Clicker Training, A Good Idea?

[sheena]

My two dogs have been trained using the clicker and/or marking & rewarding the behaviour I want both for general obedience, good manners & agility. By using the clicker you are shaping the dog to think for themselves, therefor, the dog is more inclined to remember what he did to get that click, then if, for say, you just lured him or corrected every bad behaviour till you got the right one. I can't even imagine training with corrections. My dogs love the clicker so much, that to play "clicker", it has become a reward in itself.

Working Border Collies.......high drive dogs with genetic focus, of course clicker training and reward based methods work awesome with dogs like that which is half the problem when performance dogs are shown as result of a training method where the old mutt with no drive or drive in the wrong place that doesn't assist in training is a completely different story as to what method will work best.

I am a firm believer that no single method works best on every dog and a good trainer is someone who knows the difference in a dog's character to apply the method best suited to the particular dog and owner. Any method pushers who either use only reward based methods or punishment based for every dog compromises the full spectrum of training potential attainable with a balanced training approach. In other words, any trainers or clubs that only support one method are half arsed IMHO.

IMO any club or trainer who advocates the use of punishment as it's method of training is half arsed. With the exception of maybe aggressive or dangerous dogs. But we are not talking about training "problem" dogs here, I don't think. I thought the OP was talking about a fairly normal dog. I don't agree that clicker training only works with high drive dogs...you can use it on ANY breed of dog if done correctly. I would not support ANY club that used punishment as ANY part of it's training.

[Santo66]

This is just bad training IMO. As a trainer you should be using what your dog finds rewarding. If a dog isn't motivated by the traditional food or toys, then you need to use other things. You can use being allowed to run off leash or go sniff as rewards, and you can also direct prey drive into toys with not all that much effort.

Punishing a dog for seeking out something it finds rewarding is bad training, and ruins a potentially great reward. Yes, you'll get a well-behaved dog with a prong collar, but you won't have an enthusiastic dog who wants to work for you. A good trainer doesn't remove things that motivate the dog, they learn to use them to actually motivate the dog to work.

I guess you could use the cat the that dog finds rewarding, personally I think that would be worse in the balance of good training to release a dog to chase a cat for behaviour reward don't you think? So I would correct a dog who finds chasing a cat rewarding and change their outlook on that one. Once a consequence factor is put into place for an unwanted behaviour, I have found that it increases the dog's potential to become more adapt to traditional reward. If you want an enthusiastic dog who wants to work for you it's best to get a dog from lines that have the right drives for that purpose......not all have the right drives, yet all need training and reliable obedience, so in general pet dog training, you need a broad spectrum of tools and methods to cater for wide variant of drives and temperaments encountered IMHO

IMO any club or trainer who advocates the use of punishment as it's method of training is half arsed. With the exception of maybe aggressive or dangerous dogs. But we are not talking about training "problem" dogs here, I don't think. I thought the OP was talking about a fairly normal dog. I don't agree that clicker training only works with high drive dogs...you can use it on ANY breed of dog if done correctly. I would not support ANY club that used punishment as ANY part of it's training

Then the club will be limited in the type of dog they can train effectively if they use only methods suitable for dogs with drive levels that match their methods and that's the problem.

You make it sound like we, as trainers, have no ability to change/develop a dog's motivation/reward value for food or toys

There is a big difference developing drive/motivation in a dog that has drive but hasn't been taught to use their drive over a dog who doesn't have drive in the right place......drive and motivation has to be in the dog genetically in the first place for training to extract it, that is you can't make drive in a dog who doesn't have any for sustainability to base a training program. In other words, a dog that tires of chasing a ball after one throw is never going to be ball crazy no matter the training is it?

Edited September 29, 2013 by Santo66

[OSoSwift]

I have created drive for certain things in a dog that didn't really care for it.

It is our job to fine what works for that dog. All dogs like rewards, we have to find the right one.

One dog on here was not an easy dog to train due to him not really having something he loved in the toy/food department. His reward was being released to cock his leg. Over time his owner had worked and created drive for other rewards.

One of my dogs loves to jump on me, that is a pretty high value reward for him that I can take into the ring, I have fostered that.

In every day life my dogs do receive corrections - which is why I say essentially clicker trained - if they go near a snake they get roared at, if they try and chase the cat they get an aversive. However, I try to set them up for success. My 11 week old puppy tried to chase the cat, he got a firm uh uh but he was on a long line so should that not work I could stop him following the cat. He stooped at the correction, came when called and got a huge reward.

I never use corrections when training for trialling in obedience, agility etc

My aim is to make me my dogs ultimate reward.

Oh and before you say it works because they are soft I have also owned Staffords, Rottweilers and Dobermanns and got a few titles along the way.

I was a check chain trainer, now I clicker train, why? Because do far it works better. Should a better way come along then I may do that :)

[huski]

I think what is often lost in these discussions is that there is no black and white about what method is best.

There is too much variation between each dog and handler and what problems they are facing/ what goals they have.

Anything that you can teach with corrections you can teach with rewards in a dog that has drive to earn rewards, but you may not always be able to achieve the same results only using rewards in a reasonable amount of time. What equals a reasonable amount of time depends on the owner and the dog and what the problem/goal is. Most pet owners want the problem they are having fixed ASAP

[Santo66]

I think what is often lost in these discussions is that there is no black and white about what method is best.

There is too much variation between each dog and handler and what problems they are facing/ what goals they have.

Anything that you can teach with corrections you can teach with rewards in a dog that has drive to earn rewards, but you may not always be able to achieve the same results only using rewards in a reasonable amount of time. What equals a reasonable amount of time depends on the owner and the dog and what the problem/goal is. Most pet owners want the problem they are having fixed ASAP

Correct, very well summarised

[sheena]

What a lot of balony that you can only use reward based training to train a dog with high drive. Santo66, have you ever read any of Leslie McDevitt's stuff...have you ever read "Controlled Unleashed"...have you ever heard of LAT. Leslie uses ONLY positive reinforcement methods & handles all sorts of dogs...problem dogs are her speciality. I suggest you get hold of some of Controlled Unleashed & give it a good read...maybe your eyes might be opened :) And to think that someone might use, being released to chase the cat, as a reward is just stupid.

[Aidan3]

Up until very recently I've only run classes for "problem" dogs, or those who used to be problem dogs. Just recently I've started accepting a few more normal dogs into one of my classes. Provided people are given good, simple instructions (and simple is all they need to be if they are good instructions), then the biggest factor for success seems to be how consistent people are in using those skills on a day-to-day basis. This is as true for the problem dogs as it is for the normal dogs, and as true for the low-drive dogs as it is for the high-drive dogs.

[Aidan3]

positive trying seems like it would be kinder and more enjoyable for the dog, but on the other hand most of the dogs i have met that have been trained in this method are semi reliable at best and there owners have little or no control over them if they are distracted by something more interesting then whatever is being offered as a reward.

What you use as a reward does come into the equation, but if this problem comes up the trainer needs to re-evaluate what the handler is doing and teach them how to overcome this. It really should not be about one reward being in competition with another. That, by definition, would not be training with positive reinforcement.

[huski]

What a lot of balony that you can only use reward based training to train a dog with high drive. Santo66, have you ever read any of Leslie McDevitt's stuff...have you ever read "Controlled Unleashed"...have you ever heard of LAT. Leslie uses ONLY positive reinforcement methods & handles all sorts of dogs...problem dogs are her speciality. I suggest you get hold of some of Controlled Unleashed & give it a good read...maybe your eyes might be opened :) And to think that someone might use, being released to chase the cat, as a reward is just stupid.

Again I think the bigger picture isn't whether you can train with rewards, it's whether the goal can be achieved in a reasonable amount of time and successfully given the skill level of the owner.

As an aside I don't think we should forget that when we train with rewards we all use removal or loss of a reward. For a dog that has a high desire to earn rewards it is a fact this can be more stressful than a physical correction.

[Vickie]

1380497237[/url]' post='6310816']

Up until very recently I've only run classes for "problem" dogs, or those who used to be problem dogs. Just recently I've started accepting a few more normal dogs into one of my classes. Provided people are given good, simple instructions (and simple is all they need to be if they are good instructions), then the biggest factor for success seems to be how consistent people are in using those skills on a day-to-day basis. This is as true for the problem dogs as it is for the normal dogs, and as true for the low-drive dogs as it is for the high-drive dogs.

This is so true!

I have been kind of the opposite...mostly trained normal dogs, but lately I have taken on a number of problem dogs & am amazed at how many of them become normal once their owners start to treat them as normal by being consistent.

I am also finding more & more that the very high drive dogs need similar methods to the very low drive dogs.

Edited September 29, 2013 by Vickie

[Cosmolo]

What Aidan said

Consistency can be the biggest challenge for some people regardless of method. Poor application of any method is exactly that- poor application.

[mixeduppup]

I adore clicker training.

[Santo66]

What a lot of balony that you can only use reward based training to train a dog with high drive. Santo66, have you ever read any of Leslie McDevitt's stuff...have you ever read "Controlled Unleashed"...have you ever heard of LAT. Leslie uses ONLY positive reinforcement methods & handles all sorts of dogs...problem dogs are her speciality. I suggest you get hold of some of Controlled Unleashed & give it a good read...maybe your eyes might be opened :) And to think that someone might use, being released to chase the cat, as a reward is just stupid.

It is stupid to release a dog to chase a cat for reward I agree, as it is just as stupid not to correct a dog for inappropriate behaviour and set some boundaries and consequence. Are you disagreeing that high drive dogs don't adapt to reward based training better than dogs of low drive? Are you maintaining that with reward based based training you can extract drive from a dog who doesn't have any drive genetically? Funny that most of the dogs who fail police K9 programs do so through lack of genetic drive......maybe they should read Leslie's book perhaps??

[Santo66]

What a lot of balony that you can only use reward based training to train a dog with high drive. Santo66, have you ever read any of Leslie McDevitt's stuff...have you ever read "Controlled Unleashed"...have you ever heard of LAT. Leslie uses ONLY positive reinforcement methods & handles all sorts of dogs...problem dogs are her speciality. I suggest you get hold of some of Controlled Unleashed & give it a good read...maybe your eyes might be opened :) And to think that someone might use, being released to chase the cat, as a reward is just stupid.

Again I think the bigger picture isn't whether you can train with rewards, it's whether the goal can be achieved in a reasonable amount of time and successfully given the skill level of the owner.

As an aside I don't think we should forget that when we train with rewards we all use removal or loss of a reward. For a dog that has a high desire to earn rewards it is a fact this can be more stressful than a physical correction.

It can be so stressful to dogs like this they can actually switch into fight drive and help themselves to the reward.......my working line GSD has bitten me twice from withholding reward in a high state of drive. Dogs like this can loose the plot easily from withholding reward when the aggressively desire it at high levels of arousal. There is actually a too much drive and focus scenario to earn reward at the other end of the spectrum

[Santo66]

positive trying seems like it would be kinder and more enjoyable for the dog, but on the other hand most of the dogs i have met that have been trained in this method are semi reliable at best and there owners have little or no control over them if they are distracted by something more interesting then whatever is being offered as a reward.

What you use as a reward does come into the equation, but if this problem comes up the trainer needs to re-evaluate what the handler is doing and teach them how to overcome this. It really should not be about one reward being in competition with another. That, by definition, would not be training with positive reinforcement.

It depends on how much desire the dog has to earn handler reward which is a genetic component of the dog's make up, hence, drive in the right place is essential. When you train that type of dog (drive in the right place)the dog is genetically obsessed by handler offering, that is NOTHING will override the desire to get a bite on a tug toy for example or a throw of the ball, the dog cares of nothing else regardless of distraction. The training system only extracts what the dog has genetically......a training system can't extract what isn't there......that is all dogs are not created equal.

[Aidan3]

No, it doesn't. It depends on whether you are actually reinforcing the dog or just offering a reward and hoping "drive" will get you through a litany of poor training decisions.

[Weasels]

But we can train heaps of animals in precise and complex behaviours using marker-reward training, not just dogs. So breeding in drive or handler focus can't be a necessary condition.

[Cosmolo]

Exactly Aidan- think about positive reinforcement by definition Santo66.

[OSoSwift]

Agreed Aiden and LBD.

Having said that in every day life if I see one of my dogs about to swipe my steak off the bench they will get negatively reinforced so I would never consider myself purely positive.

I also think that that label is a bit of a misnomer due to things already discussed such as with holding a treat is negative as is a nonreward marker.

[Cosmolo]

I think there is a difference in a reaction to stop something like stealing to setting up and constructing training sessions though. In the latter you have more choices and the option to plan to ensure maximum efficiency and minimal stress and fallout.