though. ;)

[Aidan3]

Reduction in FI can punish responding but real environments usually aren't simple enough for this sort of thing to be effective. A stimulus to mark barking and -P might work in some cases but I still think there are too many "what ifs?" Ian Dunbar threw some ideas around for auto-shaping for barking control several years ago, you might shoot him an email and ask what sort of problems or successed he encountered?

One thing I know that does work that would also be conducive to autoshaping is to shape less barking or a fixed duration of barking. In this case you start by reinforcing 6 seconds of barking, then reduce the time second by second to say, two barks. Or you could reduce the volume of barking.

If the barking is being maintained by something else, or environmental stimuli are triggering barking very often, then you still have a problem. But it would work with a lot of dogs.

The real problem with anti-bark collars is not the aversive control. Studies have shown that dogs are not distressed by the spray or shock, they simply learn to avoid it. The problem is that people buy them without always considering the reason for barking. There is an ethical question that is raised by giving owners access to a tool which will stop or reduce barking, which may reduce the likelihood of the owners doing something about the cause of the problem; e.g boredom, threat, anxiety. This same problem would also apply with a collar that uses +R or -P to reduce barking.

[critters]

I wouldn't want my dog to get treats all day long. I have read your explanation and still not sure it would work. sorry.

WHY do you not want a dog to get treats all day long if it is being good?

Because it will get fat? Take the treats used in the device out of the dog's ordinary meals, and it will be eating the same amount as always

Because it will get spoiled? Spoiling only occurs when rewards (or punishments) are given out haphazardly. A dog that gets a lot of treats, only when it is doing the right thing, will never become "spoiled".

Because it will come to rely on constant treats? I agree, but if you read the description on the quirky site, the device is designed to gradually phase out treats as barking is reduced, so you will not need them in the long term.

Because your dog won't respect you? Yeah..... no.

Because treats make your dog happy, and you don't want your dog to be happy while you are out, which is why you also lock him/her outside in the rain and cold with no protection, don't take it for walks, don't provide it with a comfy bed or kennel?

Sorry, I mean no disrespect, but I cannot think of one reason to not want your dog to get a lot of treats when it is being good that makes any sense!

Aidan2: Thanks for your reply. I have actually emailed this idea to Dunbar/DSD this morning so am looking forward to his/their response. I haven't heard about his work on bark shaping that you describe so it will be interesting to find out about it.

The only problem with the sort of shaping that you describe is that it can be really tricky to convince the average dog owner to put in the work, and for them to get it right. It would be great if every dog owner were a training expert, but they're not, and they like quick-fixes and fancy devices... like shock collars

I absolutely agree that working out the cause of barking and any other problem behaviour should be the first step. That's one of the big pros I consider in training using negative rather than positive punishment - a dog isn't going to mask pain or genuine anxiety just for one more treat, but they might do so to avoid a shock. So you can reduce barking that the dog does for recreational purposes, but will still know when the dog really wants to tell you something. I also anticipate that the device would have an added benefit of reducing separation anxiety, and to an extent providing entertainment, and thus reduce some of the reasons the dog is barking in the first place.

[critters]

I'd also like to make a point for any fence-sitters:

Voting for the idea gives it a chance of moving onto the next step, but is not making any sort of commitment (you can even vote on as many other ideas on the site as you like). Even if you don't think the idea is perfect, your vote gives us the opportunity to move it to the next step at which point the community discuss all the aspects of the product to ensure that a) it really is a viable idea and b) all the features of the final design are as good as they can be.

Maybe you're not convinced it will work, but maybe.... well there's only one way to find out, and that's get some prototypes! As much as I wish I had the skills and resources to make my own prototype (or the time to sit around for hours and be a manual version of the device!), the only real chance we have of being able to test out the idea to be sure is to VOTE!

[Cosmolo]

I wouldn't want my dogs receiving food in that manner either i'm afraid, though i think for some dogs a modified idea like this (like what Aidan was referring too with limiting barking) may work well. Why not give access to a treat ball though? If a dog is playing with a treat ball, actively working to get food not only is it more likely to tire the dogs mind but it is a behaviour incompatible with barking- they can't do both.

Why do i not want my dogs to be rewarded in that way?

- i don't want remote rewards in my absence to be their main source of food. I believe this may compromise other training i wish to do.

- i don't want my dog to sit quietly near an inanimate object all day- i want them to explore, push a treat ball around the backyard, engage with each other etc.

- In a multi dog household, separation from the rest of the pack for 'quiet training' purposes is likely to be counter productive, potentially increasing boredom, anxiety.

I also believe that for many dogs, the rewards would be given haphazardly- in that the dog would not connect quiet behaviour with the food reward. What if the dog was sniffing a particular area at the time the treat was delivered- if that happened more than twice for 2 of my dogs they would spend their day sniffing that spot to get the 'reward'. My other dogs would just sit their staring at the device- go and bark at what they want to bark at, then come back for reward- its too easy for the dog to get th best of both worlds.

I think this comment is pretty insulting too, its a pretty big seriesw of assumptions!!

"Because treats make your dog happy, and you don't want your dog to be happy while you are out, which is why you also lock him/her outside in the rain and cold with no protection, don't take it for walks, don't provide it with a comfy bed or kennel?"

[critters]

I wouldn't want my dogs receiving food in that manner either i'm afraid, though i think for some dogs a modified idea like this (like what Aidan was referring too with limiting barking) may work well. Why not give access to a treat ball though? If a dog is playing with a treat ball, actively working to get food not only is it more likely to tire the dogs mind but it is a behaviour incompatible with barking- they can't do both.

Why do i not want my dogs to be rewarded in that way?

- i don't want remote rewards in my absence to be their main source of food. I believe this may compromise other training i wish to do.

- i don't want my dog to sit quietly near an inanimate object all day- i want them to explore, push a treat ball around the backyard, engage with each other etc.

- In a multi dog household, separation from the rest of the pack for 'quiet training' purposes is likely to be counter productive, potentially increasing boredom, anxiety.

I also believe that for many dogs, the rewards would be given haphazardly- in that the dog would not connect quiet behaviour with the food reward. What if the dog was sniffing a particular area at the time the treat was delivered- if that happened more than twice for 2 of my dogs they would spend their day sniffing that spot to get the 'reward'. My other dogs would just sit their staring at the device- go and bark at what they want to bark at, then come back for reward- its too easy for the dog to get th best of both worlds.

I think this comment is pretty insulting too, its a pretty big seriesw of assumptions!!

"Because treats make your dog happy, and you don't want your dog to be happy while you are out, which is why you also lock him/her outside in the rain and cold with no protection, don't take it for walks, don't provide it with a comfy bed or kennel?"

Your reasons are quite valid reasons why this device might not suit you and your dogs, but don't really argue against "Getting treats all day long".

- If you're the sort of person who uses most of your dog's food in training, rather than dull meals, it's unlikely you have barking problems! If you did have barking problems, you could still split your dog's food between active training rewards and the device in whatever way suits you.

- I think it really depends on the dog if they will sit by the device all day or wander and play between treats; the benefit of a fixed interval schedule means when the dog has a treat, it knows that it's not going to get another one for a little while and can thus go play (basic Skinner box stuff - if a rat gets treats from pressing a bar on a fixed interval, it will learn not to bother pressing the bar for a while after its last treat).

- I admit that the device will not be nearly as useful for multi-dog households as single dog households, but isn't it the case with any training situation that 2 dogs are thrice as much work as 1 dog

I know the comment was pretty insulting, that's pretty much what I was apologising for, but it really does seem that if you don't want your dog getting treats all day you just don't want it to be happy. Would the same person not leave their dog with a stuffed kong, or a good bone, or other long-lasting treat? It's absurd.

Regarding treat balls and other doggy entertainment, they're fantastic, but many dogs will go chew-chew-BARK-chew-chew-BARK, because after barking the ball will still be full of treats. Not to mention, the longest I have been able to get my Dane's 5-cups-of-kibble breakfast to last is about an hour, and that's using the slowest release treat balls and frozen soaked-kibble stuff toys, so for some dogs it's not a day-long solution!

[Aidan3]

Sorry, I mean no disrespect, but I cannot think of one reason to not want your dog to get a lot of treats when it is being good that makes any sense!

A FI schedule is a non-contingent schedule. This is fine in a Skinner box, but not so good when your dog could be doing almost anything. For the record, Kavik uses a lot of food in her training so she is past the sort of objections you were anticipating.

The only problem with the sort of shaping that you describe is that it can be really tricky to convince the average dog owner to put in the work, and for them to get it right. It would be great if every dog owner were a training expert, but they're not

My suggestion was for your machine to do this.

I have taught quite a lot of people to shape their dog's barking. It's really very simple compared to a lot of other things dog owners routinely teach their dogs.

[Kavik]

Cosmolo neatly summed up my reasons put better than I can atm with fussy kids in the evening lol. A lot of my rewards are treats (I train for agility and obedience)and I would not want them being given treats like that for so long in my absence. One of my dogs would absolutely get obsessed with it and stand near it all day - she is an obsessive type and will stare at a spot for ages where she last saw a lizard etc.

Pretty low call that I would not want my dogs to be happy. I put a lot of work into them.

[critters]

Sorry, I mean no disrespect, but I cannot think of one reason to not want your dog to get a lot of treats when it is being good that makes any sense!

A FI schedule is a non-contingent schedule. This is fine in a Skinner box, but not so good when your dog could be doing almost anything. For the record, Kavik uses a lot of food in her training so she is past the sort of objections you were anticipating.

The only problem with the sort of shaping that you describe is that it can be really tricky to convince the average dog owner to put in the work, and for them to get it right. It would be great if every dog owner were a training expert, but they're not

My suggestion was for your machine to do this.

I have taught quite a lot of people to shape their dog's barking. It's really very simple compared to a lot of other things dog owners routinely teach their dogs.

Even in a random environment, an FI schedule means that a dog doesn't get rewarded any more if it is doing an unrelated "bad" thing than when it isn't doing it, so it's highly unlikely that the "bad" thing will be reinforced. Yes there's a possibility of a few coincidences causing the dog to learn the wrong thing, but it's just as likely that random environmental factors will reinforce that behaviour. The dog should learn that the only thing that changes the state of the device, is barking or not barking. I say should... it really is hard to tell for certain without testing it on real dogs in real environments.

It would be great if a machine could shape barking. Maybe something to consider, but I expect it could be too complex for the Quirky system (they don't deal with any complex programing, and it would need to be pretty complex to compute bark duration, number of barks, intensity, etc and reward appropriately). Maybe if it fails at Quirky but somebody likes the idea enough to invest a lot of money in it... hehe.

It's great that you've managed to help a lot of people with barking (I'm the sort of person who tends to be pretty good with the dogs... less so with the people). But the people you are helped are those that have come to you (a trainer? Have they even paid for your help? I don't know your background so don't know if you're talking about friends or clients). Other people won't seek a trainer's help before walking into their local pet shop and buying a shock collar (they're straight off the shelf here in WA, I know some other states have better restrictions), so I'm really hoping to have this as a competing product on the shelf next to the shock collars.

[critters]

Cosmolo neatly summed up my reasons put better than I can atm with fussy kids in the evening lol. A lot of my rewards are treats (I train for agility and obedience)and I would not want them being given treats like that for so long in my absence. One of my dogs would absolutely get obsessed with it and stand near it all day - she is an obsessive type and will stare at a spot for ages where she last saw a lizard etc.

Pretty low call that I would not want my dogs to be happy. I put a lot of work into them.

It does sound like the device wouldn't suit your dogs. But imagine if you had a different dog, that was a little dopey and slow to learn (ie needed to see a lizard in the same spot 100 times before making any connection), and loved barking just to hear his own voice, and didn't share a house with other dogs... could it work?

Again, sincere apologies about the low blow. I completely misjudged you given there wasn't any context or reasoning behind your comment- my initial interpretation was that you were one of "those" people who think if you give a dog too many treats they won't "respect" you.

[Dogs rock]

I also can't see this working. On the Quirky page you mention that the visual cue indicates to the dog that the device is inactive - how will the dog pair this visual cue with their barking? It may work if the dog is barking AT the device (or standing close to it and orientated towards it) but if the dog is at the other end of the yard then I can't see how the dog would make the connection. Granted, you do mention that there will be an audible tone to indicate when the device is inactivated, however if the dog is not looking at the device then how does it pair the tone with the light with the lack of food treats? Also, if the dog was barking excessively at the other end of the yard then it is quite possible it wouldn't even hear the tone unless you made it quite loud, which would be an added annoyance to your neighbour (and let's face it, the tone also has the potential to stimulate the dog to bark).

You also state in one of your answers that initially the treats would be dispensed at quite a rapid rate, with only a few seconds between each treat. Now, even for the largest dog, you are going to get through their daily food quota pretty quickly, and for small dogs I suspect you wouldn't even make it to 30 minutes (and that's being very VERY conservative - based on the general size of dog kibble and the daily portion of food for a small dog).

Also, you say that it is based on negative punishment - how do you know that negative punishment is less aversive than positive punishment? Are there studies on this? Punishment is punishment - that is, it is an undesirable consequence that weakens a behaviour. How can you say which is preferable to the dog? Have you done preference tests?

Another problem I foresee with this is that the treats are dispensed regardless of any other behaviour other than barking. You asked "why do you not want a dog to get treats all day long if it is being good?" (sorry, don't know how to quote as I very rarely write on DOL - I'm more of a reader than a contributor). What if I have a quiet dog that spends all day digging? Is it not possible (and in fact I would suggest likely) that your device would inadvertently reinforce other 'problem' behaviours in my dog? (Hypothetical dog, btw, so don't give me solutions on solving digging, its just an example).

I do like that you are trying to think of other ways to deal with barking, as it is by far my most hated behaviour problem to have to treat. However as it is, I can't see it working.

[aussielover]

I am struggling to see how it could work on a problem barker.

The average medium size dog would be getting around 2-3 cups of dry food a day, when you consider that a lot of problem barkers are small dogs, I just don't see how you could give the dog "treats all day" without it getting fat, even if you incorporated its meal into the treats.

And many people like to use part of their dogs meal as training treats.

I also see a problem for dogs that are not food motivated, and I have seen a number of barkers that find barking very self rewarding and will ignore available food.

I also do not want my dog constantly getting treats all day. I do not believe a dog needs to be stuffing its face all day to make it happy.

I also do a fair amount of training with my dog and I already take 1/2 of her food and use it for training.

My dog loves her food and instead of playing in the yard with her toys or sniffing around, checking things out or relaxing, I can see her fixated on the treat dispenser the whole time which I would not want.

She already plays with her kong or bob a lot toy for about 30 mins after it has been emptied in the hope that more food will magically appear

Edited July 1, 2011 by aussielover