Eight Rules for Punishment (and why we shouldn't use them)

Liesje

 I'm fairly certain we've already had thread(s) on these "Eight Rules...."

 

We have:

http://forum.dog.com/forums/t/101949.aspx?PageIndex=1

 

15 pages talking about this exact same topic (started by the same OP)

espencer

15 pages talking about this exact same topic (started by the same OP)

yep, we've all seen how nicely these sort of threads progress.....

 That's right, that's me, still trying to educate.  What a concept. 

spiritdogs

That's right, that's me, still trying to educate.

 

You're absolutely right.   No reason this has to be anything but informative. 

I take issue with #5.  Personally if my dog can't handle that the punishment came from me then it's probably too much for the dog.  This is a big reason why I haven't and won't use an e-collar with Nikon.  The relationship and pack drive is so important to who he is and what motivates his work that "neutral" corrections are not even worth considering.  For training him the e-collar is a cop-out, not because it's +P or -R and "inflicts pain" but because of what is being communicated to the dog and from where.  If he gets a correction/punishment, then I dang well want him to understand where/who it came from. The rest are kind of no-brainers I guess. I will use punishment on occasion with the working dogs but as far as aversive training dogs I'm more likely to use -R than +P.  There's a lot of frustration-drive-cap-release but I'm not sure that neatly fits into one quadrant, kind of encompasses all four at once which is how I like it.

 The organism need not understand the contingency  (why, or where it's coming from) in order for it to be effective, but it may help. It's been done with reinforcement (begin reinforcing a person's behavior, and they will increase it, without any realization that they are doing it). You can get some pretty high rates of behavior from a person who has no clue what's going on. The same occurs with punishment. You stop doing certain things in certain environments, without ever realizing it, or ever knowing why you've stopped. 

I know that among people here, I may be viewed as a horrible person, but I would use/do use punishment in certain cases. I'm sure I've probably discussed in another thread what I believe to be appropriate cases for the use of punishment, so no need to get on that here.

griffinej5

 The organism need not understand the contingency  (why, or where it's coming from) in order for it to be effective, but it may help.

 

True, but my training is not just in the context of whether or not it works or is effective, but the context of the relationship. If all I cared about was training the dog quickly and effectively, I would do a lot of things very differently.  I don't see the dog as the "organism" but my partner.  It's not just about getting him to do the behavior.  It depends on the dog and the breed and I can only speak for my dogs and how their breed was designed to behave but the dog is working at a certain level based on that relationship.  My dog will perform and do certain things for me without command or question that he would never do for anyone else and I would never expect him to do it or correct him for not doing it.

Are you saying that the dog doesn't understan that the e-collar is connected to the handler?

 

packleader

Are you saying that the dog doesn't understan that the e-collar is connected to the handler?

I don't know because I haven't used one yet, but people who do use them often have told me that this is one of the reasons (or heck, they even give the remote to someone else).  I'm not really sure how the dog interprets where the correction is coming from, but if this is true, then it is a good reason for me not to use one in my training.  I'm not saying it's wrong, I just don't agree with it.  No matter what tool or method I use, all corrections and rewards come from *me*.  I do not see any value in using a correction that the dog isn't sure who is responsible for.

espencer

Liesje

 I'm fairly certain we've already had thread(s) on these "Eight Rules...."

 

We have:

http://forum.dog.com/forums/t/101949.aspx?PageIndex=1

 

15 pages talking about this exact same topic (started by the same OP)

 

Excellent, I've merged the threads.  Thanks guys!

Liesje

I do not see any value in using a correction that the dog isn't sure who is responsible for.

  When the correction comes from the action of the dog, without association to the handler, he may learn HE is the one responsible for the outcome of his behavior.  That may be why some handlers say that in reference to using an ecollar for trash picking.  The dog has to know that it's the wrong move, even if his handler is not home to deliver a correction.  He learns that THIS behavior will result in THIS consequence - either the reward of a bunch of garbage to pick through, or a correction - regardless of whom it came from.

The art of e-collar conditioning is teaching the dog that the collar is connected to the handler and not the general environment. Why would it matter who gives a command as long as the dog responds correctly to it? The dog is not responding to the collar he is responding to the commands given.

packleader

The art of e-collar conditioning is teaching the dog that the collar is connected to the handler and not the general environment. Why would it matter who gives a command as long as the dog responds correctly to it? The dog is not responding to the collar he is responding to the commands given.

There are a variety of ways the ecollar is used.  I don't want to make this thread about the ecollar, so if you want to start a new thread, feel free.  This thread remains about the application of punishment in training - NOT about ecollars.

I didnt mean to digress but she mentioned using punishment on working dogs as ok but would never use an e-collar because it kills pack drive. To me that makes no sense at all knowing what we now know about e-collars and indirect pressure. Punishment can have a way worse effect on a dog than proper e-collar use ever could. The e-collar has no effect what so ever on pack drive, prey drive, fight drive, or defensive drive when done properly, in fact it's known to increase them. Anyway I'm digressing again. As far as the article "link" in the OP. I think a trainer should adapt the method to the dog, not the book. "corrections are for the dogs" who writes this stuff?

packleader

I think a trainer should adapt the method to the dog, not the book.

You and I agree there.  I am a handler/trainer/coach who has and will continue to use ecollars, myself.  But the OP knows that and she's a member of an Anti-Shock Collar Coalition, so I don't want to hijack her thread w/talk about the ecollar ... since we are each well aware of each others' position and respect it as polar opposite when it comes to this one topic - ecollars.  However we're very close when it comes to the knowledge that positive reinforcement is where we weight our most effective training techniques.