What are we "correcting"?

 I think did understand what you meant. It's much like correcting a young child who says something innapropriate. I work with a boy whose family is from India, thus, they kids learned Hindi first, and English second. His little sister is 5, and being 5, she asks me lots of questions. She doesn't mean to ask me something that seems rude, she simply wants to know, and that's the best combination of words she can come up with to ask. She isn't yelled at for this, she's simply told that the way she asked the question was rude, and told, or someone else asks the question in a way tht isn't rude. If we yelled at her every time she asked a question that came out the wrong way, she might just stop asking questions all together. Much the same, if we yelled at a dog every time he did something we perceived at rude, he would likely stop doing that thing. Problem is, we may not want to get rid of the behavior all together, ie I wanted my dogs to bark if a stranger is attempting to enter my home, I do not want them to bark when I enter my home. There are other things I want the dog to do, but not in the form he does it in. I might like him to greet me at the door when I come home, but I would like him to sit, and not to jump on me.

By pure defintion of terms though, we are hoping to punish the undesired behavior. We do want to reduce the likelihood of that behavior occurring under those circumstances, or at all. We are also reinforcing, or rather, hoping we are reinforcing, the behavior we want to see in that situation. However, if the kid, the dog, or whoever, does not know that he or she is supposed to do some behavior in a situation, he or she will not ever experience reinforcement for doing it in the given situation. If we take the dog aside, and say, hey, you're supposed to do this, not that, we allow him the chance to practice the behavior we want, and presumably, experience reinforcement for that behavior. Yes, each practice of the incorrect behavior will make it more likely to happen (all other things aside). However, if we know that under these circumstances, the dog will do this thing we don't want, we can preempt that. We can see that situation coming, and before the dog does what he would typically do, we could tell him what we want him to do. I'd give an example, but I'm too tired to do it right now.

griffinej5

If we yelled at her every time she asked a question that came out the wrong way, she might just stop asking questions all together.

Great point, and this is what happens to many dogs if they are always being stopped by correction.  They learn that it's safer to just sit there.  It's one reason why "crossover dogs" (those that try clicker training after having been trained by another method) don't, at first, offer novel behaviors as freely as the clicker savvy dogs that have had no correction (not that we are permissive, we merely shape alternative behavior, and allow inappropriate behavior to extinguish when it is never rewarded).  I have students actually get frustrated with their dogs for this, but those that persist are usually surprised at how their dogs eventually begin to like training after a while.

I heartily agree with your post, and hope others will take the time to read and re-read what you have said more eloquently than I apparently did;-)  We are not trying to rob dogs of being dogs, just to adjust some of their natural behavior to fit more with human expectations.  So, it's better, IMO, to do as you suggest - teach dogs to sit, rather than jump up, when greeting a human.  That's more amenable to allowing the dog its own species dignity than it is to simply correct the jumping up, but give no alternative that is rewarded by a nice greeting (or a biscuit once in a while) on the part of the human.

 I hope to be able to explain things in ways most people understand, as it's a part of my job to be able to explain things so that the parents of the kids I work with will have a clue of what I am talking about.

Now, how many of you, if every time you made a post here, a bunch of us called you an idiot, would continue to post here? Don't argue and tell me you would keep coming back for more, because I think that would be lying. Don't tell me we wouldn't do it, because you know there are some forums where all newbies are essentially treated that way. Not necessarily called idiots, but might as well be. The rules here though, might be that all posts end in . You might never figure this out on your own, because this rule only exists here, but if someone were kind enough to tell you, it'd be a simple fix. You might find it silly, but if you liked this forum enough, you'd adopt our custom.

I just figured out how to put smileys in my post and this seemed a perfect spot for one!  Yeah, I am challenged that way, among others.

Is a dog's psyche so fragile that they can't even take a verbal correction?

some yes, some no. That's not the point. The point is that "corrections" are not very effective in training dogs. There are better ways to train dogs and resorting to "corrections", while very human, is very ineffective. It's like using a shovel instead of a snowblower to clear your driveway- it works, but man is it ineffective and slow and hard work  in comparison to other techniques.

griffinej5

She isn't yelled at for this, she's simply told that the way she asked the question was rude, and told, or someone else asks the question in a way tht isn't rude.

  Some might say that the child is corrected.  Her action has literally been corrected.... one behaviour gently discouraged and the correct behaviour shown or explained.  Not everyone who uses corrections, or uses the word correction, condones or practises, yelling at dogs.....

That is a most eloquent post. And many are turned off by the word punishment, because of other connotations. Correction sounds nicer but it is, mostly, stopping a wrong thing in order to train for the right thing.

If one can reinforce the right thing to begin with, there is a chance that the wrong thing will extinguish. And, importantly, the dog must know what it is that you asked or commanded.

And much of how people define something is by how they feel about it. In a noisy or chaotic situation, I will give a command in a low, loud manner. I am most specifically not hollering at him. I am, however, speaking in a tone and range that he physically hears. A softer, lighter tone might not be heard in the midst of confusion and noise. For him, the low, louder tone gets through the melee. And has nothing to do with correction or punishment. In fact, the command is usually one trained with reinforcement.

I don't mind the term correction. To me it's just a term that means we'd prefer other behavior.

I prefer to think of the relationship as more guardian or even parental (not to confuse dogs with kids). There's some natural behaviors that need to change in order to live in polite society safely and without offending people or endangering themselves.

A child's natural behavior is to poop their pants and hit other kids when they take their toys. Would children grow out of this with no direction? A dog has natural puppy behaviors to soil in the house and play bite. I don't mind if it's called a correction to get them to not bite us, (but that it's perfectly OK to do that with other dogs in play). I do mind how it's done.

The two dogs I got at pretty young ages with little training do display more complex thought processes than the dog I got as a well behaved four year old. I tend to believe the method of training made the difference.