What's So Bad About Using Force In Dog Training?

[Simply Grand]

It's not just the physical amount of force that is in play when you use physical punishment, or corrections if you like. I've accidentally kneed Quinn in the head, clacked her jaw, stepped on her feet, poked her in the eye (I sound awful but between her clumsiness and mine it happens!), I tell her sorry, she doesn't bat an eyelid.

The one time I intentionally hit her (I was already cranky and frustrated and she went to steal food off the bench) I smacked on the nose with much less force than I've accidentally hit her with, she immediately ran out of the kitchen and went and sat in a corner watching me, then steered clear of me for a good 5 - 10 mins, until I gave her some really happy attention to show I wasn't mad at her.

She could absolutely tell the difference in my intention and the overall impact on her was much greater from the physical punishment, despite the lesser physical force.

[Willem]

No, the context of tug and correction are very different!

of course - but playing tug gives you an understanding of the forces the dog can apply. I trained for over 30 years marshal art, and playing with forces, recognise and manage forces and movements etc... was a crucial part of the training. Playing tug with a dog is like a revelation and tells you a lot about character of the dog, aggression, anxieties, power, all kind of behaviours etc...and this is what can be used to find the right degree for correction.

[Willem]

It's not just the physical amount of force that is in play when you use physical punishment, or corrections if you like. I've accidentally kneed Quinn in the head, clacked her jaw, stepped on her feet, poked her in the eye (I sound awful but between her clumsiness and mine it happens!), I tell her sorry, she doesn't bat an eyelid.

The one time I intentionally hit her (I was already cranky and frustrated and she went to steal food off the bench) I smacked on the nose with much less force than I've accidentally hit her with, she immediately ran out of the kitchen and went and sat in a corner watching me, then steered clear of me for a good 5 - 10 mins, until I gave her some really happy attention to show I wasn't mad at her.

She could absolutely tell the difference in my intention and the overall impact on her was much greater from the physical punishment, despite the lesser physical force.

agree absolutely!...it is the 'toxic energy' that hurts, not the force...

[LisaCC]

I don't think you need to do NDTF or any other dog training course. You need to go do a basic psych 101 or something on learning theory.

[The Spotted Devil]

When your working Spaniel goes hunting without you...you need a good recall. And here's where transferring the value comes in because nothing on this planet compares with live game in terms of reward value.

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1563406503954387&id=100008551569765

...sorry, I get the message 'link is broken'?...I'm still resisting to surrender to Fakebook, so that could be the cause too

Fixed - sorry :)

thanks - yes, recall over a long distance doesn't seem to be a problem if there is a strong bond between handler and dog. I don't think that it is just a technical perfect recall training that get you there. I assume it is the handler itself who becomes the appetitive stimuli (or to whom the 'value is transferred') if there is a strong bond.

Relationship is important but it is built alongside recalls in easy environments, then adding distractions (eg food or toy) plus releasing to go run/sniff/hunt/play again. Trust is a really important part of that relationship building. And that recall you saw is not easy by any stretch of the imagination - that is building layers of understanding. This is a dog who has a desire to hunt and retrieve like I need to breathe.

Edited June 12, 2016 by The Spotted Devil

[Willem]

I don't think you need to do NDTF or any other dog training course. You need to go do a basic psych 101 or something on learning theory.

I assume you would be far out of your depth if asked to explain how you get to this conclusion - and beside your limited capability in this realm: this would be off-topic anyway. However, feel free to start your own thread if you want to elaborate this further.

[The Spotted Devil]

I'm going to put the whole "force" debate to one side as I don't think it accurately describes much.

We know that animals (and humans) are less stressed (and therefore experience better welfare) when they make choices and get to control their environment. If you are clever you can manipulate the environment to make it very likely they make the RIGHT choice - for you. If you are going to punish an animal that's YOUR choice but ask yourself - do I understand the alternatives? What behaviour am I trying to suppress? And has it worked? If you have to continually apply the correction it has not worked. Do you understand how severe the punisher needs to be to stop the behaviour? And the big one for me: if I don't get this right what other behaviours am I going to suppress? If you want to use shaping and have a dog that actively throws new behaviours to earn reinforcement avoid using punishment wherever possible. My dogs are fearless about offering behaviours and are not worried about making mistakes - in fact mistakes are where they learn about what happens when you DON'T make the right decision. By the same token, don't go into a training session having less than a very clear idea of what you will reward. And don't give treats for the sake of giving treats. If you are not changing behaviour that's not positive reinforcement. That's called FEEDING.

To quote the great Bob Bailey: make it worthwhile for them to play your silly little game.

Edited June 12, 2016 by The Spotted Devil

[Willem]

I'm going to put the whole "force" debate to one side as I don't think it accurately describes much.

We know that animals (and humans) are less stressed (and therefore experience better welfare) when they make choices and get to control their environment. If you are clever you can manipulate the environment to make it very likely they make the RIGHT choice - for you. If you are going to punish an animal that's YOUR choice but ask yourself - do I understand the alternatives? What behaviour am I trying to suppress? And has it worked? If you have to continually apply the correction it has not worked. Do you understand how severe the punisher needs to be to stop the behaviour? And the big one for me: if I don't get this right what other behaviours am I going to suppress? If you want to use shaping and have a dog that actively throws new behaviours to earn reinforcement avoid using punishment wherever possible. My dogs are fearless about offering behaviours and are not worried about making mistakes - in fact mistakes are where they learn about what happens when you DON'T make the right decision. By the same token, don't go into a training session having less than a very clear idea of what you will reward. And don't give treats for the sake of giving treats. If you are not changing behaviour that's not positive reinforcement. That's called FEEDING.

To quote the great Bob Bailey: make it worthwhile for them to play your silly little game.

that (the highlighted text) is at least debatable. Stress is a response to environmental conditions and a reaction to a challenge. Thereofore the more choices humans (and animals) have, the more stress it can cause. I say can, as it really depends on a lot of parameters and individual capabilities. Clearly, having choices doesn't automatically eliminate stress, but the pathway to the right decision can be a very, very stressful experience and can inflict even traumas.

Eta: ...if the environment provides the human or social animal with a strong leader, and they have full trust in this leader: this is indeed a very good recipe to minimize stress, but it implies that a lot of choices are actually made by the leader.

Eta: ...think about the meaning of 'trust'...

Edited June 12, 2016 by Willem

[The Spotted Devil]

Sorry Willem but you are misinterpreting what I said. This is STRONG science. Give an animal control over its environment and it copes better, both behaviourally AND physiologically.

[Willem]

Sorry Willem but you are misinterpreting what I said. This is STRONG science. Give an animal control over its environment and it copes better, both behaviourally AND physiologically.

which animal and who has absolute control over its environment?

...we all struggle to maintain a certain level of control, but as most of us are not living on a remote island by themselves, plus there are all these uncertainties in life 'control over its environment' is nothing else than wishful thinking - for humans and animals. Diseases (maybe not experienced by ourselves, but partners, kids...), financial struggle (or food hunting for animals), job loss, climate ...etc. etc. are all factors that can't be controlled!

I think the most stress causing methodology is trying to control everything!...won't take long and you are burned out and depressed. 'Give an animal control over its environment and it copes better, both behaviourally AND physiologically' sounds good, however, in this life it is just an imaginary dream. Evolution is science, struggle for survival is science, and that is what shapes behaviour - and it doesn't mean it comes without stress.

Lets go back to the 'dogs': how much control do you want to give to your dog? ...equal partnership at least?...and would this work?...I doubt it. And I strongly believe that my dog has much less stress in her life if I lead her strong and wisely and make most of the decisions for her.

[The Spotted Devil]

It's about the individual's PERCEPTON. Give some species in captivity control over whether or not they interact with humans (possibly even visual contact) and they show less aggression, less stereotypies and lower faecal cortisol concentration. Give a cat a hide and they show more resting behaviour and lower urinary cortisol concentrations and are more likely to choose to approach the human carer. Allow a dog to approach you and you'll get fewer fear behaviours. These are simple examples. I lecture on this at a tertiary level so I'm not going to spend hours debating this except to say the evidence is across species. This is exactly how evolution works. Why do you think Western society has higher levels of depression? Someone who has a perception of autonomy in the work place is more likely to be happy and productive. My dogs think they make HEAPS of decisions....want food, don't mug hand...want out, sit....want retrieve, sit and follow directions...want to run, recall...want rabbit, get pigeon.

Edited June 12, 2016 by The Spotted Devil

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

This is quite frustrating Willem

I can clearly see what the others are talking about but you can't.

I have experienced this with other trainers - if what we're saying about corrections (doesn't matter whether you think they're gentle or not) is true - then what does that mean about your training methods.

How is it that the rest of us have migrated to better methods scientifically proven not to mention on the competition and battlefield to be better and faster and you want to stay with correcting your dog for something you know is wrong but your dog has no idea.

Imagine you started a new job and every now and again for no reason you could figure out, you got a nice gentle static zap. Nobody told you what you were supposed to be doing or where you were supposed to be going. Just every now and again or maybe quite often, you'd get zapped.

And if you complained - they say if you chose the zap it would be bigger so that gentle zap must be ok.

[Willem]

This is quite frustrating Willem

I can clearly see what the others are talking about but you can't.

I have experienced this with other trainers - if what we're saying about corrections (doesn't matter whether you think they're gentle or not) is true - then what does that mean about your training methods.

How is it that the rest of us have migrated to better methods scientifically proven not to mention on the competition and battlefield to be better and faster and you want to stay with correcting your dog for something you know is wrong but your dog has no idea.

Imagine you started a new job and every now and again for no reason you could figure out, you got a nice gentle static zap. Nobody told you what you were supposed to be doing or where you were supposed to be going. Just every now and again or maybe quite often, you'd get zapped.

And if you complained - they say if you chose the zap it would be bigger so that gentle zap must be ok.

If you read through the thread you will see that there is quite a development wrt 'using corrections' - I don't have to use much correction anymore now that she is 17 month old.

Her recall is impeccable for her age, she comes because she loves to come, not stressed with tail between the leg. Her performance in her obedience classes (3) and agility is at least above average. Her behaviour at home is impeccable - she loves company, but has no problems to entertain herself with her dedicated toys without destroying anything else. She doesn't bark, the neighbours love her, she gets a lot of positive feedback from the owners of her dog friends. No aggressions to other dogs, people etc..

It is a pleasure to walk her, I can call her off from cattle, cats and other wildlife when required, the problems we had at the start with getting her focus when other dogs where around disappeared. We do confidence games in obedience (e.g. walking the dogs though boxes with plastic bottles and the like...), if I tell her she can do it she does it without hesitation (not many dogs do this, even normally much more confident dogs in her class hesitate and it takes ages till they do the first step). She is not perfect (how boring would it be), but she is a great little dog.

so is this all the result of what I'm doing?...or just a lucky positive outcome despite what I'm doing?

And wrt zapping: I think I get zapped here on the forum quite often :D .

Eta: don't be frustrated!...that's the last thing I want.

Edited June 12, 2016 by Willem

[Willem]

It's about the individual's PERCEPTON. Give some species in captivity control over whether or not they interact with humans (possibly even visual contact) and they show less aggression, less stereotypies and lower faecal cortisol concentration. Give a cat a hide and they show more resting behaviour and lower urinary cortisol concentrations and are more likely to choose to approach the human carer. Allow a dog to approach you and you'll get fewer fear behaviours. These are simple examples. I lecture on this at a tertiary level so I'm not going to spend hours debating this except to say the evidence is across species. This is exactly how evolution works. Why do you think Western society has higher levels of depression? Someone who has a perception of autonomy in the work place is more likely to be happy and productive. My dogs think they make HEAPS of decisions....want food, don't mug hand...want out, sit....want retrieve, sit and follow directions...want to run, recall...want rabbit, get pigeon.

yes, but who is in charge of all this?...who protect them as good as possible?...who goes the last mile to comfort them if required? - its you, and they sense all the love you put in to train them and to manage their daily life, and that is why they trust you and are less stressed. You are their appetitive stimuli now, and that is why you can do with them what you do. It helps to use the tools (whatever tools you decide to use) the right way, but the tools without the right attitude, affection and leadership are worth not much.

[Simply Grand]

Willem, do you think using pulling the lead (with whatever amount of force) to cue direction changes when loose lead walking is a BETTER way of training than avoiding leash pressure by verbally cueing a direction change? Assuming in both cases that the dog receives a reward when it follows the handler?

Edited June 12, 2016 by Simply Grand

[Simply Grand]

It's about the individual's PERCEPTON. Give some species in captivity control over whether or not they interact with humans (possibly even visual contact) and they show less aggression, less stereotypies and lower faecal cortisol concentration. Give a cat a hide and they show more resting behaviour and lower urinary cortisol concentrations and are more likely to choose to approach the human carer. Allow a dog to approach you and you'll get fewer fear behaviours. These are simple examples. I lecture on this at a tertiary level so I'm not going to spend hours debating this except to say the evidence is across species. This is exactly how evolution works. Why do you think Western society has higher levels of depression? Someone who has a perception of autonomy in the work place is more likely to be happy and productive. My dogs think they make HEAPS of decisions....want food, don't mug hand...want out, sit....want retrieve, sit and follow directions...want to run, recall...want rabbit, get pigeon.

yes, but who is in charge of all this?...who protect them as good as possible?...who goes the last mile to comfort them if required? - its you, and they sense all the love you put in to train them and to manage their daily life, and that is why they trust you and are less stressed. You are their appetitive stimuli now, and that is why you can do with them what you do. It helps to use the tools (whatever tools you decide to use) the right way, but the tools without the right attitude, affection and leadership are worth not much.

If dogs do what their owners want them to do because they trust their owner, and feel protected and comforted, then why do many much loved, cared for and protected dogs not do what their owners want them to do? Why do they still pull and not recall and not accept getting their nails cut and bolt out of gates etc etc ect even though that is what their owners want in order to keep them safe?

Dogs (and all animals) repeat behaviours that are rewarding for them, by their own standards and perceptions. Simple as that. The key to avoiding conflict and frustration between owners and dogs is to teach/train/manipulate the dog into believing that what they want and what we want them to do are one and the same, by demonstrating that that is the most rewarding option for them.

Edited June 12, 2016 by Simply Grand

[Willem]

It's about the individual's PERCEPTON. Give some species in captivity control over whether or not they interact with humans (possibly even visual contact) and they show less aggression, less stereotypies and lower faecal cortisol concentration. Give a cat a hide and they show more resting behaviour and lower urinary cortisol concentrations and are more likely to choose to approach the human carer. Allow a dog to approach you and you'll get fewer fear behaviours. These are simple examples. I lecture on this at a tertiary level so I'm not going to spend hours debating this except to say the evidence is across species. This is exactly how evolution works. Why do you think Western society has higher levels of depression? Someone who has a perception of autonomy in the work place is more likely to be happy and productive. My dogs think they make HEAPS of decisions....want food, don't mug hand...want out, sit....want retrieve, sit and follow directions...want to run, recall...want rabbit, get pigeon.

yes, but who is in charge of all this?...who protect them as good as possible?...who goes the last mile to comfort them if required? - its you, and they sense all the love you put in to train them and to manage their daily life, and that is why they trust you and are less stressed. You are their appetitive stimuli now, and that is why you can do with them what you do. It helps to use the tools (whatever tools you decide to use) the right way, but the tools without the right attitude, affection and leadership are worth not much.

If dogs do what their owners want them to do because they trust their owner, and feel protected and comforted, then why do many much loved, cared for and protected dogs not do what their owners want them to do? Why do they still pull and not recall and not accept getting their nails cut and bolt out of gates etc etc ect even though that is what their owners want in order to keep them safe?

Dogs (and all animals) repeat behaviours that are rewarding for them, by their own standards and perceptions. Simple as that. The key to avoiding conflict and frustration between owners and dogs is to teach/train/manipulate the dog into believing that what they want and what we want them to do are one and the same, by demonstrating that that is the most rewarding option for them.

...because the owners didn't earn their trust as a leader. It is not enough just to love them, it needs a little bit more to convince them that you are a trusted leader - there is still training required. You also have to built the communication between you and the dog: they don't know automatically what drop, sit etc. and a recall means.

Eta: that is actually one of the things I tried to explain in your thread and why I think it might not be a good idea to join this training: if you have to compromise too much in this training, you leadership would be compromised too - you would feel monitored because you might do something differently, more pressure for you (= more pressure for the dog), at the end the dog might ask herself bloody hell what I'm doing here?...of course it won't be so dramatic, but your dog will very likely sense that not everything is fine, and that is not the best trainings environment.

Edited June 12, 2016 by Willem

[Simply Grand]

Ok, so what is it that those owners are not doing to convince their dogs that they can be trusted as the leader?

ETA and what is the dog's motivation for doing the behaviours the owner doesn't want?

Edited June 12, 2016 by Simply Grand

[Willem]

as a sidenote: it is actually pretty interesting how those threads develop; I think there are really good comments from all sides. One idea that really puzzles me is the one that we might become actually the appetitive stimuli after bonding and training the dog. And why shouldn't it be like this? ...we start with treats, and slowly without knowing the transfer of value makes us the appetitive stimuli. Why do we fall in love with partners?...because they lure us with treats :D ?...do clicker training :laugh: ? ...in a way our partners are our appetitive stimuli, and when we embark on a dog owner / dog relationship similar principles might be at work...

Edited June 12, 2016 by Willem

[Willem]

Ok, so what is it that those owners are not doing to convince their dogs that they can be trusted as the leader?

ETA and what is the dog's motivation for doing the behaviours the owner doesn't want?

you know that no matter how I try to answer this questions (I think both questions are related) I will have to duck for cover :D ?

Dogs have different traits and characters, or even medical conditions, so that explains why some dog are easier to train and some will provide more problems if you benchmark them with easy trainable dogs. But beside these factors, I think every dog owner has to answer these questions for him/herself.

Sometimes it is not the choice of tools, but lack of persistence and discipline when using them. Positive reinforcement - and there is no doubt that it is for a good reason so successful and popular - requires a lot of persistence and discipline, more than other trainings methodologies actually. If you want to imprint the wanted reflex in the dogs brain via this way it needs a precise plan and persistent execution of the plan, and repetition, repetition, repetition. You let the dog get away with the unwanted behaviour for a few days and all your effort in positive reinforcement you put in over weeks is lost. Then people get frustrated ... and give up...and therefore failed as a leader (the dogs senses this).

I'm sure there are many other reasons, personality, ...are you authentic enough?...you can't lie to dogs, they don't give a damn whether you have the new fancy cloth, iPhone, whether you are a millionaire, washed and combed, how many followers you have on twitter and so on....you have to be authentic.

Edited June 12, 2016 by Willem