Food Rewards - For and against..

Benedict

DPU

from a simple discussion on using food in training, look at all the spin-off conversation.  It most definitely is a topic that should be discussed.

 

Actually all that means is that this thread is dreadfully off-topic now, and if it were anyone else's thread I'd likely have said something.  However since I started it, and it's a theory debate rather than someone actually needing some kind of help, I'm happy to let it wander.  I just suggest that we don't all make a habit of it.   

I meant the other threads that were created....Reinforcement....Punishment....Hugs.....Relationships....etc.

I believe this thread has stayed on topic....the subject being food and training.

DPU

You have never stated that you understood my view and by disagreeing only, as Mudpuppy did, one dismisses the idea without consideration.  In addition I am depicted in absolutes when in fact those are not true statement, not that you have done this.  We are here to learn and by dismissing, future reference for the possiblity is not there. 

Well personally, I think that dismissing my disagreements with you simply because you assume I don't understand your point of view is frankly a little insulting, if I were the type to get my feelings hurt, which I'm not. 

Can you point me to where you've said that you understand why people use food? 

Benedict

Can you point me to where you've said that you understand why people use food? 

How many times do I have to say up until recently I did clicker training with food.  Up until recently I demo clicker training at foster dog showings.  Presently I have a female-to-female dog aggression in my house and I am using food as a start to overcome this.  I give treat snacks to my dogs and they nicely wait their turn to get their treats.  Since I use food in training and behavior changes, I understand why people use food but I don't agree with its forever lifetime continued use.

If you are asking if I specifically stated in this thread, I don't know and maybe not.  For me, I know the members here by their posting in all threads and I remember their other posts and their positions to the best I can.  I don't understand why you ask such a question other than for sake of making some creditabile point.  Remember in this thread or in another, Mudpuppy stated that I lost all creditability because my experience is I use affection (a hug) over food.  If you believe that, that is fine but such statements have a reflection back.

DPU

If you are asking if I specifically stated in this thread, I don't know and maybe not.  For me, I know the members here by their posting in all threads and I remember their other posts and their positions to the best I can. 

That's my point and EXACTLY why I asked the question I did.  I am almost positive that I have said in a previous post that I understand the arguments you make....(PLEASE don't ask me to remember which thread, I am on medication that has all but destroyed my short and medium term memory) so I'm not sure why you'd assume that in this case I didn't....or why you'd compare me to another member.  In any case, true debate MEANS that I understand what you're saying, or I wouldn't be able to argue it.  If I didn't understand your points I'd be unable to refute them, right?  If you don't like or agree with my differing opinion, that is of course your choice.  I'm not here to change anybody except myself. 

Riddle me this - my dog is currently living in a free-feed household - meaning she has access to food any time she wants.  Prior to this she was on scheduled meals and still left her morning meals on occasion.  At times I had concerns that she was thinner than I wanted, so I increased her food volumes and she'd leave exactly that extra amount in her bowl.  Clearly I have not created a state of hunger in my dog.  So, since my dog executes commands with or without treats now, has earned a few titles as a result of her training, is a Therapy dog and welcomed into homes with seniors, infants, pets, and those who simply don't like dogs but like MY dog, she enjoys top status in our dog-human social structure, is my most cherished friend and being in this world, and is hugged when we are not training....  which thing did I do right?  Or did I do everything wrong because I used treats.... pretty heavily during parts of our training.  Treats and leash corrections and affection mostly.  I did the same w/dogs I handled at the rescue in preparation for future adoptions - prep for adoption as you attempt w/your fosters.  Our dogs at best would stiffen up and become highly suspicious of your need to control their body - which is what a hug from a human often mimics for the dog. At worst, these dogs would rip skin off your face if you tried to hug them.  (Why is it different if a child hugs a dog versus a strange adult, btw?)  A food treat doesn't impose a physical entrapment to the dog.  It can be readily accepted or refused.  It doesn't involve withholding any intrinsic need to the dog - clearly myself and others have repeatedly shown the dogs aren't hungry when they train. I know you historically like to argue points just to engage in discussion, DPU, regardless of whether you believe the side you're arguing or not.  How does the situation described above fit into your view of this discussion?

I might begin to understand where you are coming from, but I'm not sure, so here goes.

DPU

Presently I have a female-to-female dog aggression in my house and I am using food as a start to overcome this. 

Can you explain why you are using food in this case? What was it that has made you decide to use food rather than something else? How long have each dog been in your care? Do you consider that you have an established bond? If so, why won't simple affection work as a motivator? Or is it not a strong enough motivator for the dog to find it useful?

DPU

Since I use food in training and behavior changes, I understand why people use food but I don't agree with its forever lifetime continued use.

Okay. You said you use food in behaviour changes and training. So do I (I won't speak for others). Once I teach a behaviour I fade out most food treats (virtually all, but occasionally, very rarely, I'll give them a treat for a job done particularly well), and the rewards transfer to life rewards, as you know. But if someday an issue arises and I need to reteach something, I will not hesitate to use treats for it. What about you?

You have a dog with F/F DA right now, and you are using food. Once this issue is cleared up, and you remove the use of food (much as a lot of people would do when an issue clears up). What if this dog then develops another issue? I'm not saying it will happen, but it's a hypothetical situation. If this dog develops another issues, would you then use food again in the future as a start to working on that behaviour issue?

To be honest what you are describing doesn't sound a whole lot different than what a lot of people already do. It's not exactly what I do, as I don't profess to see using food as a problem, but really you use food in training and behaviour modification just like other people do. You just tend to make it sound different when you don't address the actual issue. If you are that anti-food, why is it that you are using food? Is it possible that the hug and affection just is not the highest motivator at all times? Since you are working on the issue, the dog must have been there a sufficient amount of time since you do no training within the first month. Which makes this dog having been there awhile. If you have built up this trust with this dog, then by your theory (and I'm not dissing it, I'm just using it as you do), affection on its own should work, right? So why the food?

miranadobe

DPU, regardless of whether you believe the side you're arguing or not. 

I quickly read your post and possibly missed something because it was so scrunched.  My answer is short term vs long term use.

And, you are wrong in your quote, there is no "regardless" but you are free to like, dislike, or dismiss my ideas.

Now off topic, but a while back a group of you said you would help place Marvin, a foster I have for well over a year.  He stays with me "regardless" of whether he does not get adopted.  What ever happened to that offer.

DPU

Now off topic, but a while back a group of you said you would help place Marvin, a foster I have for well over a year.  He stays with me "regardless" of whether he gets adopted or not.  What ever happened to that offer.

Yes, and a little TOO off-topic, even for this thread.  If you are genuinely asking, rather than trying to make others feel bad or guilty, I request that you start a new thread about it. 

DPU

Since I use food in training and behavior changes, I understand why people use food but I don't agree with its forever lifetime continued use.

I am confused. And I may have missed something, but who said they use food as a continued lifetime use? I know my dog gets praise and toys more now for continuing to respond to request, but I sure don't treat him with food each time. Heck I just a made a couple of banana cream pies for a party tonight and I deliberately cut the over ripe parts off, into the waiting maw of my had his breakfast already dog. If your curious, the pieces never hit the floor. I sure didn't ask him to do anything. He was just there.

And as to my question earlier, you read it right, but took a different spin on it, and that, I am sure, is my fault. Let me clarify.

What I meant is that no matter how you tried, or experimented or did, this dog will not, under any circumstance, accept a hug, never, ever, from you.

Truley

What I meant is that no matter how you tried, or experimented or did, this dog will not, under any circumstance, accept a hug, never, ever, from you.

You do know that the dog would have to live its entire life in this state before "never, ever" would occur.  As I said I would look at this as a problem or a re-examination of my relationship (only my defined relationship) that I would consider for building my future relationship with other dogs. 

miranadobe

Why is it different if a child hugs a dog versus a strange adult, btw?

corgipower

DPU, I understand your reasoning for not using food. What are your thoughts on using toys as training rewards?

Honestly, I don't use toys and have never used toys on a individual dog.  I may be missing something by not using toys.  The most I do with toys is toss them and the dogs take off and they have a good round of play.  I don't mean to cause a raucous but I really don't play with my dogs.  I encourage and set up play between the dogs.  I am not sure if I would classify going thru the agility course as play or just a different form exercise.

 I thought the scientific side of the creating hunger debate was certain.

I haven't said much on this topic, mostly because I've only had the one dog and she really is thoroughly food obsessed. There is one thing and one thing only I have taught her to do with food and that is sit before she gets her dinner. Oh no, wait, two things. The other is to gently take the food from my hand rather than taking my hand off with it. Once she'd learnt to sit for food, it's pretty much all she'll do if someone has food in their hands, especially if she thinks they might give some to her. She gets so over-excited that I think those treats drive her a little bit mad. If she can't figure out what I want within 2 seconds of becoming aware of the food, her frustration levels escalate and she'll frantically try everything she can think of to get it, which is sitting, sitting harder, moving 2 centimetres and sitting again, sitting and bouncing up and down on her front feet, sitting and bouncing and barking... you get the picture. This frustrates the hell out of me and I don't think it's a healthy mindset for teaching something new, so I don't use it. I didn't to begin with. Penny's training has been probably more than 99.9% done without the use of any food at all. I use praise and classical conditioning because a) she doesn't flip out with excitement when I use these and the level of reward seems about right for the level of motivation I want to create, and b) because it's mighty convenient.

So I've witheld her dinner until she sat, much like I've seen parents withold the meals of children until they sit down to eat it, which takes all of 5 seconds max with Penny, and generally not even that because once she'd learnt it was the way to her meal she was already sitting when I turned around with her bowl. And I've witheld treats when I could see I was about to lose a finger if I didn't remind her to be gentle. She often needs to be reminded because food is such a hot reward for her that she wants it desperately, and right now. That's the extent of witholding food from Penny in a training sense. She gets it anyway, and usually within seconds.

Now, my question is, what about all the times she sees someone eating something, comes over and sits and gazes hopefully at the food and doesn't get any because it's our food? She only needs the hope of food to reinforce her behaviour. So by not rewarding her request for food "I'm sitting, see? Sitting so well, so you should toss me some of that food." are we in fact witholding a basic requirement from her and creating hunger? What about the other dogs that are not food obsessed? When they fancy some people food (because what we have must be the best kind of food there is) and come over and sit and be very still and quiet while watching the food, are we again witholding a basic requirement and creating hunger? Jill does this, and Jill has very little interest in food. She will leave food in her bowl if she's sated (and then Penny eats it) and she works for play rewards.

I'm just having trouble working this logic out. Penny has been overweight in the past, but Jill never has, but I'm not sure if you would give both of them food every time they came and sat politely, which in our house means "May I have some of that food you've got, please?" Should we not eat in the presence of the dogs because the presence of the food would make them hungry and then not giving them any would be denying them a basic survival need?

And about relationships, I allow my animals to define the terms of the affection they want. If they don't want hugs, I can accept that. Kit often doesn't even want to be touched. Now he's not a very social animal, but I don't think there's something wrong with our relationship when we go for several days without him seeking physical affection. That's just how he is and I accept my animals as they are. If my dog went several days without seeking affection, I'd be very worried and trying to work out what was up with her. In fact, it wouldn't even get that far. However, if my dog went several weeks without seeking a full embrace, I'd be glad because she only wants one of those when something is very wrong. I don't really understand why someone would use something a dog doesn't actually like that much off the mark to build a bond. In my world, I use things the animal likes to build a bond. They're very good at telling me what they want. I think it's a bit dangerous to have a view that all dogs should like something or there's something wrong with them or your relationship with them. They're all individuals, after all. If I had a dog that didn't think much of affection at all, I certainly wouldn't push the matter. I'd let them take it at their own pace and decide for themselves what form of affection they liked. I did that with Bonnie, who hated to be touched when I got her. She did need a gentle introduction to physical affection to discover she liked it. I'd do that, but it's got to be on their terms or I may as well not bother. 

First:

You do know that the dog would have to live its entire life in this state before "never, ever" would occur.

Yes that is true, but who is to say that it can not happen? I have gone my whole life without eating snails, and nothing you do is going to convince me that I should, I do not see it as a reward or something that makes my life whole. Why do you consider the needs and wants of an animal any different?

Second:

As I said I would look at this as a problem or a re-examination of my relationship (only my defined relationship) that I would consider for building my future relationship with other dogs.

That bothers me. Why? Well if your interested, it bothers me because you seeing a problem where none exists. The real problem IMO, is that the dog does not regard this as a reward or something it feels it needs, but you do. The problem is not the dog, it is your reasoning that is at fault.

Just based on your comments in this thread, and not stepping on any of the work you have done with fosters or your own dogs, for I find that more than admirable, your the one needing the affection and the response from the animal in question to bolster your own sense of what is good and right for the dog. And before you get all indignant, I can understand that. We all strive for the perfect relationship with our pets, so it really is understandable. But, and this is a big but....I find it really hard to believe that you would let it rest and accept a pet that did not allow you to have that kind of bond. So in a sense, I feel your failing the dog, because you refuse to accept it as it is. And this I just don't understand.

There are many kinds of bonds, and not all of them are about touching or being touched.