Not a deduction that follows IMO. The author makes no mention of what effective positive punishment or dominance theory is. The author qualifies his proposition as I see it like this; "confrontational behavior modification techniques" [as disclosed in the questionairre], under the guise of "positive punishment" [quoted for emphasis] or dominance theory, and in the hands of novices, is ineffective by those novices' own admission.So positive punishment is now part and parcel with dominance and pack theory ....
Well, depends on what you would consider one dog dominating another.So positive punishment is now part and parcel with dominance and pack theory ....
Very true. However, without the author's operational definition of what positive punishment entails, his or her conclusion is useless to the reader, particularly to the reader who might want to replicate whatever the author did to arrive at that conclusion.Well, depends on what you would consider one dog dominating another.
You could very well consider a correction a higher-ranking dog does to a lower-ranking one as positive punishment.
The higher one added something to the lower one's environment in an effort to reduce the lower one's repeating that behavior. Sounds like P+ to me.
If a handler tries a similar tactic, it could also be consider P+ applied in the imitation of what an alpha dog would do to a lower one.
The Blackwell study starts on page 52.I could not find the Blackwell study on the internet (for free anyways)
How could the author's "own observations" not be his fact? I don't read it as, this is well documented fact, just how he's concluded off his own observations.In contrast the article states the author's opinion as a 'fact':
As a Negative reinforcement trainer that uses Positive punishment and Negative Reinforcement. If there were more people interested and not lazy, trainers like me would not be needed. I actually have a statement that I tell all potential clients when they call for info. I tell them when I'm done training their dog (30 days to at longest 45 days) That I can't drive to their homes beat them up to make them continue the dog work. They are given a DVD of their dogs doing the work and instructions on how and what they should do with their dogs. I would bet the farm that very few owners work their dogs at home more than 30 and 60 days after dogs are picked up then all work quits. When I was younger and had an ego I would get angry, now I just tell them on phone (ahead of any training) that if they don't do the work I will have spent the money. It's not a big deal, just thought I would dump it on here.That is their interpretation. I think a better interpretation is that the people who take the trouble to attend a training class are on average more motivated and better trainers than people who do not, and that that notion goes double for people involved in agility classes. To me, classes are fine, but much less important than the qualities of the trainer.