Spin-off: what makes a positive trainer a positive trainer?

content deleted

Ixas_girl

We all know that prongs and chokes are R-, and that a newspaper swat is P+ at best (but probably not even that) - they aren't similar consequences and are grouped together erroneously.

The discussions here are far more inviting, educational, and convivial when such generalizations are not made, and posts are either factual and dispassionate or honest and heartfelt rather than generalized, judgmental, and accusatory. 

corvus

Acting the tree is R- with her, but anything more is P+.

I agree with you, Corvus. And, referencing another statement, a newspaper swat is directly +P. It is an action brought on specifically to stop a behavior. And prongs and chokes are -R only if you are not actively tugging on the leash and the dog is, then the pressure is an irritant that is released when they quit pulling. Otherwise, an action designed to increase the pressure of the equipment is +P. At some point in time, the line may blur as the trainer takes a new direction and the equipment tightens until the dog changes to follow the human, which again releases pressure.

Definitions, mine anyway; 

Positive Reinforcement: Anything which follows a behavior which increases the chance that the behavior will happen again. So for example, when your dog does something you like, you immediately click and treat, throw a ball, play tug with the dog, give a butt scratch to the dog, or happily praise the dog so his tail wags. It is important to note that it is what THE DOG PERCEIVES AS BEING VALUABLE that makes something a reward.

Negative Punishment: The removal of the opportunity for the dog to earn things he likes, following a behavior we want to decrease. Examples: ignoring a dog who is barking at you for part of your dinner; putting the dog back in the house immediately if he bolts out the door and hits the end of his leash when you go to take him out for a walk.

Positive Punishment: The application of something that the dog perceives as aversive in response to a behavior we want to decrease. So for example, when the dog does something you don’t want him to do you yank his prong collar, squirt water in his face, step on his paws, hit him, yell at him, give a disapproving look, or apply an electric shock. Keep in mind that it is what THE DOG PERCEIVES AS BEING AVERSIVE that defines positive punishment!

Negative Reinforcement: The removal of something that the dog perceives as aversive in response to a behavior we want to increase. Examples: the cessation of the pressure on a choke chain or prong collar in response to a pulling dog when the dog is back in the heel position; the cessation of the ear pinch technique when the dog opens his mouth and takes the dumbbell.

Dog_ma

spiritdogs

And, by the way, if you think we need to stop the game, perhaps that comment is best addressed to those who continually label what they do with prongs, chokes, and e-collars as "positive".

How is there a "game" involved here?  That is a disagreement, plain and simple. Person X calls it positive, you do not. There is no insult in that. 

spiritdogs

If you genuinely gave positive training the benefit of the doubt before you resorted to +P, good for you,

 

"If" and "genuinely" eh?  Well, thank you for the grudging compliment. There was no benefit of the doubt.  There was no doubt. I have never had to be be converted to positive training.  It is where I began, before I knew it had a name.

See, what I would like to see happen here is respectful, non-judgmental discussions of when and how P+ is useful.  People inclined to use P+, for whatever reason, will find that kind of discussion more welcoming and more helpful. Social learning theory has certain parameters for effective P+.  I believe that most people are trying their best, with the knowledge they have.  If Mary grew up in a house that say, rubbed a dog's nose in a potty accident, she may not know it is not an effective technique. If we tell her she's barbaric and cruel, or imply she's stupid or lazy, she isn't going to want to listen to anything else we have to say.  If we KINDLY explain why that method doesn't work, and suggest an alternative method, she is much more likely to consider it.

I think you'd be surprised, Spiritdogs, to discover that you and I probably agree on most principles of dog training. Where we disagree is on the principles of human training. (You can also call it teaching, for those who object to being trained. Heh.) For example:  

"Far  more people do not even understand the method, or they would not come on message boards and accuse PT's of bribing dogs, or say that a particular breed doesn't respond to clicker training very well.  Those statements bespeak their ignorance of the proper application of the method.  That isn't to say that individual dogs might not respond as well as others, but to categorically state that one breed does not respond well is nothing but pure poppycock.  If that's throwing snowballs, then let's keep building forts, because I am not going to accede that those statements are accurate when they are not. "

You might consider this alternative -

"Unfortunately, many people do not understand the method, and they accuse PT's of bribing dogs, or say that a particular breed doesn't respond to clicker training very well.  Those statements are not true.. That isn't to say that individual dogs might not respond as well as others, but to categorically state that one breed does not respond well is false.  If that's throwing snowballs, then let's keep building forts, because I feel it is important to correct misperceptions about positive dog training."

You have A LOT of knowledge and experience to share with people.  It'd be a shame if people stop listening because of presentation. 

 

Thank you for the PC social worker perspective on my presentation skills, but the topic is what makes a positive trainer a positive trainer?  If you speak to some positive trainers you will find that they range from completely unwilling to use any aversives to being willing to slap on a prong collar occasionally.  A few will go along with electronic containment systems (I don't like them), and some will tell you they are positive, even though they train with e-collars - I liken that to telling a kid that the spanking hurts you more than it hurts them.  At any rate, we are as unlikely to agree on what really is positive as we are to agree on whether CM is good for dogs in America.  It's like discussing religion, politics, or abortion.  That's one reason I started the other thread - so that people who regard themselves as positive trainers can tell others why they feel the label applies to them.  The reader can then decide whether to believe them or think they're full o' bull. 

spiritdogs

"If" and "genuinely" eh?  Well, thank you for the grudging compliment. There was no benefit of the doubt.  There was no doubt. I have never had to be be converted to positive training.  It is where I began, before I knew it had a name.

 I could be completely wrong about this....but, I could swear you said you tried other training before being an all positive trainer ( which is hard to do according to your own statements)....and then you saw" THE LIGHT"....but, like I said, I could be wrong.......

I think there needs to be a clear and agreed upon definition of "positive trainer", by those who use this term to market or label themselves as "positive trainers".

Any good links out there which clearly defines the doctrine?

Next we need to find which person or organization has appointed itself wise and worthy enough to decide who is indeed the most purely positive vs the not nearly as positive as the first group, who are still better than those who are viewed as not very positive at all, using the decided upon definition of those who are wise and worthy to judge each positive trainer's level of "dogfriendliness".

I guess a clear and agreed upon definition of "dog friendly", also needs to be addressed.

In reading through the various "positive" sites, it seems there is much arguement regarding the definition and who is, and who is not, positive enough.

This topic reminds me of a quote from Animal Farm, "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others".

snownose

spiritdogs

"If" and "genuinely" eh?  Well, thank you for the grudging compliment. There was no benefit of the doubt.  There was no doubt. I have never had to be be converted to positive training.  It is where I began, before I knew it had a name.

 

 I could be completely wrong about this....but, I could swear you said you tried other training before being an all positive trainer ( which is hard to do according to your own statements)....and then you saw" THE LIGHT"....but, like I said, I could be wrong.......

Cross out spiritdogs above.  That was my quote.  

Dog_ma

snownose

spiritdogs

"If" and "genuinely" eh?  Well, thank you for the grudging compliment. There was no benefit of the doubt.  There was no doubt. I have never had to be be converted to positive training.  It is where I began, before I knew it had a name.

 

 I could be completely wrong about this....but, I could swear you said you tried other training before being an all positive trainer ( which is hard to do according to your own statements)....and then you saw" THE LIGHT"....but, like I said, I could be wrong.......

 

Cross out spiritdogs above.  That was my quote.  

 

Dog_ma

Cross out spiritdogs above.  That was my quote.  

Sorry, Dog_ma......as much as I appreciate your posts.......I have heard this before......

corvus

Ixas_girl

We all know that prongs and chokes are R-, and that a newspaper swat is P+ at best (but probably not even that)  

Hold on, hold on. Regardless of how you use a choke chain on my dog, it's P+. I saw it in the way she used to freeze and give me this roll-of-the-eyes sort of look.

Not in the world of Operant conditioning.

Your definition of P+: when you do something that shuts the dog down

OC's definition of P+: Something Bad can start or be presented, so behavior decreases = Positive Punishment (P+)

R- is: Something Bad can end or be taken away, so behavior increases = Negative Reinforcement (R-) ... that means the pressure of a choke or collar ends, so loose leash walking increases.

As opposed to ... leash pop, which is P+, meaning the pressure or "pop" starts, decreasing the pulling ... and here we're talking about leash handling, not collar type.

The R- action of a corrective collar, and the P+ action of leash handling are 2 different operations!

We have to be careful to NOT emotionalize the objective science of Operant Conditioning! "Positive", "punishment" ... these are emotionally loaded terms in our vernacular world, but not in the OC world. Any "positive trainer" relying on the "science" of OC, SHOULD know that.

If corvus' dog views something as P+, its P+.  Whether something is punishment or reward is defined after the fact, by the dog.... by noting whether or not behaviour DID increase/decrease.

IMO, a choke collar is usually P+.  A PRONG is R-.  A choke is applied by the trainer to punish the dog.  Classic P+ (provided it works of course).

The prong tightens while the dog is pulling and the pressure/discomfort stops when the dog stops pulling.  I think R- is the hardest one to get your head round and the hardest one to display examples of.  In the case of Skinners box, I think rats received electric shocks through the floor until they pressed the lever and then the shocks stopped.

If you were to use a choke incorrectly - ie, dog pulls, dog chokes, dog stops pulling, pressure/discomfort is released, then yes, its R-... but that doesn't usually work and is incredibly mean to the dog.  If you were to leash pop a dog with a prong collar then that would be P+, but I don't like them being used that way.

Angelique

I think there needs to be a clear and agreed upon definition of "positive trainer", by those who use this term to market or label themselves as "positive trainers".

Chuffy

If corvus' dog views something as P+, its P+.  Whether something is punishment or reward is defined after the fact, by the dog.... by noting whether or not behaviour DID increase/decrease.

IMO, a choke collar is usually P+.  A PRONG is R-.  A choke is applied by the trainer to punish the dog.  Classic P+ (provided it works of course).

The prong tightens while the dog is pulling and the pressure/discomfort stops when the dog stops pulling.  I think R- is the hardest one to get your head round and the hardest one to display examples of.  In the case of Skinners box, I think rats received electric shocks through the floor until they pressed the lever and then the shocks stopped.

If you were to use a choke incorrectly - ie, dog pulls, dog chokes, dog stops pulling, pressure/discomfort is released, then yes, its R-... but that doesn't usually work and is incredibly mean to the dog.  If you were to leash pop a dog with a prong collar then that would be P+, but I don't like them being used that way.

if the dog goes out to the end of the leash and thus causes the tightening of the collar, it is still P+, and the loosening of the collar when the dog stops pulling is R-, and that doesn't matter if that's on a choke or a prong collar. it's a matter whether or not the trainer is applying the correction or if the dog is self-correcting. another example -- the dog attempts to drink from the toilet, but the lid closes, hitting the dog on the head. the lid hitting the dog on the head is P+, but the owner had nothing to do with it.

a properly used prong collar can involve leash pops, as with a properly used choke collar.

Angelique

I think there needs to be a clear and agreed upon definition of "positive trainer", by those who use this term to market or label themselves as "positive trainers".

Also, I think that in order to be considered a "positive trainer" that certain prerequisites should be established before any of the methods, procedure, or training techniques can be applied.  That is the dog's basic needs and social needs are met and the dog is in a "balanced" state.  

Chuffy

If corvus' dog views something as P+, its P+.  Whether something is punishment or reward is defined after the fact, by the dog.... by noting whether or not behaviour DID increase/decrease.

To be clear, P+ is defined by the result, not the felling or "view" we, or the dog, have. That's the *really important* distinction I hope is not getting lost! OC describes outcomes, not feelings.

Another important distinction is equipment vs handler behavior. Equipment is as neutral as OC. A choke or prong with no pressure applied is dormant, it's not P+, R- or anything. Of course it can be put into the service and become R- ... or P+. But then, you can make anything P+. even a clicker.

(Corgi, Chuffy ... great description of difference between P+ and R- with chokes and prongs, thanks for describing that so clearly!)