furever_pit wrote:And if I have dogs who are strong enough that a correction is done and over with and no one has hurt feelings then why not use corrections?
I would still like an honest answer to this question.
furever_pit wrote:And if I have dogs who are strong enough that a correction is done and over with and no one has hurt feelings then why not use corrections?
furever_pit wrote:furever_pit wrote:And if I have dogs who are strong enough that a correction is done and over with and no one has hurt feelings then why not use corrections?
I would still like an honest answer to this question.
And if I have dogs who are strong enough that a correction is done and over with and no one has hurt feelings then why not use corrections?
I compete in sports that corrections are not allowed, nor really useful. I used to compete in agility...I used to dabble in competition disc dog sports (frisbee)...and I now compete heavily in flyball. They all have to be off leash, and I know that flyball and agility forbid the use of choke and prong collars (never looked at the rules for disc...). So I can't use a correction collar in my sports of choice...and the dogs have to be reliable off-leash at quite a distance from me. In my sports, it doesn't make sense to use correction-based methods
LisaM wrote:Without corrections, how do you drive the point home to your dog that they must follow commands no matter what is going on around them? Or do you all own dogs that never once disobeyed you during training, even when a reward wasn't present?
pitbullmamaliz wrote:But again, I'm not choosing to do a sport where corrections are almost mandatory. If I was interested in a sport but couldn't get any further without corrections or doing something like forced retrieves, then I'd stop. Inara could handle it, but I wouldn't want her to. It's not a life or death situation, so I'm not going to cause her pain or discomfort for a game, which is essentially what all sports are.
mnp13 wrote:pitbullmamaliz wrote:But again, I'm not choosing to do a sport where corrections are almost mandatory. If I was interested in a sport but couldn't get any further without corrections or doing something like forced retrieves, then I'd stop. Inara could handle it, but I wouldn't want her to. It's not a life or death situation, so I'm not going to cause her pain or discomfort for a game, which is essentially what all sports are.
And in this statement, you have said something that I have heard many time from people who choose to train without using physical corrections... and it the reason that I think that all of the people who champion the methods don't truly believe that they are as reliable as they think... because if they were, then there wouldn't be any training that couldn't be accomplished.
Someone in the dog training club I am in said something very similar to this during a rather "heated" discussion: she would never move on to the advanced levels of obedience because at those levels compulsion is necessary for the training and she would never use compulsion so she'll never earn those titles. Uh... if your training methods are "superior" (her words) then why can't you pass the titles? Sorry, doesn't make sense to me.
Corrections are not manditory... with some dogs. However, I believe, that with some dogs they are. Just like I believe that with some kids they are. I can count on one hand the number of times that I was physically corrected as a kid, and every time I deserved it, and it made quite the impression (literally and physically... ) Some dogs, if you ignore the bad and reward the good, they will just keep on keeping on, because their "bad" is self rewarding enough that you can't over-ride it.
furever_pit wrote:I'm really really not trying to be critical. I just like talking about this stuff. Dylan's safe spot is his attention heel. I blame it on spending way too much time teaching it and using too much food to do it.
LisaM wrote:I don't think there is a dog sport out there that allows a handler to to walk out with a prong collar on and correct a dog while COMPETING.
Without corrections, how do you drive the point home to your dog that they must follow commands no matter what is going on around them? Or do you all own dogs that never once disobeyed you during training, even when a reward wasn't present?
Some dogs, if you ignore the bad and reward the good, they will just keep on keeping on, because their "bad" is self rewarding enough that you can't over-ride it.
LisaM wrote:Good topic! I have noticed that the importance of positive reinforcement is brought up frequently on this board but I rarely, if ever, see anyone refer to the value of correction. It's usually referred to as "compulsion" like it's some evil thing...
IMO the best trainers use a balanced approach, utilizing both ends of the spectrum...using food or toy to shape behaviors is no doubt the best way to approach a puppy or green dog...stress free and fun, just the way LEARNING should be . However, I think there comes a time where we need to show the dog that there is a price to pay for non compliance. Without that hanging over their heads, what's stopping them from ignoring their handler in favor of something else? Some dogs want to please more than others, and some are just downright afraid to leave their owners side so therefore a physical correction is rarely if ever needed, even in times of distraction.
maberi wrote:Some dogs, if you ignore the bad and reward the good, they will just keep on keeping on, because their "bad" is self rewarding enough that you can't over-ride it.
True but there are very few self rewarding behaviors that cannot be controlled via the environment which would allow the handler to address those issues. I would also argue that rewarding the good and ignoring the bad is highly oversimplifying the training methods of people who choose not to use compulsion (I realize you know that but was making the point for others reading this post).
mnp13 wrote:Actually, there are a lot of behaviors that can be considered self-rewarding that could be hard to fix without a correction, but also hard to find a reward that outweighs the self-reward.
Nuisance barking is one example, finding a reward that outweighs the joy that some dogs seem to find in barking their heads off can be rather challenging.
Counter surfing is another example. Keeping the counters clear does not stop the problem, because the dog will still look for things. So if the dog looks and finds nothing, the dog is still counter surfing, but the day you forget and there is something there, the self-reward has happened, and the problem is back full force.
A dog that eats shoes has not stopped eating shoes because you have learned put them away. You have just removed the problem.
And, no, I actually wasn't oversimplifying. All of the foundation work in my classes is R+, and we do exactly that: ignore the barking and carrying on, and reward the focus / attention. The only reward the dogs get in class is for eye contact and sitting calmly.
maberi wrote:Kayden has a bad habit of rushing into a dog to great them. It's not something I've spent a lot of time to work on because I don't really give him the opportunity to "visit" with dogs he doesn't know. After taking him on a walk with our foster the other day I wanted him to have the chance to great her. I spent about 15 minutes walking him towards her. She was probably only about 20 feet from me with Heidi but Kayden insisted on trying to charge forth to meet her. Every time he hit the end of the leash we would take two steps back. He would put himself back into heel, walk a few feet with me and again, we would back up. This took me 15 minutes but by the end he was in perfect heel the whole way.
I would bet the farm you would not have addressed that issue the same way. My guess is that Kayden would have gotten a couple of really nice corrections.
Is my way of doing something any better than yours on a practical level? Definitely not if we are concerned about the time of training the behavior. Is Kayden going to retain that behavior any better with your method versus mine? Hard to say... In this case I controlled his resource so not allowing him that resource is a huge advantage.
furever_pit wrote:furever_pit wrote:And if I have dogs who are strong enough that a correction is done and over with and no one has hurt feelings then why not use corrections?
I would still like an honest answer to this question.
maberi wrote:Nuisance barking is one example, finding a reward that outweighs the joy that some dogs seem to find in barking their heads off can be rather challenging.
Barking is certainly self rewarding but there is usually a trigger or reason for the barking. Once that is identified, you don't need to correct a dog to fix the behaviorCounter surfing is another example. Keeping the counters clear does not stop the problem, because the dog will still look for things. So if the dog looks and finds nothing, the dog is still counter surfing, but the day you forget and there is something there, the self-reward has happened, and the problem is back full force.
Again, controlling the environment in this situation is rather simple. Providing an alternative behavior that is far more reinforcing when the dog reaches the floor near the counter can outweigh a self reinforcement of jumping up on the counterA dog that eats shoes has not stopped eating shoes because you have learned put them away. You have just removed the problem.
Chewing is a rather normal behavior for a dog. Mind you we don't want dogs to ruin things around the house, so putting shoes in a closet definitely isn't teaching a dog not to chew but I would prefer controlling the environment, giving them a chew toy and having a clean house versus correcting my dog
mnp13 wrote:[
Actually, that generally comes from a dog learning that the only "safe" place to be is in the heel position. They don't get "in trouble" if they are at your side and looking at you, so when under stress - whether it be from the pressure of a decoy on the field or from something else - they know that if the are next to you they can be there. That creates some real trouble at higher levels of different sports when you need your dog to work under pressure at a distance, because the dog has never learned to deal with pressure away from you. The automatic, default behavior is next to you, looking at you. And it's not from too many treats, it's from too many corrections to keep him there. A lot of sport dogs have problems with breaking when they see decoys and have gotten in a lot of trouble for it, so they have been conditioned not to think - just to stick next to their handlers like glue, no thinking required.
When we were training with a Schutzhund club for a while, they were floored when Demo was working Connor doing recalls over and around sleeves, jackets and decoys. One owner/handler of a Sch III dog said "my dog would never" do that. I'm not saying that Connor doesn't have his issues but with consistent work, getting dogs to think on their own away from the handler is absolutely possible, but it takes a lot of trust from both parties.
We trained with someone years ago who taught their dog to heel using R-. Not how I would teach a dog something (especially a puppy) but that's not the point here. After a few weeks, she had a beautiful attention heel. She didn't budge from his left side, but at a certain point, it was time to teach stay. Then what? She had only learned that the place where corrections didn't happen was next to him on his left side, so when he said "place" and stepped away, she of course followed and got a correction for that. That was one confused little dog.
She hadn't been taught to think, only taught that corrections don't come if you're next to dad's left leg, but now you have to stay over there. Talk about STRESS. And no, I don't think that puppy had a clue what "heel" meant as a concept, just that that "area" meant that corrections stopped. When they concept the command, they know the command; and in my opinion once they concept that's when corrections come in. I've brought them in too soon because I screwed up, but that's my mistake.
There are also exceptions, because I think there is also a time and place for self-corrections.
Nothing is absolute.
mnp13 wrote:I think the point that Erin, Liz and Matt and a few others have been trying to make is, if you don't "have" to use corrections in training, they why use them?
mnp13 wrote:If the only form of stress you can come up with in your dog's training is a prong collar or e-collar correction, and that is the measure of if the dog is breedable, then there are some serious holes in your training. If your dog falls apart under stress, that's going to show up in far more places than a collar correction, and if it only shows up there then there are other things going on.
furever_pit wrote:
I simply reiterated my question because it had not been answered except with that question as a reply. They are two sides to the same coin, so I only wanted to hear the reasons the choose to only use +R. I'm not arguing that anyone change what they are doing, I was just curious.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users