Do you train with a clicker, or are you a clicker trainer?

I just use it as a marker for free shaping, mostly. Since I don't always have a clicker on hand I also use a marking word like "yes" or "good". I'm trying to get away from using good though since that is mostly a reward word not a marking word.

So, what does that make me? A clicker trainer or a train with a clicker or none of the above? 

Neither...I use a voice marker when using +R/OC, not a clicker. 

I use all four quadrants of OC, though I primarily use classical conditioning, social learning, basic Cesareenie philosophies (dog psychology), and my own use of touch in communication and handling taught to me by the dogs.

It works...

We've done some clicker training but most we do training with a clicker. Shadow is a cross-over and more often than not, he is most comfortable doing cued behaviors. Other times, such as being calm in public or recalling to me in spite of distractions, I will click and treat for that.

I'm a clicker trainer, even when I'm not using a physical clicker but a marker word (though I prefer a clicker, sometimes its just not practical for me). Clicker training is a holistic approach to living and working with dogs, no matter what you're actually holding in your hand. 

If I am understanding the OP right, you can be a "clicker trainer" even if you don't use the device.  It's all about the philosophy....  I mean, say you have a dog and you want to train him with a clicker, but he is deaf, so you use a pen light.... if you say you're a "penlight trainer" no one will know what you are on about.  I do train some things with a clicker, but I am not a "clicker trainer".   I don't believe in training every single thing with a clicker.  I think that can be described as using a sledgehammer to crck a nut TBH....  I don't think I would be considered "positive enough" to be a clicker trainer.  I do TRY to be.... but I confess to taking shortcuts, being shortsighted at times and making mistakes... I am far better than I used to be!
 

There's an article here about the difference between "training with a clicker" and being a "clicker trainer" by Kathy Sdao.  

She lists ten points where a clicker trainer would diverge from someone who does train some things with a clicker but who is not using the philosophy of clicker training holistically in all work with their dogs. She also talks about why "clicker training" is sort of an unfortuante monicker:

1. You can "clicker train" without ever touching a clicker. I did this when I trained marine mammals. During those 11 years, I used various behavioral markers, including an adjustable-pitch Acme Silent Dog Whistle (with beluga whales), an underwater acoustic ping (with US Navy dolphins in the open ocean), the word "good" said with specific pitch and inflection (with a walrus named E.T.), and a single silent clap—a visual marker (with the dolphins at the University of Hawaii's Kewalo Basin Marine Mammal Laboratory).

 

• You can use a clicker for training, yet be doing something quite different than "clicker training." I've met trainers who see nothing odd about holding a clicker in one hand and the transmitter of a remote shock-collar in the other. Their carrots are backed up by big sticks. Clearly, this is not clicker training.

spiritdogs

Do you train with a clicker, or are you a clicker trainer?

Nope. Like Angelique, I use all 4 quadrants of OC, plus several other types of communication with my dogs. It is most effective for us. I sometimes use a clicker but not enough to even say I train with a clicker.

I thought it was interesting that your link defines "correction" as a physical aversive. I've always thought of correction as verbal or physical.

houndlove

Clicker training is a holistic approach to living and working with dogs

Interesting. I see it as just the opposite. For me, it doesn't serve the "whole" of the dog, at all. It seems rather to be limiting one's self to one single approach or tool when there are so many out there. Kind of like using aspirin regardless of the illness or using a knife to eat whatever is for dinner (I wouldn't take aspirin for a thyroid problem or a stuffy nose or use a knife for peas or soup).

Chuffy

I don't think I would be considered "positive enough" to be a clicker trainer. 

Same here. Since I use all quadrants.

FourIsCompany

it doesn't serve the "whole" of the dog, at all. It seems rather to be limiting one's self to one single approach or tool when there are so many out there.

Occasionally, I use a clicker during training.  I do not use a clicker very often and I'm not a "clicker trainer."  

I have no problems on a theoretical level with clickers.  I just feel awkward when I'm trying to use one. So verbal marking it is!  

Clicker training - using a marker to shape responses into desired behavior that is later put on cue. Most effectively done by linking the marker with a reward. Also called free-shaping, wherein the dog is able to offer behaviors and responses and the trainer clicks or marks the desired response and rewards. Then, by clicking and treating successive additional behaviors (shaping) leads to a desired behavior that is eventually put on cue, with a command or hand signal or both.

Training with a clicker. Essentially lure/reward training with the clicker definitively marking the successfully completed behavior, followed by a reward.

Inherent in both of these, though, in my opinion, moreso in training with a clicker, is some -P. When the way to reward is so clear, some behaviors simply extinguish from lack of attention on the dog's part.

The general philosophy, in my understanding, is that, for most dogs and most training objectives, positively rewarded marked responses achieve as good or better than just punishments alone. Any training system will have some punishment in it. With clicker training philosophy as presented, it is usually -P. Or extinction.

That is not to say that a trainer cannot use punishment. But the directions are clear, never use a punishment in conjuntion with a clicker. Simply put, don't click and then punish. You can punish if necessary just don't mark the punishment with a click.

Because of Shadow's cross-over status, I am an amateur trainer with a clicker.

ron2

Because of Shadow's cross-over status, I am an amateur trainer with a clicker.

I don't know where I stand.  Basically, I won't subscribe to ONE set method of training, I will chose a specific method based on the behavior.  For example, to train the right and left finishes for rally, I simply lured the entire behavior with a treat and rewarded.  For a formal retrieve, I'm trying Shirley Chong's method.  To get Coke to quit chasing my cat, I squirt him with water.  It all depends on the behavior.  I'm not sure I'd use the same method to train a 2-on-2-off agility contact as I would an "out" (holding the sleeve until commanded and then releasing) in Schutzhund or herding live animals.

I do use a clicker (yep, an actual clicker) to shape brand spanking new behaviors.  However, I've only found this method to be successful for shaping behaviors Kenya is already partially offering.  For example, she learned "paw" (shake) and I wanted to clicker train her to "touch" whatever object I pointed to.  Since she was already comfortable using her paw and offering behaviors like pawing at things, I used the clicker to capture and name it and she learned in about 5 minutes.  I tried to use a clicker to shape the right finish and it was a disaster!  She never offered walking around my right side.  Once I lured it with a treat, she caught on immediately so the clicker wasn't really necessary for marking (I also use the word "yes";).  Like I said, I want to try Shirley Chong's retrieve, but it has been hard because Kenya will paw at and nudge the object but never offers any sort of mouthing or grasping in her mouth.  I can't capture a behavior she won't offer.  I think the clicker is better for shaping extended behaviors when the dog offers pieces of the behavior I can mark and then build on.  Right now I'm using a slightly different approach: dragging an object around until she grabs for it with her mouth and marking that (with a "yes";).  If I make the object "prey", she will offer mouthy behaviors and even retrieve it if I throw it.