DGG said:
If my dog disguises pain for survival (which I'm agree with you on this one), and *I* don't, wouldn't what *I* feel with the prong collar on my obviously less protected arm, and my reaction to it, outweigh my dog's reaction? If I feel nothing but discomfort, isn't it safe to say that my dog does too?
If you don’t feel pain, it’s not punishing to you. This also says nothing about what it is to the dog. The dog determines what is and is not punishing. So you can’t even begin to make an argument in this case. Now if you feel discomfort, and you agree dogs hide pain, the only argument you can make is your dog is sensing some level of pain; but at what level? Why do we want to cause our dogs discomfort when we’re asking them to do something completely unnatural (walking in a straight line in heel)? We don’t.
Even IF his pain senses are heighted (which you or I have no proof of), you still have to add into the equation that I felt NOTHING but discomfort, and I have NO thick hide, fur etc. to protect my arm.
It doesn’t matter what you felt, I’m not teaching you how to walk on heel with leash corrections. The only way I can prove the leash corrections are effective is to count them, not test the tool on my arm and say
ahhh that’s good enough! What you’re suggesting is that our dog would have the same emotional reaction to a painting by Picasso. Do they? The only correct answer is, I don’t know! So to, to what a dog may feel from a physical punishment.
In fact I have the boniest arms possible... now, I'm not the best at math, but I would think that, even with a dogs "heightened pain sense", the fact they have thick fur and hide (especially my Coal) would most likely make the effect equal to be around the same as what my completely unprotected and "less heighted pain sense" on my arm feels... and let me add; I'm a complete wuss when it comes to pain! I actually have less of a pain tollerence than most people and my wiring is a little screwed so that normal wear and tear on my joints that most people don't feel even more than a little discomfort, turns into aggonizing pain for me.
But you’re still not a dog, and this still isn’t a very good justification for the use of physical punishment. You must prove the punishment is effective. There’s no need to compare apples to oranges if you count your punishment over time.
I never said I correct my dog 10 times on a walk one day, and then go a week without any and then 10 on another... this argument makes absolutely no sense.
I never said you did either. In fact, I didn’t discuss your training methods. I was giving you an example of what an ineffective punishment was. Do you know what the definition of punishment is? I’m not talking about the dictionary definition. I’m talking about the definition commonly used and known from learning theory. A punishment is a consequence that follows an operant response (something the dog does) that decreases (or attempts to decrease) the likelihood of that response occurring in the future. Notice this definition does not define what that consequence is…it doesn’t matter. If the punishment does not decrease the response from occurring in the future, what is it, if it’s not at the very least annoying? I trust that you don’t want to annoy your dog during training, correct?
A correction is given for a bad behavior when it occurs. It would be impossible for anyone to correct (or reward) the exact same amount of times every single day, as corrections nad rewards are based on the dogs behavior.
I’m not sure what you’re saying here, but it’s very easy to count the number of punishments you give, and record those numbers over a period of time. If the ratio of punishments over time does not decrease, does this not demonstrate the effectiveness of your punishment? If it isn’t working, why would we want to continue doing it? Isn’t that the definition of insanity? BTW, I’m NOT calling you insane. I would presume you haven’t counted your punishments over time.
Dogs (or any living animal for that matter, including humans) will do whatever bennifits THEM. They learn what behaviors give them a reward that is bennificial to them, and what behaviors lead to an unwanted reaction which they will avoid.
This is not always true. Some dogs also learn to shut down. This is called learned helplessness. This behavior does not benefit them, yet dogs that are under stress do exactly this. Why? Because behavior does not only occur in the realm of the operant (behaviors you can observe). Behavior does always occur classically, however (what the dog associates with the behavior). If the dog associates heeling with an annoying consequence, your consequence will exacerbate the problem - more than teach your dog to not pull. Yet another reason to quantify punishments.
I would never do anything to hurt my dogs. I used a shock collar on Linkin once as a last result, and quickly threw it into a box in my closet because his reaction told me all I needed to know; this training tool was abusive and unnecessary when I'm SURE there's another method out there more affective to teach him offleash work when i have an unfenced yard... the method I've found is an extremely slow go, especialy for Linkin who will listen like gold for five minutes but the second he sees an opportunity to go chase kids on their bikes he's gone (he was abused by kids on bikes when he was with his previous owner).
I have not suggested you would hurt Linkin. I am explaining to you what I would constitute as abuse. You wondered, so I’m answering with my opinion. I went on to explain how to remove the emotional argument…count your punishments and prove they reduce over time. If your punishments do reduce over time, what argument can I make about whether your punishment is abusive? Not a very good one.
Now consider what you just stated… A tool is just a tool, you make this same argument, so I’m not sure why a prong collar is acceptable to you where a shock collar is abusive. For some dogs, a shock collar saved their life, is this abuse?
If everything else has failed after months of trying, and the prong collar works the best, I think it's safe to say it is the tool for MY dogs.
I’m not sure what you’ve tried, but hypothetically speaking, if all else failed, and the prong collar proved to be effective, yes, that is the tool for your dog. But most dog owners don’t start from the least aversive method and work their way down, as evidence by the supposed trainer named in this thread.
The degree of correction also depends on individual dog. Coal is more sensitive than Linkin and if I used the same degree of correction and praise as I do with Linkin he'd be cowering in the corner! He's a very soft dog, and even for HIM all other 'Purely Positive' methods of heel training did not work.
There’s no such thing as “purely positive”. Every behavior has a consequence (negative or positive), whether you’re conscious of it or not. So I would question the reinforcer. I would question your mechanical skill. I would question your environmental control. Reinforcement always gets behavior, there’s no exception to that. Punishment does not get behavior. Refer back to the definition – punishment attempts to
decrease a response, not get a response. You can’t punish a dog to heel. You can withhold punishment while the dog is heeling, but this is a reinforcement.
If I used the same amount of encouragement and praise for Linkin as i do with Coal he'd be bouncing off the frigging walls and not learning a single thing. With Linkin I have to remain 'calm and assertive' (not to quote any specific dog trainers I may or may not agree with), or he doesn't get ANYTHING out of training. As he's growing older and maturing I change my methods to fit him, as he IS calming down the more he matures.
It is amazing how you can control behavior by manipulating the antecedent (being calm), and by manipulating the consequence (level of reinforcement). This is all explained with learning theory.
I'm just saying... why write it off completely? Why not even CONSIDER the idea that it may be right for some dogs (when used properly as it should, and according to that dog's personality), and it may be absolutely terrible for others. I'm willing to admit training methods I don't find incredibly useful to be useful for SOME dogs. I'm not willing to write off ANY training method unless it's the type where you have to BEAT your dog to get him to listen, which is just oldschool crap in my opinion.
Do you find qualifying and quantifying punishment as writing them off? I mentioned earlier that the definition of punishment does not define what the consequence is. To me this means it CAN BE anything I want it to be. However, I don’t dump out my tool bag and grab the first tool I find. Have you tried to nail in an uncut 2x4 with a level? It doesn’t work that way. The Dogfather would suggest it does. No! I lay my tools out in orderly manner. I start by measuring where the 2x4 will go, I mark the cut line with a pencil, I use square to scribe the line, etc, etc.
