dog breed info website...

Darcean

So when I was first searching around for a breed I wanted, first settling on a czechlovakinan vlcak as my "dream" dog (I still want one haha), then, of course settling on a kai ken, I stumbled upon this site... It skewed my idea of how to train a dog to be quite honest.. for about a week. Haha.

I started to research in depth the different techniques to train a dog, but this site bugged me that the only way they advocate is the dominance theory, and that they are on the top of some of the google search lists. I know it's been discussed before on this forum, but I felt the need to look at different philosophies and techniques regarding training a dog. I, personally, am going to go for the science based training that doesn't involve dominance theory. Ie positive reinforcement(treat training, and possibly clicker training).

Though how I was brought up was for light taps on the nose, or a water bottle to squirt water for "punishment", but I am finding more and more that even that is a little too forceful for dogs, and cats. Weird? I think so. I am now going off into a different tangent, so it's time to get to the question at hand.

What are your thoughts on the various methods of training?

NavyDog

dog training methods are constantly changing as we are constantly learning about how dogs think. Growing up, I was always taught reward the good, punish the bad. Push a dogs butt down then give it a treat to teach it sit. If a dog digs, rub his nose in it and say "bad dog!". Of course that is very old fashioned but that's how it was. As I got older I started helping my cousin show dogs and she introduced me to the dominance theory. I was very uncomfortable with it and the drama that came with showing dogs so I got away from that and started getting into training therapy dogs. My instructor "taught" us that dogs have no feelings or thoughts of their own. They are purely primal and are not capable of affection. Dogs dont love you, they just associate you with treats, ect. Again, I didnt like that either. I believe dogs are capable of more complex thoughts and feelings but the guy did introduce me to click training which I think is great and works for just about any dog. It wasnt until I got out of high school in 2009 that I learned about 100% positive reinforcement which I got to say in combination with click training, is the best method for me. I worked full time for 3 years rehabilitating huskies with behavior issues at a shelter before I joined the Navy and positive reinforcement worked in every case I had. I think it mostly depends on the dog. My Amstaff had been abused by a former owner and is now super sensitive to the point of if you raise your voice to her, she will get depressed and shut down. Everything has to be super positive. My kai responds more to excitement so I have to make things fun for her.

zandrame

What site are you referring to? When I was reading your post, I thought you meant THIS site, and was confused.

The consensus here is positive reinforcement is the way to go.
Check out the Behavior/Training section for more -
http://www.nihonken.org/forum/index.php?p=/categories/behavior-training

In particular, read these threads
http://www.nihonken.org/forum/index.php?p=/discussion/6122/what-the-experts-say-about-the-dog-whisperer-cesar-millan/p1
http://www.nihonken.org/forum/index.php?p=/discussion/3851/more-books-on-behavior-training-and-care/p1

Crispy

I am pretty force-free with training methods, as a preference, but I think every quadrant of operant conditioning has its time and place. It's all about knowing what effect the methods you are employing will have, psychologically, on your subject.

I don't want my relationship with my dogs to be a contest and I truly feel heavy use of positive punishment (taps, water bottles, etc), make it a "contest". That said, if something is life threatening to my dog, I have no issue with making it a frightening experience to them so they learn to stay away (as in rattlesnake avoidance training). Maybe if I learn more, I may feel differently, but this is how I feel now with the knowledge I have now - but I am always learning and flexible to change.

I also believe that "light" positive punishment has had some part in causing my Shikoku to bite strangers. He targets hands (specifically, moving hands) but otherwise loves people. Somewhere, he had to learn that moving hands = threatening. I suspect, based on my conversations with his previous owner and how she described things, that she (or someone else in his life) was simply far too "hard" for him. While he trusts me and allows me to pet him, he still gets on-guard if I approach him or move by him quickly. Everything needs to be positive or he gets flustered, stressed, confused, and (in extreme cases) shuts down.

My Malamute, on the other hand, will become reactive and even aggressive with positive punishment. He has no tolerance for being "pushed around". I dunno about anyone else here, but if I trained my Malamute the "Cesar Milan" way, I'd probably have ended up bit a long time ago.

I don't want things to be a contest or stressful between me and the dogs. In the same stroke, there are boundaries they are expected to stay within - but I teach and enforce those boundaries without having to turn to positive punishment. I want to have fun, too.

Darcean

www.dogbreedinfo.com

For context... that was the website I was referring to.


I will post later. And no, I did not mean this forum

NavyDog

Quick question: what exactly is positive punishment? I've been hearing this a lot lately but it comes off as an oxymoron to me.

omgtain

in terms of the four quadrants of training, positive means adding something, and negative means to take away. So positive punishment is the addition of something punishing (shocking, striking, spraying, etc). Negative punishment is removing something as a punishment (time-outs).

zandrame

@NavyDog, yes, it can seem that way. But in operant conditioning, the term "positive" is used in a technical sense, for stimuli that are added as a behavior consequence. In contrast, "negative," means something is removed. In the same way mathematical numbers can be positive or negative, without inherently being "good" or "bad."

The actual consequences are what can be defined as good or bad - reinforcement or punishment.

Here is a picture -


Wiki - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement#Operant_conditioning

NavyDog

@zandrame thank you for the description. When I was looking into trainers around our new house, I saw positive punishment on quite a few of their pages. Glad I stayed away from them. Negative punishment doesn't sound bad though. I believe time outs and removing stimulus such as toys work great for certain dogs. My Amstaff is too sensitive for any form of punishment so I only use positive reinforcement and redirecting for her but for Yucca who is excitement driven, when she would chew or get into trouble, time outs worked well at teaching her not to

PoetikDragon

People who say they are 100% positive reinforcement usually also use negative punishment without realizing they are not "100% positive". That's perfectly fine - negative punishment is exemplified by NILIF (Nothing In Life is Free) and works along side positive reinforcement really well. The basic principal is that you take away something good (like giving the dog attention) when it is doing a behavior you don't like (such as jumping up on you). This is negative punishment. Punishment in this context is used to decrease the frequency of a behavior, it doesn't mean its cruel or retaliatory. Reinforcement in this context increases a behavior. You can use reinforcement to encourage a different behavior than the undesired one (eg. teach a dog to sit instead of jump when greeting visitors). However, it doesn't treat the real problem head on (don't jump on visitors) and can have slower results because its not the best tool for the job (reducing the frequency of a behavior). Positive reinforcement and negative punishment go hand in hand very well as safe, humane, and friendly ways to increase or decrease certain behaviors in dogs.

NavyDog

I agree they go hand in hand but I really never used any kind of punishment on her. No time outs because she never got in trouble and I never had to take away a stimulus because she doesn't treasure toys or food. She turns 6 in a couple weeks and I honestly can't think of anything she has done wrong. We have always just rewarded her for doing things right & she never tried to do anything another way. Of course she is a unique case. In every other dog I've had I've used both positive reinforcement and negative punishment

PoetikDragon

@NavyDog Depending on how you implement it, a "time out" could be positive or negative punishment. Would have to know what you mean by "time out" to really say. If you are adding something unpleasant to the situation, by locking the dog in a crate, room, or outside, then it is positive punishment. If you are removing something pleasant from the situation, by taking away all toys, treats, and attention, then it is negative punishment. In my experience most people take time out to mean some kind of confinement or restriction on the dog's movement, which would make it positive punishment.

EDIT: I personally don't want any negative associations with crates or kennels and never use them for punishment. Likewise, I wouldn't want a command to be a punishment, such as forcing a dog to sit for a time out like a child. And it is questionable whether a dog can really understand why its in time out anyway and associate it with the bad behavior. So really, time outs aren't a thing in my household. We do redirect and break up activities when dogs are over stimulated, but its usually just for a few moments.

NavyDog

By time out i mean putting the dog in a kennel or seperate room. I guess I thought of time outs being removing the dog from the stimulus or negative punishment. I've never thought of crate being an unpleasant situation because they like their crates. If you consider the crate unpleasant then I guess you can call it positive punishment but I would consider it negative. Either way I've never crated Cayenne.

PoetikDragon

You are correct, removing freedom vs adding confinement - two sides of the same coin. I was looking at it as positive punishment, because from the dog's perspective you are adding a new environment it wasn't in before - its tangible and concrete. The concept of removing freedom seems a bit more conceptual.

NavyDog

It really is an interesting debate though. Guess it really depends on how you use the crate & how your dog views the crate. I mostly use my crates for feeding and for going on trips so my dogs get excited when they are being loaded up but if someone only used the crate to put a dog in time out for being bad then the crate would be seen as a negative thing for the dog and make the punishment positive.

Losech

That website was obnoxious, I am not a fan. But I got incredibly irritated with the picture of a Hokkaido they had up, so I sent in pictures of Katana to replace it.

zandrame

@Losech, haha, I went to check it out, and now it is a Katana page!

Saya

Those are much nicer Hokkaido pics. I don't go to that info site much so didn't see pics before the change.. New pics are great though.

Myabee09

When Mya and Shelby have a disagreement (a.k.a.- they fight...usually over a toy) I usually put them in their kennels to calm down. I leave the doors open, but just separating them from the fight doesn't work... Mya holds a grudge and she needs time to herself afterward. They don't fight often, and I give them things to chew on when they do go in their kennels.
It works for us... they come out in their own time and they don't seem to associate the kennels with anything negative. I don't fuss them into the kennels,though. It's just a simple" let's go calm down" and I use a happy tone. I guess I use it more as a distraction from their disagreement than a punishment.

@Crispy if I had used the Cesar Milan method with Shelby, I probably wouldn't have gotten bit. Shelby would just be a nervous wreck! And Mya would never let me touch her again.

mdokic

LOL @Myabee09, Kona would be too!! Nate raised his voice once at kimber at the dog park (eating things she's not supposed to) and KONA went hiding under a bench, scared. My poor softy lol

NavyDog

@mdokic Cayenne is the same way. If yucca gets into something, Cayenne hides. Also if people are arguing nearby she will hide. She's gotten much better these last few years but it's been a lot of work

Myabee09

Shelby just looks like you've broken her heart... I've raised my voice while watching baseball and she got so upset! Our dogs and their tender little hearts..

BradA1878

I kinda hate the Dog Breed Info site too. I wish it would go away.

Darcean

Yeah, it has some good info about breeds, as well as some good pictures, but the way they try to push the dominance theory is disgusting. In a somewhat related topic, just yesterday I ran into a dog owner that have a rott, and 4 10 month old rott/pit or lab mix puppies, he was completely saying word for word the dominance theory, and using pretty powerful physical force to discipline them.. It was irritating to keep my mouth shut, and let it be because we were over there for a friend's birthday, and it was the friend's father. >.>



This thread has been an interesting read thus far!

Myabee09

That infuriates me!!! I watched a woman at the vet hit her pit bull across the face because it wouldn't sit. The people at the front desk couldn't see, so I told them what was going on. I don't know if anything was done about it, but I felt so bad because that dog was a sweetheart. It prolly didn't sit because that woman never taught it how.

I don't hit my dogs and people always comment on how sweet and well behaved they are. Just goes show that you don't have to hit or scare your dogs to make them well behaved.