|
Post by sibemom on Aug 4, 2006 10:06:11 GMT -5
OK now I get that So in essence Positive Punishment is what a PP trainer uses instead of consequenses ;D HEY MAYBE MY BRAIN IS WORKING BETTER They use distraction rather than a consequence, and you know that is my whole objection. After awhile the distraction tecnique is going to get old, and for alot of dogs it's not enough even if followed by Positive Re enforcement. BUT if you use a negitive punishment ae: TAKE THE TOY AWAY, I think that will leave a better imprint. In the dogs case a collar correction IS A DISTRACTION but also with a negitive punishment built in
|
|
|
Post by willow on Aug 4, 2006 10:31:01 GMT -5
' Willow, you are right that a dog is not a human and it is a mistake to treat him as such, but I think you are making a similar mistake - if you are 'pack leader' are you are thinking of yourself 'as a dog? I agree that dogs do need leadership, but we don't have to imitate dogs or wolves to become their leader. No, Kaos, I believe you are misunderstanding the term "pack leader", and I am glad you are not suggesting I am trying to bully my dogs into submission. As far as being " dominate" over our dogs, that is essential. If you weren't the dominate one, he wouldn't respect you as his leader, but just because you are dominate doesn't mean you are cruel or mistreat your dog in anyway. Being pack leader does not mean that you think of yourself as a dog, but the mistake most people make today is that they use human psychology to try to figure out what makes their dogs tick and you will never get anywhere doing that. You have to get into your dogs mind and understand it, at least the best any human can. We know...or at least I know, that we humans have limitations on how far we can go with even that. I never used the term "pack leader", "Alpha" etc. etc. until I started frequenting the dog sites on the computer, where if you didn't, you were just not with it if you didn't use the politically correct terms of our modern day and most people would not take what you said seriously. Frankly, I agree with you. I don't like the terms either, because as you said, I am not a dog and therefore I could never truly be a member of his pack in the sense other dogs are. And being pack leader does not mean that you imitate your dog in all respects. As human's that is impossible, but we can mimic or imitate some of their behaviors. Have you read the booklet "calming signals" by Turid Rugaas? (I may have that spelled wrong, because I don't have the booklet at my fingertips). If you haven't read the book, I think it is a very interesting read and there are things we can learn about our dogs from their body language. While we can't mimic their body language exactly, either, because we are not dogs and are not built like them, there are certain things we can do to help our dogs understand us better. Sibemom: Your post was very good and I too would like Kaos to explain what "Positive Punishment" is and where the term came from. I have never heard anyone who clicker trains use that term, because the term "punishment" is not in their vocabulary. I wish I had more time right now but I have company and I have been sitting here too long already, but hope to continue the discussion later. ;D
|
|
|
Post by willow on Aug 4, 2006 10:42:30 GMT -5
I see we are all posting at the same time and now see the explanation for Positive Punishment.
This is what I object to with PP people too and what I mean about "inventing things just to confuse us and our dogs." Either that or they are trying to impress me with their use of words.
I am not impressed, and frankly, when people speak to me in those terms, I tune them out. That may be wrong on my part, but I have tried to understand where they are coming from, and all I do is get more confused. I also don't have the time to try to learn all this stuff when what I am doing works.
Another of my motto's is, to use an archaic term: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
|
|
|
Post by Dom on Aug 4, 2006 10:54:01 GMT -5
OK now I get that So in essence Positive Punishment is what a PP trainer uses instead of consequenses ;D HEY MAYBE MY BRAIN IS WORKING BETTER I am sure everyones brain is working better than mine atm. I "officially" shut down all mental functions on Friday after I get my paycheck. I got paid 2 hours ago.... My boss still hasn't figured out to wait until the end of the day. It is an interesting topic though. I have used clickers to train "tricks" and such but my knowledge on PP training is very limited. Over all I think a lot of trainers make up words for actions/behaviors just to confuse us. Hey guess what! It works.
|
|
|
Post by willow on Aug 4, 2006 13:59:58 GMT -5
Yes, it does work on, I believe, quite a number of people, but what usually happens then, is that rather than admit you don't have a clue as to what they are talking about, you just go along with them, or you are impressed at how they speak, so you think, "Wow! They must really know what they are talking about and must be good at what they do, so I'll pay them these big bucks to work with me/my dog". Sadly what a lot of people end up with is empty pockets and dogs that still don't respond.
|
|
|
Post by kaos on Aug 6, 2006 2:14:03 GMT -5
Yup Dom, that is exactly the context in which I was using positive and negative punishment. Sorry not to be clearer. Positive punishement has nothing to do with 'purely positive training'. Positive punishment would be a leash pop for example when you actively do something that the dog doesn't like, whereas negative punishment is not giving something the dog wants, eg failure to sit politely in front of the door might lead to the owner not opening the door (assuming the dog finds opening the door rewarding).
My point was only that many people who clicker train choose to use only negative punishment (and therefore call themselves purely positive - this does get confusing), but some do incorporate positive punishment where they feel it is necessary. It is not using a clicker which determines whether or not you use positive punishment, but personal training philosophy.
Sibemom, you are totally right about punishment needing to be administered effectively, and sadly also right that many people are inclined to 'nag' their dogs or have poor timing so the dog fails to learn anything.
Personally I have come to rely far less on positive punishment, although I would not rule it out in every situation with every dog - to pick an extreme example if other attempts at training had failed and the behaviour was life threatening to the dog or other people. For the most part I use positive reinforcement (and negative punishment) simply because it has proved extremely effective for me. This does not mean that there is no discipline in my house or that my dogs do not respect me as their leader.
|
|
|
Post by kaos on Aug 6, 2006 2:28:33 GMT -5
'This is what I object to with PP people too and what I mean about "inventing things just to confuse us and our dogs." Either that or they are trying to impress me with their use of words.'
Not trying to impress anybody, just trying to explain my point. Also, the terms positive and negative punishment are associated with operant conditioning. This is a learning theory that applies as much to most 'traditional' (for want of a better word?) training methods as it does to purely positive ones.
Personally I find it very helpful to learn as much about various training methods as possible, before deciding whether they may be something I want to utilise or not.
'Have you read the booklet "calming signals" by Turid Rugaas? (I may have that spelled wrong, because I don't have the booklet at my fingertips). If you haven't read the book, I think it is a very interesting read and there are things we can learn about our dogs from their body language. While we can't mimic their body language exactly, either, because we are not dogs and are not built like them, there are certain things we can do to help our dogs understand us better.' I have seen her video and yes I totally agree.
|
|
|
Post by willow on Aug 6, 2006 9:34:49 GMT -5
I wasn't referring to you, Kaos, when I gave my opinion on "confusion". ;D I meant PP trainers, in general.
However, when you talk about Positive and Negative punishment, this is exactly what I mean, because I have never before heard the term "Positive Punishment" and then to say that it is a leash pop? A leash pop is simply a collar correction To me, and about every PP trainer I have come across does not consider a collar correction or any correction as "Positive" anything.
Why not just call a collar correction what it is? A quick pop/release with the leash?
|
|
|
Post by kaos on Aug 6, 2006 15:49:31 GMT -5
Willow - the leash pop was just one example. Positive punishment could be anything that you do to the dog which he finds unpleasant eg a smack, a squirt with a water bottle, a loud noise, a zap with an electric collar etc.
Postive in this context simply means something you add as opposed to negative meaning something you take away or don't do. Think science type positive and negative (+ - ).
|
|
|
Post by Am on Aug 6, 2006 16:09:48 GMT -5
Personally I have come to rely far less on positive punishment, although I would not rule it out in every situation with every dog - to pick an extreme example if other attempts at training had failed and the behaviour was life threatening to the dog or other people. For the most part I use positive reinforcement (and negative punishment) simply because it has proved extremely effective for me. If you're talking about punishment in operant conditioning terms (which I think you are), you have to remember that "positive punishment" is a very broad term. It's not just about physically correcting your dog or beating him. Anything you do to a dog that makes him change his behaviour next time can be positive punishment. So giving him an angry glance can be "positive punishment". Quietly saying 'uh-uh' can be "positive punishment". Giving him an e-collar tingle on the lowest posible setting can be "positive punishment". In that case, why would you want to restrict your use of punishment to extreme situations? It seems to me that using this type of mild punishment is hardly going to damage your relationship with the dog, no matter how often you use it. In many cases, it can be the easiest and less stressful way of teaching your dog. If we visit a friend and my dog jumps on their sofa, it's easier (and less confusing for him) for me to tell him "no" when he jumps up, than to spend the whole visit praising him for being on the floor! To be frank, the thing that worries me most about clicker training is that purist clicker trainers often seem to become mere treat vendors for their dogs. Most purist clicker trainers I know pay little attention to earning their dog's respect, or to making training enjoyable for him, or to interacting with him in a suitable manner at home - they're happy as long as he will perform when they get out the treat bag. The dog isn't working for them, or for the sheer fun of training. It's merely working to get that little piece of sausage that he thinks the trainer might have hidden in their pocket. That's not how I want to relate to my dog. I've been to a couple of clicker classes, and if my dog ever misbehaved, their answer tended to be to use "better" food treats, or to make him miss meals before class so he wanted the food treats more. Even if it had worked, which it didn't, what was I supposed to do in the real world when my dog was being disobedient but had just had dinner?
|
|
|
Post by Dom on Aug 6, 2006 18:13:40 GMT -5
I am not a trainer by any means so I can only relate to things I have been through with my dogs. I really don't see training as an us vs them method. Unfortunately, a lot of people (not pointing fingers here, just talking about the trainers I have dealt with) believe so much in their "method" of training it becomes a battle of wills and they lose focus that what is best for the individual dog is the most important thing. I have taken Sadie to a clicker class that believed Sadie should be in a "time out" for snapping at a dog that tried to mount her. In that same class I saw a border collie do very well with a clicker. But also saw the trainer trying to train a dog aggressive dog with it that was practically foaming at the mouth to eat another dog. I have also been to a class where prong collars where used and with one strong pop Sadie completely shut down. The trainer said "See that is what we want". What the hell! In the same class a German Shepard responded very well without distress using a prong. Heck his tail was wagging the entire time where Sadie's was glued to her stomach. Both trainers believed their method were the only one that was right. One refused to have prongs in their class and the other refused anything but a buckle collar and clicker. They were both wrong in my opinion. Dogs are not carbon copies. They all have personalities and what will work on one may not work on another. Sadie is a middle of the road type dog. She responds very well to clicker training when I am shaping a command. She also does well with a martingale if she is in a very excited state. But that is Sadie. I had to use different techniques with my Doberman and Chow than I did with her. I have yet to take her to another "training class" because there are so many close minded "trainers" out there. I don't believe in doing what is "hip" at the time in training. If it works it works. Just my two cents...okay maybe a penny.
|
|
|
Post by Laura on Aug 6, 2006 20:31:37 GMT -5
Giving him an e-collar tingle on the lowest posible setting can be "positive punishment". And if you really want to fry your brain, using an e-collar can also be a negative reward as well as a positive punishment ;D. I have thrown more than one "trainer" under the front of the bus (so to speak) for using the same methods on every dog that comes through their doors. I might use a check chain on a GSD but never on a Dachshund for physical reasons, but I might use a limited slip collar such as a micro prong or micro martingale if I thought it was needed. What works for one should not (and usually doesn't) work for all, and that should be the mantra of EVERY trainer out there.
|
|
|
Post by Am on Aug 6, 2006 20:40:29 GMT -5
Giving him an e-collar tingle on the lowest posible setting can be "positive punishment". And if you really want to fry your brain, using an e-collar can also be a negative reward as well as a positive punishment ;D. Not only that - you can use it as a conditioned positive reinforcement, if you set it really low & condition it like a clicker, so the dog perceives the stim as a marker for a treat. I love my e-collar! So versatile.
|
|
|
Post by kaos on Aug 6, 2006 23:27:32 GMT -5
Yup, you are right and it's a good point that positive punishment is a very broad term and I was generalising. I do use verbal corrections at times with my dogs - but then I don't claim to be 'purely' positive.
Don't agree at all that most clicker trainers have no regard for whether their dog is having fun, or that the dogs will only work for treats. One of the things I like best about clicker training is how much fun my dog has. He will work without treats once a behaviour is established, and indeed has no problem doing so when we compete at obedience or when we do a recall out on a walk, but I don't see anything wrong with rewarding his training efforts with food, attention or a game on a variable reinforcement schedule. At home learning new behaviours my dogs will often work for their own dinner. This stimulates their brain, teaches them to associate training with a good reward, and is generally treated as a great and entertaining interactive game.
I don't think a lack of respect has anything to do with whether or not you choose to train utilising a clicker. I am not sure how you are quantifying respect, but I can't see how a lack of respect or bad behaviour round the house could apply to my dogs. I think they are a pleasure to live with, and happily obey my house rules.
|
|
|
Post by kaos on Aug 6, 2006 23:31:08 GMT -5
Oh, just wanted to add I agree that it is a mistake to treat all dogs the same - they should be treated as individuals. This does not necessarily mean that an entire method needs to thrown out, it may simply mean that within that you have to think laterally as a trainer at times. We also need to take into account the ability and perferences of the owner when deciding on a preferred course of action.
|
|