How Far Are You Willing to Go?

Corvus said: 
"I like your reinforcement, punishment, extinction approach better, mrv. That one actually makes sense without me having to race off and find a training terms dictionary."

Well actually we need to give credit where credit is due, BF Skinner is the genius, Im just a practicioner [] 

I think one of the problems of "all positive" methods, and any method for that matter, is the people out there teaching them without REALLY knowing what they are talking about, and their knowledge stops at "click and treat"(the same works the opposite way). The analogy with children would be the parents that NEVER tell their kids "no" for fear of inhibiting the child's personality or whatever, and the result is usually a bratty kid, for what I've seen at least (I don't have kids).

This sounds to me like a result of misunderstanding, or believing that the method is in the title, and not bothering to REALLY learn before applying. Proof is that most people are under the impression that -R and -P are not a part of all-possitive training.

As far as "how far am I wiling to go"?, I guess it really depends on the situation, if my dog is not learning to retrieve, I'll try to teach him something else instead of trying to force him. If my dog is being agressive and nothing so far has worked?.... I'm willing to give compulsion a shot before deciding to put him down. As I've said before, I believe that two key elements here are, keep an open mind, and use common sense.

ORIGINAL: espencer

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

Ya know, I can't help but wonder at all of you who seem to always have some reason to correct your dogs.  If coercion training, and "no" and leash pops work so darn well, why aren't your dogs as well behaved as mine seem to be?  I completely don't get it.

And who told you my dog is not well behaved? i used leash pop at the beginning but i dont have to anymore so i guess the leash pop worked "darn well"

some of you are opposed to using treats, yet I have the dogs with the perfect recalls.  You don't want to use clickers, but my dogs "stay" and yours don't (I can leave Sioux in a stay and leave the room, even if there are 200 people in that room and a microphone blaring).  You have to use leash pulls to redirect your dogs, but all I have to do is say "leave it" and my dogs do.  My assistant just took her two dogs to their first agility trials.  In two weekends, they both have their NA, and first places.  She uses the same methods I suggest in my posts here.  What's wrong with this picture?  Why aren't you more successful?

Once again, who told you my dog (or other dogs from the people giving advice like mine) dont stay in place without even tell them to sit, mine can, no leash pops, doing it from far away, it does not matter, can we call that succesful?

Not saying you have to do things my way, but obviously, if your dogs aren't pretty obedient by now, there could be something else you could try...If it works, maybe you don't fix it, but if you are having to correct a dog and he isn't "getting" that he must do the required behavior when you ask the first time, immediately, then why would you hold fast to your ideas of how to train that behavior?  I am positively (no pun intended) stupefied by that concept.

I can say the same about your methods, why you have to give treats to make a dog behave, is clearly that is not working, i dont understand why you have to give treats to a dog to reward him because he stopped bad behavior, i dont know why you have to run away from the situation to make the dog pay attention to you (ie. a car passing that makes the dog crazy) if your dogs aren't pretty obedient by now, there could be something else you could try.

But of course just like me you did that at the beginning, now you dont have to because your dogs behave now, as you know not because you give advice of +R that means that by now YOU use it still (because that would mean that if you still have to then your method is not working and the dogs are not getting it) and is the same with us, we give advice but that does not mean we STILL use it since the dogs behave now and we dont have to anymore

I don't question that traditional training "works".  And, my post was in response to the fact that I simply don't trust that your dogs are as well behaved as you say, given your interpretations about dog behavior that you have posted on the forum thus far.  Not attacking you, simply stating that I think your grasp of behavior is not as advanced as it might be.
I just question why you would want to employ leash pops, since the dog only works to "avoid" something, not to "gain" something.   If you don't want to use treats, for example, you can still "be a tree" and allow the dog to figure out that if he loosens his leash he "gains" the ability to go forward, but if he doesn't, he goes nowhere.  At least, you still have a dog whose neck doesn't hurt, and who still trusts you.
Very few people have the skill to apply a "pop" as a pop, which means a noise, not a nasty little ill-timed whack to the larynx, or a continuous pull that chokes the dog, which is why it becomes problematic to offer it as a solution for JQ public.  Sure, you can mess up +R, too, but you haven't damaged the dog's willingness to participate in the training process, rather than be afraid to move.  Being afraid to move does not equate with having a fearful appearance, but it does mean that the dog has learned that if he does the wrong thing, you become unpredictable and possibly harsh.  If the treat thing really bothers you, why not use a toy?  Why would you start with aversives, even mild ones, if another method works - you can always go to punishment if you aren't getting anywhere, and the fault does not lie in your technique.

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

I just question why you would want to employ leash pops, since the dog only works to "avoid" something, not to "gain" something.   If you don't want to use treats, for example, you can still "be a tree" and allow the dog to figure out that if he loosens his leash he "gains" the ability to go forward, but if he doesn't, he goes nowhere.  At least, you still have a dog whose neck doesn't hurt, and who still trusts you.

 
Well the way i see it is that the dog does not need to win a specific thing to be happy, for example, what a person wins if that person fixated in something, if that person has a fixation, lets say porn, if you say "hey i buy you a dinner if you stop likeing porn so much", maybe the guy will agree with the free dinner but that wont cure his fixation for porn, every time the fixation comes back you will have to buy him a dinner
 
Now i think that a life without fixations is better that a dinner, a happy balance life without fixations i think is more worth it
 

Sure, you can mess up +R, too, but you haven't damaged the dog's willingness to participate in the training process, rather than be afraid to move.  Being afraid to move does not equate with having a fearful appearance, but it does mean that the dog has learned that if he does the wrong thing, you become unpredictable and possibly harsh.  If the treat thing really bothers you, why not use a toy?  Why would you start with aversives, even mild ones, if another method works - you can always go to punishment if you aren't getting anywhere, and the fault does not lie in your technique.

 
The dog wont be afraid to move since i'm not pulling the leash everytime he moves, lets say, i walk for 30 minutes, my dog has fixation about passing cars, in those 30 minutes 2 cars passed and i did a leash pop, the dog wont be afraid to move since he spent 30 minutes walking and only in 3 or 4 seconds of those 30 minutes i applied a leash pop, my dog was not afraid to keep walking after i did the leash pop
 
Actually the dogs links the fixation of a car with an unpleasent feeling (leash pop), we could help the guy who like porn in the same way, lets say every time he watches porn he gets and unpleasent leash pop from his leg, number one the guy wont be able to pay attention to the porn because the leash pop in his leg, second he will link a leah pop in his leg with porn so the only solution to stop the leash pop is stop watching porn (we know that for a human we can do so many other things but you get the point)
 
At the end the guy who is not fixated with porn will be living a better life without fixations, maybe treats work too but i rather to do a simple leash pop and will have the same result with the dog, stop the fixation and nothing else, not afraid to move, not attack back, not afraid, etc. his "prize"? a better balanced life []

What if, instead of "popping" the guy for watching porn, you rewarded him with an incompatible behavior, like making love to his wife?
 

Watch it Anne, making love to your wife and watching porn are not necessarily incompatible behaviors...

Ok  how about this example:
 
Dog is fairly well behaved and socialized in the family setting.  Reasonable CGC level behavior.  You move to the country.
 
Next door you have a family with livestock and poor fences.  One day, your dog see loose livestock in his front yard.  Up and over the fence, Yeee Haaaa
 
OK lets talk options   (that option sort of fits the situation better than the porn example).  I am reserving my suggestions until others jump in first.

I live in that setting, livestock right across the road. Cows and dogs eyeballing each other every day. We lived here first then our neighbors decided to add livestock. At first the dogs would bark when the cows moved, my reaction the word "Ahh", and clapping hands to return their attention to me. We walk every day past the cows along the fence, at this point the dogs are used to the cows, and are interested in other things. I haven't had the incident as described with the cows in the yard, but I am pretty certain it would not end in a bad way.

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

What if, instead of "popping" the guy for watching porn, you rewarded him with an incompatible behavior, like making love to his wife?

 
Because sex addiction is a psychological problem.
 
Any woman who has lived with a man with this obsession/addiction will tell you that she will never be enough to fill this bottomless pit. It is a need to escape from reality and emotional pain through an obsessive behavior just as any other obsessive compulsive behavior. Sometimes there are also control issues involved. This is a psychological problem which manifests itself in a behavior.
 
Actually the cure lies more in addressing the obsession at it's psychological source, which involves more than even the leash pop to redirect or correct. If you block some obsessions without dealing with the cause, it will only come out in another form.
 
Er, um...if I apply this to the squirrel or bunny obsessions (no humor intended), dealing with a dog's obsession would require more than just a correction or a reward, and include structured daily exercise in the form of walking at heel, and direction from the dog's leader before the dog's behavior escalates, (unless there is a severe underlying psychological physiological problem).
 
Complicated stuff this obsession is.
 
 

Angelique, it was just a figure of speech and meant to be humorous.  I have a degree in Psychology, so the sexual addiction thing is not lost on me.  But, this is really getting way too blue and off topic, wouldn't you say?

eley, I agree with you that people are teaching positive training (and other methods) incorrectly.  That is a problem, but it doesn't mean the method doesn't work if properly applied, as I'm sure you agree.  What bothers me the most is that there are quite a few people on this forum who don't truly understand how it works (but think they do) and are quick to disagree with it, but have never tried it (correctly applied).  They thus have no way to appropriately judge whether it would have worked for their dog, or their situation.  I find that very sad for the dogs.

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

this is really getting way too blue and off topic, wouldn't you say?
 

 
Indeed.

 

Respectfully, I will accept your statement that it wont end badly after you have spent time at an HIC test of atleast 30 dogs including: ACDs, Aussies, Belgians, and GSDs.   Been there done that (shifting stock, helping with tough dogs, manning the gate, etc.)  when prey drive kicks in and bidibility has not been tested, it is a whole different story than walking by a pasture.
 
I offered this specific example to get folks to think about reenforcers and what is at your disposal as a human being when your dog has already found the "Big Ticket" reenforcer all by himself.

I own GSDs, 2 Husky mixes, dogs with very high prey drive. You asked about cows in the yard, my dogs are used to the cows by now, even when they are galloping through the pasture. I can't speak for the other scenario, never experienced it.[]

quote:

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

What if, instead of "popping" the guy for watching porn, you rewarded him with an incompatible behavior, like making love to his wife?



Because sex addiction is a psychological problem.

Any woman who has lived with a man with this obsession/addiction will tell you that she will never be enough to fill this bottomless pi

The problem I have with the quoted analogy of correcting a man's viewing of porn
 
edited, I just reread the quoted part. Sex between humans is supposed to be of equal consent. The wife is not a "treat" to be handed out and, quite frankly, a number of wives are disinterested in sex for a number of reasons and would not be a willing participant in this +R exercise. Also, the reason this analogy won't work is because women have the control in sex, in our culture.
 
For most guys, the only time they don't want sex is when they are puking, fever-achy, stuck in bed or on the commode ill and even then, it still crosses their mind as something they want to get back to. Whereas a perfectly healthy woman can turn it down if there are no candles lit, or whatever the reason. And it doesn't matter what the reason is. When a woman says no, she means no. Women have the power.
 
This has been used in history. The Lysistrata sanction. It works sometimes.

I know this is totally OT, but what is rape then, Ron? A veto?