How Open Minded Are You?

[Cosmolo]

Question for everyone who trains, particularly if you train other people and their dogs- how open minded are you in regard to techniques, equipment and training tools when you train your dog and/ or someone else/s? Do you make blanket statements like 'i would never use a "insert training equipment here"? Do you assess the dog before choosing the training equipment? If you are at a club- are they open or closed to different ways of doing things?

Do you attend lectures and seminars about topics that you don't necesarily agree with to add to your knowledge? Do you feel you have a range of tools at your disposal?

I have met many trainers who have developed or learned a certain technique (whatever it is- some great, some not) and refuse to go outside the bounds of it even if it may benefit the dog AND handler. I never want to get so stuck in a way of doing something that i am incapable of doing it differently and am interested in your thoughts.

[leopuppy04]

Cosmo - this isn't fair! You always start good threads just when i'm doing my 'final readover' before I start work again :D

1.

I'd like to think I am relatively open minded. I do have a preference to training methods and will always try food/motivation first before any other method. As yet, I have not 'had' to use any other method, but it doesn't mean that I never will have to change my tactics a little ;). I have absolutely no problem with others using chains or halters provided (this is a biggie here!) *that they are used correctly and under proper instruction*. I find that if you make statements "I would never....." you will invariably find yourself ONE day doing just that because of the type of dog you have come across.

Our club is quite open minded, but does tend to have a mix of instructors - those that look down on clicker trainers and those that look down on correction chains.... there is a reasonable mix. Yep - will always assess the dog to my best ability before using a particular type of equipment.

2. Yes. I find them stimulating if not a little frustrating. Sometimes i've gone to a 'positive training seminar' and walked out thinking "yes, yes, yes".... then come back, stewed over it and though "hang on, but what if....". Likewise i've walked out of a 'correction' seminar and thought "no, no, no" with the same result later. In all honesty, I like to have an equal balance between the two. Heaven help the trainers that believe you can't say NO to your dog Every learning species needs to learn right from wrong

3. I haven't yet come across a dog where my training techniques haven't worked..... we may hit a few stumbling blocks and have to use a different type of method (eg: dog not understanding foldback drop), but the crusp of the training technique has remained the same. BUT, I don't believe i've really had a chance yet to fully evaluate this. Neither do I think that my technique is the 'one and only' as you will always have an exception to the rule.

I am grateful for my training last year. I believe I would be a lot more 'close minded' had I chosen the other path I was considering. I admit that 1/2 the time I walked out of lectures thinking "this is all wrong" only to go home and think about it.... and honestly say to myself that yes, I do actually do that, but in a slightly different manner. Furthermore, I can actually say to clients who ask me 'why' I don't use x y or z - I can tell them honestly and openly why..... and from personal experience. I don't say - "oh no I don't use it coz it is cruel' yet have never actually used one

[ness]

For me the question really comes down to what we are training - are we talking everyday basic manners or specific ring precision behaviours.

Everyday basic manners:

I would exhaust all positive methods first (as long as we aren't talking a life or death issue which may change things) and then take a long hard look at what other methods are around BUT I would certainly not recommend them as a matter of course.

Ring behaviours:

Open mind so long as they are all POSITIVE methods - after all this a game we play with our dogs and not something they have to do. I think in those circumstances all training should be fun. So what if your dog is in the ring and doesn't drop on a drop on recall or retrieve the dumbbell or anticipates the retrieve. There life isn't depending on it so what. I have seen to many brilliant obedience dogs excel in ring using totally positives to be persuaded that corrections are required to get the top level work.

Edited March 30, 2007 by ness

[leopuppy04]

LOL - ness.

I hadn't thought about it in terms of 2 different circumstances :D. I'm with you on that one though - my previous post in regards to general 'obedience' and manners.

As Ness said, Obedience/agility and all the rest are 'games' so I tend not to use 'corrections'... despite my frustrations (should that occur!). If it is not fun, why do it. I do however find it hard to explain this theory to my clients though....... that when the dog is 'training' ie: working with us, their mistakes are generally based on a misunderstanding, not disobedience..... yet jumping up on the bench is simply NOT ALLOWED..

haha - I think i've just made it all the more confusing for me

[Kavik]

I think I am pretty open minded about different techniques and equipment. Doing the NDTF course really opened my eyes to a whole lot of stuff I didn't know existed, and continual exposure to different types of training also expanded my knowledge. Like most people I have a preferred method and equipment which I feel most comfortable with, but I enjoy going to seminars which deal with aspects I know little about.

Even if I feel uncomfortable about the use of particular equipment or method, I can see where it would come in very handy, and I like knowing about them just in case I have the need for it one day. I feel that I have a handy 'toolbox' now. The most difficult thing for me about equipment is that I worry about the public's perception of some equipment, and this is one reason I am hesitant about using these types.

The club I currently attend for obedience is fairly open minded - there is a mix of equipment and methods from check chains through martingales and flat collars, and the odd headcollar, food and toy motivators, as well as clickers.

At agility they tend to be a bit more uptight about equipment and method. Headcollars and martingales seem to be allowed, and food and toy motivators and clickers. All has to be positive. Although a few years ago now the thing that I couldn't understand is when I got in trouble for standing on Zoe's lead when she was in a drop. She is dog aggressive, so I had taken her a bit away from the group, put her in a drop (she went into a drop herself) and stood on the lead so I could watch the instructor show us something and know Zoe wasn't going anywhere.

[ness]

ROFL Leopuppy I am playing with your mind .

[leopuppy04]

ROFL Leopuppy I am playing with your mind .

It makes so much sense when I justify it in my own mind... then I read what I write and i'm like.... huh?! LOL!

Go 'way Ness - I don't like you anymore :D I don't like people who play mindgames

[Reddii]

For me the question really comes down to what we are training - are we talking everyday basic manners or specific ring precision behaviours.

Everyday basic manners:

I would exhaust all positive methods first (as long as we aren't talking a life or death issue which may change things) and then take a long hard look at what other methods are around BUT I would certainly not recommend them as a matter of course.

Ring behaviours:

Open mind so long as they are all POSITIVE methods - after all this a game we play with our dogs and not something they have to do. I think in those circumstances all training should be fun. So what if your dog is in the ring and doesn't drop on a drop on recall or retrieve the dumbbell or anticipates the retrieve. There life isn't depending on it so what. I have seen to many brilliant obedience dogs excel in ring using totally positives to be persuaded that corrections are required to get the top level work.

Too true, except that if they break the rules in a big way the correction will be physical (NEVER hitting, just returned to the point where they should be with a thorough scolding on the way). With two fairly soft dogs it is rarely necessary and generally counter productiveto be physical though and most of our training (about 98% I'd say) is positive.

For every day basic manners and life and death issues my dogs have to obey me orI will correct them - verbally at first, but possibly physically if it is bad enough an offence: eg: little miss 10 months thought she would be clever this morning and jump out of the car as soon as I took her belt off and take off to the dog park (my bad as I didn't put the lead on first, but not the point, she should do as she is told.)- only problem was we weren't where she thought and there was no dog park. She was dragged back to the car in big trouble. once back there we made friends again big time. On the other hand when we are at agility or flyball if she makes a mistake or runs off it is fun and all positive - as you said, just a game we play.

Tony

[wheres my rock]

i think there is a difference between teaching tricks obedience stuff etc and discipline bad manners

[jesomil]

Interesting thread. I always try and be as open minded as i possibly can and have endeavoured over the years to learn and train in as many methods as i can.

I have found it depends on the person who i was training and what they are trying to achieve. After chatting with them for a while, i would get an idea about what method would suit their personality and their dog. Some people prefer to only train a certain way.

Over the years i have used completely positive training with food/toy, correction based training and also using tools such as check chain, prong, halter, martingale. It depends so much upon the person, the dog and what they are trying to train.

I think i own just about every tool that can be used with dog training and i believe most can be utilised well when the appropriate situation arises.

I have trouble with people who get completely into a method and refuse to believe that there is any other. I have lots of what if's and but.... discussions with these folk.

I have a definate preferred method of training with my own dogs though.

Edited cause it didnt make sense

Edited March 30, 2007 by jesomil

[Cosmolo]

Its great to get your perspectives- lets see if we can take it a few steps further. I'm not trying to be critical of anyone, just trying to get a better understanding of where you're coming from. Breaking it up like that raises a whole lot of interesting questions ness- do you consider obedience to have a role in keeping a dog 'safe'? At what point is it not a game? Interesting that you say you have an open mind AS long as all the methods are positive?? You don't think the dog can enjoy the sport after receiving a correction?

"So what if your dog is in the ring and doesn't drop on a drop on recall"- I totally understand what you are saying in that in the ring, this is just a mistake- nothing more and is not a big deal. But what if the same thing happened when you asked the dog to drop on recall if the dog was about to run across the road toward you? Do we expect our dogs to be ring smart so that they know when its important and when it isn't?

Then i think we have to consider the owners need for a certain behaviour and that will vary from owner to owner. For instance i see some clients who are willing and able to use extinction training for a behaviour like jumping up or attention seeking barking. That is certainly my preference if the dog hasn't been practicing the behaviour for long and if the owners are willing and able. BUT, what about those owners who have children, an illness or disability etc and need the behaviour stopped as quickly as possible for reasons such as neighbours complaints to council etc?

Here's another question for those of us that use extinction training- Do you consider the breed and drive of the dog before using extinction training as a technique?In the last 6 months I have seen 3 adult cattle dogs with potentially serious aggression issues, all of which, the owners were told to ignore mouthing as a puppy. What happened is that the dogs, being herding breeds, was in drive while doing the behaviour and thus rewarded regardless of the owners actions or inaction. When the behaviour continued, owners would try some kind of correction, verbal or otherwise, that was ill timed or insufficient, in turn providing attention to the dog usually during an extinction burst and the behaviour was continually elevated to a new level. Would it have been better to teach them how to give an effective correction to begin with?

LP- you said "their mistakes are generally based on misunderstanding rather than disobedience". Are we talking about misunderstanding of the exercise itself OR misunderstanding of the consequences (both positive and negative) for compliance and non compliance? What about the dog who understands the exercise but does not comply because the consequences are not of importance to him/her? Because for me that would be part of determining whether or not a correction was to be given.

I love these discussions

[jesomil]

Good post Cosmolo

[leopuppy04]

Its great to get your perspectives- lets see if we can take it a few steps further. I'm not trying to be critical of anyone, just trying to get a better understanding of where you're coming from. Breaking it up like that raises a whole lot of interesting questions ness- do you consider obedience to have a role in keeping a dog 'safe'? At what point is it not a game? Interesting that you say you have an open mind AS long as all the methods are positive?? You don't think the dog can enjoy the sport after receiving a correction?

See Cosmo - still not working .... naughty me .

In terms of your question "can a dog enjoy the sport after recieving a correction" - I think it depends on more than one factor. I know that for both of mine a correction, no matter how mild (but strong enough to offer a change of behaviour) DOES affect their training. In fact it tends to make them more 'disobedient' for want of a better word. I haven't really looked into the how's and why's.... i've just chosen not to correct. It doesn't work for them or me. BUT it doesn't mean that I will shun others that use it or say i'll 'never' train a dog with a correction chain (mine or a clients). I find that the positive training keeps them in the training frame of mind that I want them to be in. Not saying you can't achieve that without positive methods, but *I* tend to have difficulties.

So that brings me to my next point - I think it depends on the trainer itself. If I train correction based, I get more frustrated. The dogs sense that and in essence 'shut down'. My favourite quote for training "if you look for the bad, you'll find it. If you look for the good you'll find it". I choose to look for the good. Reward in small steps and keep your eye out for minor improvements and choose to ignore minor faults of 'disobedience'..... give your dog every chance to succeed on its own. If I didn't have this attitude, then I personally probably still won't be training as i'd be too frustrated with it. Why? Because if i'm told - your dog didn't sit - correct it - then I start to feel like my dog isn't good enough - why didn't he sit, he sits every other time, and I begin to get irrational about it..... result - I'll keep correcting because the dog is *still* not sitting.... grrr... I think - WHAT is wrong with this dog - he has been able to sit for the past 5 years!!! I end up walking off in a huff. Note that this is me personally and not what everybody else may be like. That is what I was like with my first dog. I'd get super frustrated at training when the only problem was that she simply wasn't doing it because of the vibes I was giving her. When I switched to 'positive' (I use that term loosely) training, she and I came along in leaps and bounds. Does that mean that I chuck all 'correction' training out to the wind - absolutely not. I think that this could go the other way too. Especially with a 'gruff' bloke who doesn't want to be seen as 'prissy' carrying around food. The training method depends on the individual and their dog and to me, that is what interprets what method to use. I think that I am fairly open minded in that aspect. If it works, then there is no reason to change it.

LP- you said "their mistakes are generally based on misunderstanding rather than disobedience". Are we talking about misunderstanding of the exercise itself OR misunderstanding of the consequences (both positive and negative) for compliance and non compliance? What about the dog who understands the exercise but does not comply because the consequences are not of importance to him/her? Because for me that would be part of determining whether or not a correction was to be given.

Yes, I meant a misunderstanding of the behaviour itself. Both of my dogs are very sensitive to feelings and body language (I know all dogs are, but these guys to me, seem to be a lot moreso than i'm used to). A slight change in my body language can result in a completely different response.... so I have to try my best to be consistent ;). Usually an 'act of disobedience' is simply because i've been looking at the dog or something - eg: heeling wide - not disobedience, but because i'm looking at the dog, which pulls my shoulders back, which causes him to heel wide..... look straight and I have good heeling..

Part of training for me, is to find out what consequences would affect the dogs behaviour. That changes all of the time, dependent on the circumstance. Ask Leo to sit and he spots another dog - he doesn't care if I withold the treat because by breaking he got to say 'hello'..... so my 'consequences' change with the context. Define 'correction'? Physical correction..... I rarely give one.... never say never . Perhaps what i'm asking is too much for the dog eg: heeling with a crowd of people eating hot dogs. If i'm consistently loosing attention, then i'll go back a pace - sit in heel position with your attention on me.... does that make sense? You do what I want, gets you what you want.... trying to think of another way to explain but i'm really struggling :D. I've never really had a situation where the consequences were of no importance..... maybe i'm lucky . But if my dog has not 'complied' for 3 tries, i'll go back a step - perhaps the distraction was too high - so back a step I go so that the dog can succeed and then gradually move up to where I started...... I don't know whether this is makins sense or not, but i'm just trying to explain how the correction is NOT given, but the dog is still working for what it wants and realises that all good things come from me....

[ness]

Cosmolo, sure obedience does have a role in keeping the dog safe but I am sure we all know of dogs who have great "obedience" in the ring yet are complete ratbags outside of eg dogs who heel really nicely but pull like sled dogs the minute they are out or have rock solid formal recalls but under normal circumstances have a limited recall (and sure I am not going lie that my dog was any different until I trained better).

I do believe that some dogs can enjoy the sport after receiving a correction BUT I own one that does not so can only basis my judgement on what I am working with currently. I also recognise that poor reward based training can be just as ineffective and all forms of training (be they whatever you can dream up) are only as effective as the trainer implementing them. I guess it comes down to the fact that while poorly timed reward can make a skill harder to teach an inappropriately placed correction can cause more harm than good. Furthermore that harm may or may not be fixable depending again on the level of harm caused and the skill and goals of the trainer.

For example it took me a number of years to get pushy heelwork back (reliably) after a "well meaning" instructor decided to correct her from forging using an almightly correction on her check chain all because she was half a body length ahead. Having got to where we are now I feel there were a number of other methods that may have been more suited to correcting the problem.

Cosmolo wrote: But what if the same thing happened when you asked the dog to drop on recall if the dog was about to run across the road toward you? Do we expect our dogs to be ring smart so that they know when its important and when it isn't?

Lots of dogs are pattern trained - as I said before how many dogs have really realible ring recalls but may not have a totally reliable recall outside of. They area also pretty situational. I mean if you wanted to drop your dog when they were about to run across the road would you have heeled forward a few paces, told your dog to wait, walked away a given distance, called the dog, told the dog to drop, then called the dog again. I doubt it. Chances were the dog would have been doing something on its own you gave a command and the dog dropped.

Maybe the DOR wasn't the best example - but certainly more things like the retrieves, scenting, stand for exam, sendaways, directed jumping, broad jump that sort of stuff.

Also things like precision heelwork - back on the discussion that was going yesterday on a thread regarding UK heelwork. I certainly don't want my dog walking nose glued to my leg for an entire 6/7/8km walk. I want her to be allowed to sniff and explore. Sure I don't want her dragging me everywhere but certainly don't want her to "heel".

Just my thoughts - nothing more. Yep I am pro-positives and not going to shy away from that fact. Sure Ness isn't perfect (I am not perfect either) but what dog (or human) is and especially what first dog.

On the strictly ring work obedience side I watch some of my training colleages going to ring practice week after week (all of whom think you can't train a trial dog without correction) some are still struggling for years to get there dogs to a point where they are ready to trial in UD yet I have trained Ness using completely positives with no corrections - she started her UD training in November (mostly just scent discrim) and the rest in early January and has very solid foundations and has done for about a month or two. And trust me she hasn't been an easy dog to train.

[wheres my rock]

are we moving from open mindedness to reliability here

[Arya]

great topic Cosmolo! I'm being sidetracked too Leopuppy LOL. I think I am very open-minded (well, I try to be LOL). I must admit there are times when I've almost cried at watching someone at a club 'training' a dog in what I consider to be a totally wrong way and cruel. On the other hand, I've had to stop myself laughing at some 'purely positive' comments I've had made to me. But it's good to learn all techniques and I think you can always benefit and learn from the experience of others, even if you've got a preferred training method. And, like choosing a motivator for the dog, in a way, it's the dog that chooses the training method imho. It's down to temperament, background and behaviour. I've recently seen a disastrous situation where I watched a little Basenji x that was extremely fear aggressive pulled around on a check chain until its neck bled. Now THAT MADE ME ANGRY and it was downright cruel and totally inappropriate and totally the wrong way to handle the dog's problem from start to finish of the laughingly named 'training session'. But, I'll cheerfully tell you I have no problem with check chains and use a prong collar on my own dog at times. I'm happy to use all equipment - or none!! - depending on what will work best for the dog - as long as its used properly and in context. I also really like your comment Wheres My Rock that disciplining bad manners is different to motivational training in the ring or for tricks etc. I totally agree Stay positive wherever possible but sometimes there has to be a consequence for flagrantly bad behaviour.

[wheres my rock]

im open minded so long as the method is humame bein used correctly and is fair

I think the retrieve is a perfect example i dont agree with earpinch or forced retrieves if a dog is that reluctant to retrieve then try agility or something the dog may find more enjoyable i think of why you would need to teach a retrieve for safety so to me its a non issue and i hate watching epople at club get stuck into a dog for non compliance of a retrieve it has been bullied into doing in the first place.

I do beleive that ninety percent of time reward based works fine on its own so long as you build the behaviour correctly add distractions and up the anti always looking for that step forward you can get just as reliable compliance as using other methods 10 % of the tme you need to use something else but if that is te case you also need to have the knowledge or someone knowledable to help you with timing etc and this is where being openminded comes into play

I dont go to seminars of epople i dont use the method of for my trianing with because i dont get paid to train dogs and cant afford to spend money on a seminar unless its soemthing that interests me

[Kavik]

I love seminars regardless of topic as I am interested in all forms of training! Working dogs, all dog sports, behaviour problems, even if it is not my chosen sport or field. I don't have time to sample them all but I like to learn about them Seminars and dealing with dogs that work for a living really opned my eyes to different methods and why they might be used. Something that is nice but not really important to a pet/sports dog may be essential for a working dog, they have to have a higher level of reliability. And some sports like herding have the welfare of the sheep to consider as well as the dog.

I agree wheres my rock with the retrieve - I am still working on a reliable retrieve with Diesel, but will not do a forced retrieve. He likes to hold it and carry it around and return, but is slow to get it when thrown.

[wheres my rock]

Off topic

Connor was slow on the go out so i started marking and rewarding just the leaving my side first to a ball then to teh dumbell because i marked he didnt have to continue on but cam bac for the treat the first few i really revved him up and got him running to thrown food

Now he bolts out to the DB

i agree with seminars be nice to be able to afford to go to more but alas i cant

[Kavik]

Can you expand on that, sounds worth a try