What makes YOU a positive trainer?

spiritdogs

if you wanted to teach your dog to close a drawer in your bureau, how would you go about it using your methods?

 

I would close the drawer myself.  

espence, I won't ask you if you have ever used a clicker to clicker train a dog, because you might think I'm stalking you or something.  But I'm going to make a shrewd guess and say: you haven't.  Well *I* have.  And I have SEEN what spiritdogs is talking about, over and over again....  For once (joke) she is not talking out of her bottom.  The more a dog is corrected (punished) for undesired behaviour, the more inhibited the dog is in general to offer behaviour.  When you correct for undesired behaviour, what does your dog USUALLY do instead?

I didn't think I had been that harsh with corrections with my terrier,  I thought I had been judicious and sparing.  It wasn't intil I tried to clicker train him that I saw how inhibited he was.  His tentative forays into being creative, actually offering me something, almost made me cry, and I'll tell you now that I am not an emotional person.  And he's not an isolated case, not at all.

I've had a very similar experience to Chuffy. And I wound up feeling really really bad for what I'd done to Conrad to make him so shut-down and uncreative. I'm not saying that only clicker training makes for a confident, creative, thinking dog. But I am saying that using a lot of aversives has a high likelihood of creating the opposite.  And most people who have not first-hand seen the difference don't really understand how profound it is. I was shocked, myself. I had one dog who I had clicker trained almost from day one in our house, and another who I'd trained traditionally for his first three years with us. Not like hanging him or anything, but he would get collar corrections on a choker collar and every now and then would "disobey" and get scruffed or alpha rolled. I loaded the clicker with each dog for a couple days, and then tried the shaping game "101 Things to do with a Box" with each dog. Marlowe went first and it was so much fun for both of us and within minutes he was doing all kinds of wacky stuff with the box n(and for those of you who don't see the utility of the box game, a behavior is a behavior is a behavior and if you can shape a dog to hop into a box, you can shape a dog to walk at heel or retrieve). Then I put Marlowe away and brought Conrad in, all psyched for how much fun this was and what wonderful things it boded for our new way of training. And it was just sad what happened next with him. I actually called DH in  to see him and said, "Look at what we have done to this dog." Conrad would not move. His body language was all worry and stress. He would not engage with the box and would not engage with me. He just sat there, giving me calming signals.

The thing is, for years I had lived with this dog and would tell anyone, oh yes my dog is very happy and there's nothing amiss with him (aside from his SA though we have had that managed for so long I barely think about it anymore). Before I saw examples of clicker-trained dogs, both my own and others', once I started investigating it, I would have never seen anything wrong with what Conrad was doing. He was being good. He was sitting quietly, not doing anything. Prior to that moment, that is what I had always wanted. A dog who would quietly sit and not do anything. It wasn't until I saw how wonderful it is to have a dog who is creative and offers behaviors and takes a chance that I actually rethought what I wanted with my dogs.

Later that evening, as we were all settling in after dinner, my husband looked at the dogs, and looked at Marlowe (who'd only been with us for a couple weeks) and said, "Hey, can we not break this one's spirit?"

The good news is that after several more weeks and very tiny baby steps and a lot of confidence-boosting Conrad finally began to come out of his shell and started offering behaviors when we trained.  He's a pro now. He can touch his nose to my palm (which is really key as we work on his leash reactivity) and wipe his paws at the door, and "leave it" (well "let's go" which is our "leave it" for walks) and "go to your mat". All of those behaviors were shaped and he is very bright and catches on very quickly and is actually a lot more forgiving of sloppy training than Marlowe is. Thank goodness because I'm not sure what I'd do with two Marlowes!

FourIsCompany

I would close the drawer myself.  

That's not answering the question though. Closing the drawer yourself is not teaching your dog to close a drawer in your bureau. The question was, if you wanted to (even though you likely don't), how would you do it?

I think we are straying from the original purpose of this thread.  As I understood the topic, it wasn't to argue what is and what isn't a positive trainer, but what we do, who we are or why we USE +R.

I don't put myself in a specific category as a trainer, but I consider myself +R.  And that is because of who I am as a person.  I don't use a clicker because I'm a klutz and I also tend to loose things on a pretty regular basis.

If I wanted to teach one of my dogs to shut drawers for me, well, I'd simply show them what I wanted them to do, encouraging them step by step and  "mark" the correct behavior with a YES and plenty of praise.  But, I do agree, I'd probably prefer to shut the drawer myself....as smart as my crew is, if I were to teach them to SHUT a drawer, wouldn't be long until they also figured out how to OPEN one!

Chuffy

The more a dog is corrected (punished) for undesired behaviour, the more inhibited the dog is in general to offer behaviour. 

Now you are talking about my experience when I attempted to Clicker train a SA dog before I addressed the dog's needs.  Even though I analyzed Clicker training from extremes, this was the lesson learned.

Kim_MacMillan

That's not answering the question though. Closing the drawer yourself is not teaching your dog to close a drawer in your bureau. The question was, if you wanted to (even though you likely don't), how would you do it?

 

I know, I know... But wasn't it funny! LOL

I would have to really think about that one and probably try different approaches. I would probably start with the bottom drawer. Open it a little and put something very valuable under the drawer (between the drawer and the floor) and work with him to show him how to get what he wants and therefore what I wanted. I would start small and increase in steps until he was doing the trick. So I would probably use lures and rewards if I were to teach tricks.

Most of the time, when I want to teach my dogs something, I ask myself, "What is their value in doing this"? And if there isn't something valuable FOR THEM in doing it, I don't see a reason for teaching them that. I look for something that has more value for them.

Does that answer the question?  

Chuffy

Well *I* have.  And I have SEEN what spiritdogs is talking about, over and over again.... 

As have I.

It is as clear as night and day, to be honest. Actually, with experience you can even tell the difference between dogs that have been clicker-taught to be creative, and dogs that have been clicker taught but have not been taught creativity. And both of those are quite different than a dog who was taught with a lot of punishments.

I have come to the conclusion that until people have seen the difference, or actually, who have done it themselves so their mind is open to seeing the difference, will likely never be physically or mentally able to see that difference to begin with. Because it's just not in their mental repertoire of something you would know naturally. So naturally, they disagree, as based upon their own individual experience, which does not involve what some of us have experienced, they don't see a dog that is "not offering behaviours" in the way that we can easily see it. It's not necessarily their fault, it's hard to see something you don't understand. It's the same way that until I did it myself, I didn't see it either. It wasn't some innate knowledge I was born with, at one point I didn't see this difference either, and would have disagreed based upon what I saw. But once I started teaching in the way that I teach now, I can never go back to "not" seeing it.

People have commented on how brilliant our dogs are. People on boards seeing pictures and watching videos, people in real life who see our dogs in person at our home. People who see our dogs out in public doing various things. People would say "I wish my dog could do that, he's not smart enough", or "Heck, I can't even get my dog to ____, your dogs are so smart!" It's not that they are extraordinarily brilliant, that we have some uber-dog (although I like to think I do....*G*), it's simply in the way they have learned to learn. Now, one could argue that because they have "learned to learn", they are more intelligent and in a better position to do certain behaviours, and that their brains actually are wired differently with more synaptic bridges (much like studies in human children), but the point herein is, I don't think we really have any genius dogs. They have just learned to learn, are not afraid to try new things, do not feel inhibited in trying new things, and take a huge role in their own learning. It just is different.

For instance, when I was teaching Gaci to go to mat, for instance. That was one of the most hilarious things I've taught in a while. I decided to do it entirely by shaping. First I placed the mat on the floor, and I sat on the floor a little distance away. In the beginning, before I did any rewarding at all, I just sat there, and you could see Gaci trying out whatever she could, on her own, to see what I wanted. She sat in front of me, then laid down, Then tried to high five me. Then she ran into her kennel and slammed the door open and shut a few times with her paw. She found a toy and tried to deliver it to me. When she tried the behaviours she "knew", she went on to novel behaviours. She dragged the blankie out of her kennel and laid down on it. Then she brought it to me. She grabbed my comforter in her mouth and then looked at me. When that didn't work she walked to the water dish and looked at me. When that didn't work, she walked over to her dog bed and looked at me. I decided I couldn't take any more hilarity and decided to get on with the lesson, so I clicked her for it. Bingo. One click. Just one, and she knew this entire game revolved around the dog bed.

See, Gaci is quicker than me, and she is very much into trying out new things that once she knew "what" the game was about, she did the following things:
1) She brought the dog bed TO me. Dragged it across the floor, got to me, did this little head-fling so that part of the bed landed in my lap. She looked at me with pride. I put it back, so she knew that's not what I wanted.
2) Then she picked it up and attempted to put it into her toy basket. I put it back. Not what I wanted.
3) Then she stood on it. CLICK!
4) Now she would come to me for the treat and run back to the bed. This game is fun! Eventually she sat on it. CLICK!
5) Then she tried biting at it. Nothing. Digging in it. Nothing. Laid down on it. CLICK!

Some people would see all those extra things as a waste of time. I see it as an essential part of her learning. And in terms of a waste of time, all of this happened in about 5-10 minutes, and most of that was directed entirely to learning the final behaviour. In 15 minutes the behaviour was learned where she would come get a reward and fire herself back to that bed and lay down on it. Each of those individual behaviours she attempted were not long in duration, but her actively trying to figure out what it was that I wanted. I wouldn't have it any other way.

FourIsCompany

Does that answer the question?

It does, thank you. :-) I wasn't meaning to intend any leading questions, I was genuinely interested. I'm sure we as a group could come up with a few dozen ways to do the same behaviour, which would be fun!

FourIsCompany

Most of the time, when I want to teach my dogs something, I ask myself, "What is their value in doing this"? And if there isn't something valuable FOR THEM in doing it, I don't see a reason for teaching them that. I look for something that has more value for them.

That is fair. Although for me personally, and with my dogs, my dogs see value in everything we do. *G* They just come naturally that way, or perhaps it is because of how they learned. I don't know. They are as happy pulling a closet door open as they are cleaning up their toys. They are as happy to target a yellow sticky note on the cupboard as they are fetching a remote for me. Pulling a closet door open or touching a yellow sticky note doesn't have much inherent value (the closet might if I was in a wheelchair, so it could be valuable to some, as could be the drawer-shutting example), but in terms of the dogs they have a blast no matter what it is. Often times we have clicker sessions where the goal isn't really to learn anything worthwhile, just to have fun and broaden their little brains, to promote creativity and thinking in them. A lot of things I teach I never even put cues to. And the dogs don't know the difference, it's all fun and games to them. I realize that for some people, it wouldn't be something they wished to do, and some would see that as a bit over the top, but when I see my guys learning, and learning how to learn, and enjoy learning as much as they are, it's worth it to me. Some would say they are just doing it for the reward, but I think over time it goes much deeper than that. There is a sense of partnership there, a sense of sheer open communication, when both understand each other well, each is focused entirely on the other, and there is as much classical conditioning and relationship building that happens as there is "treat earning", as they are thrilled to do it right after they ate, right after they just exercised, or right after a long day out at the beach. They'll do it even if they aren't hungry, wanting to play, etc. Because there is something that goes deeper than just "getting treats" (contrary to how some perceive clicker sessions to be).

Kim_MacMillan

I have come to the conclusion that until people have seen the difference, or actually, who have done it themselves so their mind is open to seeing the difference, will likely never be physically or mentally able to see that difference to begin with.

 

LOL! Oh, I see the difference! I can see it clear as day. And I think we all can see the difference between a dog who is clicker trained and one who is not. I just have a very different opinion and view of the happiness and contentedness of a dog who is clicker trained and one who is not. That's where the difference of opinion comes in. Not that we can't SEE it.

I don't want to be mean or judgmental about it because they're you're dogs and you get to make the decisions about their training and I KNOW you do what you think is in the best interest of your dogs and I know you love your dogs. I just don't want that for my dogs. I don't think my dogs would be happy or content under those circumstances. I know I wouldn't be.

Kim_MacMillan

It is as clear as night and day, to be honest. Actually, with experience you can even tell the difference between dogs that have been clicker-taught to be creative, and dogs that have been clicker taught but have not been taught creativity. And both of those are quite different than a dog who was taught with a lot of punishments.

I have come to the conclusion that until people have seen the difference, or actually, who have done it themselves so their mind is open to seeing the difference, will likely never be physically or mentally able to see that difference to begin with. Because it's just not in their mental repertoire of something you would know naturally. So naturally, they disagree, as based upon their own individual experience, which does not involve what some of us have experienced, they don't see a dog that is "not offering behaviours" in the way that we can easily see it. It's not necessarily their fault, it's hard to see something you don't understand. It's the same way that until I did it myself, I didn't see it either. It wasn't some innate knowledge I was born with, at one point I didn't see this difference either, and would have disagreed based upon what I saw. But once I started teaching in the way that I teach now, I can never go back to "not" seeing it.

Once again, right on point. And very much about myself, too. So, I'm not characterizing others but accepting this as a description of myself, as well. The difference, to me, is like night and day. Shadow is what you call a cross-over dog. Freeshaping is still limited and he is more comfortable waiting for cues than offering lots of behaviors. Other times, in freeshaping attempts, he will down and stay, waiting for what is expected of him, which sounds ironic for an independent breed. If you consider then, that the first 3 years of his life was full of what he couldn't do, it could take a while to figure out what he can do, if ever. Either way, it's ok. And, I can always learn more and search for ways to increase freeshaping.

Kim_MacMillan

a) they simply don't understand it
b) they are a bit intimidated that there are methods out there that don't involve positive punishments, which causes them a little (even unconscious) discomfort about what they do with their dogs.
c) or a little bit of both.

 

No, because.....the way I am with my dogs, what and how I teach works for me and many others.....It simply works

FourIsCompany

LOL! Oh, I see the difference! I can see it clear as day. And I think we all can see the difference between a dog who is clicker trained and one who is not. I just have a very different opinion and view of the happiness and contentedness of a dog who is clicker trained and one who is not

I was of the understanding we were discussing dogs that do or do not offer behaviours. Or dogs that know HOW to offer behaviours and those that do not. Not their level of happiness or contentedness. They are not at all the same thing.

snownose

No, because.....the way I am with my dogs, what and how I teach works for me and many others.....It simply works

That doesn't make any sense in relation to the quote.

The quote was in reference to people using the term "extremism" against others for their beliefs on how to live with dogs, simply because their beliefs don't line up.

Because "what you do works" isn't why people call others extremists. Just like how what I do works equally well as what you do, doesn't cause me to call you extremist. My way works. Your way works too. So what makes my way so extremist and yours not? (I realize that you have not called me extremist here).

The reason why people call others extremists is not due to the simple fact that "your way works".  It goes much deeper, much more emotional than that I'm afraid.

FourIsCompany

spiritdogs

if you wanted to teach your dog to close a drawer in your bureau, how would you go about it using your methods?

 

I would close the drawer myself.  

 

Somehow, that's exactly the response I expected.