Jean Donaldson training video?

This was posted a little while back.  Too bizarre! 

That was bizarre. She is using the behavior as a reward (premack principle). If she obeys, she gets to continue this behavior. A behavior I discouraged in Shadow and it fell by the wayside once he was neutered. In fact, I would say that neutering took care of most of that urge and training off with rewards helped cement the value of the off command. Then, again, I've disagreed with her technique before. Specifcally, her use of the Gentle Leader, allowing the dog to helicopter in mid-air with that equipment was, IMO, an improper use of the tool. That doesn't mean that I think everyone should incorporate corrections to balance against Jean's weirdness. But I've also disagreed with Dunbar's words in a commercial for the GL wherein he said he didn't bother with anymore obedience training for the walk with his dog since he was happy with the GL. I felt that such corrective equipment can be necessary until training is in place. And I also know that some dogs will not get the gist of further training an such a corrective collar as that or anything else, such as a prong, might be necessary. But I thought it irresponsible to say that equipment precludes the need for further training. But I digress.

I'm not sure what the point of this clip is and I'm not sure an explanation would help. Someone in the blog pointed out actor dogs that must hump on command and I did see a movie where a dog does that to an actor. But it's the other way around in reality. The behavior is put on cue with another reward.

Well, I've always said...a reinforcer is something the DOG wants.  Apparently, Jean's dog finds that behavior very reinforcing.  Funny, I think there are probably a lot of humans that do, too.  Anyway, I'm not that shocked - it just seems that she has an odd sense of humor.  As Karen Pryor always says, "It's just behavior".  Therefore, it can be modified.   When Jean is sick of having her leg humped, she certainly has enough skill to train a different, if equally shocking, behavior.

.

JackieG

This was posted a little while back.  Too bizarre! 

Do you have a link?

Honestly, there have been times I have wondered why certain OC trainers haven't explored this "reward" before. Food and sex. Great instant gratification, but the downside is real life requires patience and social boundaries along with personal rewards.

I would no more manipulate another being in a social context with food than I would with sex, as I find it dishonest.

But then, maybe I'm the exception to the rule because I've seen plenty of mothers manipulate their children with treats and women who manipulate men with sex. Does this bring about a deeper relationship through trust, communication, and understanding? No. But if all you care about is the resulting behavior, I'm sure Skinner would be proud.

If you've read her books, you'd know why she teaches this. It's not about manipulation--it's about teaching a behavior on cue and then changing it on cue. It's about learning cues, commands, follow-through, etc. Quite frankly, it's really no different than yanking my dog for not sitting when told to--just a lot easier on the dog (to go Donaldson's way).

Angelique

I would no more manipulate another being in a social context with food than I would with sex, as I find it dishonest

People, at least those of us who get out and go to work, get "manipulated" all the time. It's called working and getting paid. I can't make any money just sitting around waiting patiently to yank Shadow's collar, even though I know that a yank and a vocal sound is supposed to tell him everything I want and is "so much better" than treats and marking. Yes, I find Jean's behavior odd. That doesn't mean that OC isn't working and that I will abandon the use of treat training. You equate food with sex for the purpose of your statement, which is another slam on reward training. Clever, yet you do not persuade.

All training is manipulation and or taking advantage of the trainees natural drives.  You train a horse to respond to leg pressure by manipulating them via their natural desire to escape pressure.  Time outs for children tend to work well because the child does not like to be separated out from the rest of the family/his friends and made to stop having fun--therefore a parent manipulates the child into good behavior via his/her desire to be included.    

I would no more manipulate another being in a social context with food than I would with sex, as I find it dishonest.

luvmyswissy

I would no more manipulate another being in a social context with food than I would with sex, as I find it dishonest.

  Really? You've never told your dog to sit and then threw him something from your plate?  Have you ever told your kids to finish dinner or they get no dessert?

Nope. I don't feed my dog off my plate when I'm eating. With kids, finishing dinner for dessert seems more like a fair negotiation than a manipulation, IMO.

Remember I said in a social context. It's not that I don't use food as a reward, and I think luring during training a new task does fall into the manipulation zone. It's more about personal choice in when, where, how, and why I choose to use these rewards.

If I use food to teach tricks, tasks, or specific behaviors, the dog knows I have a treat and they know they will get it when they do what I want them to do. It's a fair and understood trade. No hidden treats in my pocket which the dog might get, or might not.

If the dog is misbehaving in a social situation, such as going to jump on a guest, I will deal with the behavior in a social way. There will be no treat for good behavior in this situation. Social manners are expected without food manipulation.

I don't see communication and expectations of proper social behavior regarding another being to be the same thing as the (food or sex) manipulation of another being. Again, this is in a social context.

Maybe it's a fine line, but that's just my perspective.

Angelique

Do you have a link?

http://community.dog.com/forums/t/87266.aspx

Jean Donaldson:

1.- Has too much free time on her hands

or

2.- She is bored

or

3.- She just ran out of new ideas

Angelique

If the dog is misbehaving in a social situation, such as going to jump on a guest, I will deal with the behavior in a social way. There will be no treat for good behavior in this situation. Social manners are expected without food manipulation.

And?  I don't get your point.  We also train with food here, but jumping on guests is not allowed.  So?  There appears to be the underlying assumtpion that if you use food to train, you always use food to train, which is clearly not the case - you are an example of this.  Surely you don't think you are the only one? 

For me this has zero to do with whether it's right or wrong (morally) to use food in social situations.  It is because:

a) I am not actually in the habit of carrying around dog training treats all the time on a permanent basis, which means that food is not usually AVAILABLE as a reward., and

b) The reward is what the DOG wants, NOT what I  want to give him.  So if he want;s petting, attention, praise and social inclusion, THAT is the reward in that situation.  Why introduce another reward, when the dog is clearly indicating what he wants there and then?

(OTOH if the dog was FEARFUL of the guests adnd didn't WANT to be near them or interact, I might use food to classically condition the dog - when people appear, so does yummy food, ergo people appearing can actually be a happy thing.  But I digress.)

Angelique

I don't see communication and expectations of proper social behavior regarding another being to be the same thing as the (food or sex) manipulation of another being. Again, this is in a social context.

 How are the expectations communicated? I'm willing to bet that they could also be described as a form of manipulation.  Most training is.  And any time yu are looking to change a behaviour - whether that's teaching something new in a "training session" or applying tweaks here and there in every day life - it still comes down to changing behaviour and the same boring principals apply - the dog does what works.

Angelique

I don't see communication and expectations of proper social behavior regarding another being to be the same thing as the (food or sex) manipulation of another being. Again, this is in a social context.

Ever people watched at a bar?  Especially the dance club type places?  There is a TON of communication of social expectations going on there under the surface.  Guys buy girls drinks--dance with them, but need to be careful not to be too pushy, try to say things that walk the fine line between flirtation and offensiveness, etc.

Why?

For the reward of course--sex!