The Owner's Equipment

ETA - he gets smarter too.

 
 
Has that been proven?

ORIGINAL: snownose

ETA - he gets smarter too.

Has that been proven?

I can answer that. NO.

Oh, and what does ETA Estimated time of arrival have to do with anything? LOL

ETA = Edited to add.
 
Awsomedog, whenever I've debated a point with you and used research to back it your answer has been that you believe the evidence of your own eyes and experience above any research.  So if I was to find some and post you the link or book title or whatever, would I be wasting my time?

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

Does that help?

Nope.

that always sounds the same to enable them to be more consistent - the sound is always the same and it is empowers us to be much mcuh much more precise with timing.

Perhaps trainers should just do their jobs better at being consistant, as well as working on the sound. As far as being more precise in timing goes, it's laughable to think that a 1/4 of a second makes one bit of differene. And as far as I know, I must have the fastest Good! around because my timing is awesome. LOL

The dog becomes more motivated and learns faster.

I've never seen one, not one trainer that can back that statement up.

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

ETA = Edited to add.

Awsomedog, whenever I've debated a point with you and used research to back it your answer has been that you believe the evidence of your own eyes and experience above any research.  So if I was to find some and post you the link or book title or whatever, would I be wasting my time?

Which books is it you think I haven't read? you be quite surprized. I don't tend to debate that which I have no knowledge of. But hey, go for it.

lots of people just choose to use an external "gadget" instead of voice/hand signal because it's guaranteed to stay the same no matter who uses it or what mood they are in.

That is exactly the value I see in clicker training. Human voice inflection is hard to control, except for trained singers. Even then, a singer will sound different on different takes as either their voice gets tired or limbers up. Example, Melissa Etheridge would often record while having a cold or having a "bad voice day" because it added a raspiness that is her trademark. A click, or whatever sound you have that always stays the same is a stable cue for the dog to respond to. For me, I make a smooching sound that always stays the same, then I can follow with a command.

I snap my fingers and use hand movements.........but, what I don't do, is hand out a treat.......I praise, give rubs and pats......treats come later when everybody is relaxed[]

Seeing as it is OT I will try to dig it out and post it in a more general area of the forum so it can be discussed freely if people want to.  But I'm going out now and I have a few things to do, so it will have to wait till I'm back on line and not busy.  And to be honest I'm not in any particular rush because I think it will only be poohpoohed after I've gone to the effort, so no "hounding" please.  I'll be right back.......

I'll make a comment as long as we are already off-topic. []

One of the things that I've learned about clicker training, is in certain situations in working with various animals, the trainer wants to keep the focus off of the human and/or the human's emotional state and separate from the total focus of the trick, task, or specific behavior, at hand.

I learned some of this on Karen Pryor's site and through the Falconry I and II articles listed there. I know Steve Layman personally and these articles are helpful in understanding this.

I don't personally use a clicker, because I have no need to separate the task from my connection with the dog when I work with them, but I think I understand how this could be useful in certain situations when an animal is required to completely focus and function on task and independantly from the trainer.

ETA: (5:15 pm at the eastern gate!)

I've also found that the clicker (treats and toys) tend to increase the excitement, anticipation, and drive when they are being used. Which is good if that is what you're wanting depending on what you are trying to achieve at a given moment with that dog or other animal.
 
Agility is a sport which requires speed during a specific set of behaviors for top scores, so I can see why clicker training excells in this area.

For dealing with out of control dogs, I'm aiming for a calmer and less drivey state of mind and a direct connection (focus) on their leader, me. []

I also want my voice to convey more than what a clicker alone would give me, because sometimes the dog is pretty messed up. Vocal tones are a part of the communication I have with a dog which helps me establish leadership and/or communcate my "energy", and set boundaries...all at the same time. 

Silence is also a good "tool", too. []

So, just different approaches depending on what your specific goal is at the time, IMO.

ORIGINAL: Awsomedog

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

Does that help?

Nope.

that always sounds the same to enable them to be more consistent - the sound is always the same and it is empowers us to be much mcuh much more precise with timing.

Perhaps trainers should just do their jobs better at being consistant, as well as working on the sound. As far as being more precise in timing goes, it's laughable to think that a 1/4 of a second makes one bit of differene. And as far as I know, I must have the fastest Good! around because my timing is awesome. LOL

The dog becomes more motivated and learns faster.

I've never seen one, not one trainer that can back that statement up.

 
Rather than saying, "nope" you could tell me which parts you need clarifying or point blank disagree with, otherwise there's no point in posting at all...... and I've just got to add that you are the first trainer i have ever come across who does not believe that the fraction of a second makes a difference!  In addition, no matter how consistent trainers are, there is always some variation because even the best of trainers is not infallible - which means that no matter how good and consistent a trainer you are the gadget enables you to be better - however the core method and principal remains the same.  I thought those were the two areas that every trainer was universal on: timing and consistency.  Just goes to show you learn something new every day!  Me, I don't have much truck with gadgetry in general so if my voice is working I stick with that.  As for the last statement, I suspect many trainers have backed it up, but not to your satisfaction and as they say, there's none as blind as those who won't see..... although every clicker trained dog/crossover dog I have ever seen is testament to this fact.
 
IRT Angelique, great post because I can see completely where you're coming from.... sometimes I guess you do want the variant that your voice brings to the mix - provided that it conveys calmness and confidence.  Even there I am sure a "marker" such as a clicker still has value because some owners aren't capable of this or they find it extremely difficult.  To see your dog (who in a lot of cases is substitute kid, which is probably at least part of the reason behind the problem in the 1st place) stressed, anxious or downright terrified can be heart wrenching and a clicker communicates to the dog without the excess emotional baggage that the "stressed mother-owner" is bringing in.  Plus, I am sure there is a book called "Click to calm".  I have never read it and never used the technique so I have no idea how it could be done or how effective it is, but clearly there are some people out there using a "marker" to help calm the dog and it's not just for people who want the dog up and drivey, enthusiastic and speedy.....  This too deserves it's own thread methinks so we can get back on topic.  In fact I think spiritdogs is right and the method deserves a a whole section of the forum of it's own and I suspect it would be heavily trafficked...... Meanwhile I despair of ever getting back on topic.....  It's nearly 23:30 here so time to let all the dogs out and feed the cat.  Night all.......

And in what way is this different than clicker training?

ORIGINAL: snownose

I snap my fingers and use hand movements.........but, what I don't do, is hand out a treat.......I praise, give rubs and pats......treats come later when everybody is relaxed[]

ORIGINAL: Angelique


For dealing with out of control dogs, I'm aiming for a calmer and less drivey state of mind and a direct connection (focus) on their leader, me. []

I also want my voice to convey more than what a clicker alone would give me, because sometimes the dog is pretty messed up. Vocal tones are a part of the communication I have with a dog which helps me establish leadership and/or communcate my "energy", and set boundaries...all at the same time. 

Silence is also a good "tool", too. []

So, just different approaches depending on what your specific goal is at the time, IMO.

I will agree with the above statement. 

I've never owned a clicker.  I have used methods to "capture" behaviors though, quite successfully both in birds and in dogs.  I find that for me to carry a clicker all the time would be annoying....especially since timing is crucial, and I'd have to dig through my pockets  to find the dang thing...so on. 

The voice can be a very powerful tool, if used correctly.  Delivering a marker or offering a calming tone or whatever depending upon the circumstance.

ORIGINAL: Chuffy


Rather than saying, "nope" you could tell me which parts you need clarifying or point blank disagree with, otherwise there's no point in posting at all......

You see, you can't make everyone happy. I brake post down, people complaim. I answer more general, people complain. So with out breaking it down, I was saying nope to the part I disagreed with. Now, let's break some down.

and I've just got to add that you are the first trainer i have ever come across who does not believe that the fraction of a second makes a difference!

Wow! Do you realize how fact a second is? Do you realize how fast a 1/4 of a second is? Any trainer that has a clue as to what their doing *IMO* knows it matters not.

In addition, no matter how consistent trainers are, there is always some variation because even the best of trainers is not infallible - which means that no matter how good and consistent a trainer you are the gadget enables you to be better - however the core method and principal remains the same.

While variations may occur, my intent does not, the dog knows this. As far as "the gadget enables you to be better" that's you opinion. But is it works for you, I say go for it. Always do what works best for you and your dog.

I thought those were the two areas that every trainer was universal on: timing and consistency.

I'm sorry, where did you get from my post I don't think or believe that? I just don't take it to extreme or silly levels. Next thing you know you 'll be telling me is that a millaisecond actually makes a difference. LOL Then how have people been so successful training good well behaved, happy dogs for hundreds of years and to this very day minus the clicker. But again, I'll point out, I'm not saying you can't successfully train some dogs for some things using it.

Just goes to show you learn something new every day!

Some people do, others just make (what they think to be) smart comments.

Me, I don't have much truck with gadgetry in general so if my voice is working I stick with that.

But but but wait, how can you possibly train a dog successfully with all those "variations" and those *not down to a scientific milisecond markers*? But if you say you can, I guess I'll just have to believe you. I guess I'm just so confused how anyone could ever successfully do a great job training a dog without a clicker. Nah, I'm convinced, it just not possible.[]

 

As for the last statement, I suspect many trainers have backed it up, but not to your satisfaction and as they say, there's none as blind as those who won't see..... although every clicker trained dog/crossover dog I have ever seen is testament to this fact.

I'm sorry, what fact was that???

IRT Angelique, great post because I can see completely where you're coming from.... sometimes I guess you do want the variant that your voice brings to the mix - provided that it conveys calmness and confidence.  Even there I am sure a "marker" such as a clicker still has value because some owners aren't capable of this or they find it extremely difficult.

While some people may have a problem with variances in their commands and praises, this is not a something any trainer worth their salt should see as a problem, and it certainly shouldn't effect they skills at training. And if their really good, they can help owners do the same.

 

To see your dog (who in a lot of cases is substitute kid, which is probably at least part of the reason behind the problem in the 1st place) stressed, anxious or downright terrified can be heart wrenching and a clicker communicates to the dog without the excess emotional baggage that the "stressed mother-owner" is bringing in.

Oh, so you think dogs are to stupid to know how your really feeling because *your using a clicker*. I'm trying hard not to laugh here I really am, but I'll clue you in on something *some* dog trainers know. Dog are masters of body language, it's one of their forms of communication. So you dog knows what's up with you, with you ever saying a word.

Plus, I am sure there is a book called "Click to calm".

A trainers opinion. I have a different one. That's what makes the world go round and has people bicker like old hens.

I have never read it and never used the technique so I have no idea how it could be done or how effective it is

Then why comment on it? why noy *actually* Read it so you can say something informed about it. Not what *you've heard*. That just makes a actual conversation about it impossible. Don't you think?

Awsomedog, you can specifically point to one or two areas you disagree with without just saying "nope" and without breaking the post down and individually blasting apart each and every sentence.  You said yourself you don't like taking things to silly extremes.  If there's a part you don't agree with, try to see it from another perspective and respond seriously rather than sit there laughing smugly and being openly derisory to anyone who uses a different technique to you.  What is rather frustrating is that the only reason I posted in the first place was to clarify the principal behind clicker training and to emphasise that the method is not about the equipment you use.  What the equipment is is of little relevance.  Abandon it and use your voice, that's OK too.

  



[blockquote]quote:

As for the last statement, I suspect many trainers have backed it up, but not to your satisfaction and as they say, there's none as blind as those who won't see..... although every clicker trained dog/crossover dog I have ever seen is testament to this fact.[/blockquote]



I'm sorry, what fact was that???

That the dog becomes more motivated and learns faster.  That's what I've learned from personal experience. We won't agree here.  Your experiences have obviously taught you something different.  WRT to the timing, the gadget enabling you to be better etc. We will never agree.  End of.  I agree with you a clicker is not necessary to train a dog or have sufficiently good timing, nor is it necessary to empower owners to communicate effectively with their dogs, but I am open to the idea it can be helpful.  If you're not then fine.  If you haven't tried 101 things to do with a box, I recommend it purely for the entertainment value and fun you can have with it. 

  



[blockquote]quote:

IRT Angelique, great post because I can see completely where you're coming from.... sometimes I guess you do want the variant that your voice brings to the mix - provided that it conveys calmness and confidence.  Even there I am sure a "marker" such as a clicker still has value because some owners aren't capable of this or they find it extremely difficult.[/blockquote]


While some people may have a problem with variances in their commands and praises, this is not a something any trainer worth their salt should see as a problem, and it certainly shouldn't effect they skills at training. And if their really good, they can help owners do the same.

I don't know whether my wording was clear enough - this was intrinsically paired with the next part and both on their own are a little out of context.  No, dogs are not stupid, but I've said it to espencer before and now I'll say it to you - dogs are not mediums.  Masters at picking up on body language and the tiniest cues and signals from us that we aren't even aware of, yes.  But they are not perfect and they are foolable.  There is a thread dedicated to this called Whole Dog, so if you feel the need to respond to that part, go to that thread so this one doesn't get even further OT......

What I was getting at with that paragraph is that some owners are not good at conveying calmness and confidence to their dogs and here a clicker can be useful - not only does it say to the dog "you've got it right" without any emotional baggage being carried via tone of voice, it also (IME) calms and focuses the owner - solving the problem with the owner displaying the wrong body language.... so we could neatly steer this mother back on topic now:  Has Cesar ever used one on the show because that is what the owner was using?  Has he ever shown an owner how to use one to help them convey calmness and confidence?  Or, has it ever been explained that they tried using one and it didn't work so now they are using blah? 

I wish clicker training had its own section.

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

Awsomedog, you can specifically point to one or two areas you disagree with without just saying "nope" and without breaking the post down and individually blasting apart each and every sentence.  You said yourself you don't like taking things to silly extremes.  If there's a part you don't agree with, try to see it from another perspective and respond seriously rather than sit there laughing smugly and being openly derisory to anyone who uses a different technique to you.  What is rather frustrating is that the only reason I posted in the first place was to clarify the principal behind clicker training and to emphasise that the method is not about the equipment you use.  What the equipment is is of little relevance.  Abandon it and use your voice, that's OK too.

You see, there it is again, on one hand you want me to point exactly what it is, but on the other hand you don't like the way I  break it down.  you want me to do it *your way*, sorry but that's not going to happen. Maybe I stumbled into the wrong area, but why would you come to where people discuss CM and ask about clicker training? When one goes around claiming how wonderful clicker training is, it IS about the equipment, Because remove the clicker, and then what? What is it then? It's not that I care if one likes using the clicker, but it *is* (according to the clicker crowd) the greastest invention in dog training, the clicker, a piece of *equipment*. so hows it not about the clicker/equipment?

That the dog becomes more motivated and learns faster.  That's what I've learned from personal experience.

How many dogs have you trained? In what fields of training? How many different techniques have you tried or do you know?

We won't agree here.  Your experiences have obviously taught you something different.  WRT to the timing, the gadget enabling you to be better etc. We will never agree.  End of.  I agree with you a clicker is not necessary to train a dog or have sufficiently good timing, nor is it necessary to empower owners to communicate effectively with their dogs, but I am open to the idea it can be helpful.  If you're not then fine.

Well sinse no one person own the bible of dog training and behavior, one should always have a open mind. Then decide what, when, and if something works and what doesn't.





[blockquote]
[/blockquote]

No, dogs are not stupid, but I've said it to espencer before and now I'll say it to you - dogs are not mediums.  Masters at picking up on body language and the tiniest cues and signals from us that we aren't even aware of, yes.

PERFECT! I agree 100 percent with that statement.

But they are not perfect and they are foolable.  There is a thread dedicated to this called Whole Dog, so if you feel the need to respond to that part, go to that thread so this one doesn't get even further OT......

I've said my piece.

Has Cesar ever used one on the show because that is what the owner was using?

No, though he did have a "clicker" trainer on  to help a couple with *OBT*.

Has he ever shown an owner how to use one to help them convey calmness and confidence?

No, that's not his phylosophy.

I wish clicker training had its own section.

Wouldn't that simply be under, training?