Jump to content
BC Boards

Has Cesar turned over a new leaf?


Recommended Posts

I would agree there- that would be rather annoying to any dog! To address my dog when she has deliberately done something, um, not acceptable- I find my approach and silence works best. And, no, I don't beat my dog.

 

LMAO! I love it! There are several people in my area that live and breathe Cesar. And I can immediately tell who they are. They are generally the meek, mild, soft-spoken dog owners who do not want to yell at their dogs. Instead, they go, "TSSST" (sounds like a sharp "psst" without the "p") while jabbing their dog with their finger. I can't think of anything more annoying to do to a dog. Talk about nagging! Of course it doesn't work, and the dogs continue to do whatever it was they were doing before. And the owner does it again. "TSSST!"

 

I love it when I take their dogs into the round pen with a few sheep, and when it comes time for me to catch the dog, I hear the owner outside the pen doing the ol' "TSSST!" thing. I refer to it as "Cesar-Herding" (think "clicker-herding"). Now imagine an open handler sending their dog on an 800 yard outrun, blowing a lie down whistle at the top, the dog blowing the handler off, and the handler spitting the whistle out of their mouth, cupping their mouth with their hands, and going "TSSSSSST!" as loud as they can! LMAO!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 179
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The whole problem with the Malamute is that Cesar doesn't understand squat about classical counterconditioning and is trying to work with this dog when the dog is already highly aroused and reacting to another male dog.

 

. . .

 

When you are dealing with a dog like this malamute you start at the subthreshhold level - you have the dog far enough away that he won't react to the other male dog and reward for the calm behaviour. . . .

 

This is a very good point.

 

It would be interesting to see a TV show do a "before and after" of a dog like the Malamute, and show the trainer working with the dog subthreshold to teach the dog to behave calmly and appropriately, and then integrate the dog back into the presence of the trigger slowly after the groundwork had been done in another context to illustrate that principle.

 

Working the dog subthreshold is a bit less dramatic, but it could make for very good television if it were presented in an interesting way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, it depends on the situation and dog. Some dogs need extra help in figuring out what to do instead of the behavior you don't want. Or at least, that's what I found with my dogs.

 

After reading through this post I found this interesting because I used to try this with Chesney when he was a puppy. Then it got to the point that either I wasn't very good at doing this with my dog or he just wasn't that kind of dog. So after thinking about it, I would just simply tell him what was wrong and let him think of something right. I wouldn't tell him it was right but just let him be. If he was wrong I would let him know. He sure thinks through things a lot better now and is very capable of problem solving some difficult situations.

 

Could it be that you have conditioned your dogs to look for you for every right answer instead of letting them think it through themselves?

 

I just thought that point was interesting.

 

Otherwise I like what Cesar does. He doesn't put up with the crap these people's dogs are getting away with and of course the dogs are going to be pouty and upset about their new rules, until they understand what is REALLY expected of them and how they are to behave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this is just a matter of semantics or something. When I ask a dog to stop doing something that's annoying, I don't redirect it toward anything else (.e., "watch me" or something like that). The dog can choose some other thing, and as long as that other thing isn't annoying, then I won't correct it again or really care exactly what it's doing. Some folks would call that "replacing inappropriate behavior with appropriate behavior" as above. But I don't really see it as "replacing" because *I* am not directing some other behavior, I'm just saying "Stop it," and letting the dog choose to do something else (even if that something else is nothing at all). At any rate, I haven't done anything but say "Stop it" (figuratively)--the dog is doing the choosing of what other thing (or nothing) it will

 

Yup.

A

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading through this post I found this interesting because I used to try this with Chesney when he was a puppy. Then it got to the point that either I wasn't very good at doing this with my dog or he just wasn't that kind of dog. So after thinking about it, I would just simply tell him what was wrong and let him think of something right. I wouldn't tell him it was right but just let him be. If he was wrong I would let him know. He sure thinks through things a lot better now and is very capable of problem solving some difficult situations.

 

Could it be that you have conditioned your dogs to look for you for every right answer instead of letting them think it through themselves?

 

I just thought that point was interesting.

 

Otherwise I like what Cesar does. He doesn't put up with the crap these people's dogs are getting away with and of course the dogs are going to be pouty and upset about their new rules, until they understand what is REALLY expected of them and how they are to behave.

 

Modifying behaviour problems like this Malamute isn't the same is getting the dog to figure out that jumping on you gets him nothing and sitting politely in front of you will. WIth dogs like this malamute you have to work to change their attitude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to chuckle when I see people say they want to be kind, yet they want to draw out the pressure they put on their dog, and the stress their dog experiences by not fitting in and having to be "managed." I handle spoiled, aggressive, and fearful dogs all the time and I really enjoy reaching that point in training when the dog is relaxed and understands the limits.

 

The dog then also understands that he's free to do whatever he wants, and trusts that I will inform him, in a fair manner, when he's reached the "boundaries of grace" to paraphrase a Don McCaig expression that is a favorite of mine. No head halters, no leashes, no long drawn out desensitization sessions where the limits of stress are constantly approached but never resolved - just a quick communication that aggressive behavior is uacceptable. I trust the dog to find the behavior which is most comfortable for him to replace it.

 

It puts the power in the hands of the dog, instead of "taking away his mind" as a famous clinician is known for saying.

 

Had he given a correction at that point (which it seemed to me he wanted to), it would have been very unfair to the dog, who was simply doing what made sense in the early stages of a learning process.

 

A fair correction is rarely permanently harmful. It may be ineffective, but it is the dog himself who will tell you if that is the case. One thing about "classical conditioning" based methods that is something to be watched carefully, is that it encourages the handler to be rather busy with theories and overthinking things, rather than simply judging the effectiveness of an approach by the feedback the dog will give you. It leads the handler into errors of judgment like, "Well, that dog looks relaxed and is very open to communication from the handler, but the way it got that way was damaging and surely no good will come of it."

 

Dogs don't fake emotions. If they are relaxed, they really are relaxed and thinking - and most importantly, trainable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this is just a matter of semantics or something. When I ask a dog to stop doing something that's annoying, I don't redirect it toward anything else (.e., "watch me" or something like that). The dog can choose some other thing, and as long as that other thing isn't annoying, then I won't correct it again or really care exactly what it's doing. Some folks would call that "replacing inappropriate behavior with appropriate behavior" as above. But I don't really see it as "replacing" because *I* am not directing some other behavior, I'm just saying "Stop it," and letting the dog choose to do something else (even if that something else is nothing at all). At any rate, I haven't done anything but say "Stop it" (figuratively)--the dog is doing the choosing of what other thing (or nothing) it will do.

 

I think this is a pretty common theme among those of us training our dogs in stockwork. I wrote an article about just this thing last week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Modifying behaviour problems like this Malamute isn't the same is getting the dog to figure out that jumping on you gets him nothing and sitting politely in front of you will. WIth dogs like this malamute you have to work to change their attitude.

 

I have not seen this particular episode but I pretty much watch CM when I get out of school everyday because I actually find the show entertaining and usually there isn't much else on, but you could certainly apply what I said before to pretty much all situations where the dog is acting improperly you just match the punishment with the crime. You make the wrong choice (acting aggressively) VERY unappealing giving the dog the choice to pick a less offensive behavior, if they choose poorly then they suffer the consequences, yet they are free to choose how to act a second time and if they still choose wrong the consequences are more sever for a second offense and increase until I get my point across. Its just a battle of wills, yet also helping the dog understand that I am not taking their freedom to make a choice away but for everyone of their actions their is a response/reaction from me. They choose their own fate. I let them because I know dogs aren't dumb, some are more persistent but none the dumber.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could it be that you have conditioned your dogs to look for you for every right answer instead of letting them think it through themselves?

 

No, actually it was the opposite. I had tried to get my dogs to stop a couple different behaviors through punishment alone without teaching an alternate behavior. This didn't work in the least.

 

Conversely, teaching "watch me" worked almost immediately. In a few short sessions, I had people complimenting my well behaved Sheltie who had previously been foolishly shrieking at anything she considered a threat on our walks. I found the same thing with stopping her nuisance barking which had been a problem for at least 5 years. Instead of positive punishment, I used positive reinforcement and time outs. I was embarrassed at how quickly she improved and how long it took me to try that approach. She became and has remained by far the quietest for my current three dogs.

 

I know this particular Sheltie is not a big thinker so maybe that was part of why the second approach worked so much better. She really does benefit from being told what I want her to do rather than what I don't. But I also used a "watch me" approach with my Lhasa who never stops conniving, um, thinking. I have no problem with my dogs learning that looking at me is likely to result in good things whether it's a kind word, pat, game or piece of kibble. I don't feel it interferes with their ability to think for themselves. The Lhasa is still conniving and the Sheltie is still putting her energy into being a lovely, charming girl rather than a brilliant one. :rolleyes:

 

Now with Quinn I've done little in the way of teaching "watch me." As I said, it depends on the dog and the situation. I don't find there is ONE way to train any behavior even to the same dog. I do what works and what I'm personally comfortable with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Working the dog subthreshold is a bit less dramatic, but it could make for very good television if it were presented in an interesting way.

 

Victoria Stillwell on It's Me or the Dog has done that several times on her show, often with success. I don't recall her working with a dog as bad as that Mal. The drama in that show comes from the incredible cluelessness of the owners, the horrendous behaviors of their dogs and Victoria's outrage at the situations she sees. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. . . no long drawn out desensitization sessions where the limits of stress are constantly approached but never resolved

 

. . . It puts the power in the hands of the dog, instead of "taking away his mind" as a famous clinician is known for saying.

 

I must have learned a different method of desensitization because I've found the opposite to happen in the process. In the process I have learned, the dog is not stressed, but relaxed, and I have never met a dog who didn't flat out enjoy the process and benefit from it on many levels.

 

If the dog is stressed during desensitization, the person who is handling the dog is moving far too fast.

 

The process I have learned also does not take away the dog's mind - quite the opposite, the dog learns to think through his triggers and respond appropriately through is own thought processes. It very much puts the power in the hands of the dog.

 

A good desensitization process is a lot like neurfeedback that is used on humans as an alternative (to medication) treatment for ADD. Neither leaves the person (or dog) "mindless" after the treatment is successfully completed. With new chemical pathways formed in the brain, the person (or dog) has more mind power than ever.

 

Neurofeedback treatments take more time to take effect than medication, and they require more work on the part of the person. And desensitization and impulse control work take more effort on the part of the handler and dog.

 

But I've found it to be worth it, and I have yet to meet a mindless dog who has gotten that way through desensitization. In fact, I have yet to meet a mindless dog at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing about "classical conditioning" based methods that is something to be watched carefully, is that it encourages the handler to be rather busy with theories and overthinking things, rather than simply judging the effectiveness of an approach by the feedback the dog will give you.

I think this is a very important part of Becca's post. And maybe it's the difference we see here between the people who train stockdogs and the people who train dogs for other things (please don't take this as a slam--it's not meant that way at all--I think the two groups just have very different perspectives, although we may even ultimately have the same outcomes). The fact that those of us who train stockdogs are referring (largely) specifically to border collies vs. any other breed anyone may have worked with (or is working with) might also have some bearing on the differences in approach (and perception). All I know is if one of my bitches is snarking at another, I don't need to take any more time than the few seconds required to say "Cut it out!" No need to make one look at me or otherwise redirect the aggression to some other behavior. They know it's inappropriate behavior because I just told them so, and it doesn't require a lot of thought on my part regarding classical conditioning, learning theory, or anything else like that. It's just matter-of-fact feedback, and anything else is up to them....

 

had tried to get my dogs to stop a couple different behaviors through punishment alone without teaching an alternate behavior. This didn't work in the least.

Liz,

I'm not sure where the whole punishment idea comes in, but no one who has said that they simply use a "Stop it!" type command has even implied that they're using punishment in the normal sense of the word. A verbal correction gives the dog feedback and yet doesn't require the human to even be near enough to touch the dog, let alone punish it somehow. If my youngster is getting ready to dive in and grab a sheep 100 yards away, all I've got is a verbal correction, and maybe that's why some of us place so much emphasis on the verbal, followed by allowing the dog to decide what to do next. I'm not really sure how punishment even enters the picture, unless you're referring to, say, Cesar's method of "choking up" on a dog or something similar.

 

As for Cesar and other such programs, I think the whole world would do well to realize that these are reality shows, and they will take some really bad cases, because they are the most "interesting" from a viewer POV. Just like Supernanny and all the other similar programs, no one would watch if the dogs were your everyday misbehaving mutts or the trainers were your everyday matter of fact get it done sorts. That everyday stuff just isn't quite as interesting. The fact that viewers think they can emulate what an extremely dog-savvy person does in what appears to be one training session and get great results really just reflects badly on John Q. as a whole--we should know better (but then we are pretty much a society that wants a quick fix).

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The public has a way of mangling training methods. It's somewhat expected,and well normal. But if they ineptly try Cesar's way and it doesn't work, why does it make it worse than when they ineptly try Karen Pryor's way and it doesn't work?

 

You are precisely right about the public's way of mangling training methods. But when they are mangling Cesar's method it can too often become abusive. Not only that, repeated attempts at punishment (an aversive stimulus--such as the finger poke) especially if not timed correctly, will make a dog more reactive. What is meant to be a distraction to re-direct the dog is too often applied by the novice as a punishment. If there is no underlying understanding of the approach it is doomed to fail, and who ultimately suffers? While one can be equally as inept employing Kren Pryor's approach, at least it's unlikely to lead to physical abuse. And just as a person with a hammer sees everything as a nail, in Cesar's approach almost every behavior problem is interpreted as a dominance issue.

 

I turned down an invitation to have Cesar work with my dog, because a local "behaviorist" (who attended a seminar given by him, has a photo of the two of them arm in arm on his brochure, and includes "Dog Whisperer" in the title of his business) was involved with the deal. This person was abusive and reactive, and I wanted no futher contact with him.

 

In fact, recently I re-watched the videotape I made of this person at his first meeting with Boo. We were seated at my dining room table with Boo lying at my feet on lead. I kid you not, this person had just finished bragging "I know what he's gonna do even before he knows he's gonna do it" .The very next instant, while looking right at Boo, he moved his leg and Boo lunged and bit him. It took him competely by surprise. I always felt ambivalent when he worked with Boo, even when I thought I was seeing progress. I couldn't quite put my finger on why, until it occured to me ( too late, unfortunately) that there was no modification of his fear aggression issues. His *behaviors* were being repressed, but the underlying cause was never addressed, so the apparent improvement was at best superficial. Until one fateful day when he was pushed way passed his tipping point by this person, and the result was not pretty. It has taken me a long time to bring him back from that.

 

Not long after this, an aquaintance of mine was able to convince Cesar's producers to do an episode of his show with her extremely dog aggressive dog. (It was through her that I was extended the invitation to have Cesar work with Boo) She was deeply disillusioned after the whole experience. Without going into detail, I'll just say that Cesar agreed to take her dog back to his compound and she saw what she thought were amazing results. (personally, my thought on this was, what kind of dog is going to come face to face with a strange pack on their own turf and initiate an attack?) The deal was she had to take one of the dogs from there in return. The dog she was given in the exchange was extremely cat aggressive and after a few months, rather than continue to risk the life of her cat she took her own dog back from him. With her, he is still very dog aggressive.

 

 

The whole problem with the Malamute is that Cesar doesn't understand squat about classical counterconditioning and is trying to work with this dog when the dog is already highly aroused and reacting to another male dog.

 

Actually he does. He just chooses not to use it. He recommends Patricia McConnell's book "The Other End of the Leash" and cites her research in his book "Cesar's Way". He also stated in his book that he had immersed himself in researching the science of dog behavior as his career started to take off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not seen this particular episode but I pretty much watch CM when I get out of school everyday because I actually find the show entertaining and usually there isn't much else on, but you could certainly apply what I said before to pretty much all situations where the dog is acting improperly you just match the punishment with the crime. You make the wrong choice (acting aggressively) VERY unappealing giving the dog the choice to pick a less offensive behavior, if they choose poorly then they suffer the consequences, yet they are free to choose how to act a second time and if they still choose wrong the consequences are more sever for a second offense and increase until I get my point across. Its just a battle of wills, yet also helping the dog understand that I am not taking their freedom to make a choice away but for everyone of their actions their is a response/reaction from me. They choose their own fate. I let them because I know dogs aren't dumb, some are more persistent but none the dumber.

 

Again, punishment suppresses behaviour it does not change it. It's been proven time and time again by Karen Overall, Dr. Nicholas Dodman, Ian Dunbar, William Campbell to name just a few of certified Behaviouists that have made it their work to study behaviour, not just in dogs but in other animals as well. It is not a matter of a battle of wills. It is getting a dog to understand that they don't need to respond agressively because we change how they think about the stimulus. What you are doing is escalating the punishment to the degree required to suppress the behaviour. The dog is still going to be fearful, etc of that stimuli - it knows it just can't act on it in your presence.

 

As Dr. Nicholas Dodman says - in people we would call this a Phobia - why don't we call it that in dogs?

 

If you had a person with a phobia about mice, and you wanted to get them not to be scare of mice, what is your solution - shove a mouse in their face and then slap them for not sitting there calmly and accepting the mouse? and keep hitting them until they just sit there? and YES it is the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you had a person with a phobia about mice, and you wanted to get them not to be scare of mice, what is your solution - shove a mouse in their face and then slap them for not sitting there calmly and accepting the mouse? and keep hitting them until they just sit there? and YES it is the same thing.

 

Huh? :rolleyes: You lost me.

 

Dr. Nicholas Dodman says in people he would call what a phobia? All unwanted canine behavior? All canine aggression?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Liz,

I'm not sure where the whole punishment idea comes in, but no one who has said that they simply use a "Stop it!" type command has even implied that they're using punishment in the normal sense of the word. A verbal correction gives the dog feedback and yet doesn't require the human to even be near enough to touch the dog, let alone punish it somehow. .

 

I was using punishment in the operant learning sense of the word -- something that reduces a behavior. That can range from a mild, conversational "hey, cut it out" to something abusive that no one here would advocate. Punishment does not have to involve anything physical or even loud. Negative punishments such as time outs are simply removing something the animal or person finds rewarding. Punishment does not need to be harsh.

 

A verbal correction gives the dog feedback and yet doesn't require the human to even be near enough to touch the dog, let alone punish it somehow.

 

Both reinforcement and punishment give the dog feedback. Some people use correction and punishment interchangeably. I don't do stock work, but I noticed at Quinn's lessons when his instructor would verbally correct him with a "HEY" that yes Quinn was far away and yes it was important feedback that he needed to do something different. But if Quinn didn't respond to the verbal correction, the instructor would move to pressure Quinn (still from a distance) to stop what he was doing. And if that didn't work, I'm sure the instructor would have stepped up the pressure. Again, not talking about hitting the dog or making threatening motions, though early on the instructor did toss a shake bottle nearby Quinn when he wouldn't lie down. That happened exactly once. Quinn didn't act upset, merely looked at the bottle, then lied down, but from that point on, he became much more cooperative about the command.

 

The "HEY," the instructor's moving toward him at a lesson or around the house my sigh, small gasp or finger snap are all important feedback to my dog that he might want to rethink what he is doing. But all those non physical forms of communication are at least loosely linked to something that you might agree was along the lines of punishment previously -- punishment that does not need to include anything physical to the dog and may only be mildly aversive.

 

Another possibility is that the dog finds that non physical form of communication punishing in and of itself. My Shelties often wilted at the slightest sign of my disapproval (just not when it came to barking or stealing food, LOL). They acted like they were being tortured if I led them by the collar no matter how gently and cheerfully I did so. Other dogs like my Lhasa are so tough inside and out that punishment/correction can be very difficult for them to understand.

 

Anyway, I'm not talking about hitting, stringing up, or yelling when I say punishment though I know some people will do that and worse. Don't know if I've clarified my thoughts or just blathered for too long. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a pure positive trainer. I'm not a pure compulsion trainer. I started out raising Seeing Eye puppies. Sometimes I use treats or a ball, sometimes I use a prong collar or a slip chain. Sometimes I use a squirt gun or loud claps. I don't own Border Collies - I own German Shepherds and a Chow mix. I've no experience with stock dog training or Border Collie "people" other than this board.

 

In general I try to keep any corrections (negative feedback of any kind) I give to the absolute minimum needed. The prong collar I own is a finishing tool, used for my dog reactive Shepherd, that enables me to keep soft hands and a level voice. The collar allows me to deliver some kind of physical reminder to stay in-tune to me, should it be needed. A jiggle of the leash, usually. Sometimes I just poke him in the ear. I call it "coming back to me." It was only put on and applied after building a foundation with him on what was generally expected, and building up his self control incrementally.

 

Absolute minimum needed. That's always been the goal of the "good" compulsion trainers too. Find the dog's correction tolerance level, apply that much, never more. Never correct the dog for what it doesn't know yet - to do otherwise is unfair. Spend a good deal of time in the "teaching phase" first. If the dog starts freaking out, you've gone too far and tried to do too much at once and he doesn't know what you want; back up. For all their other faults, the "good" compulsion trainers always harped on about being fair, about never asking the dog to do more than it knew how.

 

I'm very lukewarm about Cesar. Sometimes I don't mind him. I.E., that Shepherd spinning in circles in its yard because it was bored? Exercise him! Cesar said, and they did, and the dog stopped circling. Great!

 

But I often find him not very fair to the fearful dogs, and he has this annoying tendency to cover up a lot of what he's doing with garble. Empty flowery talk. Ignoring the "everyday" problems he deals with (barking at the door, chewing on things, etc.), I hate watching him put dogs in situations where they inevitably go over the edge only so that he can then wrestle them down. Why anyone would choose to push those dogs until they explode, then engage them in a battle right there on the street is beyond me.

 

At that point all you're doing is trying to make your aversive response stronger than their desire to do X. They're too "in the zone" for anything else to get through. For Cesar, that aversive is usually calmly cutting off their air supply until they're exhausted and have to stop to breathe. These are also usually dogs who've never been confronted in such a direct manner. So, the end result is pretty dramatic.

 

I would rather claim all the resources in the house and get the dog on a strict routine where they work for everything they want and have clear ground rules, maybe even start kenneling them out back if need be, than get into a brawl on the living room floor like this one:

 

JonBee

 

I mean, he's no Koehler, but it's still a pretty ugly last resort, period. And there's never a guarantee that the dog will then generalize that experience to its real owners. Even Cesar calls it a "taming of a wild animal." Like breaking a horse. Not my cup of tea.

 

Has anyone read Jan Fennell?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you had a person with a phobia about mice, and you wanted to get them not to be scare of mice, what is your solution - shove a mouse in their face and then slap them for not sitting there calmly and accepting the mouse? and keep hitting them until they just sit there? and YES it is the same thing.

 

No, its not, but it would be convenient for the positive only crowd if it was. It would be nice for all of us if it was so black and white. Positive was good, punishment was bad, clicker is good, leash pop is bad, alpha roll is bad, zen down is good, etc etc.

 

A phobia is not the same thing as aggressive behavior as we have described it. Dogs that act like the Mal did in the CM example are not scared of you, or the other male dog they are threatening.

 

There are 4 parts of operant conditioning in nature. Why I wonder, do some groups obsess about only using one?

 

You keep naming "trainers" who don't do *anything* with their dogs but live with them, and in fact I question if they do more than just house lemon brains. Start naming some behaviorist that actually do something with their dogs and you find people like Patricia McConnell - a nice balace between the camps, then you get into the group that doesn't read the books (Knox, Wilson, the late Lewis Pence..) and simply do. I know of the group who's dogs I would rather live with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A phobia is not the same thing as aggressive behavior as we have described it. Dogs that act like the Mal did in the CM example are not scared of you, or the other male dog they are threatening.

 

That's also how I read Northof49's post - that all aggressive behavior is fear-based. If so, I could not disagree more, having spent years with dogs who adored fighting/mauling/occasionally killing other dogs. I also knew dogs who enjoyed being aggressive with people, although they were few and far between (thank goodness).

 

I knew one little chow bitch who learned to walk on her heels so her toenails wouldn't click on the floor - the better to sneak up behind people and bite them. Since she was making the approach, I don't think this behavior was fear-based.

 

However, she did learn how to replace one behavior - walking normally and making noise - with another - creeping around on her heels - all by herself. Do you suppose she did this by positive reinforcement - getting to bite unsuspecting victim whose back is turned? - or by experiencing the negative consequences - walking normally makes enough noise that victim is forewarned and escapes the Jaws of Death? :D:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not a matter of a battle of wills.

 

It is when you are dealing with an out right aggressive dog that hasn't had someone be its leader.

 

If you had a person with a phobia about mice, and you wanted to get them not to be scare of mice, what is your solution - shove a mouse in their face and then slap them for not sitting there calmly and accepting the mouse? and keep hitting them until they just sit there? and YES it is the same thing.

 

If you were talking about a fear response then yeah it would be the same thing. But from what I am reading about the Mal, the dog was flat out aggressive.

 

No, its not, but it would be convenient for the positive only crowd if it was. It would be nice for all of us if it was so black and white. Positive was good, punishment was bad, clicker is good, leash pop is bad, alpha roll is bad, zen down is good, etc etc.

 

A phobia is not the same thing as aggressive behavior as we have described it. Dogs that act like the Mal did in the CM example are not scared of you, or the other male dog they are threatening.

 

There are 4 parts of operant conditioning in nature. Why I wonder, do some groups obsess about only using one?

 

You keep naming "trainers" who don't do *anything* with their dogs but live with them, and in fact I question if they do more than just house lemon brains. Start naming some behaviorist that actually do something with their dogs and you find people like Patricia McConnell - a nice balace between the camps, then you get into the group that doesn't read the books (Knox, Wilson, the late Lewis Pence..) and simply do. I know of the group who's dogs I would rather live with.

 

Wendy I couldn't agree more!

 

Punishment in my mind can be positive punishment(You jump on me you get ignored until you offer the right behavior) and negative punishment. Punishment doesn't need to be physical as others have said.

 

Going back to the mouse reaction, if someone that every time they saw a mouse triggered violent aggressive behavior and not out of fear you bet your butt that there would be a correction (punishment). But I am not talking about fear or fear aggression. Simply aggression. There is a difference in mind set therefore requires a difference in behavior modification. So I don't see how your example is the same as an outright aggressive dog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never watched an episode of CM. I just have basic cable. My mother has the channel. Do you know what time it's on or day or something close so I could go next door and take a peek? I'd like to see his methods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was using punishment in the operant learning sense of the word -- something that reduces a behavior.

 

I'm really resistant to using the word "punishment" in this sense, even though I understand the conditioning terminology. I have to struggle to bring myself to use it. I think it is generally misinterpreted and its connotation is just all wrong, because in common parlance "punishment" is seen as retributive justice -- you have done something wrong and therefore you must be made to suffer for it. That's totally different from what I and other sheepdog people mean by correction. Correction is communication -- communication that a behavior is wrong, which thus, yes, does reduce the behavior. As such, I just don't understand why it should be rejected as a matter of principle.

 

Again, punishment suppresses behaviour it does not change it.

 

The constant repetition of this dogmatic statement just sets my teeth on edge. Correction (punishment in conditioning terminology) absolutely changes behavior. I've seen it happen routinely, consistently, over and over again. I can't believe you haven't seen it too. So what's happening here? When the dog stops doing what you told it not to do, do you just define that as "suppressed behavior" rather than "changed behavior" because it wasn't accomplished through positive reinforcement? And because it's "suppressed behavior," it's bad, even though what you wanted all along was for the dog to stop doing it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...... The fact that those of us who train stockdogs are referring (largely) specifically to border collies vs. any other breed anyone may have worked with (or is working with) might also have some bearing on the differences in approach (and perception). All I know is if one of my bitches is snarking at another, I don't need to take any more time than the few seconds required to say "Cut it out!" No need to make one look at me or otherwise redirect the aggression to some other behavior. They know it's inappropriate behavior because I just told them so, and it doesn't require a lot of thought on my part regarding classical conditioning, learning theory, or anything else like that. It's just matter-of-fact feedback, and anything else is up to them....

 

It sounds like a common theme on stockdog training is letting the dog figure out the right thing, and only stepping in to let them know they're in error (as a TA, I try to run my discussions the same way :rolleyes: ). I'm wondering now, if dogs that are not typically trained that way are able to process the 'correction-without-replacement-behavior' method as easily. Do you think that 'find another, more appropriate behavior' is learned? (I'd be interested in hearing clicker/shaping exercise users response to this as well). And for those with dogs of different breeds, do you find that this works equally well with all of them, or does it come more naturally to border collies?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...