|
Post by kaos on Sept 12, 2006 23:42:28 GMT -5
BUT, if I came across a training scenario with a different dog where my methods have not succeeded I would look at other options.
|
|
|
Post by Am on Sept 12, 2006 23:50:53 GMT -5
'surely to get the best possible recall away from the most potent distractions, you should combine the two? ' Good question, and again hard to quantify, but from personal experience I am tempted to believe not. When I say in the past I have trained using aversives, I did always praise too. That's not quite what I meant, sorry. I didn't mean use both at the same time to teach a recall, with only token amounts of reward/praise. I mean teach the recall using positive only (food or prey toys, whatever really really floats your dog's boat). Then when your dog knows the recall 100% in a sterile environment, add distractions to your training, and keep rewarding your dog for correct recalls. When you find a distraction so great that your dog stops recalling for your reward, then it's time to add corrections for misbehaviour, to make responding to those distractions less appealing. In my (limited) experience, corrections can keep working to increase reliability, when postive reinforcement fails to motivate behaviour. Though perhaps our dogs are just very different? I'd also like to say that I think it's a common misperception that people who train with punishment rely predominantly upon it when training. However, 90% of what I do with my dog is positive (manipulation of praise, life rewards, games, toys, food). I use physical aversives very rarely - but they really have made a difference with his reliability around distractions. Most of the non PP trainers I have met are similar.
|
|
|
Post by kaos on Sept 12, 2006 23:51:42 GMT -5
Yes Willow, he is a softer dog, but I can assure you he didn't train himself, especially not to come away from deer. Also, being 9 months when I got him with no training whatsoever he was more challenging than dogs I have had from a puppy. He is definitely an ideal candidate for positive methods though and extremely intelligent.
My other dog is quite the reverse, very thick skinned and a cheerful (and fairly dominant - ahhh the D word) thug. I started off training him as I had always trained, and got ok but still weak in a few areas results. But have now switched to clicker training him, and stopped using positive punishments (except verbal 'no' or 'uh uh' etc) and have seen definite improvements in his reliability.
|
|
|
Post by Am on Sept 12, 2006 23:51:58 GMT -5
Well, ladies, this has been enjoyable, but this old lady has to get some sleep now. To be continued tomorrow.... ;D Sweet dreams, Willow!
|
|
|
Post by kaos on Sept 13, 2006 1:08:12 GMT -5
Am, you are right our dogs are probably very different, and I am really don't want to come across as saying my way is the right or only way. And I freely admit I don't by any stretch of the imagination have all the answers. Sometimes more questions than answers.
Obedience trainers usually don't punish recalls directly either, but you do often see a dog who has been punished for say a sloppy sit or breaking a stay or whatever then do a somewhat sulky recall ten minutes later.
You are totally right about the misconception re traditional trainers, and quite right to point it out. It seems likely that we do many things in a very similar manner.
Anyway, off to do some work with Kaos dog now as have just found out that he doesn't understand 'down' facing away from me. I think it's time to teach an away and drop at a marker. He will do the go out bit but insists on turning to face me before the down. My fault entirely but now I have to fix it!
|
|