Which do you think is more effective? I think the Koehler Method is far more effective than the Treats/Clicker "Positive Reinforcement" Method. IMO, dogs need to know how to be submissive, and needs to know consequences for bad behavior, but not abuse, just proper corrections. And of course lots of petting and praise for good behavior.
IMO, the whole new age "politically correct" treats/clicker training is not nearly as effective.
Opinions?
Dog Training For Dog Problems
Recommended Answer:I've had the opportunity to use both types of training--Koehler method of obedience training as described in the book, "The Koehler Method of Dog Training", and also clicker training/food rewards. Properly executed, the Koehler Method of dog training is hands down, far and away, much the best for getting a happy, reliable, off leash dog in a reasonable amount of time (about 10-12 weeks for basic AKC Novice level obedience).
I found clicker training to be more useful for teaching tricks, but not very reliable for real-world obedience training around distractions.
Koehler worked equally well on my hard-headed Airedale, my easy-going but fearful sheltie, and my soft and submissive pit bull mix who also had dog aggression issues and separation anxiety. I used the Koehler method to put obedience titles on my dogs, earning an CD on my sheltie and a CDX on my Airedale. Both dogs earned at least one High In Trial award, with scores always in the 190's--our best being a 199 1/2 out of 200. Judges frequently commented to me that my dogs looked very happy to be working and were impressed with their focus and level of precision.
They are equally enjoyable and reliable off leash in public. The heavier the distractions, the more focused they become on me. An invaluable habit to develop in a dog.
I don't want to denigrate anyone who chooses to use clicker training, and many people use it very well for their own purposes--I just didn't find it nearly as effective for achieving the reliability, focus, and responsibility in the dog as the Koehler method. If you follow the directions in the book step-by-step and don't skip, rush, or revise, it's a very fair method that presents the requirements to the dog in an easy to understand, gradual manner, which in turn preserves the dog's confidence.
It works just fine for soft dogs and small dogs. As with any training method that uses corrections as a consequence for disobeying known commands, you choose the level of correction that fits the temperament of the dog. With softer dogs, or dogs with fear issues, you also pay closer attention to increasing responsibility gradually, making sure they truly understand what you want before you raise the bar--they will not tolerate rushing the training the way a more confident dog might. This is not anything unique to Koehler training--it's just good training, period, that you strive to be fair to the dog, as he is now.
I recommend that anyone that is thinking of using the Koehler method for the first time, to read the obedience section of the book several times, and make a effort to locate someone nearby who is familiar with the method to guide you through it the first time.
This quote from the late author, animal trainer, poet, and philosopher Vicki Hearne may be useful:
"Here it is important to remember that there are many training techniques, and that the differences between them are not to be captured by the idea that some are more 'humane' than others. 'Cruel' and 'humane' are not informative adjectives in front of 'training technique'. If someone tells me that a certain trainer is 'cruel' or 'humane', I...know no more about that trainer's way of thinking and working than if my informant had said 'green' or 'red plaid.'
There are only two relevant questions about any training method. One is: Does it work? The other is: Does it lead to work at liberty?"
Choosing Your Dog Training Video
- Agree!!!
There is a modern belief that discipline is a bad word. Not so.
Most owners want well behaved, socially acceptable dogs, but the majority are no longer trained correctly [if at all] & are mentally left to fester.
Dogs require pack structure & clear, calm & strong leadership. If a dog has been taught the rules, knows a command & does not obey first time, the command should not be repeated, as it becomes so much white noise & the dog learns it can ignore the handler. Commands should be enforced with a proportionate correction.
For example one of my Dobermanns has a high prey drive. If her prey drive was up because she was chasing a rabbit/fox & she ignored the recall, a strong enforcement of the command would be required to snap her out of the undesired behavior & bring her back into pack, with her focus on me. If a hard voice was not effective, then other training tools such as the e-collar may be an option to correct the errant behavior.
Reward/clicker will not be effective if you are training a dog to switch from prey to pack, as the drive satisfaction from chasing a rabbit would exceed the lure of the treat.
There is no reason however, why reward based training cannot be used in conjunction with disciplining a dog for undesired behavior.
- Both are tools. Just as in everything in life there are tools that work for one job and yet are not the best tool for another job.
For a very soft (as in temperament) dog - clicker training is a great way to start and proofing needs to be done with a skilled and light hand.
For a hard dog - clicker training is laughable.
For my purposes - operant reward conditioning ( which also uses positive punishment) works in most situations to first lure a behavior and then teach it. Proofing (ala Koehler) is necessary to solidify the behavior.
Edit: I would guess all the thumbs down are because we aren't allowed to have an opinion.
- I am not familiar with Koehler, but I assume that it involves punishing wrong behavior?
I think dogs are different, and so are trainers, and you have to tailor the training method accordingly. I am not a touchy-feely- I -need- my- dog to- love- me- kind of person. I expect my dogs to behave a certain way, and I can accomplish most of that with NILIF. I consider a "good boy" and a pat, or additional privileges, to be adequate compensation for most good behavior.
If a dog expresses a behavior that is categorically not acceptable (like aggression) I believe he should fear for his life. :o)
Having said that, I recently learned more about marker training, and I can see how some of my dogs could benefit from more positive reinforcement. You need both the carrot and the stick.
I trained horses for many years, and one thing I learned was that two people could use two completely different approaches, and still have the same result.
Plus nobody knows it all....you can always learn something new.
*****
DeeDawg - I'll check it out. :o)
*****
DeeDawg - ahhhh - I looked at an overview, and it sounds a lot like what I have always done - with my horses, too:
.
Set up a situation where the desired behavior is the best natural choice from the animals point of view, give the animal time to think it through, and realize that the behavior is the best (most comfortable) choice, then ask for the behavior and reward it, and finally demand the behavior.
See now, I didnt know this was a school of thought - it just seemed like common sense to me. :o)
I dont see this as being incompatible with marker training, since marker training asks the animal to think things through, and offer behaviors, until the correct behavior is rewarded.
- The idea of "Positive Reinforcement training" ONLY is a joke, it simply can not be done. The simple reason is because when you withhold giving the cookie you are using "Negative Punishment". So at the very least SOME of the Koehler method has to be used.
Personally I am a firm believer in Operant Conditioning, BUT there is way more to Operant Conditioning than just Positive Reinforcement.
Probably most misunderstood is the late Rex Carr method called "force training" where Positive Punishment is used to prevent a behavior (like no-goes and refusals) from ever happening in the first place. This method is commonly used in field trial training, but it is surprising how few understand the concept even tho' they use it.
- koehler- HANDS down.
sometimes when training a frivolous trick i use treats to direct the dog, but for general obedience, it's koehler all the way. i can't risk having the dog not listen to me on a recall or a heel just because i'm not holding a cookie. if he refuses a roll-over if i don't have a cookie (which he wouldn't, but for argument's sake) it wouldn't be life-threatening or anything.
poor behavior and failure to comply with commands should ALWAYS be corrected. dogs shouldn't get off scot-free because they "didn't feel like doing it." that's why they are called "COMMANDS", and not "suggestions."
i recommend clicker training for dogs who are very fearful or have trust or confidence issues, though.
all my dogs are really hard and have strong prey drives. cookie training wouldn't mean SNOT to them if a squirrel ran by...
- Buy the book and read it from front to back. Form your own opinion .
Many people over the years have made negative comment about the Koehler method of dog training. After many years of me using the method with my own dogs and also teaching it to others, it is my opinion that some of the folks simply want to convince folks that what they do is better,,or they simply do not have a real understanding of the method, or lastly they will cherry pick small snippets of the method and present said small snippet as the whole method. For example; If a dog i was training tried to bit me,I may resort to actions that would be clear to the dog that it is unacceptable to bite humans. A cherry picking person might then say to others that "those Koehler trainer are harsh on dogs" but they would leave out the part about the dog tryin to get a good bite in. Furthermore the fact that 99% of the time this type of action is not needed would be left out. So I would suggest you read the book from front to back, try it with an honest effort and then form your own opinion . Mark
- Having trained horses, dogs and cats for the past 25 years my experience is that the Koehler method properly executed is far superior to the clicker/treats/ignoring bad behavior route. Properly done, KMODT has a test at every step to make sure the dog understands what is expected before moving on in the training. The method does not necessarily make dogs submissive but allows them to learn from the mistakes as well as successes and consistently produces reliably trained dogs that are a joy to live with.
- Koehler Method is the best of the two.
When I trained dogs I used something similar to Koehler. I trained dogs in basic obedience all the way up to a fully trained Police dog & I never used treats or clickers. I used lavish praise. But with the aggression dogs their treat was being able to release his aggression onto an agitator. The bite was their treat. Followed by praise & encouragement.
Never ever used treats for a job well done.
- You haven't learned much about clicker or marker training, have you?
This dog is TOTALLY trained, via clicker..When YOU can do that with a dog, let me know how YOU did it..I would love to learn from you!
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=ca…
Most successful trainers use a combination of training tactics, to get the best from the dog at each stage of training.
I challenge you to read these articles>
http://leerburg.com/markers.htm
http://www.clickerlessons.com/
I want to hear from you when you have learned more about training than Leerburg.
Myself..I never raise my voice or my hand to a dog, nor do I 'threaten' pain or painful consequences.
My dogs trust and respect me as a good leader, without me having to 'bully' them. ( I have trained well over 300 dogs)
- I think you have some misconceptions about clicker training.
I use Positive Reinforcement and Negative Punishment.
I do NILIF. (pretty darn strict in fact)
I feel there is too much potential for fallout with Positive Punishment.
ETA:
Too funny, thumbs down, ha. Thank god this question wasn't about which method you prefer, ooh wait...
Well I'm off to do a squishy gooey training session, also, drink the cool aide. Come to the other side, mwhahaha.
- Ah...how refreshing...someone w/balls...er,guts/spine (wouldn't want to be sexist) enough to dare to refute the touchy-feely,AR-brainwashed, new-age gobbledy-g-o-o-k in favor of training that's actually WORKED for several THOUSAND years!
Thank you.
But...beware the spiteful envious cry-babies here,OK?
- use positive reinforcement its far less traumatizing to the dog and most dog trainers that are good enough to get on tv use it
- KOEHLER METHOD IS NOT- I REPEAT NOT- ABOUT MAKING YOUR DOG SUBMISSIVE.
The fact that you think that is WHY people mis-interpret the Koehler method of training.
Clicker training is fine for tricks. It is not for obedience.
I train pure Koehler because I want to train my dogs brain not his stomach, besides, there are things in life far more interesting to dog then wanting a cookie. My dogs life can depend on them obeying me on one command and one command only.
The politically correct BS of clicker training is the same as mommy putting little Johnny on a "time out" when he misbehaves. How many of you are in restaurants or stores or and the little monsters are running around and screaming and the parents do nothing about it.
With Cookie training there is no consequence of the dog not doing the behavior, not getting a cookie is not a consequence the dog gets, and its not that much of a motivation if the dog finds something more interesting.
For those that want to learn about the real Koehler method, and not what "they heard" please visit
http://www.koehlerdogtraining.com
For those that say Koehler is not for "soft dogs" they are FOS.
Both my current competition dogs are "soft", one is a Rough Collie, and the other is a rescue/formerly abused, used to be scared of everyone and everything Pomeranian.
You could not get "softer" dogs. Both dogs are joyful performers, who wag their tails and are happy when working.
For a REAL dog trainer, the key to being effective is to train each dog individually and use the method in the correct manner that works for that individual dog.
Again those that say negative things about Koehler do not know anything about it.
Koehler is adamant about teaching the dog what you expect from it, days and days and days in a LOGICAL progression. No dog is ever corrected in any manner until after it understands what is expected from it.
- Whoa whoa whoa!!! You ALL know I employ corrections and believe in stern corrections when warranted but by the book Koehler Method is animal abuse, LOL! Koehler would correct a dog for not performing a behavior it hadn't learned yet...that's simply unfair. I believe in clicker training puppies and untrained dogs to teach them behaviors and then proofing behaviors and teaching a dog he MUST obey via corrections (Koehlerish but without the outdated logic of correcting a dog for something that's not his fault). Koehler Method no longer is even capable of working on the Schutzhund field, mostly because, Koehler trained dogs DON'T LIKE THEIR HANDLERS. Their recall is slow, and their independence and confidence is stripped out of fear of "messing up". There's no name for the modern method we have today...so I simply describe it as the 3 step training program: 1st phase = Learning phase that's done with clicker/marker training and positive reinforcement. 2nd Phase = Corrections to teach a dog it must obey, even if it doesn't want to. 3rd Phase = Distractions proofing, correcting a dog for not obeying during distraction....once you do these 3 phases in this order, you'll have a dog that actually likes you. You'll have a dog with a faster recall. You'll have a dog who enjoys work and training. And you'll have a dog that respects the fact that you're fair but serious, and that what you ask for must be done...this is the evolution of the fully trained dog.
-edit- Also I forgot to mention that there ARE times when you do correct a dog for something that he doesn't yet know is wrong. These are pack order infractions like disrespect (barking at your guests after being told "No" is a decent example). Also for "Bad Habits" like digging and getting into the garbage....in instances like those I crank up the e-collar and give them one good correction without saying a word.
- I think it depends on the dog. Some dogs are naturally submissive OR are very fearful and using a harsh training program may end up doing some damage to the dog in the long run. For other dogs, i agree that clickers and treats are not a good idea.
Take for example my dog and my aunt's dog.
My girl is an active Schnauzer mix that is small animal reactive and has no sense of decency with other dogs (meaning she tries to play before letting the other dog greet her.) When teaching a new behavior YES i use treats and a clicker, however to get rid of problem behaviors i use correction. She wears a Prong collar on walks just for this reason and i have used an e-collar - most behaviors went away with consistent correction and perfectly timed praise.
My aunt's dog is a shepherd mix that is VERY fearful. He need firm guidance and leadership, yes, but too much correction or too harsh corrections send him reeling. He is dog reactive mostly in their neighborhood, occasionally in my neighborhood when i "dog sit", but gets along with my girl (go figure.)
He cannot be corrected for his behavior around other dogs because it is based on FEAR and we shouldn't add to that (this is a recent diagnosis from a trained professional.) Instead we use a Halti and physically turn him around until he isn't staring head on at a dog. When he calms down and gives us his full attention, he gets a reward - this method has helped him TREMENDOUSLY (at least with me - he is able to greet other people and dogs without fussing.)
So you see, two different dogs with different personalities - the same method won't work on both. Clicker training is highly effective when teaching a behavior to a food motivated dog but NOT effective when trying to work with a "red zone" dog that would sooner bite than take a treat.
Any training program should be consulted with a trained professional. Improperly timed or used corrections are just as bad as improperly timed rewards.
- I disagree. Stay positive and you will get positive behavior.
For some reason, people find it easier to punish a dog than to focus on the good and train for positive behaviors.
Clicker training is more work than punitive correction and so people avoid it. In addition, people have this thing about taking their emotions out on a dog - well, we don't speak the same language so how can we expect good behavior for negative treatment?
Corrections don't solve the problem, they only send the message that you can cause a negative reaction. For some dogs, correcting them causes additional behavior problems. I have never heard of clicker training to create poor behavior.
You get what you give to animals. They are only as good as their owner/trainer/handler. If you give negative reinforcement, you may see negative behavior.
- The clicker will drag the dogs attention to the sound they have heard. The treats will show them the key to do tricks and will do good demeanor. You could try watching on Animal Planet. The show is called It's me or the dog.
