Survey For Dog Trainers

[Cosmolo]

This survey is part of a research project being done by a good friend of mine. It can be completed by anyone who is currently or has in the past been paid to train dogs. It is very promising that this kind of research is being undertaken so if you fall into the above category, please do take the time to complete the survey.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/3RP7DP6

[leopuppy04]

*bump*

I've done the survey and thought I might bump it for anyone else who might have missed the original posts.

I think it's a beneficial survey to do as anything that devles into further research about the best training methods for our pets has my vote

Anyone else done it yet?

[Nekhbet]

after the way the last university survey was used I think a few people will be baulking at the prospect of it.

[dragonwoman]

after the way the last university survey was used I think a few people will be baulking at the prospect of it.

Exactly!!!!

[Staff'n'Toller]

?

[Nekhbet]

A few people from Deakin ran a working dog survey, supposedly to help in discovering good management techniques with working dogs. Ended up in the Herald Sun in a typical shoddy article saying the results found that people used cruel equipment in training (prongs, e-collars etc) because it was so non specific in the actual survey. I read it, it was just yes/no without allowing people to explain themselves. Research at its worst I refused and a lot of people I knew did too.

ETA Cosmolo nothing against Catherine at all I know she's a real dog person and is doing it with the right intentions

Edited March 4, 2012 by Nekhbet

[Staff'n'Toller]

A few people from Deakin ran a working dog survey, supposedly to help in discovering good management techniques with working dogs. Ended up in the Herald Sun in a typical shoddy article saying the results found that people used cruel equipment in training (prongs, e-collars etc) because it was so non specific in the actual survey. I read it, it was just yes/no without allowing people to explain themselves. Research at its worst I refused and a lot of people I knew did too.

ETA Cosmolo nothing against Catherine at all I know she's a real dog person and is doing it with the right intentions

Ahh ok, thanks for the info.

[alpha bet]

after the way the last university survey was used I think a few people will be baulking at the prospect of it.

I see this point, especially after going and watching some of the presentations from the PHD students - results/conclusions being stated but really often the numbers of dogs used in various studies are soooooo limited that they are not a true representation.

However this one seems okay, just seems strange that these types of surveys are left to a random online - with an online survey info can be added by anyone.... where there is either minimal or no experience ...

Surely there is a way for this info to go to "professionals" i.e. those that advertise in newspapers, have independent websites, advertise in telephones.....

Plenty of people have elevated opinion of their status as a dog trainer.....

[Yesmaam]

because it was so non specific in the actual survey. I read it, it was just yes/no without allowing people to explain themselves.

.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Yesmaam

[megan_]

after the way the last university survey was used I think a few people will be baulking at the prospect of it.

I see this point, especially after going and watching some of the presentations from the PHD students - results/conclusions being stated but really often the numbers of dogs used in various studies are soooooo limited that they are not a true representation.

However this one seems okay, just seems strange that these types of surveys are left to a random online - with an online survey info can be added by anyone.... where there is either minimal or no experience ...

Surely there is a way for this info to go to "professionals" i.e. those that advertise in newspapers, have independent websites, advertise in telephones.....

Plenty of people have elevated opinion of their status as a dog trainer.....

Often online surveys are used to identify macro trends, and then someone uses this to then do more traditional, resource and cost intensive data collection. The internet is a really cost effective and easy way to get a lot of data.

Re: the comment about people being able to explain themselves, it is hard to use descriptions/explanations in statistical research (how do you categorise and measure it?). The survey obviously is looking for the trends, rather than "what is the reason that X uses Y over X?". That may or may not come later.

It is a bit "damned if you do, damned if you don't" because if people don't participate then there will be less research into dog behaviour and training.

[Weasels]

Often online surveys are used to identify macro trends, and then someone uses this to then do more traditional, resource and cost intensive data collection. The internet is a really cost effective and easy way to get a lot of data.

Re: the comment about people being able to explain themselves, it is hard to use descriptions/explanations in statistical research (how do you categorise and measure it?). The survey obviously is looking for the trends, rather than "what is the reason that X uses Y over X?". That may or may not come later.

It is a bit "damned if you do, damned if you don't" because if people don't participate then there will be less research into dog behaviour and training.

This. No point trying to process complicated data in the form of responses if it turns out only a couple of ppl in your survey use aversive collars anyway (as an example). Research is always just the starting point for more research (fortunately for those of us that like to stay employed!)

Plus, as someone who's been on the receiving end of media 'science reporting', it does not necessarily represent the original work. Journalists do fun things like focus in on one specific stat, get someone else with a vested interest to say something OTT and controversial, then find someone random who isn't a scientist and knows nothing about your work to say the study is flawed So I'm just sayin', just because a hack newspaper reported some hysterical story doesn't mean that's what the scientists talked to them about.

[leopuppy04]

after the way the last university survey was used I think a few people will be baulking at the prospect of it.

I see this point, especially after going and watching some of the presentations from the PHD students - results/conclusions being stated but really often the numbers of dogs used in various studies are soooooo limited that they are not a true representation.

However this one seems okay, just seems strange that these types of surveys are left to a random online - with an online survey info can be added by anyone.... where there is either minimal or no experience ...

Surely there is a way for this info to go to "professionals" i.e. those that advertise in newspapers, have independent websites, advertise in telephones.....

Plenty of people have elevated opinion of their status as a dog trainer.....

I think what the researcher is trying to find out though is what the trend is, so that is why you want a large pooled number from 'random' online people. Remember that it clearly states, the demographic to which you have to be to complete the survey is to be a 'paid' dog trainer. Now regardless of their qualifications or skill-set - if they are being paid for their skills by clients, then their views into training methods and how to train dogs IMO is valid and worthy of being recorded in the survey :).

With the ever-increasing regulations placed on dogs and dog owners in Australia, dog training is a common feature of dog ownership. There are many trainers in Australia offering a wide range of training methods to help improve dog behaviour. However, there has been surprisingly limited research conducted on the effectiveness and welfare implications of the various training methods used to train dogs. The general aim of this PhD is to investigate common methods of training, assessing both their effectiveness and welfare implications. The aim of this questionnaire is to understand the training methods that professional dog trainers in Australia routinely use.

with the bold statement in mind (taken from the survey aims) I think that the larger 'pool' of trainers, the better the information regarding the training tools and techniques used will benefit the research :). JMO!

Edited March 7, 2012 by leopuppy04

[alpha bet]

after the way the last university survey was used I think a few people will be baulking at the prospect of it.

I see this point, especially after going and watching some of the presentations from the PHD students - results/conclusions being stated but really often the numbers of dogs used in various studies are soooooo limited that they are not a true representation.

However this one seems okay, just seems strange that these types of surveys are left to a random online - with an online survey info can be added by anyone.... where there is either minimal or no experience ...

Surely there is a way for this info to go to "professionals" i.e. those that advertise in newspapers, have independent websites, advertise in telephones.....

Plenty of people have elevated opinion of their status as a dog trainer.....

I think what the researcher is trying to find out though is what the trend is, so that is why you want a large pooled number from 'random' online people. Remember that it clearly states, the demographic to which you have to be to complete the survey is to be a 'paid' dog trainer. Now regardless of their qualifications or skill-set - if they are being paid for their skills by clients, then their views into training methods and how to train dogs IMO is valid and worthy of being recorded in the survey :).

With the ever-increasing regulations placed on dogs and dog owners in Australia, dog training is a common feature of dog ownership. There are many trainers in Australia offering a wide range of training methods to help improve dog behaviour. However, there has been surprisingly limited research conducted on the effectiveness and welfare implications of the various training methods used to train dogs. The general aim of this PhD is to investigate common methods of training, assessing both their effectiveness and welfare implications. The aim of this questionnaire is to understand the training methods that professional dog trainers in Australia routinely use.

with the bold statement in mind (taken from the survey aims) I think that the larger 'pool' of trainers, the better the information regarding the training tools and techniques used will benefit the research :). JMO!

I agree that these surveys have relevance it just seems a lazy way to chuck an online survey - yes you are meant to be a paid dog trainer - however there is no way of knowing if the responses are from professionals - someone who may have completed a 6 week dog training course and might have had a couple of paid clients from an advert on the community notice board is not a professional. In fact the associations i belong to categorise a professional as having at least 5 years experience in the field and you have to provide information on this and letters of reference.

so if The aim of this questionnaire is to understand the training methods that professional dog trainers in Australia routinely use then they should be directing this to the professional dog trainers......... i.e. via those who advertise etc.... fairly easy to pick up a phone directory or even google dog trainers australia and start to build a list..... there are a few associations that already have a list of 'professional' members - these should also be surveyed..... I haven't seen this survey anywhere else!

Oh and just for the record i did fill it out...... trouble is they get frustrating cause you do want to add more.....

[Kavik]

I didn't fill it in as I don't know if I count

I have held a couple of classes at the dog daycare where I worked a while back, and had a couple of casual clients, but nothing recently.

[Aidan3]

The purpose of a survey such as this one is to cost-effectively gather a whole bunch of data so that you know where to focus more expensive efforts in later studies. On the off-chance that a huge number of people lied about being a paid dog trainer it probably isn't a big issue, they still identified themselves as dog trainers. So long as the method is reported honestly. Putting together a database of professionals has many of the same problems as just asking on-line, except that it costs a lot more to put together that database.

[leopuppy04]

I agree that these surveys have relevance it just seems a lazy way to chuck an online survey - yes you are meant to be a paid dog trainer - however there is no way of knowing if the responses are from professionals - someone who may have completed a 6 week dog training course and might have had a couple of paid clients from an advert on the community notice board is not a professional. In fact the associations i belong to categorise a professional as having at least 5 years experience in the field and you have to provide information on this and letters of reference.

so if The aim of this questionnaire is to understand the training methods that professional dog trainers in Australia routinely use then they should be directing this to the professional dog trainers......... i.e. via those who advertise etc.... fairly easy to pick up a phone directory or even google dog trainers australia and start to build a list..... there are a few associations that already have a list of 'professional' members - these should also be surveyed..... I haven't seen this survey anywhere else!

Oh and just for the record i did fill it out...... trouble is they get frustrating cause you do want to add more.....

I do agree with you, however can you please tell me how we as a country/state or even world wide define a 'professional' dog trainer?! We don't?! It is up to each individual how they define themselves. Same for calling yourself a dog behaviourist/ dog whisperer/ dog trainer etc... there is no quantifying way to define this.. So with this in mind, how can this survey miss out on some valid representation of how people who are getting paid for their services offer and work within the industry and the methods that they use?

The survey does ask for your experience and we may find in the results that this actually directly correlates to the training methods use etc etc. As someone said earlier - research is a great way for finding out *some* information, but also a door opener into 'what we need to research further'.... but without research how do we quantify anything?

Out of curiosity - which group is this that you are a member of and is this Australian based? If this is the case, then perhaps forward this link or the link to the survey to them? If they fill it out, then there are more 'professionals' as you say with experience who are filling out the survey and therefore not 'skewing' any results that may come out of this :)

The purpose of a survey such as this one is to cost-effectively gather a whole bunch of data so that you know where to focus more expensive efforts in later studies. On the off-chance that a huge number of people lied about being a paid dog trainer it probably isn't a big issue, they still identified themselves as dog trainers. So long as the method is reported honestly. Putting together a database of professionals has many of the same problems as just asking on-line, except that it costs a lot more to put together that database.

Agreed :)

Edited March 8, 2012 by leopuppy04

[alpha bet]

The purpose of a survey such as this one is to cost-effectively gather a whole bunch of data so that you know where to focus more expensive efforts in later studies. On the off-chance that a huge number of people lied about being a paid dog trainer it probably isn't a big issue, they still identified themselves as dog trainers. So long as the method is reported honestly. Putting together a database of professionals has many of the same problems as just asking on-line, except that it costs a lot more to put together that database.

There is already a data base thru the current associations. Cost is not the factor.

[Nekhbet]

I still have reservations ... that last one did not go on to clarify - it ended in victimisation. I spoke to the Dr in charge of the Deakin survey he didnt actually know what a lot of equipment actually was or what it was for. He just knew it was 'bad'. I asked him to explain himself and he couldnt. Yet his findings are published and submitted to government to 'help' promote best practice for the care and training of 'working dogs'. Uh huh.

Anyone that doesnt want details to me, is something to be avoided. Because then personal biases can influence the 'meaning' of the results. If only 2 people in the survey use aversives compared to, say, 50 that don't wouldn't you want to know why? Or are we just feeding the government more fuel to ban what equipment and methods we have left.

I think personally the government and some other groups should just keep their noses right out of dog training methods. All its doing is making things worst for a lot of people and animals.

Edited March 8, 2012 by Nekhbet

[Aidan3]

The survey in question gives plenty of room for additional comments.