The war between "positive" and "correctional"

spiritdogs

Well, someday when you get to be a better trainer, you won't need the discipline.

Not a trainer, never claimed to be.  Just your average dog owner figuring out what works with MY dogs. 

spiritdogs

These are training failures, just as it is a training failure if your child doesn't know that sitting on his sister's head is wrong.  And, that big huge punishment may keep him from sitting on her head in the future, but he may, just as a dog decides not to like you very much, decide to hate his sister.  Doesn't always happen that way, but it's enough reason for me to want to handle things a different way that still works in terms of the behavioral result.  

Really?  I have to train my kid not to sit on his sister's head?  D@mn, I forgot to train him not to rape, murder or maim too.  No telling what he might do while on vacation on the coast of Maine this weekend, BEWARE MAINE RESIDENTS!   I doubt the big response will make him like me less if the past 21  years are any indication.  This is the kid who is a psychology major doing animal research on rats and who has empirical evidence that harsh responses have longer lasting effects and greater potential for behavior extinction so I don't think he'd agree with you on that one.  

I'm a criminal justice major, a law and order type, and a big believer in discipline.  Both the type that encourages self-regulation and the type that provides an unpleasant response to a given behavior (or the fear of an unpleasant response) that is dangerous and undesirable.  My methods work for me, my dogs and my family.  My kids have 2 parents in separate households.  One is the drill sargeant and not averse to using physical punishment when necessary (rarely).  The other is ridiculously permissive and thinks bribes and meritless praise is a great parenting method.  Guess which one they spend the bulk of their time with voluntarily?  Guess which one the kids say they prefer to be like?  Guess which one they're choosing to move cross country with?  Yeah, not worried about wittle pookie not liking me because I set limits in whatever way was necessary and that I felt "fit the crime".  If someone must "manage the environment" constantly with their dogs or their children, they will never be self-sufficient or they will run amok when they're let loose on the big wild world.  No one manages the environment 24/7.  Nor could someone possibly sit around thinking "what if" and train for every possible scenario.  They'd lose their mind and their free time!  Being tackled while scooping poop is not a failure to manage the environment, it's a dog with a wild hair that needed plucking.  I'd rather have Indie think "Jumping on people = BAD, sitting in front of people = LOVES" than to only have the 2nd part of the equation present. 
 

Hmmmmm, "good" trainers don't need to use the scientifically proven quadrant of +P, and are "failures" if they do...spare me.

I do not allow the Innocent to pay my debts.

If only it were that simple. WIsh I'd remembered that Kivi Tarro is sometimes a dog with drive when I impulsively got in the hare's cage that day. Wish I'd realised before I got in that Kit was in a touchy mood - although with his new setup you can't actually see enough of him to tell until you get in there and that's one of the reasons why he's often not in a touchy mood. Wish it had occurred to me that Kivi Tarro was also in an excitable mood. But I didn't and there's no point dwelling on it. I learnt my lesson and so did Kivi, and Kit for that matter, because he's been a bit explosive around Kivi Tarro since. Thankfully, Kivi Tarro now thinks twice before chasing him, which gives me the opportunity to call him away and then shower him with praise. Kit is settling down around KT, now.

I haven't trained pre-emptively because Kit can't handle a dog staring intently at him wanting to chase. It makes him skittish and stressed, which makes him infinitely more exciting to a dog. I've been endeavouring to teach Kivi that rabbits and hares are boring and should be ignored. For the most part, my attempts have been successful, thanks in part to Bonnie who furiously ignores Kivi and refuses to react to him. It's when I start paying them attention that Kivi suddenly pays attention to them, naturally, because if I'm interested, it's probably interesting. And that's why the rule was I don't pay attention to the rabbits when Kivi is around. I broke my own rule without really thinking about it, but I have 2 innocents at stake and one of them has to pay my debt if the other is to be spared. I don't need people to tell me I did the right thing or not because I know I did the right thing. When Kit forms a strong fear association, sometimes he never gets over it. We were at the point I thought I could prevent that as long as I could get Kivi away fast and quietly and he never got a chance to chase him again. I think I have prevented it. I give myself a pat on the back for that. Punishment doesn't gel with my temperament, so having to punish is its own punishment. I haven't had to do it since. I didn't have to hurt him or do anything physically to him beyond holding him so he couldn't keep chasing. I'm not foolish enough to think there was no fallout, but like I said, I have plenty of credit in the piggy bank. Kivi can hack it. I learnt early that he's pretty soft and was prepared for my punishment to be too harsh, but luckily for me it wasn't.

And fear associations with people are very bad. It takes my hare months to warm to someone and sometimes he never really accepts them if they have habitually frightened him. A frightened hare is a hare that isn't thinking and is likely to hurt himself. A frightened hare is reinforcing his own fear reaction. My goal in life is to avoid fear in my hare's. Thank goodness dogs are more resilient to fear!

I'm a criminal justice major, a law and order type, and a big believer in discipline. 

No ****, really? I would never have guessed.  

When Kit forms a strong fear association, sometimes he never gets over it.

And therein lies the rub, which is why it makes more sense not to punish with a fear inducing stimulus.  Maybe even the people who are busy training humans (because like it or not, you are training them - whether by intention, error, or omission) should read "The Fallout of Coercion". 

Thanks for that link.

A couple of points clearly come to mind, echoing a statement made earlier in regard to punishment. The proof is in the pudding. Did the behavior decrease? If yes, then it was a punishment and seemingly effective. Secondly, a punishment, by that definition need not be drastic or scary.

But do we punish a dog for being a dog? Evidently. Let's pretend our dogs are wild animals, and we just observe and do nothing. Well, last time I checked, dogs are not automatically friends with all little critters. In fact, if you are a cotton rat in my back yard, your days are numbered. So, as dogs are individuals, one may like cats or rabbits, and another may not like them, except as lunch, with a side of crab grass. Should I punish a dog for doing what comes naturally? Should I punish him for peeing? As the video in the link points out, you cannot compete with the environment of inducements that are rewarding by offering more deterrent or punishment. You must show why your way is more rewarding. And the dog doesn't speak english. And you must accept the possibility that all the effort may be for not if a certain dog is simply bent toward pursuing the prey. Either make that pursuit a reward which puts it on your cue and likely to only be offered for a reward, or manage the environment. Or make sure the punishment is for the right reasons. Others here have pointed out that they only use a punishment if the dog already knows the behavior and disobeys anyway. Does the dog know, to begin with, that the behavior was wrong in our rules? Then how will they understand the punishment, if it is, indeed a punishment to them?

And the punishment can be effective at the time but not have a lasting effect. I, too, tried neg P in stopping the jumping. That didn't work as well as I wanted it to work. What did work was training "off" with treats. Do it often enough, and it becomes the preferred greeting because it is more rewarding. Just as with other dogs, "belonging" is most rewarding. Each dog is still working for a reward. Dogs do what works. The punishment often only stops at the moment. When the dog learns to change behavior to avoid the aversive, doesn't that become -R?

a big believer in discipline.  Both the type that encourages self-regulation and the type that provides an unpleasant response to a given behavior

yeah, and that's why the justice department doesn't work well to stop crime- because it relies solely on punishment. Everyone drives over the speed limit, tries to cheat on their taxes, steals office supplies from work, because these behaviors are regulated solely by punishment and are self-rewarding. Punishment and threats of punishement simply don't work very well to modify behavior.

I would agree with you, MP. With an added condition of my own. I also believe in capital punishment, even though it is not a deterrent. I believe in capital punishment because it removes an unresolvable danger from society. Some things you just can't fix.

In my previous post, I referred to a link but that link is actually in another thread. Sorry for the confusion on my part.

I have known 3 people that have been in prison, not just jail. One is dead, the other, in for identity theft, did change his ways but manages the situation by staying away from the influences that got him there. Another, who was in for manslaughter, no longer places himself in similar circumstances. Of the three, the one who was in for manslaughter is the most honorable and friendly of the bunch. He will make you laugh so hard your sides will hurt. He will literally give you the shirt off of his back if you need it. Just don't think you can take him on because he will prove you wrong. But he was like that before prison. And he stays out of situations that require such drastic action. But he will do what it takes to defend himself, which is what the initial problem was. So, how did that punishment work? Technically, he was punished wrongly but when all you get is a public pretender, I mean, defender, what do you do?

mudpuppy

yeah, and that's why the justice department doesn't work well to stop crime- because it relies solely on punishment.

No it doesn't.  It provides consequences and rehabilitation in most cases including speeding tickets and domestic assault.  The justice system is more often forcing offenders to attend victim impact panels where they are confronted with the outcome of their offenses.  Shame is not traditionally a great behavior modifier, however, these programs have been shown to reduce recidivism, particularly in the area of drunk driving.

mudpuppy

Everyone drives over the speed limit,

I don't.

mudpuppy

tries to cheat on their taxes,

I don't.

mudpuppy

steals office supplies from work,

I don't.

mudpuppy

because these behaviors are regulated solely by punishment and are self-rewarding.

These behaviors are signs of poor character.  There's something to be said for pride and self-esteem regulating behavior as well.

Tell me, why don't you drive drunk, or do you?  Why don't you murder or assault someone when they pi$$ you off?  It's probably a combination of fear of the consequences as well as being raised with a particular belief or value system and pride that you are not the type of person who would do certain things.  Do you resist telling your boss to F off when they're being a butthead because you fear losing your job or because you are hoping for a raise if you hold your tongue?  The answer is most often a combination of the two.  Positive punishment has its place (IMHO) but it's not a solitary approach.  Neither is positive reinforcement.  Each of the 4 quadrants have their role to play in both human and canine behavior.

BCMixs

Tell me, why don't you drive drunk, or do you?  Why don't you murder or assault someone when they pi$$ you off?  It's probably a combination of fear of the consequences as well as being raised with a particular belief or value system and pride that you are not the type of person who would do certain things. 

Yes and this moral code is something dogs do not have IMO. 

I don't resist telling my boss where to go for fear of losing my job, I do it because I have a little more self respect than that.  I don't speak to people like that in general, never mind the person who has offered me a job, is paying my wages and is helping to train me to further me my career, not to mention being very lenient about time keeping and time off where my son is concerned. 

I don't believe dogs have such a concept of "self respect", but I could be wrong.   

I don't believe "because it's there" is a valid argument for positive punishment.  Just because you can doesn't mean you should. 

Actually, it would seem that much imprisonment is just management. And results vary. DW put a man in prison for aggravated sexual assault, for which he had been charged before. He had also been in prison twice before for aggravated assault and was also under investigation for attempted murder. And various trouble before that. A lot of charges were dropped because people were afraid to testify. The paperwork on him showed his STG status as being associated with the Mexican Mafia, a prison gang that deals in drugs, extortion, and contract murder. A real bad guy. He was paroled once and went back in before the year was out. And now, you know why DW values her privacy and I won't show her pic.

So, when's the punishment going to start working? I know a guy that had a DUI a few years ago. He had to go to AA type classes, interlock on his truck, etc. Now the interlock is off and he drinks, at home, supposedly not driving anywhere while intoxicated. When he was going through the legal process, it cost him every penny he had. About $6,000. I know another person, though not closely, who has had 3 DUI's and still drinks and drives.

I know another person who has wrecked cars while drunk but still will have a few drinks and then drive. When's the punishment going to start working?

Or is it that these are not punishment to the person doing them?

And can we expect dogs to have the same morality and character as a human?

Interesting questions, I think.

 I used to give rides to AA to some people who had lost licenses, and was permitted to attend many of the open meetings rather than wait outside.  If you are given the opportunity to be an observer at these events, it quickly dawns on you that one of the reasons the program works for many people is that they are not judged or punished there.  They are given positive reinforcement for attending, for even one day of sobriety, for going on commitments, and for sharing their stories in the hope of helping others.  Feedback, medallions, help from others, respect.  Something many of them never knew in their families of origin.  Not that that is the case all the time, but most of them drank right through embarrassment, lost jobs, lost families, vehicular homicide, jail, etc., all of which you would think would be +P enough that they would have changed their behavior sooner.

spiritdogs

Feedback, medallions, help from others, respect

I, too, am familiar with AA (and no, I'm not one of the examples I mentioned). Respect is key. There is no way for AA to monitor one's alcohol intake. It is the honor system because only you can decide you have a problem and only you can work through AA. And the reasons for success are self-driven. No one judges another. It is the hardest row to hoe because it's all on you.

But some DUI programs require some kind of awareness training to open your eyes. The friend that spent all of his money trying to stay out of jail had to recall how many drinks he had that night (approx 6) and divide that into the $6,000 it cost him afterward, not counting the bar tab. $1,000 per drink. Not drinking while the interlock was on means that he could drive to work and make money and start to dig himself out of the hole. And perhaps that has worked, sort of. He may not be drinking and then driving. Is the punishment working, yet?

When I was 7, I got spanked, through cotton underwear and authentic dungarees (Navy grade denim) at approximately 40 swats. When it was over, I was black and blue and blistered and peeling. For playing in the dirt and telling the truth. I get paid to play in the dirt and I still tell the truth. Is the punishment working? Or am I doing what is personally and financially rewarding?

Oh for heaven's sake, people. Don't bring the justice system into this when I know from personal experience what most of you think about certain offences against innocent people. Dogs and people.... if a dog could understand the concept of crime maybe we could compare them. But as dogs and all other non-human animals, presumably, do whatever pushes their happy buttons whenever the opportunity presents itself and never think anything of it, I don't think it's meaningful to discuss the justice system, as much as I personally think it's a big sewrage tank designed to hold the poo of society (what gives anyone the right to declare someone else the poo of society in the first place??).

Anyway, I digress. Punishment can and does work. Penny taught Kivi Tarro that the car was a bad place for him to be by biting him everytime he got in it. Fortunately, Kivi is less prone to car sickness than Pyry, so we were able to reverse the association by getting Penny out where she couldn't bite him and showering him with treats, cuddles and praise when he gets in on his own. Pyry, on the other hand, is 6 years old and still loathes the car and won't get in on his own.

What it comes down to is whether you want to play around with something that can work so well, and yet plays on negative emotions in a dog. And not just any negative emotion, but fear, which is an extremely powerful negative emotion. Considering it's pretty hard to know just how much you need to punish and considering there are so many variables, like with Kit who one day might engage a dog that wants to play in a game of chasies and the next totally freak out when the same dog wants to play... well, I'm a zoologist and I'm not that confident about reading my animals.  

corvus

Punishment can and does work. Penny taught Kivi Tarro that the car was a bad place for him to be by biting him everytime he got in it.

And I accept your statement that Penny curbed Kivi with a bite or two or 10. Is that the punishment that worked? And can you bite Kivi Tarro in the same manner? I don't say that to be cheeky, just considering all the conditions of the successful punishment. A bite from Penny, another dog in a certain way with perhaps, a certain social position and type of personality. No doubt, delivered with a certain intensity and speed. It stopped him from getting in the car, so it sounds like a successfull punishment. And the bite could be non-painful. But can we assume that a dog will generalize that an ersatz bite with a human hand means the same thing? As someone else pointed out, a punishment can have the effect of a reinforcer because it's still attention, which is reinforcing. Sometimes, I think what a human views as a punishment becomes a cue. The dog has become accustomed to that style of attention from the human.

Remember that even a rat in a maze may find several dead ends or punishments but he will find the reward in the end, which is what he has been seeking, all along. And we could liken corrections to dead ends in a maze. Just remember that no one puts a rat in a maze with no reward, unless they are sadists. The rat will either escape the maze or shut down. Now, which seems more efficient? Let the rat bump around and eventually he will figure it out by process of elimination, if his mind doesn't shut down to begin with? Or, scent a trail for his nose to follow that leads directly to the prize? We can't stop all punishments. Neither can we deny the power of reward.

Remember that even a rat in a maze may find several dead ends or punishments but he will find the reward in the end, which is what he has been seeking, all along. And we could liken corrections to dead ends in a maze. Just remember that no one puts a rat in a maze with no reward, unless they are sadists. The rat will either escape the maze or shut down. Now, which seems more efficient? Let the rat bump around and eventually he will figure it out by process of elimination, if his mind doesn't shut down to begin with? Or, scent a trail for his nose to follow that leads directly to the prize? We can't stop all punishments. Neither can we deny the power of reward.

There is much power in absence of a reward.  Initially, it makes the organism, rat or dog, try a new behavior to get the reward.  The object, in dog training, is to make the exercise simple enough that the dog will try a new behavior, but not so complex that the dog stops offering alternative behavior (my definition of shut down).  So, if you are trying to train a dog to come, and you have him on a thirty foot lead... here's how the scenario can play out.  You say "come" and he doesn't.  You gently reel him in, but instead of a reward (tripe, roast beef, cheese), he only gets to smell the reward, but not get it.  You then let him get distracted again (for the first few minutes you may not be able to get rid of him) and call again.  Dog learns that getting to you may mean a reward.  Do that often enough and he'll get to you every time.  Then, start spacing out the rewards, or mix them up a bit.  Once it's roast beef, once it's a tennis ball, another time, it's getting to go for a walk or a ride.  Intermittent reinforcement, where the dog is only rewarded occasionally, keeps the behavior strong.  Before you know it, you have a dog that comes any time you call.  It's so simple I'm amazed that more people don't quit refusing to use food as a motivator.  What do you think you get if you punish a dog for not coming???