I went to a Cesar Millan seminar today.

Hmmm?  Interesting post Mudpuppy.  It sounds like there's a fine line between a correction and negative reinforcement.

ORIGINAL: probe1957

ORIGINAL: Trevell


If I ever come to the point where I need a professional dog trainer/behaviorist's help, I'll be sure that he is expirenced with chickens, cats and whales as well.   Thank god for this thread!

[sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif]

I see you haven't been here for very long but, I think, you will fit in just fine.  []

Thanks probe1957!  Just wanted to ease the tension in here a little bit!

ORIGINAL: Trevell

Hmmm?  Interesting post Mudpuppy.  It sounds like there's a fine line between a correction and negative reinforcement.

Actually a corrrection(leash correction, NO! etc.) is a possitive punishment, not a negative reinforcer.

ORIGINAL: eley

possitive punishment

now there's an oxymoron.

ORIGINAL: cyclefiend2000

ORIGINAL: eley

possitive punishment

now there's an oxymoron.

 
 
[sm=lol.gif]

ORIGINAL: cyclefiend2000

ORIGINAL: eley

possitive punishment

now there's an oxymoron.

Well, the "possitive" in possitive punishment, means "adding something" not "it's all love and rainbows". The same way that a "negative re-inforcer" is NOT a bad thing, it is simply the removal (negative) of something that reduces the odds of success. Basiocally, in this context, possitive means adding something, negative means removing something, not possitive=good, negative = bad.

yeah, i have heard trainers try to justify it this way before. to me a punishment is a negative response, no matter how you want to justify your actions. [sm=2cents.gif]

there's two types of punishment, jsut the same way there are two types of re-inforcers. It goes like this:

Possitive Reinforcer: adding something that increases the odds of success.
Negative Reinforcer: removing something aversive that reduces the odds of success.
Negative Punishment: removing something desirable to increase odds of success
Possitive punishment: adding something aversive

Even "All possitive" method trainers use all but the possitive punishment. The idea that "possitive training" is based solely on possitive re-inforcement is a myth.

ORIGINAL: mudpuppy

why don't you care????

 
I don't care because he, generally anyway, will obey my command.  Obedience is all I care about, when I issue a command, but I really don't think he is afraid.  I think he obeys because of the ear scratching he gets for doing so.  []
 

Let's talk about the difference between a correction and a negative reinforcement.

 
I am not sure if we are discussing a difference in semantics or if we agree or if we disagree.  I can be amazingly dense.
 
My trainer refers to a collar pop as a correction.  He will say, "issue a correction," or "correct him."  When he says that, he wants me to pop his collar.
 
An example.  I tell Odie to "sit."  Instead of sitting, he thinks, "Maybe when I finish sniffing the cat's butt, I will."  I pop his collar and his butt hits the ground.  I tell him to "down."  He hesitates.  I pop his collar and he drops.  He doesn't disobey often but, when he does, he will comply, 100% of the time, with a collar pop.  Clearly, he understands the command or a collar pop would just confuse him.
 
Odie is the 4th dog I have trained, with the assistance of a professional trainer.  All were different trainers, but all used similar methods.  I will say, there is a lot less collar popping, suggested by trainers today, than there was when I trained my first dog, 30 years ago.  That trainer, from 30 years ago, could ACCURATELY be described as "yank and crank," unlike when the term is normally used to describe trainers, on this board.
 
There is a distinct possibility that I have never owned a dog that would be considered well trained by your standards, and I am okay with that.  However all, except the one from 30 years ago, were well trained by my standards.  That dog was just mis-wired or something.  []

ORIGINAL: eley
 The idea that "possitive training" is based solely on possitive re-inforcement is a myth.

so says the leash pop trainers.

i have not seen any true positive reinforcement trainers break it down quite the same way. i have only ever seen leash pop trainers present training in this manner as a way to purport their training methods as positive reinforcement.

ORIGINAL: mudpuppy

A big eye-opener for me was watching a clicker training demo. The joy in those dogs that you just don't see in corrected dogs. The willingness to experiment and keep trying. The ability to learn. The desire to work. An experienced clicker trained dog can literally be taught ANYTHING in minutes. Because they are willing to make mistakes-- they aren't afraid to try stuff and see if that's what mom wants today.

This is absolutely true!![] Dasher is my first "clicker only" trained dog.  All my previous dogs were not clicker trained or only half heartedly clicker trained as I used to not see much value in it.  He is such a nut, if he is unsure about a behavior that I want, he will begin giving me all the other behaviors he knows, just to see which one will work.  He has been the easiest dog to train by far.  I did not use negative reenforcement with my other dogs, but did not use a clicker either.  While they were fairly well behaved, I did not get the drive that I think clicker training creates.  I don't think I would ever not try clicker training a dog first, much easier!!

+R obedience trainers do break it down that way. 
 
+ R= The dog works to get things the dog likes.  Example:  Giving a dog a food treat the moment he achieves the sitting position.  Examples of +Reinforcers: walks, rubs, toys going outside, attention, petting, food treats, etc...
 
Neg. R= The dog works to avoid something  the dog considers unpleasant.  Example:  Releasing the pressure on a flat buckle collar the moment the dog achieves the sitting position.  Examples of  Neg. Reinforcers:  water spray, raising your voice, citronella spray, shaker can, choke chain corrections, being ignored, etc...
 
+Punishment= involves presenting a negative consequence to an undesirable behavior the moment the dog does the undesirable behavior.  Example:  Saying "NO!" when a dog chews on the couch.
 
Neg. Punishment= [color=#000000]involves [/color][color=#ff0000]removing   something good from the dog at the moment the dog performs an undesirable behavior.  Example:  Taking away the dog's favorite ball from sight when the dog leaves a sit-stay position before asked to.[/color]
 
Compulsion training is training using force to get a desired behavior.  Example: pushing down on a dog's hind end to put him in the sit postion.
 
"Corrections" refers to all types of punishment, both positive and negative.  Not all corrections involve physical force.  

mastiff:  it seems that you and eley have described the same thing in two different ways. (ie. i cant make eley's definitions match your and vice versa).

for instance....
eley says that...

Negative Reinforcer: removing something aversive that reduces the odds of success.

while mastiff says....

Neg. R= The dog works to avoid something  the dog considers unpleasant.  Example:  Releasing the pressure on a flat buckle collar the moment the dog achieves the sitting position.  Examples of  Neg. Reinforcers:  water spray, raising your voice, citronella spray, shaker can, choke chain corrections, being ignored, etc...

those two definitions, for seemingly the same thing, are different in my view. if you are spraying your dog with citronella, how is that removing something aversive? isnt that using an aversive (or negative) technique to get your desired reaction?

Spray your dog with citronella!?  You have got to be kidding, right?

Is spraying your dog with stuff and shaking loud things at your dog part of Cesar's therapy?  editing in;  and choking them with choke chains? ( That one would literally kill my hyper pup. 

i dont spray our dogs with anything.

they are 100% clicker trained.

i was only using one of the examples mastiff mentioned.