The Training/Behavior "Chatter" Thread

Because of you, I have that Jewel song stuck in my head. "My hands are small I know ..."  

 And because I have to relate that to dog behavior ... um um. Failing.
 

Well to get this party rolling I think thats a great topic to start off from! I do not have a firm stance on "hands on training". However I do not approve of force by human hands but a gentle touch or directive hand is sometimes helpful with distracted puppies. To me it all boils down to....

" A TRUE authoritive figure never needs to use physical restraint"

If you do that means you obviously have no control over your dog. BUT during training a little direction comes in handy. For example I dislike prong collars with a passion but that dosnt mean I dont think they dont have a place as a training aid HOWEVER too many people rely on them continously instead of a training tool while you teach walking manners. I much rather my dog rely upon my command then have me be at mercy of a choke chain ro prong collar or worse....me having to use physical hands on methods.

Funny though.....in my experience a lot of people (I'm not saying all) use force, ie stepping on leash, holding dog down, holding mouth shut, physical restraint before they try other options. A lot of people today want a quick solutiuont to so called problem issues but they dont want ot put the effort and bonding into it, they rather run off and get a no bark collar, prong collar or some other restraing device. Its a shame, people in the old days never had to use such tools nor do cattle dog owners and there dogs put a lot to shame when it comes to obediance.

I've gone back to clicker training Kenya.  I've always used the same operant conditioning principles, just using a marker word, but now...at least with her I am convinced that the clicker itself DOES make a difference.  I was reading "Click to Calm" and the author mentioned some differences between verbal markers and using a clicker (can't remember specifically) and that prompted me to go back to the clicker.  I think I'm done with verbal markers for good!  The other great thing about the clicker is that Phil can use it.  We've narrowed down her fear of him to his voice and his direct eye contact.  With the clicker, he can work with her and she is not afraid.  He doesn't have to use his voice or stare directly at her.  No commands, no verbal marker....just clicking and treating based on gestures and her offering desired behaviors. 

I'm using the clicker for a new command - "mat!"  It means, go to the mat, lay down, and stay there until I come to you and release you.  She's figured out the lay down and stay part.  I have to point to the mat or lead her to it, but she'll figure it out eventually.  Last night I put her on the mat and checked my e-mail, lol.  I've also been putting her on the mat and doing weird stuff like jumping over her, straddling her, doing bunny hops....just so she gets used to weird stuff and doesn't think that someone standing directly over her means she should get up.  All in all I think it's going well.  Thank you, Cressida, for putting this idea in my head.  I am being really precise/strict about what constituted being "on" the mat and not calling her off the mat.  I think this will come in very handy eventually...

For those of you who think everything should be taught "hands-off"... What's wrong with using our hands as a communication to our dogs? Why do you think this is harmful?

I'd like to hear the answers. I use my hands for everything!  There's not a single command I have that doesn't have a hand signal (sit, down, wait, drop, up, off, paws, jump, paw, come, here, front sit, OK!, go fetch, right finish, left finish, left turn, get back, stand, heel...heck even my verbal "eh eh" has an accompanying hand signal). I can't imagine not using my hands....

For those of you who think everything should be taught "hands-off"... What's wrong with using our hands as a communication to our dogs? Why do you think this is harmful?

I'd like to hear the answers. I use my hands for everything!  There's not a single command I have that doesn't have a hand signal (sit, down, wait, drop, up, off, paws, jump, paw, come, here, front sit, OK!, go fetch, right finish, left finish, left turn, get back, stand, heel...heck even my verbal "eh eh" has an accompanying hand signal). I can't imagine not using my hands....

I don't think the question referred to using your hands to signal, but rather putting your hands ON the dog. I communicate with my dogs using my hands all the time too, but prefer to be as hands off as possible to train behaviors, for many reasons. One example of hands off training would be luring to teach sit or shaping with a clicker rather than the old school method of pushing down on the butt, perhaps while also pulling up on the leash. Or using a body block to train wait rather than preventing forward movement by restraining with the leash or holding the collar.

I do most of my training at home off leash, (or have them drag a leash, stepping on it only if necessary to keep them from wandering off), and would rather learn to communicate with my dogs without having to rely on any particular training equipment.Suzanne Clothier refers to it as "naked on a mountaintop in Tibet", meaning you're not dependent on anything but yourself and your relationship with your dog. You may use collars, leashes, clickers, treats, toys, whatever, to get there, but ultimately the goal is to eventually not need them anymore. She has a great article on her website entitled "How Much Does Cooperation Weigh?" about how it doesn't matter how big and strong your dog is because you shouldn't be in physical confrontations where that's a factor in the first place.

 It's definitely more challenging - I have to learn what motivates them, and learn to be more interesting than chasing the cats, for example. That's why I like NILIF so much. If I can figure out a way to teach without physical force, where the dog has to figure out what he needs to do to get what he wants, and has the choice to comply or not, that's just preferable to me. It's up to me to teach him why it's in his best interests TO comply, to make our relationship such that trusts and respects me enough to not question what I expect of him.

Cassidys Mom

I don't think the question referred to using your hands to signal, but rather putting your hands ON the dog. I communicate with my dogs using my hands all the time too, but prefer to be as hands off as possible to train behaviors, for many reasons.

OK, that makes SO much more sense, lol! 

I agree then, I cannot physically manipulate positions and behaviors from Kenya, even if I did train that way.  She gets nervous and starts acting all submissive.  What's funny is that she has her U-CH, so she MUST know how to stack or did at some point.  I'm teaching her sit-stands and stop-stand-stays.  Hopefully, eventually I can put my hands on her and stack her.  I can right now, but she shrugs her shoulders and lays her ears flat, so it's not pretty.  In obedience and rally you can place the dog for stands and exams, so eventually she will have to be re-trained to stack and be touched.

The only command I've taught her so far that required me to touch her is doing the stand, sometimes she inches forward on her butt and if I tap her belly with one finger she will stand.  She is marked and rewarded as soon as she begins to stand, even if she doesn't make it all the way up yet.  

Besides that stand and stack, most of our training is luring and the rest is capturing.  My trainer says I have really clear and consistent hand signals for rally.  It's not because I thought really hard about hand signals, but I taught all her rally positions with luring.  An abbreviated version of the lure motion becomes the hand signal naturally. 

I don't think using hands physically in training is harmful, but I am quite keen to try as hands off as I can manage with my next dog. I like this idea partly because I'm so impressed with what it has achieved with Kit and partly because it occurred to me that I'm very free with my hands and sometimes they don't actually help. I especially dislike my tendency to use Penny's leash as an extension of my hands and try to direct her with it. She hates pressure on her leash and it usually makes her freeze and glare at me as if to say "Look, would you quit that?" I noticed that I was pulling on her leash when I didn't actually need to. She has a good 'leave it' and generally she will leave something on command, but would rather have a sniff of it first. I was pulling her away as I said 'leave it', so it occurred to me that she wasn't getting a chance to leave it by choice, really, so was she actually learning? Later on I caught myself trying to pull her backwards by the leash when a large dog came out to meet us showing every signal that told me he meant business. Penny wanted to stand still and allow him to meet her rather than retreat. As it turned out, I think she had the right of it and I was a little annoyed with myself for conveying my tension through the leash and trying to overrule her superior dog language knowledge. I resolved to trust her more, but find it difficult not to tug on that leash without thinking.

I think it's good to desensitise a dog to hands, but I've decided my hands don't belong in training due to my tendency to rely overly on them. I don't need them, so why set myself up to depend on them? If I could guarantee that I wouldn't whip those hands out and use them to override my dog's choices when I didn't need to, then I would be happy enough to use them in training. The nice thing about voice control is that dogs can decide to ignore you if you're wrong. Had Penny been off leash when she met that intimidating dog, she would have ignored my voice commands in favour of placating this dog in her doggy way. There is a time and place where dogs should be free to make their own judgement calls, IMO. Anyway, I'm not entirely sure how much I can take hands out of training at this stage, and my decision to do so is based soley on the type of relationship I want with my dog. It's a personal choice and I don't think it's necessarily superior, just what I want to do. In everyday life where you don't need to control your dog especially, I think hands are a dog's friend. They stroke dog ears!

Leisje, I'm glad you're having fun with the mat training. Right now I'm working on a big goal, but we're making great progress: both dogs to be able to be sent remotely to their mats (not led--Marlowe's a lot better with this than Conrad is right now), and stay there (preferably in a down and I won't actually reward until they are in a down, but as long as they stay somehow on their mats I don't go and set them up again, I let them carry on), and settle (Marlowe has a tough time with this, he has a hard time toggling between "on" and "off" and it has meant that I've shaped a 'down with your head on your front paws' thing for him, which helps him mentally prepare to settle), pretty much indefinitely. The goal is by Christmas morning, while my parents are over, while we're eating (this is a big deal for Marlowe), and while we're doing the present thing, the dogs will stay on their mats. We had a little dress rehearsal as DH's parents came to town last weekend and we had a little early mini-Christmas-morning, and the dogs really did great. They broke their stays a few times but given his parents were over for almost 3 hours, I think that's a pretty good rehearsal. The only problem I had was when they did break their stays, I couldn't remotely send them back to their mats, I had to sort of escort them, so we're working particularly on that. And how much do I love that I'm the only person in my agility class who can walk freely around the building without my dog accompanying me and without having to tether or crate him? It's awesome. I read in Control Unleashed how one of the author's dogs after going through mat training would try to get on the mat while it was still in the air being thrown down and Marlowe tries to do this every now and then. He likes his mat.

 As far as the clicker, here's an article that explores the neurology of the clicker and a hypothesis on why it might be better than a voice marker. I absolutely prefer it to a voice marker, though I'm such a clutz that in agility class I just can not handle the fancy footwork involved plus the clicker plus the reinforcers. When we go to practice by ourselves though I can take things at a bit slower of a pace and use the clicker more. It makes a huge difference for Marlowe, who's a really non-verbal dog.
 

Ooh good points Corvus! I heard a saying once that correlates with what you say about using the leash....it went something kinda like "force no matter how well its concelaed provides resistance" meaning even if you mean well by tugging on the leash it is their natural reaction to pull back!

One thing I would like to ask is: For those of you who think everything should be taught "hands-off"... What's wrong with using our hands as a communication to our dogs? Why do you think this is harmful?

I don't really think it's harmful- just not very practical or efficient. You want your dog to obey and communicate with you when the dog is far away from you, so if you start out with some kind of handsy technique, it's just one more tool you have to work to fade out. Like people who use leashes as tools of communication/ training; just one more tool to fade out later.

I'm also not a fan of the "physically put the dog into a position" method of training because I don't think it works as well as other methods like free-shaping or capturing or even luring. If you push the dog's butt down to teach a sit, did the dog understand he's supposed to wait for you to push his butt down or did he somehow grasp that you wanted him to move himself into a position? this can be quite a leap of understanding for a young dog.  Eventually they all do learn to move into the sit by themselves, but most dogs can be taught a hands-off sit in mere seconds. Also the physically modeling methods seems to produce passive dogs who wait to be shown what to do. If you've never seen or worked with a highly experienced clicker-dog you may not fully grasp why this is undesirable.

Cassidys Mom

Suzanne Clothier refers to it as "naked on a mountaintop in Tibet", meaning you're not dependent on anything but yourself and your relationship with your dog.

I'm starting to understand the whole "hands-off" thing more now and I thank everyone who has contributed so far. I realized while reading that my dogs NEVER wear a leash or a collar unless I'm taking them somewhere in the car. I don't even use a clicker, treats or toys to do the vast majority of "training". It's me, my dog and my hands (hand gestures, hand signals as well as hands for touching).

When I talk about putting my hands on my dogs, it's not about confrontation or brute force at all! It's about using my hands as guiding tools. I believe that where other people use a leash or a collar, toys, treats or a clicker, I use my hands... as a guide, not as restraint.

And since I don't "train" my dogs to take positions (aside from the very basic ones), it's not like I'm using my hands to manipulate or force them into positions. They can take whatever position they find comfortable.

The most recent thing I'm "training" is B'asia -- to not go for Jaia's bowl after she's done eating. She found out that she could just go over to his bowl push him a little and clean up all the bits that he forced out to the floor with his rambunctious way of eating and get about 1/4 of his meal. So, for the last few meals, I've been standing by to let her know that that will not be allowed. Sometimes I step between them, sometimes I use my hand, but I always use my body because it is my preferred way to communicate with them. And it is what they do. They body block. And so I do, too. If we both prefer and understand that form of communication, I'm not sure why I should insist that they listen to a verbal command, given in a language that they don't understand.

Given our relationship, after a couple more sessions, I will be able to keep her from approaching his dish with a "eh-eh" from across the room.  

Some would suggest that I train an incompatible behavior or separate them or whatever, but to me, that seems to be giving them LESS of a choice about what they do. My way, I don't care what she DOES do, as long as she leaves Jaia's food alone. Training an incompatible behavior or separating them would be a form of control (make her do this so she can't do that) and I'm just not that into controlling their every move.

All the positions I've taught my dogs (sit, down, stay, heel, etc) I have taught with luring. When I talk about use of hands, I'm not talking about pushing down on a dog's butt or shoulders to put him into a position. I'm talking about touching or guiding him. It can be as light as a few fingers touching the top of his head to a palm placed on the side of his rear or neck to indicate a move to one side or the other. I'm constantly touching my dogs. We have a very organic communication.

corvus

I think hands are a dog's friend.

Mind if I put that in my signature? I love it! 

Liesje, I'm glad you're having success with Kenya! 

"Some would suggest that I train an incompatible behavior or separate them or whatever, but to me, that seems to be giving them LESS of a choice about what they do"

I wish more people would train along those lines. You want your dog to behave witohout threat and on its own accord versus being shut away so it wont act out.

I recently went to a friends home, knocked on the door and heard some comotion going on. She had locked her dog in the back room because he dosnt know how to greet guests. I can understand that...especially if its a puppy or has nervous tendencies but this was a 5 year old lab who was typically well mannered and she just hadnt taken the time out to teach him manners. So....long short just like your dog with the food bowl....all it takes is some time!

Allow me to cast the first semantic gauntlet. I think "hands-off" can also be a euphemism for an absence or diminished use of physical corrections, such as collar pops, pins, finger-bites, etc. That doesn't mean you can't touch your dogs or even give touch cues. I've heard some describe their "finger-bites' and it sounded more like a touch cue. I also propose that our rounded primate fingers do not feel like pointed fangs and incisor teeth as one would find on a dog. But some feel as if it works.

Anyway, what I value about the clicker is the steadiness of the noise. I happen to sing. I've been playing guitar since 1974 but I've only seriously worked on my voice since 1987. My voice can change from day to day. While running through my practice set, it can change a little from beginning to end. Point being, you can say yes 4 different times and you will say it 4 different ways that you can't hear but your dog can hear. Also, change in pitch within a word also means something to a dog.

The clicker never changes. So, when the dog hears that sound, it knows beyond all certainty that the sound equals a reward. The timing of a click is as pinpoint as the timing of a punishment should be. And it is easier to click at the exact instant a desired behavior occurs. Of course, there are some people for whom using the clicker doesn't work with their sense of timing, so they practiced and developed a verbal marker that, as best as they can, always sounds the same. Whatever floats your boat.

And you don't have to use the clicker forever, only for training newer behaviors. That's why it's not bad to link a marker word to the click so that when you fade the use of the clicker, you can transition to not needing it. After fading, the reward can become seemingly sporadic, like a slot machine in Vegas. As long as you let the dog "win" enough to keep playing. You get what you reinforce.

I prefer desensitization to flooding. The former is less traumatic than the latter, even though the aim of both is to change the meaning of the stimulus. So, it's okay if Shadow is still excited, as long as he's happy and excited, rather than nervous or reactive and excited.

I've heard it said that some dogs don't have a lot of time. Well, with my dog, I have him for life so I have approximately 10 years left, conservatively, to solve any problem. If I was fostering him, I wouldn't adopt him out until he was better, which means I would be taking the time to change his ways, which means there is time for desensitization. Rescuers and fosters are special people with a lot of knowledge but the family they adopt to doesn't always have the same level of knowledge. So, the dog is going to be managable before he/she moves on. I'm not discounting flooding but for me, that would be a tool in the back of the shed.

And sometimes, dogs desensitize over time with familiarity. Shadow used to be afraid of garbage trucks. Then, after about 3 months, he could care less. He used to freak out with the vacuum cleaner. Now, he justs moves out of the way. And he's never been afraid of the lawnmower and merely moves out of the way.

ron2

I think "hands-off" can also be a euphemism for an absence or diminished use of physical corrections

Yeah, I'm starting to see that. I would consider about maybe 2% of my touches involve physical corrections such as you've described. The rest is guiding, grooming and loving. I noticed today (with this thread in my mind) that my dogs come to my hands. In other words, if I hold out my hand, they will come up to it. Not sniffing or with their nose, even, they just come up and contact with the side of their face or neck. They LOVE my hands.

I hear you about the clicker, ron. If I were teaching particular tricks and behaviors, I think it's a good way to go. My interactions with my dogs are far less scientific and much more intuitive. Only rarely do I stop and think... "Now how am I going to teach that"? Usually, it is just a matter of intuitive communication. I have nothing against a clicker at all, it's just not "me", if that makes sense. To me, it's so sterile and precise, inorganic and harsh. And since I'm not marking behaviors, I don't need it. My dogs know the tone of my voice and my body language.

If your goal is to teach a dog precision behaviors in the shortest time possible, then a clicker (or clicker training) is definitely the way to go.

The only time I can remember ever using just flooding was with the dogs' fear of the smoke alarm. Otherwise, I've never needed to. I have used desensitization with Jaia at the vet, but I think there was some flooding involved, because I did have him on a leash and used some "force" to get him to go where I wanted him to, but not much. It was mostly energy. But it took a couple weeks of going every day - and going just up to the cusp of his comfort zone, so I think it was a little of both. I don't have a preference, really, just whichever one works best. I believe in getting the dog out of his fear in the fastest way, while not creating more fear.

Shadow being afraid of the vacuum cleaner reminds me of how I got B'asia used to it. She didn't really have a fear, she just didn't like it at all. I took a little stuffed ball and sucked it up on the end of the tube and offered it to her. Then turned off the vacuum and it fell. I kept doing that on and off and pretty soon she ran over and grabbed the ball off the end of the tube and took off! LOL So, now, every time I start the vacuum, she goes and gets one of those balls and wants to play keep away with the vacuum cleaner! LOL

I love this thread!  

As for the hands off training, I do not see a problem with using hands, hands can shape positions, hands can assist in movement. It depends on the dog. Hands should never be used in anger or to instill fear.

 Hektor is large and slow and bullyish. I have used hands to assist him off the couch (by grasping his collar, saying Off and assiting him off) or off the bed if he does not heed my request to move. I do not see this as "manhandling him". I do not use hands for Gunnar for the simple reason that he always heeds the verbal request.

 I use hands because he understands clearly what Off means and he chooses not to respond. To offer him a treat after he has ignored my request does not make sense to me.