I'm just curious as to what you guys think about the positive reinforcement (no corrections, no saying "uh huh", ignoring unwanted behaviour) method when it comes to dog training.
I'm not sure where I stand as I've only really started getting into dog training for the past few months so I am just barely a beginner.
I don't think it is effective when you ignore unwanted behaviour and in most cases a correction should be given. Maybe I'm a hypocrite because I've tried the whole positive reinforcement/clicker training methods and they have been successful so far. I haven't needed to use prong collars or chockers.. my dog walks perfectly fine next to me and has an excellent recall rate ect.
I've seen some amazing things that have been taught by Clicker Training (search Kikopup/zsianz1 on YT).
But I'm literally torn between which method is the most effective.
My statements probably aren't clear.. (it's probably my fault for being up at 3am haha) but I just want to know what you guys think and what training methods you use.
Star for your dog section contacts? Cheers.
Dog Training - Consistency vs. Habitual
Recommended Answer:Positive reinforcement is fine when you want to teach a dog a behavior. You have to get them to perform it somehow so they know what is expected of them.
There MUST be corrections in a dogs training. They will not learn properly and their training will not be fullproof until that happens.
All positive or all negative training does not work. There HAS to be a balance depending on the individual dog. Some dogs won't need as strong as corrections as others but that doesn't mean they don't need them period!
The consequence for not obeying a command must be greater than the satisfaction the dog gets from ignoring you. If the biggest thing a dog has to worry about when it doesn't listen is not getting a treat or having you walk out of the room... that is not going to teach the dog anything! That isn't a bad enough thing to happen in the dogs life to make them realize that obeying you is the ONLY option they have!
I think 'all positive reinforcement' training is crap and no one can convince me otherwise. It may work as long as your dog is feeling focused, what happens when they decide to chase that rabbit or car and don't come back to you when you call.. Are you going to ignore them then when they are killed by a car? Shot by a farmer? No, there has to be consequences.
You do good, there are good consequences. You do bad, there are bad consequences.
Ignoring isn't a consequence, dog's don't feel the social sting of 'shunning.
IGNORING A BEHAVIOR IS PERMITTING A BEHAVIOR.
If any bunny huggers disagree then they can eat my bunny for all i care!!
ADD: Tarson.. it is very sad to see your parents dropped you on your head as a child! But no need to spout off useless advice!
Training Your Dog at Home - Save Thousands of Dollars on Dog Training
- Positive Reinforcement is great... but it's only one piece of the puzzle.
In dog training, just like in everything else, there is no one magic answer to everything.
I think things like clicker training absolutely have their place for certain tasks. Like teaching lightswitches, for example, there absolutely is no more effective method in my opinion - none.
Clicker training when your dog is chasing a rabbit across a 45mph road - not so much.
- Honestly? No corrections = Crap, IMO.
I correct my dog, and he still respects me as pack leader, and he listens. He is not dead, and he is not shaking in the corner because of my corrections. If you ignore your dog... you are just letting them continue with the undesired behavior.
I've tried positive reinforcement, and it doesn't work too well for my dog.. corrections work best for me.
Starred!
- I think that 100% positive reinforcement makes for ill behaved, untrained, overweight dogs! ;)
Personally, I could not imagine getting ANYTHING done with my dog w/o corrections of some sort. It would not work for us
- I train my dogs with Positive Reinforcement. It works on them very well.
- I think clicker training is an effective way to teach a dog a particular behavior, if you have great timing and the ability to break down the behavior into its parts, so the dog can figure it out.
Personally, it drives me nuts watching the dog try to figure out what is wanted, and I really dont care for that level of intensity. Likewise, I do not want to have to carry treats everywhere I go. I prefer to show the dog what I want, reward the behavior (not necessarily with a treat), and go from there.
I think dogs interpret "ignoring" as permission, and I do not agree with ignoring bad behavior. Dogs, themselves, do not ignore each other, they correct each other, and that is the approach I find to be more effective.
I dont see the two methods as mutually exclusive....one or the other could be more appropriate with different dogs or activities.
- Positive Reinforcements CAN work well so can other methods BUT when it comes to proofing, it is the Koehler method or any "old style" methods that work best. Any dogs that are trained with chokers, prongs & electric collars are usually better trained because if they don't want to feel any discomfort, they will NOT do any nonsense & will obey their handler's commands 100%. That's my opinion.
My dogs have always been trained with chokers & I have recently started using the prong collar on my Dalmatian. I have always used to "old style" method which is jerking to correct the dog & rewarding the dog when it does something right. I have always believed that training should always have a fair amount of corrections & praise.
Clicker training is absolutely fine BUT it's best used for training something fun like tricks & dance, not OB. I have seen many OB trained dogs that were trained with clickers & have never been jerked before, breaking their sit/down stay commands during trials & I'm talking about dogs trained by Chief OB Trainers & dogs in Intermediate & Open levels.
And yes, I agree with you. Ignoring a bad behaviour is UNACCEPTABLE!!! You're only reinforcing it that way.
- While I train positive methods, I do not ignore behaviors. I do not use the command "no" because it confuses puppies. "Know and no" come up in conversation and the puppy can think it does something wrong. I use a command like "shame" instead. I have herding dogs and they want to please you, so it is my job to teach them what behaviors make me happy, and what behaviors I do not allow. I don't have a problem correcting a wrong behavior, I have a problem thinking that I should have to smack my sacred puppy in the face in order to train them. If I ever get so inept at training that I have to smack my puppy, grab it's nose, spray them in the face, use shock collars, or yank them around, or yell and scream and curse at them, then in is clearly a time in my life when I need to quit training puppies. My husband uses a clicker on his puppy, she is a hunting breed and he needs it to gain her attention. You have to do what is best for you and your dog, it doesn't matter what others do. Methods that work for me and my angel dolls, might not work for you, so do what is best for you and don't let others put you down.
- I prefer to train my dogs with basic human common sense. Unsurprisingly many of the things that were taught to me by my parents and grandparents have actually turned out to be useful.
Know your dog - they're all different. Learn and don't mistake their body postures. Punish misdemeanours instantly or wait til next time. Really bad behaviour needs sharp correction. Reward good behaviour. Don't wake a sleeping dog by prodding it. Dogs need to be allowed to play with other dogs. Dogs know when you don't like them etc etc.
All of these things can be 'culturally tracked' to their places in 2009. Positive has it's place and will work with a compatible dog that just wants to be a nice dog in the human pack anyway. The old ways can save a dificult dog from being unecessrily PTS. Whatever floats your boat really.
- Praise and positive re-enforcement has it's place. However i find it incredibly stupid (this is my personal opinion) to ignore a dog for doing a behavior or to offer no corrections of ay kind. I mean, come on - if a dog bites you are you just going to stand there and allow it? You wouldn't let a child hit you, would you?
Of course not - you would find some way to correct the behavior that doesn't hurt the individual in question (be it dog or child.)
I find positive re-enforcement to be good for teaching - if a dog does not know what "sit" means then SHOW them and praise like mad. However it has no place when it comes to proofing. You (or at least I) wouldn't praise a dog for sitting ten seconds after issuing the command, AFTER the dog barks it's head off at a bird.... would you?
I certainly wouldn't - who knows if the praise would be seen as praise for the sit or praise for the entire event (which just means the dog will repeat it.) My dog would be corrected for not following a command she KNOWS in favor of barking, then would be praised once her focus was back on me. Simple.
There is a place for praise and a place for correction. NEVER correct a dog who doesn't know what you are asking - that just confuses the dog. NEVER use your hand or foot to hit or kick a dog. My correction is limited to leash type ONLY, and never without due cause.
Note: Bring on the bunny huggers.... i'm expecting tons of thumbs down for this one *sigh*
Koehler Method all the way for me!
- It works wonderfully to start young puppies at 8-12 weeks old. In fact it is the way that many competition trainers use to teach puppies how to learn because they are not "wrong". However, I have found that as the dog gets older the training has a tendency to fall apart, if consequences (adversives) of some type are not added to the mix. This is especially true when the pups turn 4-8 months of age and learn that they have a choice.
In my own training, I have found it very difficult to make myself more attractive that some of the distractions that I work around. This is especially true on things like the recall where disobedience can result in a dead dog. The distractions that I work around include traffic, deer, rabbits, running children, other wildlife, other dogs, etc. So this is why I am more correction based as the dog gets older. It is hard for me to stand there and "act like a tree" when a squirrel darts out in front of my dog and she gives chase. I tried this once and ended up in a tangle of leash, human and dog.
There is no one method that works perfectly for every dog and every person. The effective method is the one that works. So if this method is working for you and this particular dog, by all means continue to use it. However, you need to realize that your next dog may not be so easy to train.
I find that most experienced, successful trainers use many methods. They are not hypocrites. They use what will work for that particular dog at that particular time. Thy also look at what the dog is being trained for. Most service and working dogs are trained with adversives because they must be "bomb proof" and stable in their training or someone can get hurt. On house pets the training doesn't need to be as rigid. Plus there is a difference in training a high drive dog that tests the owner at every level and one that is only interested in pleasing the owner. So keep your mind open as you get more experience.
- I prefer to remain positive when TEACHING. However, there comes a point where a negative consequence helps to reinforce the lesson.
Watch a mother dog and adult dogs (that is, adult dogs that are well-adjusted in regard to other dogs and puppies) and how they treat puppies. None of this "positive only" stuff! They send the puppy running and screaming if they dare to cross the lines. Mind you, they don't actually harm the puppy, but they make their point with a lot of sound and fury. Most puppies will not make the same mistake twice.
An excellent article on the subject is "Lessons From The Masters: Learning about punishment from Dogs themselves" by Suzanne Clothier. You can find it at http://flyingdogpress.com in the articles section, registration is required but it's free. She also has many other excellent training articles.
Excerpt:
"There's a growing tendency among many dog trainers to denounce the use of positive punishment (P+), though properly defined it means only this: "the presentation of an undesirable consequence." For many trainers, P+ is a bit of jargon heavily laden with ugly images of pain, fear and outright cruelty. And there's no denying that historically, dog training has leaned heavily on punitive methodology, much of which is thinly disguised abuse in the name of training. But when we mistakenly equate P+ with abuse, we are ignoring what dogs themselves can tell us about the value of P+."
- I agree with you. Positive reinforcement training does not = no corrections.
I too believe that often by ignoring a unwanted behavior, the person is actually "condoning" that behavior.
Also I don't have the patience either to stand around for half an hour waiting for my dog to finally read my mind and happen to do what I want it to do.
You don't have to read on...the below is rather lengthy to maybe help some novices expand their thoughts on training.I too understand clicker training can be amazing. I have seen particular behaviors that are pretty difficult to teach be "spot on" when trained with a clicker, but the trainer was a spot on clicker trainer. I have seen very knowledgeable, well known clicker trainers (positive reinforcement only) who are also well known, well educated behaviorists still "training" a dog to simply behave in public after 1 1/2 years and the dog is still pretty unmanagaeable. The vast majority of people I know and see clicker training have poor timing, have poor judgement what and when to click, and the only thing their dog has learned is that when the person clicks the dog is to look at them to get a cookie.There also is "training" and then there is "training"; the importance/value of the "behavior". If I am trying to teach my dog to shake hands, I will only use positive and withold reward until she does offer her paw...because it is only a trick and I really don't care if she shakes or not. However, as a pup the first time she actually noticed a car going down the road and made the first move towards it, POP! Physical correction with "UH UH leave it"! This was the first actual "correction" she ever had.
I am for common sense training. There are behaviors you ask for and train for. There are behaviors/ actions you do not want and you correct for. Take the above behavior of the reaction to the car. I had already basically "trained" my pup to walk on leash and "come" (using positive) on a long line but had not yet proofed with distractions nor off leash. At the time of this first "incident" we were on our property and I was simply offering her "dog time" on a loose leash wandering around our 1/2 acre "potty field" and letting her investigate. She was not under a "heel" command. Her move towards the car was a pretty natural reaction, but one that can result in dead dog.......hard correction! The way I see this and for what "I" want in my dog, this was not a situation for me to call my dog to come. She knew the command come, and she would have come. And then I would have rewarded her. But here is the catch. What do I want of my dog when she sees a moving vehicle? What I want is for her to simply go about what it is she is doing and ignore it. No action nor reaction. I certainly do not want her to every time come to me in a recall. If I had asked for a "come" one of two things would have resulted. 1) She would have come, gotten a reward and that might have been the first step in teaching her that every time she sees a car she must come to me. 2) She would not have come, and I would have set her up to fail her "come" command and would have had to correct her, not for doing what I initially did not want her to do (react to cars) but for not coming when called.
Show what you want, reward for it. Ask it and if you get it, reward. If not, show again (most people aren't clear nor succinct on the show it part). Patience, thought. Many "intricate" behaviors/tricks (depending on what you are training for) can be difficult to "wrap your mind" around and depending on you and the dog, sometimes the person needs to back up and try a different tact.
Once your dog knows it, and chooses not to, correction.
For "dog choice behaviors", as chasing, biting etc, you correct.
- I am very much a positive reinforcement trainer. That doesn't mean my dogs NEVER get a correction, but it does mean I try to minimize when it occurs, and fix my training so it shouldn't be necessary in the future. PR trainers have several items in their bag of tricks for when thing go wrong, and ignoring the behavior is only one of them.
Ignoring unwanted behavior can be an effective tool for certain things. It is not effective if the behavior is being reinforced in some other way. For instance, ignoring excitement barking usually doesn't work, because the barking itself if self-reinforcing. Ignoring counter surfing isn't effective because the dog is reinforced by whatever he managed to eat when counter-surfing. Ignoring the dog for jumping up on you can work because at that time what the dog wants is your interaction, so taking away your attention when the dog is jumping on you, and then giving your attention when the dog is not jumping on you, can be effective. And there were plenty of times when my dog was a pup and did something that I didn't like, that I simply took note of it, and then figured out what I want to do about it.
Sometimes that something was a management solution, especially for puppies, and sometimes it was a training solution, or more likely, a combination of both.
Some trainers use time outs very effectively. Some use Negative Reinforcement Markers (NRMs). As with any punishment, it should work within a few applications, and if it doesn't you should be considering another method.
Congratulations on teaching your dog to walk nicely on leash. That is a great example of using PR when many people consider using corrections essential. And many will say that using corrections works, and yet they will need to use a certain collar every time they are on a walk, and use that collar at least a few times on every walk. They are happy that the dog "responds to the correction" but don't realize that they shouldn't need to. Which isn't to say that there aren't people who do manage to teach walking nicely on leash using corrections, as it is a simple (not easy, but simple) behavior.
And then there's all the things you can't teach using primarily correction, for instance, try to teach a dog to do 12 weave poles correctly primarily using correction, not sure it can even be done, much less hold up in a national competition. But I'm guessing it isn't that you want to switch methods completely, just that you want to know where to put corrections in. My answer to that is that "violence begins where knowledge ends." The better you learn to split behaviors into small pieces, learn to watch dog body language, prevent situations from occuring, and keep your reinforcement rate high, the less you will find you need to "correct" your dog. If you really feel you need to correct, go ahead and do so, and then think about how you might have prevented that from arising in the first place, either through training or management.
One of the things that happens with dogs who don't experience a lot of punishment is that they are more willing to try to new things, which is what makes some of the "amazing" things possible. It can also be crazy making if the dog isn't taught when it is appropriate, and when not- when I first started using PR, my dog was wild because I didn't know how to establish limits without using punishment, which I was trying to avoid. Punishment has an overall depressant effect on behavior- which can be very reinforcing for the trainer who doesn't want his dog trying new things, or wants the dog to be more subdued when not actively engaged in training. I prefer my dogs to be creative, but not everyone does! I'm currently working on some very cognitive tasks with my young dog, object discriminations and matching to sample- something that takes a lot of confidence in the training method because of its complexity. If she were wary of the training, I really don't think it could be done, and I don't know anyone except very PR trainers who even try. One of the side effects of using PR as your primary method is that you begin to have a lot more respect for your dog's abilities, and consider what can be accomplished as a team.
Please consider joining one of the training lists such as clickersolutions (a yahoo group) which can help you work through different training solutions.
- With dogs it's all about association. A dog can either associate positive or negative emotions with something. The problem is that most people treat their dogs like they are human. For example when a dog owner returns home to find the dog has shredded a newspaper they yell at the dog. The dog has no idea why their owner is yelling. They perhaps chewed the paper 3 hours ago and have no idea this is why the owner is yelling. They are more likely to think that the owner is displeased because they welcomed their owner home!
There are some really useful dog training tips here...
http://www.training-dogs.biz
I believe that if you reward good behavior that your dog will associate that good behavior with whatever reward you give them. That doesn't mean you can't use negative reinforcement for your dogs negative behavior. It just means that you have to make your dog understand clearly exactly what they are being rewarded or punished for.
So when a dog jumps up you should say "down" in a firm voice without shouting. If they persist perhaps give them a firm tap on the nose and say firmly "down". If you take action at the exact moment they exhibit negative behavior they are more likely to associate that action the unwanted behavior.
- It's very sad to see that so many people have been abused by their parents that they only know how to be abusive back. By the way they recommend negative punishment it shows the uneducated dolt with menial mentality. Please don't listen to them!
- Positive reinforcement is the only way to go. ( positive reinforcement instead of negative punishment )
- I am a firm believer in corrections. I don't see how 100% effective ignoring unwanted behaviour can be. It makes no sense to me.
When you have an 80 pound Doberman thinking it's okay to jump on you - are you willing to accept the risks that may occur if you just ignore them? Most dogs' brains don't work that way anyways - they may become more frustrated with you ignoring them and just keep going at it. At least that's how my dog would be! He's too smart - he needs to be told what is "good" and "bad".
It's good that your dog is listening to you. But, depending on his age, new behaviours can develop. A perfect walking dog may develop behavioural issues with socialization (not saying this is what happens, just using it as an example). So although the dog is perfect in the home, wouldn't you want the dog to be well behaved in public too? So in that case - if the dog is becoming aggressive towards other animals or people - do you thinking a clicker is going to help that? Or ignoring that behaviour? Of course not! Some people may think ignoring that is a good idea and then when the dog finally stops, to give it a treat - but do they understand what they are reinforcing? They just told their dog that the previous behaviour they were displaying was good!
"Negative punishment" as one poster has mentioned is not what a correction is. It's not hitting your dog or getting mad at it. It's something that takes their mind back to the task - a simple touch, or correction by leash in most cases.
There has to be a happy medium. You need positive reinforcement when you want a dog to learn a new behaviour - but it should also be phased out. Example: I taught my dog to sit or heel with treats, but he doesn't necessairly get them anymore just because he did what I asked - now a treat is just that, a treat. But ignoring a dog's behaviour seems, for lack of a better term, just wack lol.
I don't know - to each their own I guess. I'm just not a believer in the "positive reinforcment" training in the sense that there are no corrections being used.
A lot of people come on here with problems with their dogs and a lot of it can easily be fixed with effective corrections.
ADD: Oh, the bunny huggers are out to play! Judging by the TD (didn't know you weren't allowed to have a preferred method of training LOL). Either that or Greek's fan club is pissed off haha
ADD: Tarson...speaking of dolts...correcting your dogs does not mean you are abusive. Get a grip.
- I thinks its a crock both that and clickers.
I think its for the bunny huggers who are more worried about Fido liking them, then training them. They do not realize that a dog loves you more when he knows his place in the world-as a DOG.
I think clickers and cookies are for people who believe that their dog needs to be bribed and are more interested in training their dogs stomach then their brain.
There is a tried and true method that has trained thousands upon thousands of dogs over many DECADES. A method that creates reliable happy dogs who obey on one command and one command only.
http://www.koehlerdogtraining.comClicker training is for those who like multiple commands, sit, sit, sit, good sit.
Really wonderful until Fido is running across the street and by the third or fourth command he is now a speed bump.
Forget the cookies and clickers and use traditional dog training if you want a truly obedient dog.
ADD: WOW, I just went and read the other answers!! WTG you guys!!!
