E-collar discussion

Kim, a few times I've handled someone else's GSD that nearly outweighs me and I'd take him over most terriers any day of the week!!!  Terriers and I, well we just don't mix, lol.  I do not think size has anything to do with prey drive or courage.  An acquaintance of mine has a smaller Aussie that I think would compete with some GSD if she tried Schutzhund.  I've also seen cattle dogs and JRTs doing SchH and saw a rat terrier title in SDA/Dog Sport protection at the Premier this past June.

Anyway, I guess it just illustrates the many uses of the tool.  I personally would not use one as a management tool or for controlling prey drive but I've seen it done and done well.

Anne I respect your experience as a trainer and behaviorist, but seriously, posts like these (even with the "disclaimer";) are what start knocking people down a few notches on my credibility scale. Yeah I get the "tongue in cheek" part but why would you even post it at all if you didn't really think that? You really think I'm that stupid? That I would start zapping my dog on level 5 and call it a marker? I guess I need you to clarify what is the difference between a cheap, poorly made "vibration collar" and an expensive, very well made e-collar on vibrate....

Liesje, I think your opinion on e-collars being a valuable tool for you are coloring your interpretation of my point, which is NOT that I think any such thing about you.  However, I do not think that it is correct to interpret an aversive as a marker (bridge).  It's an aversive, whether it is a mild one or an intense one.  That's all.  We just differ on the interpretation of the word "marker".   A marker is a signal, not a punishment (and, here, I am intending the scientific interpretation of that word).

For those who want to know, the following page provides some of the basic definitions of operant conditioning terminology:

http://www.honoluluzoo.org/enrichment_operant_cond_terms.htm

spiritdogs

  However, I do not think that it is correct to interpret an aversive as a marker (bridge).  It's an aversive, whether it is a mild one or an intense one.  That's all.  We just differ on the interpretation of the word "marker".   A marker is a signal, not a punishment (and, here, I am intending the scientific interpretation of that word).

For those who want to know, the following page provides some of the basic definitions of operant conditioning terminology:

http://www.honoluluzoo.org/enrichment_operant_cond_terms.htm

How is a vibration, tone, or tickle an "aversive"?  Like I said earlier, I've seen dogs cower at the sound of a clicker or duck away from being pet, so do I get to make the blanket statement that clickers are now an "aversive" and petting is now a punishment not a reward?  Do you really believe that ALL dogs have the same reaction to every single "marker" or "aversive"?

Aversive for one dog is a tickle for another. I've seen some crazy hard dogs in training that really make you wonder how anyone can get anything through to them.

Jason L

Aversive for one dog is a tickle for another. I've seen some crazy hard dogs in training that really make you wonder how anyone can get anything through to them.

 

But, my point is that it doesn't always break down into the tougher, more aggressive, more drivey dog needing a harder correction or even a harder marker.  I don't want this to be a "SchH people use this and pet people use this" type thing.  Joining a new club is exposing me to new things, and one thing I'm seeing is dogs like my Kenya (shy, lacking confidence, even neurotic) responding much better with an e-collar than say, a verbal "no".  I guess the crux of the issue is that for some dogs, where the correction or even NRM comes from seems to matter *more* than what the correction or NRM actually is.  It seems the e-collar is really the only tool that addresses this caveat of communication.  I'm amazed at how well it works because until recently, I only knew the e-collar as a tool for those who use negative reinforcement (talking operant conditioning here...command the dog, stim until the dog performs the behavior, reward the dog NOT command the dog, wait for the dog to perform a behavior, and stim to correct).

Ah, I get where you are going with this. (The thread is too long with too many off shoot points to keep up! ) . Yes, that's an interesting point about the "impersonal" nature of ecollar and in that sense it is very similar to the argument why we use clicker and not a marker word in the beginning (because clicker is consistent and devoid of emotion) and I can see how it would make a difference with a handler sensitive dog.

Just an an anecdote: one of the top people at our club once said that when she is working with green handlers, she likes to teach them to use electric rather than the prong. Prong lacks the consistency of the electric and in an inexperience hand will just end up making the dog confused (why did he correct me harder this time than last time, etc.) . She was looking straight at me when she said it. I don't know why haha.

 It's been a long day and I shouldn't even try to write this post but I will

apologies Lies for muddying your thread

1) I don't see e-collars as aversive. period.  Yes an idiot might misuse use it as such but used properly it is a marker. Plain and simple.  Some of you will never understand that I accept that - too bad you can't accept the proper use of one.

2) I understand that there are wide variances within breeds with regard to most aspects of personality (temperament, biddability, drive, etc) My statements about Aussies was a generalization about the breed. a factual generalization and one that Ann and others have stated more than once on this forum.  That is not saying that it doesn't have varying degrees in individual dogs.  Then again I don't assume people are so dim that they would not realize that.

3) Not everyone gets a dog that has any interest in doing anything for you when you get them. That includes the simplest of communications.  Or gets a super young pup that has been purposefully bred.  I think Gina's point of living with a dog is different than working with one. (However three trainers have handed me B's leash back and said glad he's yours and not mine , guessing they realized my challenge)

What always disappoints me in these discussions is that the OP asks a question - in this case a knowledgeable, interested, intelligent OP - and instead of getting pertinent information gets blasted by those that choose to a) not do the same sport as the OP, and b) don't like the method/tool in question so they divert the discussion.

I am guilty of responding to the negativity because it bothers me that some of you want respect but don't offer it. That does reduce my opinion of a professional when they are disparaging to me/my ideas/beliefs yet expect me to put them on an alter.  That is not conducive to communication nor a true exchange of information.

Kim, from my perspective, and that is what it is Beastie, err Bugsy, is most certainly a one of a kind.  He hasn't been easy and I have tried most tools with him, taken classes, read voraciously, worked with trainers and he can be exceptionally well behaved.  But he will do whatever he has to in order to do what he wants when the mood strikes.  It is not a good trait in a super powerful 105lb dog.  Any of you who are adamant about not using an e-collar or who suggest using a flat collar or harness on him.  Good luck. Call me from the Emergency Room/Casualty tell me how many fingers are broken or wrists or shoulders torn or worse.  You cannot have him off leash because he will bolt and you will never catch him.  He's just 'different' - I have close relationships with a 100lb huge no longer overweight golden, a 70lb golden, a 70lb boxer, and a 90lb lab.  NONE come close in strength, pair that with the intensity, drive, independence, intelligence and hyperness.  I love him like nothing else but he is a handful

Karen, maybe you and Bugs should try SchH when he is recovered from the TPLO!    j/k...sort of....hey we do tracking which I think you've already started with him, obedience which no dog seems to ever have enough of, and work powerful dogs in prey drive....

Honestly for the most part this thread has been tame.  I haven't really been offended by any posts here and hope no one else has.  Some have made me laugh they are so full of misinformation about tools, training, breeds, whatever.  Some posts have clarified things for me about certain individuals for better or worse.  I think we can all frame each post based on the individual experiences (or lack thereof) of that poster.

It might be that there is too much social pressure for some dogs in a verbal correction from the handler. Perhaps the e-collar distances them from any sense of handler displeasure? 

spiritdogs

However, I do not think that it is correct to interpret an aversive as a marker (bridge).

The dog defines what is aversive - no?  So, for some dogs, a collar can be used as a marker.... and for some dogs, a clicker is highly aversive.

I am confused.

corvus

It might be that there is too much social pressure for some dogs in a verbal correction from the handler. Perhaps the e-collar distances them from any sense of handler displeasure? 

Yeah, what I've been saying all along!

Chuffy

spiritdogs

However, I do not think that it is correct to interpret an aversive as a marker (bridge).

 

The dog defines what is aversive - no?  So, for some dogs, a collar can be used as a marker.... and for some dogs, a clicker is highly aversive.

I am confused.

A "marker" is a conditioned reinforcement.  An aversive that is followed by a reward is a negative reinforcement.  While it's correct that the dog chooses, I find that many dogs find shock aversive, but the humans in their lives don't seem to think they do.  Of course, many people think dogs like to be hugged, too...

spiritdogs

 While it's correct that the dog chooses, I find that many dogs find shock aversive, but the humans in their lives don't seem to think they do.

I think most people use shock collars either for positive punishment or negative reinforcement (IMO too many use them for the former when they work much more effectively with the latter), so it would make no sense for them to think that the dog did not find the shock to be aversive.  Why would they use it then?  You need it to be aversive for positive punishment or negative reinforcement to work.

Liesje

corvus

It might be that there is too much social pressure for some dogs in a verbal correction from the handler. Perhaps the e-collar distances them from any sense of handler displeasure? 

 

Yeah, what I've been saying all along!

It is also a comment that i agreed with in an earlier post 

"Having said that, i am sure that the sound reduction from overbearing owners, and  the usual barrage of non contigent punishment  may allow some more senstive dogs some space to learn. "

I also wish to point out that electric current is almost always adversive, BUT in some circumstances it isn't.  At low levels and at the right frequencies and under the right circumstances it can be quite pleasant. In fact it can be used to block percieved pain.

It certainly doesn't fit the criterea for e collar use that i have seen.

Liesje

spiritdogs

 While it's correct that the dog chooses, I find that many dogs find shock aversive, but the humans in their lives don't seem to think they do.

 

I think most people use shock collars either for positive punishment or negative reinforcement (IMO too many use them for the former when they work much more effectively with the latter), so it would make no sense for them to think that the dog did not find the shock to be aversive.  Why would they use it then?  You need it to be aversive for positive punishment or negative reinforcement to work.

Exactly, which is why I don't use them.  But, the point I was trying to make is that a marker is supposed to be benign, therefore not aversive, and only intended as a conditioned reinforcement, NOT a +P or -R