Training/"corrections"/collars

[borasaurus]

Most of the time she has to resort to physically moving the dog, scolding harshly, or like I said whacking on the behind. The reason it doesn't work? I think her dog is actually just not very bright. He basically has a goldfish memory. While he doesn't like getting squirted in the face by a water bottle, he won't remember five minutes later and doesn't associate the bottle with the water with his actions. Honestly, one of the most frustrating dogs I've met, but still cute (most of the time). I tried to teach him commands in the same manner I teach Kieran; it didn't work at all.

[mum24dog]

Most of the time she has to resort to physically moving the dog, scolding harshly, or like I said whacking on the behind. The reason it doesn't work? I think her dog is actually just not very bright. He basically has a goldfish memory. While he doesn't like getting squirted in the face by a water bottle, he won't remember five minutes later and doesn't associate the bottle with the water with his actions. Honestly, one of the most frustrating dogs I've met, but still cute (most of the time). I tried to teach him commands in the same manner I teach Kieran; it didn't work at all.

 

The reason it doesn't work is because she is giving the dog absolutely no clue what she wants it to do.

 

And where is his incentive to comply? Does she do anything interesting with him?

 

Why does it forget the punishment of a water squirt? Probably because what it wants to do overrides the adverse effect.

 

There are very few really stupid dogs but there are far too many clueless people. He isn't your dog and it will take a lot more than a bit of training from you to override what is happening the rest of the time in this dog's life.

[CptJack]

Most of the time she has to resort to physically moving the dog, scolding harshly, or like I said whacking on the behind. The reason it doesn't work? I think her dog is actually just not very bright. He basically has a goldfish memory. While he doesn't like getting squirted in the face by a water bottle, he won't remember five minutes later and doesn't associate the bottle with the water with his actions. Honestly, one of the most frustrating dogs I've met, but still cute (most of the time). I tried to teach him commands in the same manner I teach Kieran; it didn't work at all.

 

I agree that the reason this probably isn't working is because she's saying NO! NOT THAT!

 

But she isn't saying 'Yes, this."

 

There was a blog post recently somewhere that compared this to sending a human to the grocery store without a list of what to buy, but instead a list of a dozen products NOT to get and being upset when they came home with the wrong things. Saying don't buy cream cheese, apples, or ham doesn't work nearly as well as saying buy oranges, turkey, and swiss . How long would it take you, staring down a whole grocery store, to accidentally get it right without more input?

 

Dogs have a LOT of options beyond that thing they're doing in the moment, and a lot of times communication isn't there to learn from anyway. Ie: They don't know that DOING THINGS for the human GETS THEM THINGS.

 

You can't communicate with just NO. You can't even come CLOSE. In 99% of issues, you don't even need the no. You can tell it specifically what to do instead and get to the yes.

 

Even in those instances where you need to communicate the no, you have to also actively teach what you want.

Edited February 17, 2015 by CptJack

[Maralynn]

Most "dumb" dogs have spent their lives with people who have no clue how to communicate to a dog. And the "dumb" moniker turns into a self fulfilling prophecy.

[CptJack]

Most "dumb" dogs have spent their lives with people who have no clue how to communicate to a dog. And the "dumb" moniker turns into a self fulfilling prophecy.

 

Yeah, they just scream or flail at the dog or try to 'make it' do things via some method or another that doesn't involve communicating with the dog and teaching it to... well, teaching it to learn and giving it an opportunity to use its own brain.

 

I call Jack 'dumb' a lot, but absolute truth of the matter? He was compulsion trained for YEARS before I got him (as in physical manipulation). It has literally taken years to get him to be willing to try things, or to offer behavior - his inclination is just to wait and be shown what you want - and he still dislikes training pretty intensely and would rather do anything else.

 

Now, I'll give credit where it's due - what he learned before me he knows and knows well and is 200% reliable with.

 

But if you want more than a sit, down, and stay you're going to have to learn how to communicate effectively. And the dog has to have learned, first and foremost, that learning is a fun game that they should want to play with you. Once you've got that, you can achieve anything.

 

Without that... Not so much.

[Maralynn]

There is no doubt that dogs who have been taught that learning is a fun game have an incredible desire and eagerness to learn. BUT I think that clarity and consistency are more important to learning than making it fun. A dog needs to understand the rules of learning and have the rules consistently applied. Many people are incredibly inconsistent when it comes to training (with both punishment and reward based methods) and their inconsistency is a huge detriment to their dog's ability to learn.

[CptJack]

Maybe it's just my dogs, but I'm not sure how you can have fun without clarity and consistency. Maybe not perfect consistency, sure, but if there's not a reasonable amount of it you end up with a frustrated dog. Like I said - maybe just my dogs/the dogs I have, but if the rules are changing in any real way, PARTICULARLY the ground rules, they are not only not learning well ... they're not having any fun at all.

Because they're frustrated. What they frustration looks like varies, but. I don't think you can get to 'fun' with 'training' and not have consistency and clarity as the foundation. Not unless you've got a dog unlike any I own now or have owned.

Well, provided you're the one doing the teaching instead of the dog, anyway, instead of the other way around. That might conceivably work, but even then you'd need consistency for the dog to figure out how to get the response to start with.

[mum24dog]

You can train without fun but how much more incentive for the dog if learning is made a game rather than a chore?

Agree about consistency though - impossible not to.

[Riika]

This false duality (or poor terminology) comes up regularly in these discussions, and I really dislike it.

Using the word "punishment" instead of "correction" is wrong; they are not the same thing.

It is about as wrong as when I would start calling positive training "bribing".

I use punishment to correct is what I am saying. Not all things, but some of them-in this instance, chasing chickens.

[Sekah]

I think there's a fine line when it comes to corrections. The true definition is "to make correct". Too often people seem to misunderstand it as "to make sorry". If the correction is offering useful information and is following the LIMA methodology, I don't take issue with it.

[Chanse]

Also, I don't think anyone has mentioned that capturing is another method of dealing with unwanted behaviors (common ones being barking and jumping). Instead of scolding a behavior you can use a clicker or a marker to capture it and make the unwanted behavior another trick. While corrections/punishment may get you to the end result eventually, capturing may be quicker and more effective. This allows you to work with the dog instead of against it.

 

Barking and jumping are the simplest examples. Other unwanted behaviors may take some creativity. Basically, if the dog really wants something then you may be able to use that to your advantage to train the dog to do something else (Premack Principle!).

 

I feel that corrections are overused (I will be the first to admit that, I'm not perfect and often regret using a correction when I didn't need to), but they do have their place in the trainers tool box. For example, if the dogs safety is at stake, then something like an e-collar may be necessary. Such as teaching a BC to not chase cars, or being able to interrupt a labs prey drive when it goes off chasing a deer. But I think these should be more of a last resort type of option because there is more then one way to eliminate or control these unwanted behaviors.

[Root Beer]

I think there's a fine line when it comes to corrections. The true definition is "to make correct". Too often people seem to misunderstand it as "to make sorry". If the correction is offering useful information and is following the LIMA methodology, I don't take issue with it.

 

And yet even that definition doesn't quite work. I've debated this with trainers who incorporate correction into their training and who make the claim that a correction is anything that "makes the dog correct".

 

If my dog doesn't twirl on cue and I pull a treat out of my pocket and lure the twirl once, and then cue it again and the dog does it, I made the dog correct. But was that a correction? No, of course not! At least I have yet to run into anyone who would say that it is.

 

Or, what if I were trying to train a rear cross and my dog couldn't read my body language and kept turning the wrong way. So, I set out a target to show the dog the right path, and then take it away once the dog has practiced a few times and the dog is now able to read the cross. Again, I made the dog correct, but was the incorporation of a target a "correction"? I have yet to meet anyone who would say "yes" to that.

 

As a +R trainer, I strive to be consistent and clear, and there are tons of rules, and I do a lot of things to "make my dog correct". That typically entails either lowering the criteria to a place where I know that the dog is going to get it right, or it might be providing more information through use of a training prop, or a target, or even a lure (I use lures boldly and shamelessly).

 

But I would maintain that the true usage of "correction" among trainers (both those choose to who use them and those who strive not to) isn't only about making the dog correct. There is some aspect of communicating "what you are doing is wrong" to the dog, at least on some level. And, of course, that can be done so mildly it is almost neutral and it can be done quite harshly, and everything in between. Whether that crosses the line into making the dog sorry can depend a lot on the intent of the handler and the history and temperament of the dog.

 

Of course, I find this whole conversation ridiculously interesting and will analyze these kinds of points to death simply because of that interest. If you find my considerations off the wall, just ignore them.

[D'Elle]

I like what Mr. McCaig and others have said about communication. This is, in my opinion, the most important aspect of training - it is the key to the whole thing. I also like Cpt. Jack's grocery store analogy. Whether corrections are used or not, I think the attitude of the handler is most important. I don't think that an attitude of punishment works as well for dogs as an attitude of simple consequences. Any organism, be it a worm or a bird or a dog or human being will continue to do what brings them consequences that they like and will stop doing what brings consequences that are undesirable, unless that organism is highly defective in some way. What I get from Mr. McCaig's description of training is that it is a conversation between the dog and the handler. A negotiation. The dog says "I will do this" and the handler says, "if you do, then this will happen", and the dog learns to choose what will bring a positive result. I think that if corrections are used with this attitude of conversation there's really no problem with using them, assuming that they are, as others have said, carefully tailored to the level that is best suited to the individual dog.

[buckeyemanohio]

wow quite a bit of responses. I read through all of your responses thoroughly and will use everyone's advice (parts of some and parts of others). I do want to make clear that when I trained my lab I didn't start out correcting or yelling during our basic training. I would ALWAYS praise him with petting and words during the process. I was taught to use the correction ("pop" on the chain) when he "strayed away" from the lesson and then follow with praise. I thought it was strange but it worked. It worked very, very, well actually. I just wanted a very obedient loving dog and that is what I got with my lab. I don't think he was ever, ever scared of me. He was and still is (13yrs old) our family pet. But I am willing to use other methods first now before resorting to the training collar. Especially after learning from all of you about how sensitive a border collie can be. By the way the video I purchased years ago to train in that manner was Leerburg. Perhaps you have heard of them? Most of their training was for German Shepherds but could be used for all dogs, well most dogs I guess I should say.

 

I agree with the comments that perhaps "one size fits all" does not apply with dog training especially when it comes to border collies. Are there any DVD's that you might suggest that could help me with this training process? Someone mentioned Control Unleashed: The Puppy Program. That is a book and it seems very interesting and I might get that. However, does anyone know about that book? Does it train with a clicker?? I do NOT want to train with a clicker (no offense to anyone who has done so). Does this book come in a DVD?? Or can you suggest any good DVD's to get?

[Smalahundur]

I think there's a fine line when it comes to corrections. The true definition is "to make correct". Too often people seem to misunderstand it as "to make sorry". If the correction is offering useful information and is following the LIMA methodology, I don't take issue with it.

The "LIMA methodology"...?

I train for a large part correction based, but I have never heard of "LIMA".

Googling it brought me to Peru, not very helpful...

[Root Beer]

The "LIMA methodology"...?

I train for a large part correction based, but I have never heard of "LIMA".

Googling it brought me to Peru, not very helpful...

 

Least invasive, minimally aversive.

[Maralynn]

Maybe it's just my dogs, but I'm not sure how you can have fun without clarity and consistency. Maybe not perfect consistency, sure, but if there's not a reasonable amount of it you end up with a frustrated dog. Like I said - maybe just my dogs/the dogs I have, but if the rules are changing in any real way, PARTICULARLY the ground rules, they are not only not learning well ... they're not having any fun at all.

 

Because they're frustrated. What they frustration looks like varies, but. I don't think you can get to 'fun' with 'training' and not have consistency and clarity as the foundation. Not unless you've got a dog unlike any I own now or have owned.

 

Well, provided you're the one doing the teaching instead of the dog, anyway, instead of the other way around. That might conceivably work, but even then you'd need consistency for the dog to figure out how to get the response to start with.

 

I do agree with you. But I've seen several people trying to use reward based methods with no consistency. The dogs are frustrated, but still look kind of engaged for the food or toys involved. And then the dog becomes "dumb"

 

And when punishment based methods "work" it's because of the consistent expectations, not the corrections.

 

That was more the point I was trying to convey.

[Root Beer]

I agree with the comments that perhaps "one size fits all" does not apply with dog training especially when it comes to border collies. Are there any DVD's that you might suggest that could help me with this training process? Someone mentioned Control Unleashed: The Puppy Program. That is a book and it seems very interesting and I might get that. However, does anyone know about that book? Does it train with a clicker?? I do NOT want to train with a clicker (no offense to anyone who has done so). Does this book come in a DVD?? Or can you suggest any good DVD's to get?

 

Although the author of the CU program does recommend use of a clicker, you can substitute a super well-charged marker word for the clicker (if I am not mistaken, she says that herself in the book - the clicker is not 100% necessary). Charge the word up so well that when you say the word, your dog looks your way with happy expectation, and you're good to go. Another option is to mark with a tongue click. Again, charge it up well!

 

But there is a ton more to the CU approach than the clicker, so I do recommend that you check it out. You will learn a ton.

[Smalahundur]

Least invasive, minimally aversive.

You Americans sure love your acronyms don´t you

Thanks for enlightening me Kristine.

[Maralynn]

wow quite a bit of responses. I read through all of your responses thoroughly and will use everyone's advice (parts of some and parts of others). I do want to make clear that when I trained my lab I didn't start out correcting or yelling during our basic training. I would ALWAYS praise him with petting and words during the process. I was taught to use the correction ("pop" on the chain) when he "strayed away" from the lesson and then follow with praise. I thought it was strange but it worked. It worked very, very, well actually. I just wanted a very obedient loving dog and that is what I got with my lab. I don't think he was ever, ever scared of me. He was and still is (13yrs old) our family pet. But I am willing to use other methods first now before resorting to the training collar. Especially after learning from all of you about how sensitive a border collie can be. By the way the video I purchased years ago to train in that manner was Leerburg. Perhaps you have heard of them? Most of their training was for German Shepherds but could be used for all dogs, well most dogs I guess I should say.

 

I agree with the comments that perhaps "one size fits all" does not apply with dog training especially when it comes to border collies. Are there any DVD's that you might suggest that could help me with this training process? Someone mentioned Control Unleashed: The Puppy Program. That is a book and it seems very interesting and I might get that. However, does anyone know about that book? Does it train with a clicker?? I do NOT want to train with a clicker (no offense to anyone who has done so). Does this book come in a DVD?? Or can you suggest any good DVD's to get?

 

If you headed back to Leerburg, you'd see that the philosophy there has changed greatly over the past several years. It's now MUCH more reward based - even for GSDs/Mals etc. The recent DVDs are about training through play and reward and the like.

[Root Beer]

You know, there seriously needs to be an up to date reinforcement based training book for +R based basic pet dog training.

The best one I know of is the Power of Positive Dog Training by Pat Miller and I consider it too out of date to recommend much anymore.

 

There are a lot of great +R sport foundation books, but I can't think of a thing that is an excellent go to for generic up to date +R basic life skills training.

 

Even CU Puppy, which I think is beyond excellent, is sport focused. It can be easily applied to "plain old training", but it doesn't make that jump.

 

I'm thinking an up to date +R based resource on training:

 

Safety at doors

Kitchen manners

Calling off prey and cars

Off leash hiking

In-home crate training

Loose leash walking

Reliable recalls

Etc. 'cause I know there are things I'm not thinking of

 

Something that is accessible to people who are new to training that introduces the most effective +R training methods (including training with food, toys, play, praise, and environmental reinforcers) in a way that is fun, consistent, structured, highly effective, provides instructions to train the behaviors to fluency, and fits more sizes than you could ever imagine. And is written in an objective and pleasant tone that will not offend anyone.

 

Somebody write this, please. And then follow up with a DVD . . .

[d112358]

You Americans sure love your acronyms don´t you

Thanks for enlightening me Kristine.

 

Sekah's Canadian, so the jargon's spread across the continent.

[Eileen Stein]

I agree that the reason this probably isn't working is because she's saying NO! NOT THAT!

 

But she isn't saying 'Yes, this."

 

There was a blog post recently somewhere that compared this to sending a human to the grocery store without a list of what to buy, but instead a list of a dozen products NOT to get and being upset when they came home with the wrong things. Saying don't buy cream cheese, apples, or ham doesn't work nearly as well as saying buy oranges, turkey, and swiss . How long would it take you, staring down a whole grocery store, to accidentally get it right without more input?

 

Dogs have a LOT of options beyond that thing they're doing in the moment, and a lot of times communication isn't there to learn from anyway. Ie: They don't know that DOING THINGS for the human GETS THEM THINGS.

 

You can't communicate with just NO. You can't even come CLOSE. In 99% of issues, you don't even need the no. You can tell it specifically what to do instead and get to the yes.

 

Even in those instances where you need to communicate the no, you have to also actively teach what you want.

I think the grocery store analogy is a poor one for many reasons, chief among them the fact that it assumes you want the dog to be doing something in particular (oranges, turkey and swiss), rather than just not doing what it's doing. I've found my dogs are smart enough to understand the concept that I don't want them to do X, and that I don't care what they do as long as it's not X. That's a useful thing to be able to communicate.

 

Of course you can communicate with just NO. Think of the dog who picks up a (non-poisonous) toad, and never picks one up again. The toad didn't tell it to sit instead, or lie down instead, or tug on a tug toy instead. The toad told it "Don't pick up toads," and it communicated that very well.

 

It was very simple to train my dogs not to try to interact with me before the alarm goes off in the morning. Two steps: Murmur "Uh uh" when the dog tries, and never react in any other way until the alarm goes off. Now they wouldn't think of trying to interrupt my sleep. Did they get a reward for leaving me alone? Did they get a punishment for not leaving me alone? So why did it work?

 

Also, think about how dogs train thousands of pet owners to get up very early in the morning when the owner doesn't want to. Don't try to fit it into some terminology like +P or -R. Just think about what they do, and why it is (or is not) effective. The dog isn't giving the owner a list of things to do; the dog is just communicating "Stop lying there." "NO! NOT THAT!"

[Maralynn]

I've noticed that, Kristine. The information is all out there but needs to be found and tailored. I'm not normally a person who wants it all laid out (I'm not one to completely follow any one program or method but rather create my own hybrid), but I think it would helpful for many people.

[Chanse]

Just wanted to touch on the clicker comment real quick. The control unleashed book does recommend a clicker or marker word/phrase like Root Beer said. To be honest, when I first started training my BC I thought I didn't want to do clicker training, but that was before I understood it. Now that I understand how it works I am having trouble thinking about why I didn't want to do it. The clicker isn't something that you have to use forever and you can phase it out of any command really quick. It tends to make training less confusing for the dog because you can mark exactly when the dog does something right instead of hoping you get a treat to them in time.

 

I don't use the clicker for all of my training (usually because I forget where I put it or left it at home, but I do tend to use a marker word "yes!"). For me the clicker has been most useful in CU type exercises, especially eye contact/attention work. Once the dog makes eye contact with me I click and treat. This would be very difficult to mark without a clicker.