Didnt realise so many people believed in Alpha nonsense.

mashlee08 · 2012-08-07

So I have moved areas and become part of a face book group for the local dog park. There are quite a few members who post, asking how do I get my puppy not to be the alpha over the older dogs and blah blah blah she needs to know she is at the bottom. I REALLY did not realize how many people bought into that BS. Sigh.

xxxxdogdragoness

· #161 · Sep 11, 2012

TorachiKatashi said:
The biggest problem with any type of training that uses aversives or corrections is that you're putting blame on the dog when the blame belong solely on your own shoulders. If you haven't shown the dog in a fair, understandable manner what is expected of them in a given situation, then you have no one to blame but yourself when they choose to behave in their own way. If you want to use corrections, start correcting yourself every time your dog does something "wrong," and see how motivated you suddenly are to work on your training.

See I believe that to be partly true: in the case of Josefina, who knows what she is supposed to do but doesn't, was very frustrating but got no inhumane treatment, sometimes has to have a negative consequence for disobeying commands (controlling her bite when on other dogs are playing community dog with a fetch toy) if she puts her teeth on a dog that causes them to yelp she gets a time out forthr rest of the play session no ifs ands or buts.

Doing that has diminished her instances of doing things she knows is naughty being rude = no more fun period

Reply

Save

Like

S

spanielorbust

· #162 · Sep 11, 2012 (Edited)

This is where I come at the topic as well.

I've not ever had a dog that stretched the limits, but I WAS a child that deliberately disobeyed, and I was gifted with one as pay back.

I believe there has to be dogs like this as well?

To give a for instance - with a child not a dog - my youngest, who was two and knew better, decided to chomp down on his older brothers arm. The older brother was screaming bloody murder and in pain and I said in a firm voice "-his name-stop biting your brother!" The youngest looked at me knowing EXACTLY what I said and gave me a glare that said 'forget you' and bit even harder. He was enjoying a good bite (and I remember doing that exact thing to a sister of mine when I was young).

I used an aversive action called a smack on his behind, at which moment he let go, which was the only goal I had at that time. His brother deserved protection and didn't need to be tortured with teeth clinched onto him while I attempted to convince the little one to do what he already knew was right.

The lead up to the bite was that they were sitting and cutting paper for some kind of a craft project we were doing - supervised the whole time.

It was the first time he was spanked and spanking was only ever a rare occasion, as I avoid aversives with kids and dogs, but I cannot believe that they are not absolutely necessary some times.

SOB

See less See more

Reply

Save

Like

KBLover

· #163 · Sep 11, 2012

dogdragoness said:
See I believe that to be partly true: in the case of Josefina, who knows what she is supposed to do but doesn't, was very frustrating but got no inhumane treatment, sometimes has to have a negative consequence for disobeying commands (controlling her bite when on other dogs are playing community dog with a fetch toy) if she puts her teeth on a dog that causes them to yelp she gets a time out forthr rest of the play session no ifs ands or buts.

Of course - that's just negative punishment (time outs, withdrawal from the fun/social time). You also know Josefina knows the correct behavior. Of course you can punish a refusal to do a known behavior if you know the dog knows (whew).

I think what Torachi was saying is that if you have a dog in the learning process, or you just 'expect' the dog to do whatever even though the dog hasn't been taught what that whatever is - correcting the dog is unfair. I know if I ask Wally to get me a blue pillow and he just looks at me like "what are those sounds coming out of your mouth?" and I punish/correct him - that's unfair to him. Who's fault is it that he doesn't know what I'm talking about? Not his.

However, I usually attack from another angle. If Wally does refuse a behavior, I'm more looking at what made him refuse. That changes how I approach any solution. If he was too distracted, then I know more proofing is in order. If he tried to do it, but did it wrong/got mixed up, I need to refine more and/or maybe reteach the other behavior he did (put it on better stimulus control).

I can also see it as "if the behavior is conditioned strongly enough, would the dog ever refuse?" To me, that's an interesting question. Can a behavior be conditioned so strongly that the dog will almost absolutely (since there's no such thing as 100%, but can I get 99%) perform the behavior first time every time? If so, then is it really the dog's fault a behavior might only be 86% reliable?

See less See more

Reply

Save

Like

KBLover

· #164 · Sep 11, 2012

spanielorbust said:
This is where I come at the topic as well.

I've not ever had a dog that stretched the limits, but I WAS a child that deliberately disobeyed, and I was gifted with one as pay back.

I believe there has to be dogs like this as well?

I would say there is.

I can think of times Wally pretty much did that like he was "seeing if I was serious about it". I never hit him, unless it's during play, but I have removed him from whatever he was doing.

I also think it depends on the scope. If we're talking all dogs ever and everywhere, then sure, aversive is probably necessary as saying 100% of all dogs never need aversive for anything is not something that's likely to be true. If I'm talking about the one that's in my care and am in a day-to-day relationship with - then that answer might be different.

Reply

Save

Like

xxxxdogdragoness

· #165 · Sep 11, 2012

workerant said:
I suspect it's a lot like kids. Some kids need a firm hand, some thrive with lots of independence. You don't have to buy the entire hierarchy model of canine social structure to be firm with your dog.

This^^^ Positive or whatever you call it doesnt work on every dog... Just like a firm method doesn't work on every dog the methods I use with buddy (very gentle, as aversive free as possible) would have made Izze laugh. Same with josefina now that she has matured, if there is no negative consequence for her actions she won't take me seriously.

Say what you want about that I'm not applying the technique enough & that dogs do respond to it & they do... But some learn to outsmart the standard CC/OC & click-&-treat procedures.

Reply

Save

Like

Pawzk9

· #166 · Sep 11, 2012

dogdragoness said:
Say what you want about that I'm not applying the technique enough & that dogs do respond to it & they do... But some learn to outsmart the standard CC/OC & click-&-treat procedures.

I sometimes see dogs ask questions: will this be reinforced? is this allowed? I try to answer those questions clearly, but it tells me the dog is not conditioned to the behavior. Often we take short cuts and skip steps. And by the way, your use of negative punishment (time outs, etc.) is every bit as much an element of operant conditioning as click and treat.

Reply

Save

Like

KBLover

· #167 · Sep 11, 2012 (Edited)

dogdragoness said:
This^^^ Positive or whatever you call it doesnt work on every dog... Just like a firm method doesn't work on every dog the methods I use with buddy (very gentle, as aversive free as possible) would have made Izze laugh. Same with josefina now that she has matured, if there is no negative consequence for her actions she won't take me seriously.

Say what you want about that I'm not applying the technique enough & that dogs do respond to it & they do... But some learn to outsmart the standard CC/OC & click-&-treat procedures.

What part of "being firm" falls outside of operant conditioning and classical conditioning?

Likewise, are you saying you never give positive reinforcement to Josefina? Doing her work, as I remember you saying she enjoys it (I believe it was Josefina, sorry if I'm mixed up), is reinforcing and is something you adding to her environment, so it's positive - therefore +R.

Same for negative consequences. How does that fall outside of operant conditioning? Why do negative consequences have to always be aversive?

Reply

Save

Like

KBLover

· #168 · Sep 11, 2012

Pawzk9 said:
And by the way, your use of negative punishment (time outs, etc.) is every bit as much an element of operant conditioning as click and treat.

Exactly. That's why I don't understand what's "outside of OC/CC" that she's mentioning.

Reply

Save

Like

xxxxdogdragoness

· #169 · Sep 12, 2012

KBLover said:
What part of "being firm" falls outside of operant conditioning and classical conditioning?

Likewise, are you saying you never give positive reinforcement to Josefina? Doing her work, as I remember you saying she enjoys it (I believe it was Josefina, sorry if I'm mixed up), is reinforcing and is something you adding to her environment, so it's positive - therefore +R.

You are correct, the reward IS the play, throwing the ball, getting to join in etc... i use treats to train young pups & just ignore as much undesired behavior as i can, then in adolescence i gradually rein in the slack, mine never ask 'will this be renforced' as they know it always is because i never fail to renforce desired behavior, behaviors i want to occur again.

BUT the difference is i dont simply ignore things like not sitting for the ball to be thrown, breaking stay, not doing a down & more important, not coming when called (which i make sure i teach before & make sure the dog knows it before i chastise them for not doing it)

Same for negative consequences. How does that fall outside of operant conditioning? Why do negative consequences have to always be aversive?

no, they dont, i dont make my dogs feel bad about themselves for not 'obeying' they just dont get what they want.

Reply

Save

Like

NDpups

· #170 · Sep 14, 2012

I think everyone here recognizes that some dogs have tendencies to dominate and some to the degree that their tendency is to fight all perceived challengers. BUT, the main factor as far as I'm concerned is that the dog shows me and my commands respect. Even if the dog has successfully defended his turf over and over, I expect him to follow my rules, which includes not attacking other dogs. Much of the disagreement comes from the terminology. And I too am a little sick of people pulling the theory out and using it as a club to try and beat up other posters. What I call "respect" you may call "submission", but I don't care what you call it. I train my dogs to respect my commands, and I don't really think it's the same thing as a dominant wolf in a wild pack. It is a special situation that does not really translate, IMO. If anything I think we have the role of the pup's mother, showing them what is acceptable and what is not. Especially since domestic dogs have been selected for infantile properties which remain for their whole lives.

See less See more

Reply

Save

Like

xxxxdogdragoness

· #171 · Sep 17, 2012

Yeah I don't know the official term for it by I practice the "you'll get what you want only IF you do what I want FIRST." lol

Reply

Save

Like

L

lovejc

· #172 · Sep 17, 2012

I think I will have to use more positive reinforcement/treat training with my girl Ruby. She's a bit hard headed and when I use aversives she either doesn't care or she seems to challenge me more. She is just a teenager (almost 15 months) but I'm thinking of using more treats as she is VERY food motivated. I have never trained this way but I am open to it.
The way I figure it- maybe I've never used this method before but maybe she wont reach her full potential if I don't...

Reply

Save

Like

Pawzk9

· #173 · Sep 17, 2012

lovejc said:
I think I will have to use more positive reinforcement/treat training with my girl Ruby. She's a bit hard headed and when I use aversives she either doesn't care or she seems to challenge me more. She is just a teenager (almost 15 months) but I'm thinking of using more treats as she is VERY food motivated. I have never trained this way but I am open to it.
The way I figure it- maybe I've never used this method before but maybe she wont reach her full potential if I don't...

Thing is it is not just about using "more treats". It's about using the treats thoughtfully and in a way where the dog understands exactly what is being reinforced. That means a marker, and it also means that the treat is not a bribe - I make it a point to not even reach for the treat until the behavior has been performed. I do find it works a lot better than routine aversives.

Reply

Save

Like

Top Contributors this Month