Should Methods Vary with Dog's "Personality" and/or Breed?

Oh no question about it. There is no one stop shopping for dog training imo. All dogs/breeds/personalities will require modifications to any training philosophy.

My aussie is a soft dog and corrections don't work with him - well they do work but he gets very upset when even other dogs get corrected. I've seen what different styles of training does to him. He is far more willing and excited to work with all positive reinforcement. When we were in a corrective style class, he did things because he had to. When we were in an all positive class, he did things because he *wanted* to. There was a huge difference in his responses in each class.

My husky otoh, needs a correction or two here and there. While positive training works for her in most cases, she is far too stubborn and dominant for it to work all the time. I do a mix of subtle soft training, positive training and corrections/alpha type stuff with her.

I would have to say yes and no.

For the yes part, I would have to say that I certainly would alter my intensity of teaching, speed in teaching, rewards used, etc, based upon the age, personality, breed (to a very lesser extent - I worry much less about breed than I do about personality), and attention span of the dog.

For the no part - the principles I use affect all dogs, and all species, pretty much identically. That's why I love using the concepts that I do, because you don't use "this method" for breed A and "this method" for breed B because Breed A's method is for "hard dogs" and Breed B is a "soft" dog. Clicker work works with ALL ranges of dogs equally, where the differences come in is HOW you motivate them, what rewards you use, and what types of things are of interest to the dog itself.

For instance, I'm working with two different dogs right now for conformation teaching. One I'm using exclusively food rewards for, the other I'm using exclusively toy rewards for, as that's what they work best at. But the concept behind what I'm doing is the exact same, and I'm using the same methods for both of them.

Similar to tracking training, I'm working with two very different dogs in that. One is slower and methodical, who almost needed a bit of a confidence boost. The other is very drivey, and needed to be channelled into slowing down a bit. Other than how I did my footsteps and how quickly I moved with them, and how quickly we progressed to the next step, the teaching style is basically the same.

So yes, I think every teacher needs a wide variety of tools in their toolbox to be able to best work with dogs. However, those tools all work within a particular philosophy that doesn't change much from dog to dog. I raise all my guys pretty much the same way, and perhaps it's because I don't label dogs as "stubborn", "willful", or "dominant" that I don't have the same problems that others seem to have. I don't look for problems to "fix", rather I look for successes and build upon those.

Not sure how much that makes sense...hence why my answer doesn't have one answer to it. *G*

FourIsCompany

Do you think different methods and philosophies of training and behavior modification should be used on different dogs?

Yes

FourIsCompany

Why or why not?

 

Because dogs just like people, have different personalities, different drives, different motivations.

FourIsCompany

Or do you think one method will work great for all dogs?

 

I will say that I believe that one should always use a positive method. To me that word means that I do not scream, lose my temper or engage in abuse of the dog and if a method is not working or is causing the dog to react in a negative manner (fear, confusion, aggression) then that method should be discarded for that dog.

FourIsCompany

What determines the method(s) and tools you choose? Breed? "Personality" or other traits?

 

Personality, and the manner in which the dog responds to the method being used. I always start out with very positive rewards based training and tweak it as needed depending on the dog. For me breed has not got too much to do with it, although breed can be a factor in the overall personality of the dog.

 As a for instance:

 Hektor has been leash trained on a flat collar and the large portion of his heel training has been in a flat collar. Due to some early signs of possible dog aggression when Hektor is in close proximity to strange dogs he wears a prong. This is because of his size (80-85+ lbs at the moment) his personality (he is a bull, and can hit the end of a flat collar and drag me wherever he might wish) and his overall lack of sensitivity (he has run for miles covered in cactus thorns and has even had them hanging from his testicles with no apparent thought or concern for the pain).

 Many say the prong is bad, cruel etc. Today Hektor graduated his second class, and finished his test while wearing a prong and the entire day was loose leash, no corrections and he was perfectly behaved. He visited the pet store where he met many people, one in a wheelchair and many dogs. One pit-bull came up to him while I was sitting on a stool. This dog was somewhat rude, I told Hektor to “settle” and to “leave it”, the pit slipped his collar (causing his owner to almost panic) and by staying calm and speaking quietly to Hektor we were able to advert what could have been a bloody disaster.

 All this occurred while wearing a prong and not one correction was administered. The prong was there (not because it is always needed to control him) in case he did attempt to go after another dog. He has done this once before and has pinned another dog to the ground. When he does decide to do this, treats do not matter, commands do not matter and therefore he wears the prong. To some wearing the prong is cruel, to me it is just being responsible.

Kim_MacMillan

I would have to say yes and no.

 

Would it be fair to say that you use the same method for all dogs (clicker), but different techniques (rewards, speed, intensity) depending on the need of the dog? That's what I'm hearing and just wanted to verify.

My goals are the same (operant conditioning using only verbal forms of corrections, avoiding flooding and physical corrections), but the methods differ at the starting point.  Kenya is "soft" and thus you cannot use any form of physical correction or she will roll on her back or run away from you.  Aside from that, I've had better and more effective experiences working with dogs keeping my goals in mind.  Some dogs at the shelter are FAR more stubborn than Kenya, strong (physically and mentally), and less attentive, making some physical corrections necessary in the beginning.  I think you can train a dog to respond to a training technique just as much as you can train a dog to do a specific trick or command.  Kenya is already an operant dog so we use a lure/reward form of operant conditioning for her training.  With the more stubborn dogs, it takes more time to help them understand what it is I am looking for, but eventually, they all get it and eventually, I am using lure/reward for them as well.  There's also different methods within the technique.  To teach Kenya's heel, I lure her by putting the treat up by my face.  With a pit bull puppy I was training at the shelter, I held the treat at my side.  When Kenya loses focus, I stop moving.  When other dogs I've worked with lose focus, I often to an about-turn.  Personally, I think the differences in techniques I use have more to do with the training level of the dog than the personality or breed.  I'm sure Kenya went though her stubborn, unruly phase as a puppy and probably needed a few physical corrections at times.  At this point, she is trained to do a certain level of commands and also trained to understand the technique we use to train more commands.  With the puppies or the unsocialized dogs at the shelter, I'm really training them to be trainable at first, not training them to do specific tasks.  Once they are familiar with my method, I don't have to use the techniques I'm trying to phase out. 

dgriego

he has run for miles covered in cactus thorns and has even had them hanging from his testicles with no apparent thought or concern for the pain

 

I agree that there are some dogs who have a high tolerance or threshhold for pain. For them, physical corrections or punishments might not work as they do not cause enough pain to stop the behavior. I've known at least one or two others to successfully use a prong correctly. It applies pressure in a way different than a flat collar. And as you point out in the rest of your trip to the store, a different stimulus brought about a different reaction and the prong did nothing to solve it. In fact, your dog, when keyed up, is nearly impervious to pain, n'est pas? As you explained it, you were able to achieve various levels of resolution by not coddling the fearfulness and by increasing range until calm behavior could be rewarded. Which is what I do.

The prong is just a tool and when used properly is not torturous, no matter how draconian it looks. FWIW, I'm not totally opposed to the use of remote collars in field trial work. But they must be on the lowest setting, offering no more than a tap on the shoulder, as a signal to recall and receive bountious reward. They shouldn't be used as punishment. I also know of trainers who use clickers to train field work and that is the method I would try first. And there are some dogs for whom an electric fence and collar means nothing. Triggered into prey drive, they will bound right through the shock and keep on going. So, in comes management. Prongs, muzzles, crates, whatever, as long as the dog associates goodness with these things. Prongs can be used to apply physical pressure if the dog is not interested in what you have to offer.

Sometimes, training depends on the life and work of the dog. Traditional sled dog training is to place the dog in an established team and he will learn from the other members what to do, over time. It's not quick. In K-9 training, a dog has to be trained to take a hit and still hold on, something that we never have to do as companion dog owners. But a number of people have found a way to train with positive marker training. Field work, K-9, SaR, therapy, agility. So, it is a method that can be used on different dogs for different jobs, ala the way that Kim mentioned. And all of it takes time. A K-9 is often rewarded with tug on a towel. This takes longer than handing a treat. The reason is you don't want the dog working for treats so that a suspect can't divert the dog with a bit of food. In fact, the harder the suspect tugs away, the more rewarding to the dog, though the ultimate reward is tug with his handler. So, training takes longer because of the necessity of the job but it does not take away from the fact that it is +R training.

Also, if I find a dog is not responding to a reward, I ask myself, "Self, why is that something else more rewarding? And how can I supercede that? Or use it to my advantage?" If Shadow was all about prey drive, I might keep a stash of stuffies on hand to mangle and shred. So, while I might use the same training method, regardless of dog, I might change rewards, depending on personality preferences or the context of the situation.

A dog might do something again if it was rewarding, in whatever way. And he might not do it again if it wasn't rewarding. Or, sometimes, the punishment was severe enough that he always shied away from it. Which doesn't always work. I would like see a follow up on dogs that had a meeting with a porcupine. Did they go after another porcupine, later in time?

FourIsCompany

What determines the method(s) and tools you choose? Breed? "Personality" or other traits?

The other traits would include physical limitation such as deafness, medical history, prior handling, prior home environment, existing home environment such as adults only in house or other animals in house such as cats or birds.  With Breed, Personality, and other traits as I have defned, taken into consideration, I would create a plan that would be best for the dog but only after I have spent the time to get to know the dog and see how the dog behaves without human influence. 

For the Weather Girls, Blizzard and Drizzle, one (Blizzard) is laid-backed, gentle, sees only through rose colored glasses, seeks only pleasure, but is deaf.  The other (Drizzle) is hyper active, aggressive, but sleek, muscled, and agile.  Because they are Great Danes and giants, training is a must and for me formal training is a must.

For Blizzard I trained using hand signals and touch under the guidance of a specialized trainer.  It was shaping by touch and corrections were minimal and defined by pressure.    Working with a dog without one of it main senses taught me a lot of my body language and that of the dog's.  We applied the same technique for agility training and did go through a course, but I eventually saw Blizzard didn't enjoy agility all that much.

For Drizzle I trained using rewards (praise only) and corrections in a formal training class.  This dog needed to know the clear boundry line between play, hunting, and protection because of the aggressive bug in her ear.  Drizzle excelled at agility and the training method there was mostly flooding to get the dog use to the equipment.  I determined this dog can take it.

For fosters that come to my home, I work to elevate their needs to be a the social level before a plan can be developed.  That means that I have to satify their lower needs of basic survival, be it breed instinct, food, or medical.  Then, depending on my observations and knowing the dog, I select a method.  Some require a specialized trainer and some do not. 

Oh yeah, for one of my residence Great Danes name Petro, I chose no training method and did not train the dog.  He is a perfect houseguest and "gets along well" with everything.  He is exist for play.  Don't see a need to have him sit, stay, down, etc....he IS trained on the COME command.

ron2

Also, if I find a dog is not responding to a reward, I ask myself, "Self, why is that something else more rewarding? And how can I supercede that? Or use it to my advantage?"

 

That's a great point! I call that being smarter than the dog. And sometimes it's a real challenge for me! LOL I really love searching for the challenges in finding the best way to get the behavior I'm looking for. And many times, if an unwanted behavior is repeated, I have to ask myself, "What is his/her value in repeating that behavior and how can I provide the same or more value for NOT doing it"?  

This is a great discussion and I'm learning a lot!  

my training tools include everything from clickers to e-collars. i would say that i don't use different training philosophies or different learning theories for different dogs, but i certainly adapt my methods, not only for the dog, but for the moment. through out a session, the dogs needs change. the loading changes, the environment changes, the light bulb comes on. whatever it is, and each moment requires a response that fits what the dog is faced with at that moment. i do believe that breed makes a difference, but i don't acticely sit there going this is Breed A and so it need training method X and this is Breed B and it needs training method Y. i simply adjust to the individual. with all my dogs i do balanced training. i think that whether balanced training or all positive training is better depends a lot more on the trainer than the dog. i have never had success trying to use all positive methods. i think it's because i don't have enough belief that it does work. for people who are clicker trainers to go and put a training collar on a dog and start giving corrections, when their training philosophies have never believed in correcting a dog, i don't think it would be effective.

FourIsCompany

That's a great point! I call that being smarter than the dog. And sometimes it's a real challenge for me!

 

Same here.

Kinda OT, sort of. I had a pole light that was kicking my butt. It wouldn't work. All the standard methods of troubleshooting, including correcting a main system grounding, did not help. So, I had to simplify and imagine what someone else did about 30 years ago when the building was built. And how they did it made no sense, other than as an afterthought to cover a previous mistake. And I found the hidden junction box that had the problem. There was the break in the wire to the pole, as well as another wire from something else "bleeding" over to the ground wire, which is why I was getting shocked by the pole itself (only about 50 volts. A nuisance for me.) It required reducing everything to absolute basics and seek out the source, as it were. Somewhat as an analogy, it is that search for the mystery that teaches us and can be rewarding in itself. I finally got smarter than the pole light. Once in a while, I am as smart as Shadow.

There are times when Shadow is excited or keyed into something and he doesn't care for a treat. Which doesn't stop me from using +R. I have to change the reinforcer. Or manage the environment. Or both.

FourIsCompany

ron2

Also, if I find a dog is not responding to a reward, I ask myself, "Self, why is that something else more rewarding? And how can I supercede that? Or use it to my advantage?"

 

That's a great point! I call that being smarter than the dog. And sometimes it's a real challenge for me! LOL I really love searching for the challenges in finding the best way to get the behavior I'm looking for. And many times, if an unwanted behavior is repeated, I have to ask myself, "What is his/her value in repeating that behavior and how can I provide the same or more value for NOT doing it"?  

edited out by DPU

I think I agree with 4IC but I think I need to qualify Ron2's.  I have the tendencies to look at the opposite effect.  To me supercede means escalating and competing.  Escalating the reward means to me a bigger disappointment when that reward is withheld.  In Drizzle's case, her demeanor in a training session was nervousness and fear.  I did all sorts of high value foods but eventually relied on a known pleasure .  Her reward for a requested behavior was a pet and a cuddle.  Was I rewarding the requested behavior or was I reinforcing the nervous behavior.  I know it was the requested behavior. 

 

Well, it would be fair to say that if the only thing I used in teaching was a clicker. But that's not the case. A clicker is only part of my philosophy. What I use teach discrete operant behaviours.  I do a lot of classical conditioning as well, and that doesn't involve a clicker. I do use P- and extinction, neither of which involve a clicker. Things like desensitization, habituation, counter conditioning - things usually used in behaviour modification of "problem behaviour" - none of these involve clickers.

So you're partly right, but it doesn't fully encompass my ideas. :-P Basically I apply the same philosophy to all of my dogs (as I sit here and re-direct our 4 mo-old who thinks sticking her cold nose up the back of my shirt is fun to try and get attention), but in different ways. So yes, as one PART I would use the clicker in the same way for all dogs (and all species really).  

DPU

To me supercede means escalating and competing.

 

That wasn't what I meant by supercede. I meant to replace or provide a reward more important or stimulating than the previous, though my reward could mean more because it's coming from me.

DPU

Her reward for a requested behavior was a pet and a cuddle.  Was I rewarding the requested behavior or was I reinforcing the nervous behavior. 

You were rewarding a requested behavior. The reward doesn't always have to be food.

DPU

Escalating the reward means to me a bigger disappointment when that reward is withheld

 

I must confess to being confused by that.

ETA: never mind, this refers to a previous discussion on lure/reward, where the dog has to work for the treat.

DPU

In Drizzle's case, her demeanor in a training session was nervousness and fear. 

Why do you suppose that was? And did the cuddling take away the fear and give her some control or ease that you would only lead her to a good place? Or was it something else?

 

I would have to say that my methods vary quite a bit, depending on breed, personality, ability/disability, etc., but my general philosophy does not.  My toolbox is undoubtedly filled with the same tools as Kim's.  And, I use clicker training with deaf dogs - I just use a flashlight or a hand signal for "yes" instead of a clicker.  I avoid e-collars, but will, in the case of a deaf dog, put on a vibration collar and teach the dog to look at the handler when the collar vibrates - this enables the handler to then call the dog using a hand signal.  I use all kinds of motivators - not always food.  You have to use what the dog is willing to work for.  Example - you are a chocolate freak.  Someone offers you a vanilla cone to do their homework for them.  Then, someone else offers you a triple chocolate cone to do theirs.  Who would you rather work for?  Dogs have preferences, and trainers can use them to advantage with a bit of imagination.