I don't understand why...

ron2

And her points are valid. And scientific. For an organism doesn't learn by punishment but by reinforcement. Punishment or correction merely stops something. Avoiding the agitation is neg R and behaving for the reward is pos R. An organism learns be reinforcement, period, paragraph, and new book. And I know that will hurt some feelings, too. And punishment or correction doesn't always stop what it is supposed to stop.

No, those points are not valid and as I see it, it is using science in a selective and bias manner in order to promote a certain way of thinking.  And it is also a big denial that other quadrants do not come into play in order for the dog to learn.  Reinforcement is a procedure, as a reward or punishment, that alters a response to a stimulus. OC describes how a dog learns and the dog learns from all the quadrants, not just one or two or from the Reinforcement quads of OC.  In simple terms, in order to reinforce behavior with a reward (e.g. food) the effectiveness of that reward has to be measured against the opposite force, withholding the reward.  Even though the human may not recognize it, the dog may interpret the withholding of a reward as +P or -P.

I recently watched "It's me or the dog" in one of the episodes Victoria claimed that if a verbal correction doesn't work right away to stop using it and move on to something else......well, here came the pot lids.....lol, they worked like a charm. She instructed the owner to bang the lids and immediately put them down and avoid eye contact with the dog. Makes sense, the dog ran over to the owner and was looking for the source of the noise. The dog never connected the owner with the noise.

I do agree that we should set forth our best foot when it comes to training. My dogs do well, but are not prepared for every situation and I will use a short and sharp verbal correction. Dealing with 5 dogs, and having 5 dogs in a situation at times where things will have to seize immediately, this type of approach works best. 

Benedict

I have no issue whatsoever with issuing corrections as I defined them several posts ago.  To repeat:  a correction is anything that stops an unwanted behaviour, a cue is anything that starts a wanted one.  Sometimes those 2 go hand in hand, sometimes they are separate.

HOWEVER, the above finds its validity within the larger concept of it being necessary, to me, that all interactions with my dog must have meaning.  Of course, they are all going to have meaning for him (you get what you reinforce) so the challenge is for me to arrange everything so that the meaning he absorbs is the meaning I want him to have.  As I type this, Ben is snoring on my feet.  No interaction there, right?  Wrong.  He is comfortable, he trusts me, he knows I am not going to make any sudden movements or decide to kick him in the head.  There is a base level of understanding between the two of us.  In this instance I am not setting him up to succeed, there is just simply no chance of failure, but if I need to move and ask him to get off my feet, the meaning is clear that he has to do that.

As I use what people call correction I will also use a praise, example: we are in the woods and they sniff out an animal that is very interesting to them, I verbally correct, call them to me and give praise, I praise a lot....it all goes hand in hand.

My dogs are snoozing all over the house with Rumour right by my computer chair....lol...all of them trust me not to hurt them, even the more uncomfortable things that can happen, like Rumour's ears acting up (the dog loves to dunk his head, not so good with a chronic ear situation), but he will actually lign up to have drops put in his ears.....it's amazing he doesn't walk off.

ron2

 I wish someone could tell a blonde joke so that I could be offended.

Ron, Did you hear about the blond Bear?  Got stuck in a hunter's trap, chewed off it's 2 paws and 1 leg, and was still stuck!

luvmyswissy

ron2

 I wish someone could tell a blonde joke so that I could be offended.

Ron, Did you hear about the blond Bear?  Got stuck in a hunter's trap, chewed off it's 2 paws and 1 leg, and was still stuck!

What do you call an intelligent blonde?  

Golden Retriever

And also...

Blonde joke 

OK, BTT! 

willowchow

I agree with the above.  And, sometimes it seems things are implied in your posts too.  Like the "slap on a prong" comment.  I'm reading that as you are implying that those that do that don't care or don't love their dogs.  I know many people that use a prong and would never hurt their dogs and care very much about them.  As I said in my earlier post, sometimes you need to fix the problem quickly.  How many people have time to deal with misbehavior before work or when they have to be somewhere?  It's just not always practical to break out treats and clickers and whatever.

I wasn't at all inferring that people don't love their dogs, but loving a dog does not mean that you understand dogs completely, or the methods by which they learn best.  Before I was a trainer, when I was an ordinary pet owner, I put prong collars on my dogs - and no one could EVER accuse me of not loving my dogs.  But, the simple truth is that if an owner puts a prong collar on a dog that doesn't need one, a lot of harm can unwittingly be done.  I'm sure that I harmed one of the dogs that I loved best, which is why, now that I know better, I try my darndest to educate people about alternative means for getting their dogs' attention, and getting them to do as they want.  If an owner doesn't have time to deal with misbehavior before work or any other time, they can rationalize whatever they do to your dog to make it comply, but it still doesn't mean that was the best course of action.  It just means they were pressed for time and took a shortcut that was possibly more expedient than wise.  People who don't have time for training dogs, or who don't know how and have no intention of going to class, aren't would be better off to adopt dogs from shelters that do behavior evaluations so that they can get one that is reasonably behaved.  I didn't always have my clicker and a bag of beef while training my dogs, but it doesn't take much to toss a few Cheerios in your pocket when you go out for a walk.  Some people are too lazy to do even that.  But, they always have time for the rationalization.  My dad had a sign in his office that read, "Why is it that people never have time to do things right, but they always have time to do it over?"  'Nuff sed.

I'm not going to comment on the post because I don't want to argue.  But, going back to the original post, I guess I'm just having trouble understanding why you'd get so upset having dogs that aren't/haven't been trained in training class.   

spiritdogs

I didn't always have my clicker and a bag of beef while training my dogs, but it doesn't take much to toss a few Cheerios in your pocket when you go out for a walk.  Some people are too lazy to do even that.  But, they always have time for the rationalization. 

You know with this type of attitute you will  be stepping on someone's toes.

You might find it interesting with your great knowledge that some dogs when highly excited or anxious won't even take a treat.....they don't want to have anything to do with food. I really would like to see a dog that would prefer eating a Cheerio over wanting to sniff something way more interesting .

Also, I really don't see how a verbal, then calling a dog and praising a dog is doing all kinds of damage........but, I am sure in your eyes it probably does.

spiritdogs

I wasn't at all inferring that people don't love their dogs, but loving a dog does not mean that you understand dogs completely, or the methods by which they learn best.  Before I was a trainer, when I was an ordinary pet owner, I put prong collars on my dogs - and no one could EVER accuse me of not loving my dogs.  But, the simple truth is that if an owner puts a prong collar on a dog that doesn't need one, a lot of harm can unwittingly be done.  I'm sure that I harmed one of the dogs that I loved best, which is why, now that I know better, I try my darndest to educate people about alternative means for getting their dogs' attention, and getting them to do as they want.  If an owner doesn't have time to deal with misbehavior before work or any other time, they can rationalize whatever they do to your dog to make it comply, but it still doesn't mean that was the best course of action.  It just means they were pressed for time and took a shortcut that was possibly more expedient than wise.  People who don't have time for training dogs, or who don't know how and have no intention of going to class, aren't would be better off to adopt dogs from shelters that do behavior evaluations so that they can get one that is reasonably behaved.  I didn't always have my clicker and a bag of beef while training my dogs, but it doesn't take much to toss a few Cheerios in your pocket when you go out for a walk.  Some people are too lazy to do even that.  But, they always have time for the rationalization.  My dad had a sign in his office that read, "Why is it that people never have time to do things right, but they always have time to do it over?"  'Nuff sed.

OK, but if at one point you didn't "know better", isn't it possible that these people you're venting about just don't know better?  Why is it that they have to be "lazy"?

 I guess I don't see the problem with a verbal correction which tells the dog, to use Becca's words, "Ah, not that", since it has exactly the same effect on the human.  If Ben screws up we both get corrected.  I tell him to leave it and he does, he has told me that he's incapable of resisting whatever it was and I need to deal with that in some kind of appropriate way.  We have exchanged necessary information in a nonviolent, nonconfrontational way.  I don't see the harm in that. 

 Sometimes, the laziness comes after they get the information about how to deal. 

There is no harm in interruption - but people often confuse interruption or correction with information.  I don't have a problem with interrupting a dog verbally, but when I do so, I prefer it to be by issuing a cue that the dog understands because I have trained it.  Granted, sometimes it can be necessary to interrupt quickly and strongly (dog trying to herd or nip children, for example).  But, getting the dog to perform an alternative behavior is the object ("leave it" or "come";) rather than simply to prevent the dog from doing the incorrect behavior and being confused about what TO do.  JMHO, which is about as worthless on this thread as t*ts on a bull, therefore I will leave and let you beat the dead horse some more.  Some days I miss our old emoticons...

spiritdogs

 Sometimes, the laziness comes after they get the information about how to deal.

So if others have given YOU feedback on effective communication, and you resist taking it to heart, are you lazy? Or do you disagree? Perhaps these "lazy" owners aren't convinced.

There is no harm in interruption - but people often confuse interruption or correction with information.  I don't have a problem with interrupting a dog verbally, but when I do so, I prefer it to be by issuing a cue that the dog understands because I have trained it.

I'd be interested in hearing you definitions of information, interruption,  and correction. To me, a correction is a type of information, as is praise or a food reward. The information says "Don't do that!" or "Yay mom is happy you did that! Do that more!"

Dogs understand the concept of "don't do THAT." They use it with each other all the time. The big difference with humans is that we usually have more detailed wishes. Sasha doesn't want Eko chewing on her, and will give him a stern "Cut it out!" but she doesn't care if his second choice is chewing the dining room table. I do.

Alternate behaviors come in handy with young dogs, dogs who don't know most of the rules, and dogs with really poor impulse control. But they aren't strictly necessary.  Sasha knows the general range of acceptable behavior, so I can tell her to stop something (usually with an eh eh) and she'll choose an alternate behavior herself that is a ok. Eko .... not so much. His long list of alternate behaviors are all pretty undesirable in my eyes, so he needs more guidance on what to do instead of behavior X.

It's fine to prefer specific commands over general verbal corrections. Neither is right or wrong. I prefer the basic "stop that," because I don't really care much what the dog is doing as long as it isn't on the no list. Sit here, sniff that, whatever. I also don't have herding breeds, who might appreciate more specific input on what to do - I have relatively independent dogs.  

Dog_ma

I also don't have herding breeds, who might appreciate more specific input on what to do - I have relatively independent dogs.

I have a young herding dog who is not just relatively independant; but very independent.  I could have the wrong perception...but your statement sounded to me as herding dogs can't be independent.  Sorry if I misunderstood.

I'm not so sure I agree with the statement of humans having more detailed wishes.  Usually, its pretty cut and dry with interruptions:  "don't do that,"  "go find something else to do."  My dog is a pet, not a working dog...so I have no problem with her making her own decision in finding something else to do.  Typically, she does make good alternative decisions, because in the big scheme things she wants to please.  Like you point out though...it depends on the particular dog.

spiritdogs

But, getting the dog to perform an alternative behavior is the object ("leave it" or "come";) rather than simply to prevent the dog from doing the incorrect behavior and being confused about what TO do. 

I must be dense when it comes to this, and sorry if it feels like I keep harping at the same thing. I really don't agree that the dog should have to perform an alternative behavior......once told to stop, and the dog moves on to something else isn't that what was expected out of the dog? In the past when I have given a verbal and I don't need the dog to come to me the dog just moves on and that's that. Dogs correct each other and after that the same thing happens...the offending dog just moves on.

Lately I've been working a bit on Coke because if I leave the room he might try to take some food, not always, but sometimes he might try.  He won't take food from us or in front of us and generally I don't leave food out because I'm a neat freak, but it's something I've been slowly working on in case we are ever at someone else's house and they leave food out.  I leave something on the counter, leave the room, and when I hear him go for it I say "no!" (I always correct AS he is going for the food so the timing is right, not after he's eaten it and is walking away).  He immediately drops to the floor and sulks.  A few seconds later, I typically take a piece of the food or a dog biscuit and have him do a sit-stay.  Then he gets the treat and praise.  That way, each mini-training session ends on a positive note.  He gets food and he gets it by doing what I want.  I hate correcting him and then having him sulk away and that's it because I think he might not ever understand what it is I *want* (four on the floor in the kitchen).  I want him to understand that the counter is NOT appropriate, BUT if he sits and waits patiently he will earn a treat, he doesn't have to steal it to get it.  I don't need him to actually DO a sit-stay each time there is food out, but I just see it as a way of ending on a positive note.

So for those that are averse to corrections, is there another way to go about it?