Great videos on behavior by Dunbar, Donaldson and others

tashakota

I took time to watch a few of the videos posted in the CM video thread and I would not have classified any of the dogs in those videos as "red-zone" dogs.  Three little white dogs barking at things going by the window?  A bulldog that barks and nips at skateboarders?  Not really red-zone dogs IMO.

 

Most of the dogs he deals with aren't red-zone dogs. Just normal people who are having trouble with their dogs. Like me.   I think it's great that you watched some of his videos.

I have enjoyed the videos in this thread and appreciate you posting the link to them. I think it's been interesting to see the commonalities between trainers as well as the differences. I think we all may have thought they were quite different. What's that? They're more alike than they are different? I think so. We're all going to have our preferences, but when it comes right down to dealing with problem dogs, they're not all that different.

FourIsCompany

Just normal people who are having trouble with their dogs. Like me

 

FourIsCompany

I have enjoyed the videos in this thread and appreciate you posting the link to them. I think it's been interesting to see the commonalities between trainers as well as the differences. I think we all may have thought they were quite different. What's that? They're more alike than they are different? I think so. We're all going to have our preferences, but when it comes right down to dealing with problem dogs, they're not all that different.

 

Excellent points. I also agree with Kim's post, almost entirely. And allow me to say something else that may or may not sound controversial. If you change what Jean said to energy and and pack leader, instead of focus and turning butt like an alpha, it sounded like she was saying the same things Cesar would. In fact, one of my primary concerns with Cesar is his use of terminology. But now I have a translation, so to speak. And Dunbar also spoke of ranks among dogs, hierarchies. So, even if we don't base our dog social scene on the gray wolf, there is some scientific support of at least some common concepts in canids, in general.

Now, for the depth of our beloved toolbox. In Jean's video clip, we see a range from corrective equipment and -R through +P and onto +R. And in the tv show of that famous guy, we are starting to see a little more +R, when before, it seemed like just a series of corrections. I would like to see more, if we truly want to talk about a big toolbox. Many here point out that they use several positive methods. I can accept theoretically that some dogs might be helped by short term +P, provided it is effective, i.e. strong enough to change things in a few tries. Followed immediately by a direction to go in that has a reward. That is, a big toolbox is not just a wide assortment of corrections or punishments. It is also +R, -P, environment that allows the dog to reward itself by fitting in with the plan, such as you did, Carla. I think you really rocked on that and I don't say that to be nice or civil or get on anyone's good side. I have a bad habit of saying what I think or now, which is not always what someone else may want to hear. Or, I won't say anything (my best form of butt-kissing). To quote others, and to use the analogy of my own experience as a tradesman, the proper tool at the right time in the right way is best. And if you don't need that tool, don't use it. And I think it depends on the dog in question. Some dogs just don't ever need corrections or corrective equipment, they just need to hear that click. Other dogs may not be able to hear it at first or always, and you have to use other things.

If I had no choice, I would use corrective equipment and I would use what the dog requires. One might do best with a prong because all they need is the pressure. Another dog, such as the one in the video, might indeed, need a GL. DPU has had great success with the Illusion and it allows old ladies to walk his Great Danes at the dog events he goes to.

Personally, I would always strive to do more training and see if I can eliminate the special gear later on, but that is my personal way, not to be pushed on anyone else. And if I encountered a dog that always needed that special equipment and it kept them calm and considerate, so be it. It would be better than constant or harsh corrections, imho. That is, the GL, prong, or Illusion is more humane than rasslin. And, in some cases, would be more effective. My dog likes to play hard and some of my scruffs on him, in retrospect, were like play to him. ("What are you going to do? Tickle me?";) Any corrective equipment that accomplishes a better walk than being dragged along is a sure sign of responsibility.

 

 I thought of this thread today when reading a new book I just purchased. It is called Click & Easy and is by Miriam Fields-Babineau. I like it and am curious as to what those of you who clicker train may think of her. 

 

 Anyway the point of my post was something she says on page 58 of her book where she is talking about training devices, she discuss various collars and harness's and says that since this book is a book on clicker training and positive reinforcement she will not discuss some tools in depth since they have no place in such a book.

 

She goes on to say: "That said, although clicker training is a positive way of teaching, it is not and end in and of itself. Few dogs can learn with purely positive reinforcement. There must be balance. That is nature that is life.  Using a humane training device along with a clicker will offer a way of correcting the dog without causing mental or physical damage. As the dog learns that he must pay attention, regardless of the circumstances, the training device can be used less and less". 

 

So here is a positive clicker trainer saying that corrections are sometimes needed. She says that the device uses, whether it is a GL, a Harness, a choke or a pinch, all are tools used to "position" and "correct" the dog until the desired behavior is second nature. She of course says she prefers the GL's and Harness's to the choke and pinch but at least she is willing to admit that both are used for the same purpose.  

 

As I have said in the past, a correction is a correction regardless of what you might want to call it. Jean corrects the dog (and I see nothing wrong with how) and Cesar corrects dogs, they may use different methods, they may not agree with each other’s methods, but they are both using corrections.

 

 I would also say that either tool in the wrong hands and used improperly could hurt a dog both physically and mentally, whether it is by hanging on a choke or prong or hanging on a GL. I use a prong on Hektor and yet the corrections are not painful to him and on most occasions he does not even receive any. But when he lunges at something he gets a sharper correction, and IMO if he were wearing a GL the correction would most likely be more uncomfortable to him than what he gets with the prong.

 

 So I will again say that it is not the tool it is how the tool is used. I have watched most of the videos and liked a few of them, it was enjoyable to be able to watch them, but I must confess (and please remember I have stated that I have no problem with how Jean handled the dogs) that Jean’s video's could be just as damaging as Cesar's if someone just watches and decides to slap a GL on their reactive dog and work it like Jean does.

 I believe (from reading the posts) that I am one of the "middle" people in this thread, having expressed respect and admiration for Cesar as well as other trainers (including Jean) and so I do find it interesting that a "disclaimer" is demanded of Cesar (there was even a recent thread that mentioned posting a disclaimer when posting a Cesar video link) and not demanded of Jean. Does anyone here disagree that if one watched only her reactive dog video clips that one could do harm to their dog by going out and acting on the short video they saw?

  With that being said, I have never been a fan of disclaimers, I attribute them to being a necessity of society because of idiots and that people with sense do not need disclaimer. But it does seem a touch bias not demanding one here.

dgriego

 So I will again say that it is not the tool it is how the tool is used. I have watched most of the videos and liked a few of them, it was enjoyable to be able to watch them, but I must confess (and please remember I have stated that I have no problem with how Jean handled the dogs) that Jean’s video's could be just as damaging as Cesar's if someone just watches and decides to slap a GL on their reactive dog and work it like Jean does.

I have to say I agree with you there.

dgriego

With that being said, I have never been a fan of disclaimers, I attribute them to being a necessity of society because of idiots and that people with sense do not need disclaimer. But it does seem a touch bias not demanding one here

I think the disclaimer on CMs show is in case anyone gets their face ripped off.  While there is potential for discomfort, injury and confusion with the method Jean is demonstrating, severe injury to the handler is not likely.

I've got that book..bought it last year for Christmas I believe. You're right, she does believe in punishments along with clicker work. I think it's been said so many times before, but I think there is a 100% unanimous consensus that the clicker is not the be all and end all. It is one tool, which aids in teaching the behaviours that you DO want, and it takes away the focus from constantly punishing what you don't want. It's also been mentioned over, and over, and over again...lol.....that people who use clickers do indeed use punishments! Some use only P-, some also use P+. There is a continuum along people who use clickers. I'm glad you finally got to understand that by reading the book. :-)

 And I do disagree with her on some of her standpoints, but once again that is the joy of having personal feelings about different issues!

dgriego

Using a humane training device along with a clicker will offer a way of correcting the dog without causing mental or physical damage. As the dog learns that he must pay attention, regardless of the circumstances, the training device can be used less and less". 

I don't agree, for instance, that using a "humane" (and humane is in the eye of the beholder....I don't consider e-collars, prongs, or slip collars humane tools, not in their traditional use) tool will not cause any damage. Even this tools used CORRECTLY can and do cause damage! That evidence has been evidenced quite well. Used correctly, a slip collar can still damage the trachea, a prong collar can still puncture the skin on the neck, and an ecollar can still create other behaviour problems. Doesn't necessarily always, but the risk is always there with every dog.

dgriego

So here is a positive clicker trainer saying that corrections are sometimes needed.

It's unfortunate that you haven't seen the huge number of people on here, who use clickers, who also use punishments (which is what a correction means, to me). Perhaps now that you have been shown that through a book, you'll see where people on here are saying the same thing as well. :-)  I for one use punishments. I just choose to use P- instead of P+. But it's still punishment.

dgriego

She says that the device uses, whether it is a GL, a Harness, a choke or a pinch, all are tools used to "position" and "correct" the dog until the desired behavior is second nature

I disagree with this. I think they are all used to position, yes. But even though some of these tools are used to purposely punish (replacing "correct";), and some are used simply for management (there is a difference between physically maneouvering a dog to prevent behaviours and inflicting some sort of reaction to inhibit behaviours), ALL of these tools are very disciminatory devices, and I don't think second nature factors ino it at all. As soon as any of these devices are removed the dog will return to doing what it did to begin with, as dogs are the masters at becoming equipment-wise. And again I disagree with her in them being used for the same purpose. They are made in such a way that mechanically they do very different things  (well, harnesses come in a spectrum from being constrictive/punishing to non-constrictive/managing). Some of them guide movement by physically moving the body in a particular way, some of them guide movement by inflicting discomfort in an attempt to stop a certain behaviour. To put it another way - one type prevents the ability to pull in the first place, the other inhibits the desire to pull by creating consequences for pulling (for some dogs...some dogs will pull through all of these until taught in another manner).

dgriego

As I have said in the past, a correction is a correction regardless of what you might want to call it. Jean corrects the dog (and I see nothing wrong with how) and Cesar corrects dogs, they may use different methods, they may not agree with each other’s methods, but they are both using corrections.

I suppose so, if you call them corrections. Corrections aren't present in my life with dogs, so I wouldn't ever say a "correction is a correction regardless of what you might want to call it" and I don't consider it as such. I would say that Jean Donaldson used R- in her video that I described above, and I would say that Cesar uses P+ or R-, usually primarily P+, depending on the particular scene.

 

dgriego

So I will again say that it is not the tool it is how the tool is used.

Certainly how any tool is used is of crucial importance. But for me, yes, part of it IS the tool itself as well and what it is designed to promote as a consequence.

dgriego

So I will again say that it is not the tool it is how the tool is used. I have watched most of the videos and liked a few of them, it was enjoyable to be able to watch them, but I must confess (and please remember I have stated that I have no problem with how Jean handled the dogs) that Jean’s video's could be just as damaging as Cesar's if someone just watches and decides to slap a GL on their reactive dog and work it like Jean does.

Oh, I agree with you there. There is equal risk for the average person to try either of those things without working with a professional. I completely agree.

The difference I think is that Jean isn't on public TV telling this to the world. That is not a dig against CM's show, as there are lots of dog shows out there showing these types of things on TV, but as a common social psych comment goes, though: the "do as I say, not as I do" phenomenon a lot of us hear is a myth. When it comes to that, we are almost ALWAYS going to do what we SEE others doing, regardless of whether or not a warning comes attached to it or we are told to do otherwise (or not to do it). A huge part of life as a human and growing up is imitation, and people are more likely to imitate what they see, which in this case they are a lot more apt to imitate a television program (of any of the people working with dogs) than a small streaming-video online where even most of us dog folk who are INTO dogs have not seen most of those videos. That is something that has been very well documented in the literature regarding the psychology behind it. There is an underlying difference in intention inherent in there.

 I agree that most clicker trainers, myself included, are not "clicker-***" who think all dogs respond to clickers, or that you might not need the occasional correction.  But, sadly, it has been my experience that too many people have mistaken ideas about clicker training principles, and they do not put the training into practice correctly - then, they tell others that clicker training didn't work for them, or that their dog "needed" correction, when in fact, if they had simply understood and implemented the training properly, the likelihood is that their dog might have been one of the millions of dogs that would be absolutely thrilled to learn via operant conditioning, without ever needing the +P quadrant.  My contention, despite the fact that I am often characterized as a positive-only trainer, is that yes, correction is sometimes needed, but mostly it is not, and that we should always try least invasive, minimally aversive first.  And, that means thoroughly learning about positive training before trashing it in favor of techniques that are less dog-friendly.

i am curious what technique you use when a dog sneaks into the garbage behind your back when you're not looking

lostcoyote

i am curious what technique you use when a dog sneaks into the garbage behind your back when you're not looking

I put the garbage bin away. The easiest solution one can implement easily, and it's very dog-friendly and human-friendly! Perfectly stress-free solution! *G*

You'd think the dog having enough successful attempts at getting into the garbage when human is not looking would teach the HUMAN a lesson in logic.

All of the garbages in our home are out of the dog's reach. The bathroom garbage is under the cupboard. The compost/waste bins are in the garage just outside the kitchen. Why "make" a teaching issue that doesn't need to be made? It's just as easy to simply put the darn garbage out of reach, as it is to teach the dog to leave it alone. This is one of those cases where I'm perfectly happy just preventing the behaviour in the first place, rather than insisting the dog must "obey".

Of course, if you were adamant that the garbage had to stay there, then one could come up with a list of alternatives.

that is fine kim - we do that

 but let's say that we wish to have the garbage bin on the ground in it's normal place

 

specifically, what +R methods (other than putting it up out of the dogs reach) would stop the dog from getting into it?

 

lostcoyote

i am curious what technique you use when a dog sneaks into the garbage behind your back when you're not looking

If I were to punish a dog for getting into the rubbish bin, I have to be "looking" in order for me to "catch him at it" and in order for the punishment to be fair, effective and appropriate.  If a dog does ANYTHING when "you're not looking" you don't have any CHOICE but to use the Rolled Up Newspaper Method - ie, bash yourself on the head in future and chant "Bad human, watch the dog more closely!  Bad human!  Put your danged stuff AWAY!!"

If I were to punish a dog for getting into the rubbish bin, I have to be "looking" in order for me to "catch him at it" and in order for the punishment to be fair, effective and appropriate.

indeed - let me try to rephrase the question once again.... given the following criteria: the garbage bin shall remain on the floor..... when a dog sneaks into the garbage and you catch him or her in the act of doing it, what +R technique you would use to train the dog not to snaek into the garbage bin.....and also more specifically, what +R techniques would you use to train a dog to leave the garbage bin alone at all times?

If the dog has a recall...and some other commands as a base...a "INSERTDOGSNAMEHEREINHAPPYVOICE"... "Come!"

Seems like this'd work quite well...esp if your dog is accustomed to being rewarded with high value treats or attention upon a recall. Then you can crate them and put the garbage can up.

Shoot I'll bet rolling on the floor laughing or crying, or bolting from the room with a "what's that??", would bring the dog over to you with no punishment or correction...most dogs are intrigued by crazy human behaviors..

 Suppose one did not want to put the garbage away or perhaps had no likely sensible place to put it where the dog could not get to it, then how using +R would one teach a dog to leave the garbage can alone?

 I am a proponent of not having to change my entire house around just so the dogs can be part of it. I have teenagers so things are often left out on counters (where they do not belong) such as a lof of bread or crackers or someother food. What +R method would help to create a reliable dog that would not counter surf?

Moderator speaking...

Pointed detailed questions on HOW to get a behavior, are a great topic...for a new thread. This one is to remain on topic, which was the videos in question.

Thanks!

lostcoyote

what +R technique you would use to train the dog not to snaek into the garbage bin if you elect to leave the garbage bin on the floor.

 

I actually replied to this while you were posting, Gina. Sorry. I deleted it and will repeat it if a thread pops up for it.