Jump to content

Koehler Training In Sydney?


ursus
 Share

Recommended Posts

there is no need to use Koehler for LLW - there are many rewards based methods (withor without corrections) that can be used to teach this.

But the Koehler method is reward based. How else can you teach a dog to do something (as opposed to stop doing something) and then keep doing it, unless it is rewarding?

Surely the science alone must tell you that? Behaviour does not have a tendency to repeat unless it is reinforcing in some way or another.

Have you learned about 'negative reinforcement', itsadogslife? Or you may have heard of it under other names, escape or avoidance conditioning?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 293
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

They can maintain it for as long as they have been trained to maintain it, and how much drive the dog has.

I guess it comes down to what you see as a reward. You could say the absence/removal of an ear pinch or colar tightening is rewarding to the dog (removal of unpleasant stimuli - more likely to repeat), but I would not call that a rewards based training method.

While we are on Michael Ellis, a good video explaining engagement

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3t3VMY-IVuw&feature=related

Edited by Kavik
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Aidan2 Have you learned about 'negative reinforcement', itsadogslife? Or you may have heard of it under other names, escape or avoidance conditioning?

Negative reinforcement: removal of something (adversive) which reinforces behavior tending to make it repeat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Kavik You could say the absence/removal of an ear pinch or colar tightening is rewarding to the dog (removal of unpleasant stimuli - more likely to repeat), but I would not call that a rewards based training method.

If something is "rewarding to the dog", it really doesn't matter what you or I may want to call it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Aidan2 Have you learned about 'negative reinforcement', itsadogslife? Or you may have heard of it under other names, escape or avoidance conditioning?

Negative reinforcement: removal of something (adversive) which reinforces behavior tending to make it repeat.

Yes, it's really the most useful part of correction. Some behaviourists even make a convincing argument that punishment doesn't really exist, it's really just reinforcement of something other than the punished response. We would never refer to negative reinforcement as 'rewarding' even when using layperson's terms although similar regions of the brain can show activity.

A lot of Koehler style training relies on negative reinforcement. Even praise can become a conditioned negative reinforcer - "Good boy (the correction will not be forthcoming)".

This is something really interesting - even a reduction in the frequency of really poorly time corrections can be reinforcing! Sidman designed a procedure where mild shocks were given at steady intervals, not for anything the animal actually did, just on a timer. Then, when the animal performed some behaviour, he would earn a reprieve from the shocks. This would reinforce the target behaviour. Not really what we would consider a reward though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Kavik You could say the absence/removal of an ear pinch or colar tightening is rewarding to the dog (removal of unpleasant stimuli - more likely to repeat), but I would not call that a rewards based training method.

If something is "rewarding to the dog", it really doesn't matter what you or I may want to call it.

But it does, you are forgetting classical conditioning. Emotionality and self-control come into it, very much so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Kavik You could say the absence/removal of an ear pinch or colar tightening is rewarding to the dog (removal of unpleasant stimuli - more likely to repeat), but I would not call that a rewards based training method.

If something is "rewarding to the dog", it really doesn't matter what you or I may want to call it.

Ok if you are being pedantic - it is not a method which uses positive reinforcement. When I am talking about rewards based methods I am talking about positive reinforcement based methods. Not those which utilise mostly negative reinforcement.

Why would you want to use mostly negative reinforcement anyway? Sounds like a combatative way to decide to train a dog.

Edited by Kavik
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huski, here is a video of a Koehler trained dog in training for novice

ask away...

I don't really have any questions aside from, do you really think that is good work?

To be honest if that is the video that is held up as an example of how amazing Koehler training is, it's pretty unimpressive.

I will upload a video to youtube later on and send you a link, I have a couple of old videos of dogs that have been trained using the Koehler method.

Thanks JJ!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huski, here is a video of a Koehler trained dog in training for novice

ask away...

I don't really have any questions aside from, do you really think that is good work?

To be honest if that is the video that is held up as an example of how amazing Koehler training is, it's pretty unimpressive.

+1

Also I doubt that dog would heel off a rabbit running away.

Edited by Jumabaar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say that video does very little for promoting the Koehler method.

The figure 8 makes me shudder!!!!

This video show a dog at possibly a similar level using clicker training.

You tell me what you see the differences as. Ignore the crap down signals !!!

Edited by OSoSwift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really have any questions aside from, do you really think that is good work?

To be honest if that is the video that is held up as an example of how amazing Koehler training is, it's pretty unimpressive.

I haven't read much of this thread past the first 2 pages but watched this video and have to agree with huski, that video was VERY unimpressive in regards to quality obedience work. What was with physically putting the dog back in position confused.gif Each to their own. If someone wants to use that method and thinks they get quality work from it then let them live in their own little world! The woman looked completely miserable with her dog, not to mention her dog probably wanted to be anywhere but there. Why be there if it is that unenjoyable?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really have any questions aside from, do you really think that is good work?

To be honest if that is the video that is held up as an example of how amazing Koehler training is, it's pretty unimpressive.

I haven't read much of this thread past the first 2 pages but watched this video and have to agree with huski, that video was VERY unimpressive in regards to quality obedience work. What was with physically putting the dog back in position confused.gif Each to their own. If someone wants to use that method and thinks they get quality work from it then let them live in their own little world! The woman looked completely miserable with her dog, not to mention her dog probably wanted to be anywhere but there. Why be there if it is that unenjoyable?

Agreed, that was absolute rubbish, and they both looked unhappy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Impressive dog :)

1) The people who have seen me do attention heeling at the shops or on walks (nowhere near that good!) have been impressed with my dog. Only time I got weird looks was when I was doing the food spitting technique outlined in an earlier Leerburg video lol.

2) No I would not think Michael Ellis would walk his dog in attention heel on a casual walk to the shops. He would probably do loose leash walking - there is no need to use Koehler for LLW - there are many rewards based methods (withor without corrections) that can be used to teach this.

3) I think the average dog owner is quite capable of using rewards based methods to teach whatever level of obedience they wish to achieve. If they don't wish to train attention heeling they don't have to - they are more than welcome to train a casual LLW. I am not currently training up a dog for competition obedience (my ob prospect has health issues)so am not training attention heeling atm, but mine can LLW fine. Sometimes they offer attention heeling (including the one who has never been taught attention heeling ever - sometimes for quite a distance too :laugh: ) which I will pay.

4) I don't know how long the dog in the video can keep focus without reward - it is only a puppy. That is certainly the tricky part of competition obedience - it is quite a long time for them to work well. You would build up duration. It would depend on the training and on the dog and handler. Since I have seen some great vids of dogs, esp SchH dogs, with great attention during the whole routine, it can be done :)

I read a post somewhere not long ago where someone put up a video of Alison Kollenberg correcting a dog hard in Sch training from a forged heel which she responded to. Alison is probably the Sch competitor/trainer in the country with the most achievments explained quite openly that you CANNOT train and get reliability in the sport purely in reward based techniques, she went on to say that nobody does even though they don't show it in their training videos, she said that the assumption Sch dogs trialled at high levels are trained without learning consequence from corrections is absolute nonesense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...