Punishment Has No Place

DPU, if I felt I could understand your post I would be intrigued by it!  Could you clarify?
 
I really do think there is a subtle distinction between punishment and correction.... you can correct an action without punishing a dog for it.
 
Example:  Glenda "corrects" her pups when they mouth her by saying "unh uh - no bite" and then providing something they CAN have and praising them (that's right isn't it Glenda?)
 
To me, this "correction" is NOT a punishment.  It is not unpleasant for the dog and it does not by itself decrease the likelihood of the puppy chewing on Glenda's hands.  It is merely a precursor to a re-direction.  She has gently and simply corrected the pups action, "No, not that - THIS".  To uphold this argument, do a forum search on bite inhibition; see just how many new pup owners claim "they have tried yelping, saying, No Bite etc but it hasn't stopped the puppy.... ";  "He still bites.... in fact he is getting worse".  They corrected his action.... but it did not enough to stop the pup from repeating the action, therefore it was not a "punishment".  (Punishment: Defined by the fact that it decreases the likelihood a behaviour wil be repeated)  However - I've said this before and I'll say it again - I don't believe +P is effective on it's own because pups have to chew on SOMETHING and if you don't GIVE them an outlet and +R they will keep going back to the "bad" behaviour and your punishments will have to get ever more severe....  Which is why my preferred approach for this is a combo of +R (praise and reward for chewing on good stuff) and -R (stopping play and attention when teeth touch skin).  And in fact I believe punishment is detrimental in this area of training, but that's just my belief.
 
A "leash correction" can be a punishment.... it depends how it is applied.  Sometimes it just gets the dogs attention or "sets a boundary" (to borrow from CM) other times it causes discomfort for the dog and therefore (if you are lucky, used the right amount of force and your timing is good) decreases the likelihood he will repeat that action..... If you are not so lucky or skilled he could associate the punishment with the wrong thing.... he could associate with a behaviour which you DO want repeated - or he could associate it with for example the presence of children or other dogs.....
 
No one is denying that P+ is part of how dogs learn.  The trick is making sure that they learn what you want them to when you apply it.  And just because it is a "part of the pie" in how a dog learns does not mean that it has to be a large slice..... or even that you HAVE to apply it all.  There are many areas where I don't apply it and it has not resulted in an unreliable dog in  that area.  Ex:  I NEVER punish for incorrect toileting..... but my dogs are clean.  I never punish for puppy biting.... but they quickly learn not to bite.....  I HAVE used punishment in an attempt to "proof" a recall many years ago and pretty much screwed up that dogs recall permanently.  So shoot me if this colours my view on punishment, its effectiveness and its place in training.

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

To uphold this argument, do a forum search on bite inhibition; see just how many new pup owners claim "they have tried yelping, saying, No Bite etc but it hasn't stopped the puppy.... ";  "He still bites.... in fact he is getting worse".  They corrected his action.... but it did not enough to stop the pup from repeating the action, therefore it was not a "punishment".  (Punishment: Defined by the fact that it decreases the likelihood a behaviour wil be repeated)  However - I've said this before and I'll say it again - I don't believe +P is effective on it's own because pups have to chew on SOMETHING and if you don't GIVE them an outlet and +R they will keep going back to the "bad" behaviour and your punishments will have to get ever more severe....  Which is why my preferred approach for this is a combo of +R (praise and reward for chewing on good stuff) and -R (stopping play and attention when teeth touch skin).  And in fact I believe punishment is detrimental in this area of training, but that's just my belief.

 
Agree, yelping or saying No Bite wont do anything, they dont know english, now you have to be careful of what you see there, dogs chew, no doubt, but sometimes there is something more behaind that chewing that the simple nedd of do it, dogs chew because they have pent up energy, they chew also because they are bored, if that is the case and you just correct without giving them excersice (in case the pent up energy) or mental estimulation (in case of the boredom) then that wont change anything

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

DPU, if I felt I could understand your post I would be intrigued by it!  Could you clarify?

 
Simple, creating anticipation of a reward and then withholding the reward causes stress and anxiety in the dog.  Thats punishment for not doing the correct behavior?

ORIGINAL: espencer

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

To uphold this argument, do a forum search on bite inhibition; see just how many new pup owners claim "they have tried yelping, saying, No Bite etc but it hasn't stopped the puppy.... ";  "He still bites.... in fact he is getting worse".  They corrected his action.... but it did not enough to stop the pup from repeating the action, therefore it was not a "punishment".  (Punishment: Defined by the fact that it decreases the likelihood a behaviour wil be repeated)  However - I've said this before and I'll say it again - I don't believe +P is effective on it's own because pups have to chew on SOMETHING and if you don't GIVE them an outlet and +R they will keep going back to the "bad" behaviour and your punishments will have to get ever more severe....  Which is why my preferred approach for this is a combo of +R (praise and reward for chewing on good stuff) and -R (stopping play and attention when teeth touch skin).  And in fact I believe punishment is detrimental in this area of training, but that's just my belief.

Agree, yelping or saying No Bite wont do anything, they dont know english, now you have to be careful of what you see there, dogs chew, no doubt, but sometimes there is something more behaind that chewing that the simple nedd of do it, dogs chew because they have pent up energy, they chew also because they are bored, if that is the case and you just correct without giving them excersice (in case the pent up energy) or mental estimulation (in case of the boredom) then that wont change anything

 
Firstly, chewing is a perfectly viable way to help a dog relieve stress, boredom and pent up energy  you simply channel it so he chews the correct things.  I am not saying that if you give your dog chew toys you don't need to exercise or train him.... I am saying that your post seems (to me) to have the implication that chewing is sometimes somehow bad and symptomatic of a lack in the dogs needs being fulfilled.....  occasionally this is true perhaps.... But how many people give a frozen kong to a dog to chew on to keep them occupied as well as  a walk before going to work?  That doesn't mean the walk was not long enough is what I am saying.  Anyway, that's all way OT.
 
I do think it odd that the part of my post you appear to agree to is the part that says a correction by itself is not enough.... So far you seem to have been in support of corrections while you have also said in previous posts that you don't believe in the need to get the dog to do something positive instead AND you have also disdained punishment as emotional correction, symptomatic of an unstable leader and therefore undesirable..... We are clearly not on the same page here AT ALL!!!!!!

ORIGINAL: DPU

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

DPU, if I felt I could understand your post I would be intrigued by it!  Could you clarify?

Simple, creating anticipation of a reward and then withholding the reward causes stress and anxiety in the dog.  Thats punishment for not doing the correct behavior?

 
No, because positive punishment is defined by the fact that it decreases the likelihood of a behaviour being repeated. 
 
If you are thinking along the lines I think you are, then creating the anticipation of the reward and witholding it actually causes the dog to increase his efforts (an extinction burst).  You can either withold the reward until the bhvr goes away (if it is undesired) or reward for increased effort if it is desired. 
 
I think the witholding of the treat until the dog displays a behaviour you do want would be classed as negative punishment... Please someone correct me if I'm totally screwing this up!

yes, you've got it right Chuffy.  I correct AND redirect.

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

Firstly, chewing is a perfectly viable way to help a dog relieve stress, boredom and pent up energy  you simply channel it so he chews the correct things.  I am not saying that if you give your dog chew toys you don't need to exercise or train him.... I am saying that your post seems (to me) to have the implication that chewing is sometimes somehow bad and symptomatic of a lack in the dogs needs being fulfilled.....  occasionally this is true perhaps.... But how many people give a frozen kong to a dog to chew on to keep them occupied as well as  a walk before going to work?  That doesn't mean the walk was not long enough is what I am saying.  Anyway, that's all way OT.

I do think it odd that the part of my post you appear to agree to is the part that says a correction by itself is not enough.... So far you seem to have been in support of corrections while you have also said in previous posts that you don't believe in the need to get the dog to do something positive instead AND you have also disdained punishment as emotional correction, symptomatic of an unstable leader and therefore undesirable..... We are clearly not on the same page here AT ALL!!!!!!

 
Everything is on "Excercise, discipline and affection, in that order", you cant correct a dog for chewing if you havent met his excersice needs, if you did it first and he still chews then we can scratch off the list the pent up energy or boredom  and is just matter of the dog not knowing what is right from worng
 
I dont think that chewing is a perfectly viable way to help a dog relieve stress, boredom and pent up energy, i said that they have the need of chewing, that is a "healthy" need, it is not healthy if they do it for something different like boredom and pent up energy
 
The dog needs to excersice, you cant compare chewing with excersice at all, they are in a way different level, if you dont excersice him then he will find a way to release that energy and he will target your couch, you can give him a bone but that like i said is not the same that a good walk

It is only punishment if behavior disappears....we function under stress and anxiety all the time, in many cases optimum behavior occurs.  cant be punishment in that situation.

Everything is on "Excercise, discipline and affection, in that order", you cant correct a dog for chewing if you havent met his excersice needs, if you did it first and he still chews then we can scratch off the list the pent up energy or boredom  and is just matter of the dog not knowing what is right from worng

Too simplistic.  He could get the walk he needs and still chew up the couch.  It's less likely (tired dog is a good dog) but still probable.  How many people here crate while they work - most give a really good walk beforehand as well.  Why bother if adequate exercise was enough?   What about SA dogs - they are stressed because their owner is not home - not because they have not had enough walks.  What about when something frightens them when left alone?  A lot of dogs (especially young ones) just need to chew and that's all there is to it.  If they chew inappropriate items, the fact that they were unconfined and/or not left with suitable chew items is as much a factor and concern as the amount of exercise they have had.  Has nothing to do with "right and wrong".... chewing is like peeing..... a basic need and function, you just have to make sure it goes in the right place.  No correction necessary.

I dont think that chewing is a perfectly viable way to help a dog relieve stress

It relieves stress and makes the dog feel good because it causes the release of certain chemicals in his brain.  Chewing is as much a basic need as exercise.  It provides mental stimulation and promotes oral health.  If you choose (chews haha) not to use it to help make your dog happier and healthier then that's up to you.
 

  The dog needs to excersice, you cant compare chewing with excersice at all, they are in a way different level, if you dont excersice him then he will find a way to release that energy and he will target your couch, you can give him a bone but that like i said is not the same that a good walk

 
Please re-read:
 

  how many people give a frozen kong to a dog to chew on to keep them occupied as well as a walk before going to work?  That doesn't mean the walk was not long enough is what I am saying.  Anyway, that's all way OT.

 
You will notice that I didn't suggest a chew could REPLACE the walk - but that it is a valuable ADDITION.  I can't believe I have been drawn into a discussion about chewing on a debate thread about Punishment..... I'm bowing out now.  Bye all.

Edit to add:  Phew thought I'd wandered into the CM area by mistake then!! 

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

Too simplistic.  He could get the walk he needs and still chew up the couch.  It's less likely (tired dog is a good dog) but still probable.  How many people here crate while they work - most give a really good walk beforehand as well.  Why bother if adequate exercise was enough?   What about SA dogs - they are stressed because their owner is not home - not because they have not had enough walks.  What about when something frightens them when left alone?  A lot of dogs (especially young ones) just need to chew and that's all there is to it.  If they chew inappropriate items, the fact that they were unconfined and/or not left with suitable chew items is as much a factor and concern as the amount of exercise they have had.  Has nothing to do with "right and wrong".... chewing is like peeing..... a basic need and function, you just have to make sure it goes in the right place.  No correction necessary.


It relieves stress and makes the dog feel good because it causes the release of certain chemicals in his brain.  Chewing is as much a basic need as exercise.  It provides mental stimulation and promotes oral health.  If you choose (chews haha) not to use it to help make your dog happier and healthier then that's up to you.

I dont create my dog at all, why, because she has the excersice she needs so she does not feel destructive or hyper when i'm leaving,  people dont have to create if they dont want to but they need to excersice their dog before they leave

It has to do a lot with right and wrong, chewing a bone - right, chewing a couch - wrong, as simple as that

Chewing releases stress indeed, but you have to ask yourself, what are you doing or not doing that makes your dog being stressed?

If its not punishment then its reinforcement?  Its not negative reinforcement because an aversion was not removed.  Its not negative punishment cause nothing is taken away.   It seems to fit as a positive punishment because whatever the dog's behavior, he is being punished by not getting a reward.  How is this different from me anticipanting Essie snapping at dog when another dog comes near me, saying a calm No and when the other dog approaches, praise or reward Essie.

I think that the point of the OP has been lost somewhat.  The article was on the topic of punishment being inappropriate in the learning phase of training. 

My contention is that humans often think a dog has learned a particular behavior long before he really has - and that we should consider that punishing a dog for something he doesn't yet have full grasp of is not only unfair, but counterproductive.  Instead of engaging in yet another us versus them controversy on the larger topic of whether punishment is appropriate at all, could we stick to what might be appropriate in the learning stage?

ORIGINAL: TinaK

I apologize to take this off track, but [sm=devil.gif]
The author of the article wrote a book titled "The Only Tricks Book You'll Ever Need". Now, I wouldn't have the guts to name my book like that - that's pretty brave. Now I am gonna have to go and check it out, since it's the *only one*.[8D]

Authors sometimes don't name their own books - publishers have a say, too.  Regardless, I think it's just a cutesie title designed to sell books - why would she not want to do that after taking the time and energy to write it? 

The article says:

Our efforts as teachers, trainers and companions to our dogs would best be spent reinforcing the right behavior rather then punishing the wrong one.
 
But until that behavior comes along, the dog will receive punishment in the form of withholding the reward.  The dogs knows the reward could be forthcoming and therefore anticipating which leads to excitement and then frustration.  Withholding is punishment?  Punishment takes many different forms and are applied in varying degrees.  Are there boundaries to punishment?

This is not a "us vs them".   I am trying to understand if it is correct that in order to be successful in positive reinforcement training that punishment has to coexist. 

By original definition, (and very difficult to implement cleanly) lack of a consequence following a behavior is extinction.  So differential reinforcement of other/incompatable behaviors is where the reinforcement comes in.  Punishment by definition is the introduction of an aversive.  Withholding something is passive,  punishing is active.