OC, Clicker Training, Learning Theory

  What kind of dogs do you have?

 
Right now we've got 12 Mini Schnauzers, 1 Papillon, and 1 Shih Tzu mix.

ORIGINAL: Kim_MacMillan

I wasn't quoting you when I asked the question.  In past threads, DPU has mentioned having difficulties with a clicker b/c he has so many dogs.

On a side note. I've got 14 dogs under one roof at the moment, and I have no problems whatsoever using a clicker to teach what it is that I need. [] For public interest, if it helps.

 
Do the 14 dogs exceed 700lbs of dog? 
 
During the Clicker Training class that was my first question (out of probably 100 questions), with so many dogs and so many clickers going off, how is mine to tell the difference.  The instructor stated that it is not only the sound of the clicker but also a combination of other things, mostly ME and interacting with the dog. 

Do the 14 dogs exceed 700lbs of dog?

 
 
Cute.......I think three of ours will probably weigh more than Kim's 14.......[]

Do the 14 dogs exceed 700lbs of dog?

 
No, they don't. But I can't see what bearing that possibly has on the effectiveness of the clicker in teaching. [] I think you need to explain that one. Since when does size have anything to do with anything, really?
 

  During the Clicker Training class that was my first question (out of probably 100 questions), with so many dogs and so many clickers going off, how is mine to tell the difference.  The instructor stated that it is not only the sound of the clicker but also a combination of other things, mostly ME and interacting with the dog. 

 
Dogs are amazingly intelligent, often far more intelligent than we give them credit for. Of course they know the difference. Just like my dogs know the difference, in my own home. I can use the SAME clicker with more than one dog in the room, and the dog knows whether or not that click was meant for them.
 

  Cute.......I think three of ours will probably weigh more than Kim's 14.......[]

Once again, perhaps you're just making a genuinely kind statement. However, I still don't see what size and weight have anything to do with this discussion?
 
In case it helps, I did grow up raising Labrador Retrievers. I've also had a Cairn, a Cairn mix, Shelties, a Pom personally. In working at the boarding kennel I have worked with all ranges of sizes in dogs, and yes, often I worked with multiple dogs at one time whose weight averaged obscene numbers (the Giant Schnauzer, St. Bernard, and ittie/Rottie mix was a fun trio to work with communally). I'm not sure if this has any bearing, but I'm not sure why the issue of size came up so I thought I'd throw it out there in case it has some relevance to you.

No need to get uppity.  You provided a number 14 that was meant to impress so I also did the same.

When I asked the question to my instructor his explanation made sense to me but warned me of the "ME" factor at home.  Meaning the other dogs will want to be engaged also.  And he was correct.  You may not be observant but the dog in the same room while you clicker train another, may be miserable.  But maybe not and maybe you have an explanation as to why not.

No need to get uppity. You provided a number 14 that was meant to impress so I also did the same.

 
 
Yes, that is how it came across to me, that fourteen is way more than what I deal with.......so, it is safe to say you are not exactly dealing with powerful breeds, just to set the record straight.....other than that, don't worry about it.

Once again the OP is referencing me and I must say that the man from the south is overly sensitive. Instead of characterizing a simple discussion as an attack, being personal, or questioning one's comprehension...it should be view as maybe the understanding is not complete.

 
You have mistaken a statement of fact for sensitivity. More than once, you have stated that I have no right to comment if I don't have the exact same situation as someone else. And instead of derailing another thread, I start this one.
 
I didn't find much on satiation. But let's go with that. Say a dog gets tired of a treat after several sessions. There is nothing that says the reward can't be different. Today, on a walk, Shadow wanted to sniff the pee spot where another dog had been. I commanded 3 successful recalls, then I let him go and sniff, which was what he wanted. I had no treats or clicker with me. But it was still positive motivation. And, oh my goodness, I delayed that reward to get an obedience. I still prefer that to a fancy cinch collar.
 
Also, as those who actually study clicker training and positive operant conditioning know, there are various applications of rewards and their timing. Differential, fixed rate, random. Also, different scenarios may call for different rewards. I have done so with Shadow, following a thread by Ed on play training. Using an activity the dog really wants as the reward for obedience.
 
I realize that you have a personal conviction that clicker training is all deprivation. And that it is a blockage for you in clicker training the one dog that was deprived. But that personal conviction does not disprove the effectiveness of clicker training and the underlying science. And, in practice, so far, I haven't found a satiation stage, yet. I think, too, the possibility of a theoretical satiation on one particular treat, such as roast beef cooked with a particular season, is a reason to discount clicker training.
 
As for people commenting from their particular perspective, Corvus speaks from her unique perspective and no one disallows that. Glenda owns 6 GSDs and has never disallowed my perspective. Spiritdogs (sorry, tough old broad) has been around dogs since she was a little kid, which is a little longer than I've been alive, has certs and a college degree and has never once disallowed my perspective.
 
And I don't think Kim was being uppity. A few times, number of dogs has been called into question. She has 14. Then total combined weight was called into question. So she relayed her history with bigger dogs. And got called uppity for it.
 
None of which disproves the effectiveness of learning theory, clicker training, positive operant conditioning. In actuality, she has answered more completely and eloquently than I have and is being called uppity for it. How is that helping to answer the actual question.
 

You post really confused me.  At first I thought you only read as far as my first post and that is what you were responding.  I thought the discussion is not going to wait until you catch up. 

But then you reference 'Kim is behaving uppity' which was totally unrelated to discussion of whether deprivation and satiation exist in training.  Anyway that meant to me that you read my 2nd post and then also Kim's post.  I believe Kim was talking to you and giving you sites to reference to study.  Even those studies were not meant for dogs but for studies to understand deprivation and satiation in humans.  I am still looking for the ones I referenced and it may have beenpapers from HSUS or from the university where I work.  It has been a while since my research. 

I am surprised at your comment about member's creditentials and experience.  Spiritdogs was quite offended when creditentials were brought up way back when.  Beside my experience and my P.....ehr...education achievement means nothing?  Plus I am not self taught in clicker training but received my instruction from a professinal.

ORIGINAL: DPU

Ron2, then I take it you reject the statement "deprivation increases learning and satiation decreases learning".

 
Ron2, I just can't tell what your answer is.  You seem to say yes deprivation and satiation exist in training but you have not observed it.  Is that correct.  There is enought reference material for you to give a straight answer.  Because I am tired of being jumped all over whenever I use the word deprivation in reference to training which just happened in another thread.  
 
And, nothing personal here nor and I am not sure what you are talking about when you say
 
"More than once, you have stated that I have no right to comment if I don't have the exact same situation as someone else. And instead of derailing another thread, I start this one."
 
PTS, yes!

No need to get uppity.  You provided a number 14 that was meant to impress so I also did the same.

Uppity? Wow, I love how people can get offensive when they become defensive. You mentioned that it doesn't work because there are many dogs in your home. I simply stated that I have many dogs in my home and it works wonderfully. There's nothing uppity at all in my statement. It was a statement. Just like I could say I have three parrots or four mice or 14 bettas. It's a number. Since when does a number become uppity?

When I asked the question to my instructor his explanation made sense to me but warned me of the "ME" factor at home.  Meaning the other dogs will want to be engaged also.  And he was correct.  You may not be observant but the dog in the same room while you clicker train another, may be miserable.  But maybe not and maybe you have an explanation as to why not.

And now because I use a clicker with multiple dogs in the area I'm not observant. Boy, this discussion just gets more and more friendly doesn't it? [] For the record, to ease your mind, my dogs are not miserable at all when I'm working with another dog. Sure, they likely wish it was them that was working with me, and there might be some frustration, but that's no different than if I was working with no clicker, with touch, with a choke chain (actually, there would likely be feelings of relief then), with touch, etc. But that's because they love working with me, they love to work in general. So there's likely an element of disappointment or want there, but no different than if I rewarded my son with $20 for mowing the grass and didn't give anything to my daughter when she didn't do anything.

This might just be a curiosity question, but do you ever walk one dog without the other? Take one in the backyard and leave the others indoors? Train one while not training the others? Reward one dog for a behaviour and the other dogs don't get a reward at that time? Are your dogs all "miserable" because they can't interact with you twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week?

Why would my dogs be miserable because I'm not working with them at that particular moment? Sure, they might wish they could be involved, but there are many, many things in life they can't be involved in with me 100% of the time. They get over it, and they certainly aren't acting stressed in any way. I'd like to think I am fully able to understand the body language of dogs, and that I can observe them, considering I've doted many years to them, am studying my degree in behaviour, learning, and observation, which will be used directly in the context of canids, and will hold my career in them when I am ready. I could discuss each physiological sign that shows they aren't hurting too badly, but then I might again be accused of being uppity, so I'll dumb it down.

  
Yes, that is how it came across to me, that fourteen is way more than what I deal with.......so, it is safe to say you are not exactly dealing with powerful breeds, just to set the record straight.....other than that, don't worry about it.

So, I don't live with powerful breeds, and that automatically means that I haven't dealt with poweful breeds. Because I don't deal with dogs in any avenue of my life, including the part where I mentioned working in a boarding kennel environment, with many of those "powerful breeds" you oke at.  If the power of assumption ever became valid in science, some of you guys would be extremely well-known.

I believe Kim was talking to you and giving you sites to reference to study.  Even those studies were not meant for dogs but for studies to understand deprivation and satiation in humans. 

Hmm....well I did give her some references to look into. But they were not studies to understand deprivation and satiation in humans. They were studies showing the correlation between deprivation, learning and memory formation. And they also had nothing to do relating them to clicker teaching. Clicker teaching does not involve deprivation, not in any way, shape or form. Perhaps you should study what deprivation is in terms of science, because you are using it in different contexts in the same discussion.

Ack, Ron's a him, not a her...lol. My apologies, I was typing too fast and didn't re-read it.

So, I don't live with powerful breeds, and that automatically means that I haven't dealt with poweful breeds. Because I don't deal with dogs in any avenue of my life, including the part where I mentioned working in a boarding kennel environment, with many of those "powerful breeds" you poke at. If the power of assumption ever became valid in science, some of you guys would be extremely well-known.

Mein Gott, mein Gott.......should I include the animals I have boarded before, which includes a Rottie, a Rottie mix, an Australian Terrier, and a few Labs,......they board and are not integrated into my pack, can't you see the difference, we are talking making a pack work with several powerful breeds......darn, I almost forgot the rescues I brought in that were adopted out........

Talk about power of assumption.......

As for people commenting from their particular perspective, Corvus speaks from her unique perspective and no one disallows that. Glenda owns 6 GSDs and has never disallowed my perspective. Spiritdogs (sorry, tough old broad) has been around dogs since she was a little kid, which is a little longer than I've been alive, has certs and a college degree and has never once disallowed my perspective.

I think the certificates were an issue in the past, and to this day we don't know how one gets a dogtraining cert., unless they are now available in reputable universities...as for experience since a child, can I count that? I grew up in a household with dogs (GSDs), and I am in my 30', guess that means I have 30 plus years of experience?

Since when does size have anything to do with anything, really?

some men think it does - lol

ORIGINAL: Kim_MacMillan

Sure, they likely wish it was them that was working with me, and there might be some frustration, but that's no different than if I was working with no clicker, with touch, with a choke chain (actually, there would likely be feelings of relief then), with touch, etc. But that's because they love working with me, they love to work in general. So there's likely an element of disappointment or want there, but no different than if I rewarded my son with $20 for mowing the grass and didn't give anything to my daughter when she didn't do anything.

 
There it is DEPRIVATION stated by Kim MacMillan.  How arrogant of us humans to assume the level of frustration that we exert on a dog.  That we can measure it and assume it is insignificant.  As I have stated in many post, I am interested in the psychological impact of deprivation and satiation in Clicker Training so I don't harm a True SA dog while teaching obedience training.  You say it does not exist in Clicker Training so I have nothing to worry about...there will be no harm to the dog.  Can you guarantee this?