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

Ixas_girl

But then, you can make anything P+. even a clicker.  

Ixas_girl

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.

You should really check with the dog on this, they might disagree.

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.

I suppose you could always get frustrated with the prong and just throw the clicker at them.

 

Or use the clicker as a punishment marker instead of a reward marker. 

Ixas_girl

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.

zart

You should really check with the dog on this, they might disagree.

Well, I asked Ixa how she interprets the operational structure of OC, and she said "woof".  

What is needed here is a distinction between an aversive stimulus and punishment. Lots of things can be aversive to a dog, but applying them may or may not result in something being a positive punishment as defined by operant conditioning.

I see people all the time letting their dogs choke themselves on the end of a leash and choke chain. That's an aversive stimulus but clearly is not punishing the dog in any way because the dog keeps right on pulling.  

Dog_ma

Or use the clicker as a punishment marker instead of a reward marker. 

corgipower

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-,

Only if it WORKS to increase or decrease behaviour!  This is a key part of understanding consequences.  IME, using a choke collar as a self correcting device is not effective at decreasing pulling behaviour.  The dog just gets to the end of the lead and keeps pulling, gagging "choking" (despite the name, the dog should NEVER choke) and causing who-knows-what damage to the dog.

corgipower

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

Ixas_girl

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.

Sorry, you are right, that is a much better way of describing it.  It was what I meant, but you put it much better with less room for confusion!  A dfog can dislike something, but it doesn't do anything to decrease behaviour... and then a fair and well timed P+ could decrease behaviour without being THAT dreadful for the dog.  And then of course you could give the dog a well-timed thrashing that would decrease behaviour AND be really really horrible for the dog.  I think it is important to make the distinction.  What I meant was, if the dog views something as a punisher, then he/she will actively work to avoid it in future by not repeating that behaviour... I rarely make any sense

Ixas_girl

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.

Chuffy

What I meant was, if the dog views something as a punisher, then he/she will actively work to avoid it in future by not repeating that behaviour...

Awesome! That sounds really clear! It also reminds us of the specificity of each individual dog. Some dogs *really* dislike the pressure of the prong and respond to it readily. With other dogs, a prong doesn't mean doodley, and they'll pull against a prong till their eyes pop out.  

Similarly, dogs respond to rewards differently, some are more motivated by social interaction, and others by food, toys, or privileges. So, I agree, the disposition of the the dog (and the human) determine the nature and efficacy of the consequence to influence behavior.

I think everyone is making sense and making way too much of  P's; +'s and -'s. I think positive training is just that, all positive, no prongs, no leash pops, and God forbid no choke collars. If you are going to try positive training then those items are not needed. Positive is positive, not positive with exceptions and then called something it's not. I am sure I will not convert anyone to try a simple clicker and a treat bag but I will keep saying it as loud as I can. Just maybe someone new to training will read it and look for a clicker class and try it first. It is a great experience for the dog and the owner. And so very rewarding watching your dog do something with you because they want too. Or learning something because you allowed them too. Not because you leash popped a prong or strangled them into it.

I am new to this board and really don't know how long I'll last here but this group seems to use mostly old school training and try their alphabet soup best to make it sound new.

Zart, I agree. I've had some very positive experiences with clicker training. While learning the Ps and Rs helped me be clear about what I was doing and WHY it worked, I like hearing your enthusiasm for action, for the thing that works for you, rather than the science and theory behind it. I've often read, here on this forum, a quote about how we all (dogs included) do what works!

zart

and try their alphabet soup

Actually, I use this:

heehee!  

zart

I am new to this board and really don't know how long I'll last here but this group seems to use mostly old school training and try their alphabet soup best to make it sound new.

Nah.  This board is full of people who don't use prongs or choke collars, and full of people who train primarily through reinforcement and incorporate prongs or chokes in a limited way.  We're arguing the finer points because we are all dog nerds.

I think you may have got the wrong impression by reading this thread; most people here are mostly positive!  This is a thread about ALL FOUR quadrants of operant conditioning, I may have talked about prongs and check chains but it doesn't mean I use them or like them.  They are just examples of 2 of the quadrants.  We just like arguing about words...

Um what?

Sorry, I'm a clicker trainer. No prongs, chokers, yelling, poking, or aversives of any kind used in my training regimen. I'd say that goes for a large number of the people using this forum. Not all, but many. Just because I can explain what positive punishment is in an operant conditioning context doesn't mean I use it in training. But I do know what it is and how it works and why it works.

People for some reason have this weird aversion to the operant conditioning terminology and I can't really figure out why. Whether or not you know what to call it, you are using one or more quadrants of operant conditioning in your training, so learn a little about what it is and how it works and why it works so you can talk about it.

"Positive training" is short for "Positive reinforcement training" which itself is short for "Non-aversive training using positive reinforcement and negative punishment". And I assure you, a lot of people on this forum use non-aversive training.