Boerboel

yes I mentioned that very point just a bit lower in the post.  It is about the ability of the individual who stands and moves on two legs.  Now naturally, I think of everything in the terms of behavioral philosophy but that is just me [] (radical behaviorism that is)

And the same goes for the different techniques that are not +R

 
Yes, BUT there are some techniques that are harmful to the dog even if you are doing it right. That is a generalization by the way - not saying CM or anyone else in particular has practiced these.
 
There is a proper way to 'hang' a dog - involving the correct timing, execution, and duration. But I still wouldn't let anyone, professional or not, do that to my dog. Even executed correctly I think the psychological effects are so negative and may spill over to the dog's relationship with humans.
 
Conversely, +R when used correctly is not going to cause emotional or other harm to your dog and the relationship you have with the dog.
 
My point is, just because you are doing a technique correctly doesn't mean it is a safe or good technique.

ORIGINAL: mrv

It is a common problem that people misinterpret what positive reinforcement is.  It is not a treat, or a toy, or a pet, or praise in and of itself.  It is only positive based on the impact it has on behavior.

Correct, the dog gives you the behavior you want you reward. However, if a unbalanced dog is in fight mode, you can have any *reward you want* and you can try *clicking to calm* all you want, it's going to have 0 effect. And I would know.

If an animal is continuing a behavior then something in the environment or in the animal itself is supporting the maintainance of that behavior.

Correct again, if someone allows their dog to become aggressive, and stay that way for years, that dog is unbalanced.

I would suggest that just because a technique has been inappropriately used by someone, does not mean the technology is at fault.  Any individual has the potential to "do it wrong".  Many of the problems that get posted on the board involve just that situation.

Yes, but at the same time one can absolutely say there are some techniques that do not work in some situations.

It is just as easy to do leadership strategies wrong as it is to do applied behavior analysis.  It is all about observation and timing. 

Yep, I agree. I know trainers that have no other training other than OBT, who try doing behavior work with dogs only making things worse.

Example, how I trained my coonhound to not lunge at squirrels. High prey drive dog, and in that situation, treats don't distract him--he doesn't bat an eyelash, I could be holding a t-bone steak and he wouldn't care. So, in that situation, food treats (which he'd normally stand on his head and sing the national anthem for) are not a reinfrocer for him. Nor would a toy (which even under the best of circumstances is only moderately reinforcing), nor would a game.

No, what he loves is hunting. So, okay, I can work within that framework to shape a new behavior. Going on the sequence of predator behavior (mark>eye>stalk>chase?>grab-bite>kill-bite), I decided I'd reinforce the behavior I want by giving him an opportunity to engage in at least part of that behavioral sequence (mark>eye). I'd negatively punish by walking away, removing all possibility of even beginning the behavior sequence he found so reinforcing. I taught him to sit politely and watch the squirrels rather than lunge and bark and try to chase them.

Ok... since I have not seen the episode (but would really love to![]) I will just comment on what I have read so far. I think that the method that a owner picks should be based on there dogs personality as well as there own. I know that certain training works for some dogs and not for others. Is it possible that the girl trainer was just quilified to do OBT and not behavior. I know when you start out that you start out in one type and can work your way up to other more advanced training. There for if she wasn't quilifed she should not have excepted the job. Was the trainer there when CM came in? Did he give her some pointers, recomend any thing or repremand her? Did CM tell the owner that the girl didn't know what she was doing? Just want to get some more insite on this episode.

The agression behavior is a pattern and by definition is reinforcing.  If the behavior is interupted it is possible to change the behavior with differential reinforcement strategies.  However, one must be able to deal with the triggers for the behavior as part of the plan for behavior change.
 
I do not agree that it is impossible to use applied behavior analysis to change any type of behavior.  In fact,  I believe any behavior change can be explained by looking at the behavior chain A-B-C.  Behavior can be inhibited and replaced or reinforced and maintained.
 
I do believe that many techniques are misused but that punishment based strategies are the most harmful when screwed up.
 

ORIGINAL: politepuppyobedience

Was the trainer there when CM came in? Did he give her some pointers, recomend any thing or repremand her? Did CM tell the owner that the girl didn't know what she was doing? Just want to get some more insite on this episode.

 
The trainer was there all the time since she was the only one getting along with the dog, she told Cesar that she would love to keep the dog in her house but she was afraid that could not get along with her other dogs (which were not the most balanced dogs)
 
CM gave his point of view but treated the other trainer (who may be like around 23 years old) as a normal person, like she was the other owner, i dont think CM is use to reprimend, we know that he always talks about the present and never says anything like "you did it wrong" but more like "this is what you should be doing now" and of course he didnt talk bad about the trainer because she was doing her best and was having a good intention anyways

I didn't think that he would but since I did not see it I had to ask. That also clears up alot of things up. Sounds like maybe the trainer is new to the trade and maybe didn't quite know what she was getting into but gave it her best shot. Also sounds like she hasn't quite figured out how to intergrate her skills into her own house yet. I am sure that things turned out well at the end of the show.

ORIGINAL: mrv


I do not agree that it is impossible to use applied behavior analysis to change any type of behavior.  In fact,  I believe any behavior change can be explained by looking at the behavior chain A-B-C.  Behavior can be inhibited and replaced or reinforced and maintained.

Nor do you have to agree, but would you mind explaining how *you* would use "applied behavior analysis" to stop a DA Rottie who goes nuts when ever he/she sees another dog? I'd also like to know what experience you have working with aggressive dogs? Or dogs taught to do protection work?

Well the trainer drove the dog from Philadelphia to LA because CM wanted the dog to socialize with his pack (I'm sure Patty LaBelle paid for everything in case the producers didnt) and once the dog was more balanced Patty give the dog to the trainer to live with her
 
When CM went to the trainers house to see how the dog was behaving he could see the other trainer's dogs were or hyper or a little bit dominant, which was not going to be the best enviroment for the new dog, CM gave tips for those dogs too []

In such a case, I would suggest that a multiple phase approach would be best.  A training activity in which obedience commands are emphasised so a new default behavior is in place.  Distraction training with dogs at a distance in safe situations (barriers between animals).  In this phase the breaking of eye contact would be one facet, as would redirection to the default behaviors.  Keeping the dog in motion and focused on intereaction with the handler.  As the training progresses, different variables would be systematically changed to promote the generalization of the behavior across environments.
 
I do not work with serious aggression cases.  I refer those out.  I do work with reactive and what are perceived as agressive dogs in a class setting.  I have been teaching public obedience classes for 15 years and typically, I get the hard dogs. 
 
As to my qualifications, I am trained as a behaviorist... I use the principles daily in my work... I work in schools.  I see some of the same arguments in that setting about techniques that occur on the board.

In such a case, I would suggest that a multiple phase approach would be best. A training activity in which obedience commands are emphasised so a new default behavior is in place. Distraction training with dogs at a distance in safe situations (barriers between animals). In this phase the breaking of eye contact would be one facet, as would redirection to the default behaviors. Keeping the dog in motion and focused on intereaction with the handler. As the training progresses, different variables would be systematically changed to promote the generalization of the behavior across environments.

 
This is the best approach I can see. It may take longer, but it is humane and does not further aggravate the DA as many +P approaches might. I am reminded of the beginning of "Scaredy Dog" in which the author describes her own DA dog. The dog was quite DA to begin with, and after a professional behaviorist hung the dog to check it's aggressive behavior, the dog associated the pain with the dog that was in front of it. It then saw "other dogs = pain = must keep them away from me". The DA became far worse and only through a slow desensitization program was it brought under control and the dog is now completely manageable.

ORIGINAL: mrv

The agression behavior is a pattern and by definition is reinforcing.  If the behavior is interupted it is possible to change the behavior with differential reinforcement strategies.  However, one must be able to deal with the triggers for the behavior as part of the plan for behavior change.

I do not agree that it is impossible to use applied behavior analysis to change any type of behavior.  In fact,  I believe any behavior change can be explained by looking at the behavior chain A-B-C.  Behavior can be inhibited and replaced or reinforced and maintained.

I do believe that many techniques are misused but that punishment based strategies are the most harmful when screwed up.

Everything in your posts indicates that an "applied animal behaviorist" is one who uses learning theory, operant conditioning, and classical conditioning not social learning theory or fulfillment by design. (I know this is being talked about in the other thread, but it seems to be spilling over).

When I looked up "dog psychology" and "dog behavior" on the net when Cesar's show first came out, every site I found which contained those words was all about training and operant conditioning.

I can see why people get confused!

Many behaviorists solve behavior problems with basic learning theory, operant conditioning, and classical conditioning, and do not use social learning theory or fulfillment by design.

I think we need to reclassify both "trainers" and "behaviorists" or add the definition of a "dog psychologist". Something's amiss. []
 
ETA: Reminds me of Jane Goodall's field work and observations putting Dr. Leaky into a tailspin and him telling her "Oh great! Now we have to either redefine tool use, animal, man, or all three".

edit: misunderstanding

Espence, mrv was replying to AwsomeDog's post about a DA rottie. See above.