Lee Charles Kelley
Posted : 2/29/2008 12:59:47 PM
There are several reasons I don't like clickers and would never use one in training.
First of all, it's a mistake to think that dogs learn through making mental associations. They don't. They learn to choose behaviors that they find successfully reduce their own internal levels of tension or stress. It's learning by homeostasis, if you will, not through external rewards. Looked at from this perspective, learning happens on a visceral and emotional, not a mental, level. The way I see it, clicking actually gets in the way of this normal, natural learning process. It runs the energy through the wrong channel, so to speak. And the dog actually has to work harder to learn things than he would if he were energized during the training process. When a dog is energized he can learn a new behavior once, with no repetitions, and he'll never forget the lesson for the rest of his life. Link: http://www.tiny.cc/playbenefits You can't get that kind of learning through clicker training.
Yes, clicking is a great tool, I suppose, for training dolphins at a distance, or even gun dogs in the field (which was its original application). But I see no earthly need to use it with pet dogs. (Nor does Bob Bailey, by the way.) When a dog is trained properly, learning is its own reward. We don't need to cram learning into this outmoded Skinner box.
Let me put it another way, if you get a dog to focus on you, whether you use a treat, a tennis ball, or your own playful body language, an emotional, energetic connection takes place, and training becomes more like a dance than a "you do this and you get a reward" kind of dynamic. I've often come across clicker trainers (Karen Pryor, for example, who frankly doesn't know anything about dogs) saying, "Dogs are only in it for themselves." This is so untrue. Of any species on the planet dogs have the least amount of the "selfish gene" imaginable! They come into this life wanting to be part of a group dynamic. They yearn to be taught how to put their energy toward a group purpose. To repeat: For dogs, learning to obey the trainer is its own reward. You don't need extrinsic reinforcers. They live for this stuff!
Also, when done improperly, clicker training creates hyper-anxiety. Too many owners and trainers ignore this, thinking if the dog is producing physical behaviors on command, they've been successful. (I've also heard a lot of clicker trainers complain privately that their dogs have developed food-related misbehaviors, such as scavenging, counter-surfing, etc.)
Finally, from what I've observed in the changing dynamics of the dog training world over the past 40 years (though I've only been an active participant for the last 20), 85% of most training success belongs to the dog, and only 15% to the trainer or his or her methods. In other words, everyone has their favored methods that fit their own personality, and they pat themselves (and their method on the pack) when they're successful, ignoring the fact that every dog who ever lived was born wanting to learn and obey. They're genetically engineered for obedience. Dominance trainers are attracted to their method due to their own emotional pathology (it gives them a sense of power), and I think clicker trainers are attracted to theirs because it's so linear; my impression is that most clicker trainers have trouble dealing with the true nonlinear nature of behavior and learning.
Fortunately, clicker training is just a fad. It hasn't caught on the way Karen Pryor and others hoped it would...
LCK