[DogGoneGood]

I understand a good deal of people on this forum have differing opinions on different training methods and I know the e-collar can sometimes be a touchy subject for some people. So lets please keep it professional This post is purely for educational purposes...

I've been researching methods concerning the e-collar for months now and have breifly talked to a few different trainers on the subject as best I can (some things are really hard to explain via internet and it's one of those tools you don't want to give an "idiot" the "how to" manual, and I totally understand that).

The reason I've been researching it is because I was viewing this tool as a last result for Linkin's recall. I've tried every other tool at my disposal and method I've been taught or come across to teach him a solid recall but every time the second that leash is unclipped he's off like a shot and there's no getting him back (unfortunately I don't live where there's a fenced yard and don't have any say in that department). Once agian, this thread is for educational purposes and I'm not seeking advice Just giving a bit of history.

I converse with a fellow trainer via e-mail and have brought up this problem with Linkin. He mentioned how he's used e-collars for (as he calls it) "Leash Literate Dogs". These are dogs that are 100% awesome on leash but the second it's off they become door knobs (Linkin fits into this category, especially when it regards his recall). I told him I DO have an e-collar but don't use it because I'm too wary to. I didn't really know HOW to use it and wasn't comfortable with the idea of "shocking" my dog. He told me he uses it to "shape" behaviors rather than correct, although that he sees a place for it in both areas. He then sent me some articles to read. It didn't get the exact answer I was looking for regarding shaping, but I think I'm starting to understand how he views shaping.

Now, I wouldn't critisize his methods, I'm just looking for some understanding on the subject.

The way I see it; this shaping involves "stiming" the dog (no command given first). When the dog comes to you you praise it. If the dog doesn't come you tap the stim button and also "reel" the dog in because the dog is also on a long line attached to a regular collar. You keep doing this until the dog gets the "light bulb" and then you add in your command.

To me this doesn't make complete sense. I can understand (somewhat) the REASONING behind it, but to me, as a method to train, it just doesn't make sense. I'm open to different methods of training if it will work for certain dogs, but to me this would be the equivalent to putting a prong collar on my dog and repeatidly giving a correction and then praising when he comes to me out of fear, when I haven't given him any idea as to what he SHOULD have done first. I believe that if you're going to use corrections you should first give your command and give the dog a chance to actually respond to it then when the dog doesn't respond you give a correction (be it via a collar or just verbal) and then you show them the correct thing to do (ie: "reel" the dog in).

What I've understood of "shaping" is it's something you do when the dog is first learning a command. So if you want to teach the dog to come you use your lead to "reel" the dog in and show him what to do, so you're shaping the behavior and then you praise to teach him "yes, that's the thing to do". I don't understand for the life of me how giving a dog a correction (which, regardless of what anyone says, that's what the e-collar does!) when you haven't even asked anything of him first is considered as shaping.

So what are your thoughts? Regardless of whether or not you've used, would ever use, or even agree with using an e-collar, can this tool be used to "shape behaviors" or is it simply another tool that gives you more freedom (for me, it's easier to transition to off leash for my leash litterate dog) but is essentially a tool for giving corrections?

Just looking for a bit more insight on the subject, as I'm a newb to e-collars and want to understand them fully first.

[Curbside Prophet]

Originally Posted by DogGoneGood

The way I see it; this shaping involves "stiming" the dog (no command given first). When the dog comes to you you praise it.

The "stim" in this case is dependent on when you actually stim. If you stimed while the dog was sniffing a tree, the stim would be a cue, no different than a verbal recall cue. If you stimed while the dog voluntarily recalled, it would be a secondary reinforcer. Your praise being the primary reinforcer.

If the dog doesn't come you tap the stim button and also "reel" the dog in because the dog is also on a long line attached to a regular collar. You keep doing this until the dog gets the "light bulb" and then you add in your command.

This is negative reinforcement. Your stim (an aversion) is repeated and ceased once the dog performs the desired behavior.

but to me this would be the equivalent to putting a prong collar on my dog and repeatidly giving a correction and then praising when he comes to me out of fear, when I haven't given him any idea as to what he SHOULD have done first.

In the negative reinforcement example, yes, it's exactly the same in theory.

I believe that if you're going to use corrections you should first give your command and give the dog a chance to actually respond to it then when the dog doesn't respond you give a correction (be it via a collar or just verbal) and then you show them the correct thing to do (ie: "reel" the dog in).

Negative reinforcement is not punishment. You can only get behavior from reinforcement. So you would use negative reinforcement to develop the behavior before you proof the behavior and use correction.

What I've understood of "shaping" is it's something you do when the dog is first learning a command. So if you want to teach the dog to come you use your lead to "reel" the dog in and show him what to do, so you're shaping the behavior and then you praise to teach him "yes, that's the thing to do".

If you have to reel in the dog...that's not shaping. Shaping involves voluntary behavior on the dog's part. For example, you'd shape a sit by waiting for the dog to sit, mark it, and reward it. Sometimes you have to break the behavior down into tiny, tiny increments until it's exactly what you want. So again, if you're shaping sit, you might mark the point where the dog's butt moves a centimeter towards the ground, but may or may not sit. The end result of shaping, however, would be a dog offering the behavior volutarily without any physical prompts.

I don't understand for the life of me how giving a dog a correction (which, regardless of what anyone says, that's what the e-collar does!) when you haven't even asked anything of him first is considered as shaping.

When it's not a correction and reinforcement.

So what are your thoughts? Regardless of whether or not you've used, would ever use, or even agree with using an e-collar, can this tool be used to "shape behaviors" or is it simply another tool that gives you more freedom (for me, it's easier to transition to off leash for my leash litterate dog) but is essentially a tool for giving corrections?

If the dog is in fact leash-wise, I'd want to spend a lot of time in a secured area practicing recall without a leash, before using an e-collar. Not everyone has the time, patience, or resources to do so, however.

ETA: I should have explained that the reinforcer in negative reinforcement is the aversive stimulus going away (minus, or negative),

[wvasko]

Hypothetical situation, trainer and dog are walking, dog is out there being a free spirit, trainer does not say anything and buzzes dog, many dogs will beat feet back to trainer. BUT this is a trainer who has the ability to read these dogs properly. That's the difficult part of collar work. To be on the safe side the Hypothetical trainer is in a completely fenced in area or a large indoor facility. This is going to stop spooked runaways etc. which occasionally will happen. This is not in anyway advising anybody to use an e-collar, as that is a personal training program.

[Marsh Muppet]

Originally Posted by DogGoneGood

I don't understand for the life of me how giving a dog a correction (which, regardless of what anyone says, that's what the e-collar does!) when you haven't even asked anything of him first is considered as shaping.

I can't help with that, as it is not the generally the accepted methodology. There is a school that supposedly uses the e-collar as a teaching/shaping tool, but I know nothing of the method--besides their students appearing extremely well trained. There is no book; you have to enroll in one of the franchise schools if you want to learn more.

As to the general use of the e-collar for recall (or anything else), it can be a wonderful tool. Contrary to internet histrionics, it is not inherently inhumane. The lowest setting on my collar is imperceptible to large majority of the people I've demonstrated it on. I can feel it, but most people cannot with the prongs touching the inside of the wrist. With lots of increments up the scale, it is not hard to find a working level that effects the desired response, but without overwhelming the dog. Modern collars--assuming a high quality unit; a collar is not something you want to cheap it on--can be used on even extremely sensitive dogs. The point is not to induce seizures and cause smoke to pour out from under the dog's coat.

Once a dog has been conditioned to the fact that "come" is not an advisory opinion, it shouldn't require much in the way of continued stimulation. It should be rare, in fact. Having a dead reliable recall, in the face of any distraction, and at considerable distances, can be a matter of a dog's life or death.

That's the "why". The "how" is not a matter for experimentation by novices.

[DogGoneGood]

Thanks for the replies.

Curbside Prophet - You always make me feel like an idiot because I have to read your posts twice to understand what you're talking about LOL

I found this article: http://www.dobbsdogs.com/library/schutzhund/schutz.html which I think explains it the best out of any article I've read.

Is this basically like what you're talking about too?

Either the articles I read previously were wrong or I was the one who read them wrong because it was my understanding you "tap" the stim button (and I'm sure it said that) and then reel the dog in to teach it what to do. Once you've done that for a while (it said by the second session is usually when you introduce a command) and that you stim repeatidly and give command and then stop when the dog comes to you.

ETA - oh, you're correct on the "shaping" term as well, Curb. I was the one confused on that. I get all the different dog training deffinitions mixed up and confused at some times and tend to just make up my own so then other people think I'm wrong when we're actually talking about the same thing but calling it two different things. So, my bad

I think the two articles are pretty much the same but different wording in a way. This second one (the one I posted) explains it pretty well, that you're teaching the dog to come ASAP and to do that you're teaching him to avoid the stim.

Ugh, okay my brain's hurting and I feel like I'm going around in circles on this and lost my train of thought... I should take a break and then come back to it. But the article I posted did make things clearer for me, Curbside; is this kind of what you were talking about?

Originally Posted by Marsh Muppet

I can't help with that, as it is not the generally the accepted methodology. There is a school that supposedly uses the e-collar as a teaching/shaping tool, but I know nothing of the method--besides their students appearing extremely well trained. There is no book; you have to enroll in one of the franchise schools if you want to learn more.

As to the general use of the e-collar for recall (or anything else), it can be a wonderful tool. Contrary to internet histrionics, it is not inherently inhumane. The lowest setting on my collar is imperceptible to large majority of the people I've demonstrated it on. I can feel it, but most people cannot with the prongs touching the inside of the wrist. With lots of increments up the scale, it is not hard to find a working level that effects the desired response, but without overwhelming the dog. Modern collars--assuming a high quality unit; a collar is not something you want to cheap it on--can be used on even extremely sensitive dogs. The point is not to induce seizures and cause smoke to pour out from under the dog's coat.

Once a dog has been conditioned to the fact that "come" is not an advisory opinion, it shouldn't require much in the way of continued stimulation. It should be rare, in fact. Having a dead reliable recall, in the face of any distraction, and at considerable distances, can be a matter of a dog's life or death.

That's the "why". The "how" is not a matter for experimentation by novices.

Muppet - I think we posted at the same time :P

Yeah, from what I've read quality of collar makes a huge difference as well. The one I got wasn't exactly cheap, but isn't the BEST either. If I had the money I would love to get a better one, but just don't have the money for it. It has 10 settings on the remote and I've tried them on myself but can't feel a thing until about 5, but it's my understand that that doesn't necessarily mean the dog can't feel anything below those points, right?

What's the name of this school? I'm wondering if it's the same place my trainer friend went to :P

[Curbside Prophet]

Originally Posted by DogGoneGood

Curbside Prophet - You always make me feel like an idiot because I have to read your posts twice to understand what you're talking about LOL

I like a 6 dollar burger at a 1 dollar price. Don't you?

I found this article: http://www.dobbsdogs.com/library/schutzhund/schutz.html which I think explains it the best out of any article I've read.

Is this basically like what you're talking about too?

Mmmm ya, it's pretty much the same as you described, negative reinforcement.

The article was a little confusing in that it assumed the dog understood the command, yet used the collar to teach the command. That's probably inherent since it's written as an introduction to the collar.

[Marsh Muppet]

Originally Posted by DogGoneGood

What's the name of this school? I'm wondering if it's the same place my trainer friend went to :P

I was referring to Fred Hassen's Sit Means Sit schools. All I know of his method is what I read in a piece written by Captain Haggerty (who was like the Jack LaLane of dog training in NYC). My comments are not a recommendation, nor are they a criticism of the system.

PS: by a "quality unit' I was referring more to reliability than the number of levels (though more is better). Cheap units have been known to stim dogs randomly or not at all.

[TooneyDogs]

My understanding of the e-collar and recalls is that the intensity of the stim gets lowered as the dog gets closer to you....the quicker the dogs comes, the quicker the stim is reduced. It reminds me of the old recall method called Boogey Man. The dog is put on a long line and then scary things happen....by that tree, next to the shed....loud noises/firecrackers/flags popping up/people shouting. You'd scare the dog and 'teach' him that the only safe place is next to you.

[Marsh Muppet]

Originally Posted by TooneyDogs

My understanding of the e-collar and recalls is that the intensity of the stim gets lowered as the dog gets closer to you....the quicker the dogs comes, the quicker the stim is reduced.

I'm sure you get a thousand twists on any technique, if you poll a thousand different trainers. The way I learned was to recall the dog (after previously training the recall) and stimming the dog all the way back. The stim ends when the dog gets back to you. The dog eventually has to return against resistance to stop the stim. This gets the dog driving back to you at flank speed.

[DogGoneGood]

I know I keep saying I need to get off the comp because I'm too tired to think anymore, but I seem to be addicted...

Curbside - I think what they mean is when a dog KNOWS a command but is refusing to do it, then the e-collar is introduced. A dog can not respond to a command and know it at the same time, it just means that they aren't listening 100%. Linkin has a good enough understanding of "Come" to do it 90% of the time on a long line but the other 10% he waits for me to have to show him what to do because he's simply refusing to do it (something else is more interesting). Off leash his recall is about 1% effective because he's learned from experience that he can take off and do something really cool and exciting that he otherwise couldn't do if he came back to me. Instead it's just boring ol' me in the boring ol' yard. Which is why I decided to seek another method to teach him leaving is bad and coming back to me is good. I haven't simply decided to just amp up the negative either, but also amp up the positive (getting SUPER excited when he comes back even though I was taught to stay calm with him because he gets excited too easily, and using a lot of play time as a reward).

I really wish I could have gotten Linkin when he was much younger. When I got him he was 8 months old and already had so many bad habits that it's made training him extremely difficult, although at the same time, I guess I'm thankful for that experience as I'm sure in the long run it'll make me a better trainer because I've learned a LOT with Linkin.

Originally Posted by TooneyDogs

My understanding of the e-collar and recalls is that the intensity of the stim gets lowered as the dog gets closer to you....the quicker the dogs comes, the quicker the stim is reduced. It reminds me of the old recall method called Boogey Man. The dog is put on a long line and then scary things happen....by that tree, next to the shed....loud noises/firecrackers/flags popping up/people shouting. You'd scare the dog and 'teach' him that the only safe place is next to you.

I don't think it's quite the same. This "Boogey Man" method could seriously scar a dog for life. If I used it I'd have a dog who was seriously sketched out about all sorts of situations where as I'd rather have a confident dog who hasn't been scared into listening to me. The stim on an e-collar shouldn't be something PAINFUL or scary but rather discomforting. If you're scaring your dog into returning to you the stim is WAY too high on the collar. At least, that's my understanding

[Curbside Prophet]

Originally Posted by DogGoneGood

Curbside - I think what they mean is when a dog KNOWS a command but is refusing to do it, then the e-collar is introduced.

No, what I think they mean is the dog knows "here" already (he was taught using some other method), and now we're going to associate "here" with the stim. The author says to "stim" the dog, then cue "here", stim again and repeat the stim until the dog trots his way back to you. That initial stim is to associate the stim with "here".

That's no different than if I taught the dog a visual cue for sit without a verbal cue, and now wanted to add a verbal cue. Using negative reinforcement with a leash that process would be: "sit", visual cue, repeated leash jerks until the dog sat.

But again, this is an introduction to the use of an e-collar, and as such, the author is not really describing how to proof behavior with it. They get into "corrections" when they start talking about using higher levels of stim.

[DogGoneGood]

Originally Posted by Curbside Prophet

No, what I think they mean is the dog knows "here" already (he was taught using some other method), and now we're going to associate "here" with the stim. The author says to "stim" the dog, then cue "here", stim again and repeat the stim until the dog trots his way back to you. That initial stim is to associate the stim with "here".

That's no different than if I taught the dog a visual cue for sit without a verbal cue, and now wanted to add a verbal cue. Using negative reinforcement with a leash that process would be: "sit", visual cue, repeated leash jerks until the dog sat.

But again, this is an introduction to the use of an e-collar, and as such, the author is not really describing how to proof behavior with it. They get into "corrections" when they start talking about using higher levels of stim.

Hmmm... mayhaps I'm interpreting it differently because I wasn't reading the article as a "how to introduce an e-collar to your shutzhund dog" but rather as further information about using an e-collar - as that's what I'm looking for. To me the same basic principals can be used to proof a dog in a way like I need for mine; but more as a correction tool I suppose.

I find it a bit confusing; in fact quite a bit confusing; because so many things I've read about using an e-collar for different methods and different purposes sound pretty much the same. How can a method be used for one thing and then changed juuust slightly and be called a method for something else?

[GreatDaneMom]

im not going to get into methods of using it and such for training...becaues i have to leave for work in about 5min LOL. but i will say this:

Great Dane named Molly. just turned 1yr old. came to daycare, totally crazy. knows no sit, down, stay, off, leave it, recall, etc. NOTHING! of course she is a pain in the butt the whole time she is there boarding. owners pick her up and we explain she needs some obedience training, let them know we offer classes etc. and why she needs the training. they say they ARE training her basic obedience WITH and e-collar.

now here is the problem with this dog using an e-collar for training. she is afraid of getting "shocked". she knows it comes after the beep. they ask her for a sit, if she doesnt sit, they beep...she then sits. she will do things with the collar on BUT as soon as it is off, she has no reason to do anything, because she will not be shocked. hence why it seems as though she doesnt know ANY commands when shes not wearing it.

[wvasko]

DGG

Curbside Prophet - You always make me feel like an idiot because I have to read your posts twice to understand what you're talking about LOL

You are very fortunate only having to read his stuff 2 times. Just keep one thought in mind using an e-collar is like anything else. You have heard on forum about how using a prong collar is fine for special dogs and for trainers that know how to use it properly. Trainers learn proper prong and e-collar etc etc etc by using it on dogs. All the books/articles/links are not going to help you. No matter what the problem is eventually you got to press the button to get the reaction, read the reaction, learn from the reaction. It's the moment of truth.

GDM
I have no idea why anybody would use an e-collar on a dog that young. They need a new trainer.

[Elana55]

The problem I have always had with E collar work is getting the dog to associate the simulation with the behavior desired. This is not to say the E Collar has no place, but that its use can backfire on you in very dramatic ways. For instance, if your dog is sniffing a marking tree and you say "come" and the dog keeps sniffing and you stim the dog, he will more often than not associate the stim with the TREE and not with the fact that he ignored the command. I am not sure that any of these articles adquately address this. They all assume the dog will associate the stimulation with not doing the 'right' thing. With repetition that may be true, but at first it may create another problem which may be very difficult to fix.

Beyond this, if your dog is smart enough to be 'leash wise' he will very quickly become 'collar wise' and will learn to obey well with the collar or dummy collar in place but may become as recalcitrant as ever with the collar off.

[Marsh Muppet]

Originally Posted by Elana55

This is not to say the E Collar has no place, but that its use can backfire on you in very dramatic ways. For instance, if your dog is sniffing a marking tree and you say "come" and the dog keeps sniffing and you stim the dog, he will more often than not associate the stim with the TREE and not with the fact that he ignored the command. I am not sure that any of these articles adquately address this. They all assume the dog will associate the stimulation with not doing the 'right' thing.

That may be true if the dog is not properly conditioned to the collar in the first place. The process is necessary to teach the dog what the stim means, and how he can avoid it or shut it off. I don't see that anything is assumed. The articles are not intended to take the place of a program of instruction. They are merely an overview.

Originally Posted by Elana55

Beyond this, if your dog is smart enough to be 'leash wise' he will very quickly become 'collar wise' and will learn to obey well with the collar or dummy collar in place but may become as recalcitrant as ever with the collar off.

Collar-wiseness can be avoided, to a large extent, by properly conditioning a dog to the unit. This starts with the dog wearing it for a month or more before it is ever energized. I've heard more experienced trainers than myself remark that "they all get collar-wise, eventually". This may be true (I haven't trained hundreds of dogs), but if you do it right, it shouldn't be a huge obstacle. If you randomly intersperse "Amish" style corrections, collar-wiseness should be largely irrelevant since the dog can't predict the source of correction. If you play your cards right, the dog won't figure it out until after his responses are thoroughly trained (i.e., after the avoidance of correction ceases to be the primary motivation to correct responses to commands).

[rosemaryninja]

Am I right in thinking that using an e-collar to shape a behaviour would be like shaping with a clicker, only in reverse?

[Marsh Muppet]

Originally Posted by rosemaryninja

Am I right in thinking that using an e-collar to shape a behaviour would be like shaping with a clicker, only in reverse?

I'll admit to not knowing everything, but I don't see how unless the collar has tone mode or a vibrating pager mode. The tone on my collar could easily substitute for a clicker, and can function at up to 1 mile under ideal conditions. The electric stimulation is always considered negative by the recognized e-collar trainers that I've read. I'll also admit that I haven't read everything. BTW, several people I know claim their dog's dislike the vibration more than the working level of stim.

[DogGoneGood]

I've actually been putting the collar on him a lot with no intention of using it yet just to try and avoid him becoming collar-wise. Of course no garantees, but I think if I do it right he shouldn't figure it out, or like Marsh Muppet said, hopefully he won't figure it out until AFTER he's been trained enough for the recall to become automatic.

Wvasko - I know all the articles in the world won't give me the experience I need. I really wish there was a trainer close by who has experience with it but there actually is only one other trainer in this town and they do the treat and click thing, so I'm kind of assuming they don't have experience with an e-collar (although we know what "assuming" means...).

I just don't want to wander into it blind. If I can learn as much as I can first then I feel I'll be a little bit more prepared as to how it works, how important timing is, how to fit the collar, how to find out what level to use etc. etc. I feel I've pretty much learned all these things by now and just need to get up the guts to go out and actually try it.

I'm thinking I'll put a long lead on him with the collar as well for the first while. Last time I actually tried using the e-collar on him (this was last summer) he ran past the range and was gone within a minute. So this time I'm using the long leash for the first while and am going to move slowly in progression, only when I feel he's solid at one level will we move onto the next.

GreatDaneMom - so let me get this straight... the dog was being corrected with the e-collar even though it didn't have an understanding of the commands in the first place? How is the dog supposed to understand what "sit" is if they didn't TEACH it to him first? I'd suggest the training through you guys again!

[Elana55]

Originally Posted by rosemaryninja

Am I right in thinking that using an e-collar to shape a behaviour would be like shaping with a clicker, only in reverse?

Yes. I believe you can say this.

With a clicker you mark and reward the desired behavior. The click is associated with something positive (reward) when the desired behavior is exhibited.

With the E collar you correct the undesired behavior by applying an aversive with the reward being the cessation of the correcting aversive for the desired behavior. When using a tone or vibration, the tone or vibration is warning that an aversive correction is coming if the undesired behavior does not cease and be replaced with the desired behavior.

Both methods break the desired behavior down into increments with increasing requirements as the desired behavior becomes more ingrained in response to a cue such as a verbal "come here."