How About Dog IQ?

I think it's a combination of the dog's temperament, how the dog is trained, and why/how/how hard the dog is corrected.  The most operant dog I know and have ever seen, which also happens to be the dog with the most flashy and correct obedience I have seen personally, does wear an ecollar and prong collar (though he was not initially trained with these tools).  But I've also seen someone who has no idea what he's doing basically shut down his young dog and the dog always has a look of avoidance during training.  There are huge differences in both the dogs and the handlers.  In one case the handler is very experienced, built a positive foundation with the dog so the dog understood how to get what he wants and in the other case the handler has his first dog and is expecting the moon from a tiny puppy so the dog is always confused and doesn't have any fun during training.

To me, dog IQ would be how "operant" the dog is.  Nikon is my most operant dog, but he also has the most drive to get the rewards (more food and prey drive than Coke and Kenya).  Say I'm training Kenya (all positive) and I step on her toe by accident (but pretend it's like a physical punishment), she takes that personally and kinda shuts down for a while.  If I step on Nikon's toes - which I do all the time b/c he is always crowding me - he doesn't even notice.  He is the most hyper and energetic, but he also offers behaviors the quickest and most consistently.  I've had Kenya for a few years now and if she's really excited to see me it might still take her a minute or so to calm down before I will acknowledge her, but Nikon sees me come in the door and goes flat into his down immediately b/c he knows that is what gets him praise and the release to go outside.  If I am standing in the kitchen eating food he does a little routine of sit, down, roll over, speak, come to front, etc and will try anything he can think of to earn a bite.  The other dogs will sit there and beg for a minute and then give up and wander off.  He gets corrected in training, the others do not.  But he has far more drive to get the reward.  Also with him I've trained him since 7 weeks and built in the positive foundation, rewarded him for figuring things out and being operant, rewarded the "default" behaviors I want him to offer, but the others I got as mature adults and did positive training but lost that window of opportunity for really building in the drive.  Kenya is so affected by environment and lacking in confidence, she perceives things as corrections or punishments that are accidents (me bumping something or making a loud noise, etc).  Coke is less affected by those things and has more food drive, so he is more operant than her for food rewards but not nearly as much as Nikon.

I've never been big on "IQ" tests, however, I can easily see, and have witnessed, how the type of training used with a dog will determine how that dog can learn in the future. Obviously it all starts with puppyhood and experience, and getting the puppy the most enriched, valuable puppyhood it can have. There is so much that causes what people consider "intelligence" in dogs, that really is just time-determined learning periods in a dog's life.

However, I have clearly seen the differences between dogs taught with shaping, dogs taught with luring, and dogs taught with compulsion. The difference I've seen is crystal clear, although I'm not sure I can call the actual difference "level of intelligence". I would be more likely to call it something else - but at this time I'm not sure what. I would possibly even just call it a higher level of creative thinking, leading to making it easier to learn new things? I say that because I, too, have seen some working dogs trained with mostly compulsion, who on doing things by request, seem pretty simple and make  bad shapers...but when left to their own devices in what they work at, are highly intelligent (working Labs, herding dogs actually herding, etc, terriers entering a predator frame of mind, etc).

So I don't think you can claim the level of intelligence solely on training methods, however there is clear evidence that puppies trained to be creative from a young age do develop more synapses (brain connections) than those dogs who aren't trained at all, or are trained in a "you do as I say" fashion. But it's more complex than just training methods. I see the difference, though, even in my own dogs, in comparing those taught to be creative thinkers from 8 weeks of age or earlier, and those who have been only introduced to a clicker as an adult. I see too many differences to be able to discount it - there is credibility there in the evidence.  

Here we get into definations again.

I consider the "eh eh" a correction.  Granted it is typically followed by a redirect, but there are times when  it is not.  Sometimes a sharp LEAVE IT is needed.  That's a correction, no?

Maybe I just am a slacker,but I consider my dogs to be pretty well trained.  Still, they are DOGS and it's instinctive for them to pick up that juicy morsal of squished squirrel, or at least to want to sniff it.  For that, there is a correction.

Yet, overall, I still prefer to tell my dogs what I want and expect them to do, rather than what I don't want them to do.  And that's the way I raised my kids.  It makes sense to me that a child who is allowed to make choices based on gentle but firm guidance,  instead of being beaten into submission, is going to score higher on an arbitrary test.  Its logical to me that these children have learned to make choices, have more confidence in themselves to make the correct choice and are maybe more relaxed in a testing situation.  More self confident?  With a situation where a child is spanked, the PARENT is the one making all the choices, deciding what is right and wrong and not allowing the child the room to grow mentally.

But, how does one equate 'corrections' to spanking?  Unless of course you mean physical corrections?

Kim_MacMillan

However, I have clearly seen the differences between dogs taught with shaping, dogs taught with luring, and dogs taught with compulsion. The difference I've seen is crystal clear, although I'm not sure I can call the actual difference "level of intelligence". I would be more likely to call it something else - but at this time I'm not sure what. I would possibly even just call it a higher level of creative thinking, leading to making it easier to learn new things? I say that because I, too, have seen some working dogs trained with mostly compulsion, who on doing things by request, seem pretty simple and make  bad shapers...but when left to their own devices in what they work at, are highly intelligent (working Labs, herding dogs actually herding, etc, terriers entering a predator frame of mind, etc).

So I don't think you can claim the level of intelligence solely on training methods, however there is clear evidence that puppies trained to be creative from a young age do develop more synapses (brain connections) than those dogs who aren't trained at all, or are trained in a "you do as I say" fashion. But it's more complex than just training methods. I see the difference, though, even in my own dogs, in comparing those taught to be creative thinkers from 8 weeks of age or earlier, and those who have been only introduced to a clicker as an adult. I see too many differences to be able to discount it - there is credibility there in the evidence.  

I would never teach a dog using corrections. It's not fair to punish a dog when they haven't been taught any better.

A handler might use corrections or compulsion or punishment or whatever with a dog when they also shape behaviours, use markers, positive reinforcement etc. It doesn't have to be one or the other. I would never personally discount any form of training because each dog is so different and you never know when what works with one dog won't fly with another. When it comes to training methods, success is all about how you use them, and the dog you are using them on.

glenmar

Yet, overall, I still prefer to tell my dogs what I want and expect them to do, rather than what I don't want them to do.  And that's the way I raised my kids.  It makes sense to me that a child who is allowed to make choices based on gentle but firm guidance,  instead of being beaten into submission, is going to score higher on an arbitrary test.  Its logical to me that these children have learned to make choices, have more confidence in themselves to make the correct choice and are maybe more relaxed in a testing situation.  More self confident?  With a situation where a child is spanked, the PARENT is the one making all the choices, deciding what is right and wrong and not allowing the child the room to grow mentally.

But, how does one equate 'corrections' to spanking?  Unless of course you mean physical corrections?

As kids we were never raised by being beaten into submission as a way of teaching us appropriate behaviour. But when we knew the rules, and knowingly did something wrong, we were punished (the punishment would vary). 

At the end of the day, there are far too many differences between kids and dogs and the way they process and think and function in society to really be able to compare them, and the way the learn. Kids grow to have advanced reasoning ability, dogs don't. Kids grow to have morals, dogs don't, etc.

Yeah huski I think you are right on.

And Kim I totally agree on the significance of puppyhood.  It's more than just a socialization period, but I really do believe that how the foundation work is done (or not done) plays a huge role in what will work/not work with the dog later on and how the dog responds to rewards and corrections.

I was raised in the "spare the rod, spoil the child" era.  Children were to be seen but not heard....the whole nine yards.  To me, that sort of attitude stifles the development of a child.

But, how does it relate to dogs?  If we are comparing the IQ's of children who are spanked to those who are not spanked, well, my conclusion has to be that the corrections referred to regarding dogs, must be physical corrections?

I think they would have to be pretty harsh physical corrections.  After all what does spanking do?  Makes the kid never want to get spanked again, right?  It's not like a "hey" or "eh eh" or leash tap where you are stopping and redirecting the dog, spanking makes you not do what you did again b/c you fear getting spanked.  If that's how people are honestly training dogs then yeah, I can very well see why the dog would shut down and never offer any behaviors.

Liesje

And Kim I totally agree on the significance of puppyhood.  It's more than just a socialization period, but I really do believe that how the foundation work is done (or not done) plays a huge role in what will work/not work with the dog later on and how the dog responds to rewards and corrections.

Totally agree with you here.

There is so much more to it than socialisation, though I do think it's extremely important. It's really important to lay a good foundation.

I think when people talk about corrections and punishments, they often tend to think of the extremes and the 'old ways' of doing things, methods which many reputable trainers who do understand and may use punishment or corrections today don't utilise.

In one of the other threads a poster was giving the example of the way the down command was taught - stomp on the leash forcing the dog to down as way of teaching them what you wanted. My dog has great fast downs and she was never forced into them. She loves doing it and will practically throw herself on the ground when I give her the command word. She has never been raised using 100% positive methods and I don't think that has impacted on her intellect, willingness and happiness to work or her level of drive.

Yep.

I think that for most dogs, positive only their entire life works.  However I do not believe the reverse to be true: I think that for NO dog, negative only will work.  I am not against corrections or negative reinforcement but I do not believe that you can effectively train and communicate with a dog based on coercion and punishment.  To make that relevant to the OP, a parent raising their child based on spanking is going to end up in court and have their child removed. 

But for many dogs, there is no reason that you can't do something later on that differs from the foundation.  Like in the other thread I was saying that I train all my dogs differently from each other, but I also change up my methods even when training the same dog.  I use various methods depending on the skill, whether I am looking for precision or speed/drive, where the dog is in his age/development, etc.  To me it is more important that one takes these things into consideration than what specific method they end up using.  The reason I go to the trainers that I respect and pay for lessons is because I see them training each dog differently, with different tools, a different plan, different homework for the owner.  I would never go to a trainer or club that only allowed one method, or required one type of collar, etc.

studies like this only serve to confuse me...LOL.

I think I agree with those that say probably best not to read too much in, humanize the dog, etc. Comparing a kid to other kids intelligence wise is just pointless to me, because so much of how you learn and what you learn is later in life...and IQ seems to matter not at all really, in the real world unless you are at the extremes. IQ seems to have very little to do with real life...happiness and productivity...some uber smart people are miserable and do nothing to help the world, and some not so smart are happy and productive members of our society. Go figure.

Liesje

I think they would have to be pretty harsh physical corrections.  After all what does spanking do?  Makes the kid never want to get spanked again, right?  It's not like a "hey" or "eh eh" or leash tap where you are stopping and redirecting the dog, spanking makes you not do what you did again b/c you fear getting spanked.  If that's how people are honestly training dogs then yeah, I can very well see why the dog would shut down and never offer any behaviors.

I'm glad you added that to the discussion - I'm not so sure that some kids care whether they are spanked again.  Most probably do.  That kind of fits in with what you were saying about the differences in your dogs.  Just because I don't use physical correction on my dogs doesn't mean that I don't perceive the differences in them based on environmental stimuli.  For example, Sequoyah would bounce off a trash can on the way to getting her frisbee, and never pay much mind.  Sioux, on the other hand, lacks predatory drive and gives up on the tennis ball after one bounce and would never in a thousand years do battle with a trash can lol.

I also agree with Kim about the puppies and creative thinking.  In dogs that are trained with compulsion, no matter how mild, you are still building obedience from the perspective of inhibiting behavior that is not the behavior you want.  Others may be shaping behavior they want, and not paying so much attention to the behaviors they don't want, because they will eventually extinguish in favor of the desired behavior.  The process is, however, different for the dog, too.  He gets to offer behavior in the hope that he will be rewarded, which is creative.  Another dog will be stifled from offering behavior so that he doesn't get the correction, which may be very obedient, but does not reinforce the creative aspect.  It is true, as she stated, that the same dog might be ever so clever left to his own devices - and that may speak to his natural intelligence, or simply to the fact that dogs know darn right well when the human is attached, or at lease close enough to act.

I don't have as much problem with parallels to human behavior as some folks do, because I think that, up to a certain point, mammals pretty much learn in the same ways.  Granted, there is a higher reasoning capacity in humans, but I'm not sure that there isn't a similar effect on intelligence that is dependent upon many factors in dogs as in humans. that is dependent upon the behavioral input that the organism receives  from others. 

spiritdogs

Liesje

I think they would have to be pretty harsh physical corrections.  After all what does spanking do?  Makes the kid never want to get spanked again, right?  It's not like a "hey" or "eh eh" or leash tap where you are stopping and redirecting the dog, spanking makes you not do what you did again b/c you fear getting spanked.  If that's how people are honestly training dogs then yeah, I can very well see why the dog would shut down and never offer any behaviors.

 

I'm glad you added that to the discussion - I'm not so sure that some kids care whether they are spanked again.  Most probably do.  That kind of fits in with what you were saying about the differences in your dogs. 

Exactly.  Some kids probably get spanked a lot and still act up.  I on the other hand remember very clearly the last time I was hit, I remember what I did and I never did anything like that again.

We could probably draw another parallel here on the difference between a real punishment and a "nagging" correction.  Like the kids I see in stores who are just acting up and backtalking to their parents the entire time, disrupting everyone, and all the parents say is "I'm gonna whoop you...." but they never actually DO anything, they never take the child home, use a time out, remove a privilege, just empty threats like giving a hard dog little collar pops over and over and over.  And then I look at my parents who did not use much punishment that I can remember other than the one time I remember getting hit, but for some reason, the way I was raised I just *knew* that they were in charge and was never even tempted to disrespect them.  Maybe it was because, like training dogs, if I was good, I got praised and won more freedoms (more computer time, no curfews, etc), rather than just getting threatened or getting spanked for being bad.

I tend to question studies like these, because behavior input (external influences like socio-economic status, etc) is so different for each human, and comparing humans to dogs still doesn't quite fit for me, esp in this context.

My sisters and I were all spanked, and even physically abused by our alcoholic father - meanwhile, we all have genius IQs.  Oh, and we all have been productive people who have "stayed out of trouble", ie, offered positive behavior - no arrests, no drug problems, etc, etc.  Our step-sisters, who were not hit, have average IQs, and have had arrests, drug problems, etc.  Clearly, we're not in any study, but here's where I have to believe that genetics plays a bigger role in IQ than anything, enhanced by environment, of course, but your base level stems from your genetics, IMO.

Likewise, I think human (and dog) IQ is not the same as behavior.  Measuring if a dog will offer extraneous/novel behaviors may seem like some to be a measure of IQ, but I don't.