# Study: More Isn't Better For Training Your Dog



## AbbyK9 (Oct 11, 2005)

Interesting reading.

Give Buddy a Break: More Isn’t Better for Training Your Dog | Wired Science | Wired.com



> Dog owners teaching their pooches to sit, come when called, and stop the shoe-chewing are better off giving their dogs breaks, rather than daily drills.
> 
> 
> Beagles trained once or twice a week for a short period learn more between sessions than those taught every day in long lessons. The results are partly based on the brain’s need to consolidate and cement what learns during sleep, says animal behavior researcher Helle Demant of the University of Copenhagen.
> ...


----------



## kiya (May 3, 2010)

Very interesting indeed. My trainer told me to do no training with Lakota 2 weeks ago. She's about 18 months old and has selective obedience in class, she is distracted easily. I think she's probably been to 25 group classes with a long break between the winter & finally getting spayed. It seems if I only do 1 or 2 repititions she's perfect, anything after that she's bored and doesn't "comply". So this week I just started doing a simple quick routine asking her to do things only 1x. I noticed this when I was asking her to take the dumbell. The more I did the less she wanted to take it.


----------



## fuzzybunny (Apr 29, 2011)

The only training I did with my two was the 1 hour a week we did at class and they are both pretty obedient.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

I've heard that before. My trainer tells me that when training something new, stop when she gets something right with a big hurray for her and let her think about it until the next day or later.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I do not admit it much, but the only training I do with my dogs is during class, once a week, for whoever is currently in classes. 

I do not expect my dogs to be finished in six or eight weeks. I just go on, slow and steady, and on, and on, and on. 

The interesting thing is that oftentimes, (not always), mine do better than the people who profess that they work with their dogs every day. I am not surprised with the study.


----------



## AbbyK9 (Oct 11, 2005)

My two cents ...

I like to work in little increments, such as five or ten minute sessions, when I am working on something new. I always start out and end with something she knows well (like sit or down) and throw in stuff she knows well when it looks like she may be getting stuck to boost her confidence before trying on the command she got "stuck" again, breaking it down into smaller portions or going back a step.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Sue, do you think that is because you aren't stressing your dogs?


----------



## fuzzybunny (Apr 29, 2011)

Jax08 said:


> Sue, do you think that is because you aren't stressing your dogs?


I'm not Sue but here's my 2 cents . I think (a) you're not stressing the dogs and (b) training can be naturally incorporated into daily activities instead of doing formal sessions.


----------



## TMarie (Jul 6, 2006)

Interesting article!

We train 3 days a week, always have. It doesn't matter which dog we are working with, Shepherd or Aussie, if we ever trained more then 3 days, they tend to not do as well. For instance, we know many people that will increase their training a couple weeks before competing in a trial. We don't do that. The few times we did, we found that the dogs tended to zone out more, or just not be as *up* on trial day. So we just keep our same training routine, regardless if we are getting ready for a trial or not.




AbbyK9 said:


> My two cents ...
> 
> I like to work in little increments, such as five or ten minute sessions, when I am working on something new. I always start out and end with something she knows well (like sit or down) and throw in stuff she knows well when it looks like she may be getting stuck to boost her confidence before trying on the command she got "stuck" again, breaking it down into smaller portions or going back a step.


We do this on the days we are not doing a full hour or so's worth of training.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

If I tried to train every one of them, every day, that would be stressing them. After the third dog, I would probably be tying them to the fence with zip-ties. No, that isn't even funny. 

I think that I am not pulling my high energy hunting dog out of a crate after being in it all night a pee break and then all day while the owners are working, and then rushing off to class with the dog. I think mine basically work off more energy at home and are not full of pent up energy when we are out there. 

But I don't know whether this is not stressing them or not. I mean, some people have their dogs out and around other people and dogs every day, and I do not. So they are probably a little more stressed in classes than those dogs. But since I generally take them through six to eight sets of classes in their first year, they get pretty used to seeing other dogs and people, and do not have a problem with it when I take them to shows.

Joy went to:
puppy 6 weeks
puppy 6 weeks
basic 6 weeks
advanced 6 weeks
agility 6 weeks
cgc 6 weeks
rally 6 weeks
conformation 3 weeks
advanced 6 weeks 

between 10 weeks and 17 months. That is 51 weeks of classes out of about 63 weeks. I missed about six classes with her for being in heat twice, so about 45 altogether. I took her to her first show last year in Cleveland at Christmas time, signed her up for four days, and finished in three with a 92, 93, and 94. Not wonderful, not bad. She was not stressed at all. 

Unless you are thinking I should be stressing them, pushing them to figure out thresholds or whatever. I am looking only for a great dog with people or other dogs, not a dog that will go for a bite sleeve -- that is just something I am not into. I do intend to try her on sheep when I can find that in the neighborhood (puppy match maybe, herding fun day). She does not have a problem with thunder or gun shots, I could probably get a TT on her without a problem. I am considering TDI with her as well. 

Bear and Dolly went into heat this week, so Heidi and Joy will take their places in class. Heidi because I need two legs for her RE and there is a show in August. Joy because I have not had her out in a while.


----------



## kiya (May 3, 2010)

The main reason I continue to go to group classes is the exposure to other dogs and because I still need training! My trainer throws a lot of different things out there. Last week it was the dumbell, I never even thought about it, and because it was something different Lakota was "right on". Having a well socialized obedient dog is very important to me. Believe me I am by no means a drill seargent! I really don't spend a lot of time doing drills. My biggest training is our daily bike ride maybe a few suprise recalls in the yard, sit or down for cookies.
I know she's still very immature and would rather chase butterflies. My dogs have plenty of time to be "dogs".


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Well, yes, you can tell a dog to stand while you are doing toenails or pulling floofs out of their coat, and you can have the dog sit while you fill the water bucket. I am still getting Bear prints all over my shirt so I must not be doing enough of that sort of thing. I really do not expect much out of my dogs, I do expect them to come when I call them, every single time. To go in when I tell them to, to go to my car and wait at th back for me to open the door, to not take my hat when I am bending over grabbing their bowl. To not walk in poo -- some of us are still working on that, and to wait after drinking to nose me, and to not knock over my pooper bucket or spade. Yeah, I do stress them out quite a bit I guess.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

I"m not sure how bitework is relevant in your post but no, that's not what I was thinking.  I was thinking that stressed dogs revert back to their original training so if you are pushing training then the dogs may be picking up bad habits along the way rather than taking it a bit slower and taking the time to teach it correctly without stress.

So, in theory, in a show there is more stress and dogs could revert back to bad habits.  I haven't shown so I really don't know the answer to this. Does this sound plausible?


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I think so. 

Maybe Heidi and Babs did great at the last show that I was so stressed about because they were stressed?

One thing about my training classes, is we do very little work off lead. Which means when I get to the ring, I am always crazy nervous. For some reason Babsy does BETTER off lead. I do not know why this is. So, they pay better attention to me, off lead, and revert to original training I guess.

I wonder how good my dogs could be with a good handler...


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Jax was better off lead and my agility trainer thought it was because she was less confident so therefore a bit more clingy. On lead, she was like "oh look at the bird! It's all good cuz I'm tethered to that blonde that give me cookies!"


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Well they do get dependent on the lead for direction. With the lead, they do not have to pay as close attention because if I turn or stop, it will be telegraphed. And I do not even mean a tight lead, just that it seems that with the lead on, they just sort of are aware of how its swinging. Without the lead, they are like oh, what is she going to do next.


----------



## Tbarrios333 (May 31, 2009)

I have to agree with this study to a point.
I think it's very easy to start letting your dog tune you out and get bored during training and taking breaks can definitely help that. Eventually, the longer the session and the more bored your dog is, you start rewarding for half-butted (there is my family version of the word) behaviors, which creates bad habits in training.
If you keep them short and fun, I don't think daily training can really be that detrimental to your dog.

I think most of the problems people have with training is that they can't make themselves interesting to their dog. Whenever I observe someone training their new dog, I can always tell right away who's experienced and who isn't. 

The less experienced people are really boring in their dogs eyes and they just don't get why their dog doesn't want to pay attention. Ie. the person is following their dog around saying "siiiiit... siiiiit... siiiit NO stop it... siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit." There's nothing wrong with that, but really it's not the dog's fault, it's the trainers fault. A break from training the siiiiit would be great here until the trainer learned how to be more interesting! 

The more experienced trainer is out there making a fool out of themselves. They make weird high pitched noises, they're quick with their rewards, they're always moving around, and they mark at the appropriate times. Most importantly, they can really read their dogs and know when to stop the training.

If you're seriously into competition however, I can see why it would be important to just let your dog be a dog and take breaks from training all together.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

fuzzybunny said:


> I'm not Sue but here's my 2 cents . I think (a) you're not stressing the dogs and (b) training can be naturally incorporated into daily activities instead of doing formal sessions.


Interesting! 

I read the study as saying that they only trained the dogs in the reported times and frequency - wonder if the beagles were around people the rest of the time or were they simply crated or kenneled. This would defintely make a big difference in the results i think.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

> I wonder how good my dogs could be with a good handler...


Unfortunately, I don't have to wonder about this - I get to see it whenever the trainer takes my dog's lead to demonstrate something in class (which she does quite often as he does the command very well)! AAACCCKKKK!


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Personally, I believe the conclusions of this study are over reaching for what they did. While a puppy may well benefit from fewer and shorter sessions it is certainly not true for an older dog. Dogs learn through repitition, and the only way to get repitition is to train. If folks were to only train once a week, the dog would be five years old before he was ready to title. 
Additionally, I believe that the methods used for training have a tremendous effect on this. If one relies solely on a dog "wanting" to comply for a "hotdog and/or hug" then surely daily sessions would not be as productive as the dog will surely lose interest.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Just got back from class. The last time Heidi was out (anywhere besides the stud owner's) or had any training, was late March/early April (just before she went into heat) and got her RA and her RE leg. The last time Joy was ANYWHERE other than my home (I live alone, and rarely have anyone over) was before Christmas when she got her RN in the Cleveland show at the IX center. 

Joy was first. She did not drag me. Her fronts were a little crooked as she was very interested in the lab pup next to us. But she did pretty good on everything. She was good on the sit for exam which she never had done before (for the CGC you are right next to the dog, for the BN, you are six feet in front). And then she did the stand so well that after class I asked the instructor to go over her -- obedience stand for exam. And she did that perfectly. Her stays were good. I could almost take her in for CD, the only thing I would be worried about is off-lead heeling. The girl was even sitting when I stopped without being queued for that. Joy will be two at the end of 

Heidi was awesome. She stood for exam for three separate people. I put her on a down stay walked across the ring, out of the ring, got a drink of my pop, and then walked back, and she never broke -- this is a dog that has not done a stay since one day in March/April. I worked her on lead and off lead, and she did the rally course with maybe two points off throughout. 

Dogs may learn by repetition, but I kind of agree with the study. If you train a dog slow and steady, and get the basics down, and make it light and fun, you can let six months go by with nothing and be able to come right back where you left off.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Zahnburg said:


> Personally, I believe the conclusions of this study are over reaching for what they did. While a puppy may well benefit from fewer and shorter sessions it is certainly not true for an older dog. Dogs learn through repitition, and the only way to get repitition is to train. If folks were to only train once a week, the dog would be five years old before he was ready to title.
> Additionally, I believe that the methods used for training have a tremendous effect on this. If one relies solely on a dog "wanting" to comply for a "hotdog and/or hug" then surely daily sessions would not be as productive as the dog will surely lose interest.


Normally I have a CGC and an RN by the time the dog is a little over or a little under a year old. Because I am usually working on other puppies then, it is usually longer before I do anything more with them. But I have seen people work with their dogs much more often, every day and it took them longer to get the same titles on their dog. I think that you might be surprised how well your dogs would do if you just worked them one day a week. I do not think it would take any longer to title them.

As for hot dogs or hugs. I did not bring treats with me. Of course I praised my dog when they did the right thing.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

I try to train daily. Something small and while we are just going about our everyday lives. Today it was backing without pressure (and with the help of a ruffwear egg)! I did see a video on the Leerburg site about giving your dog a break. It wasn't talking about limiting per week but actually giving your dog a couple of months break in the 'off' season.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

selzer said:


> Normally I have a CGC and an RN by the time the dog is a little over or a little under a year old. Because I am usually working on other puppies then, it is usually longer before I do anything more with them. But I have seen people work with their dogs much more often, every day and it took them longer to get the same titles on their dog. I think that you might be surprised how well your dogs would do if you just worked them one day a week. I do not think it would take any longer to title them.
> 
> As for hot dogs or hugs. I did not bring treats with me. Of course I praised my dog when they did the right thing.


 I know what a CGC is, but I am not familiar with an "RN" (Registered Nurse??). It does not surprise me that you can make a CGC at 1 year old, even with training once a week. 
I also know people who train frequently yet take forever in titling a dog, this speaks more to the skills of the trainer than it does to any thing else. 
I will disagree with your last assertion. It is simply impossible to accomplish things and move to the next thing if you only train once a week. Actually, when I teach something new (retrieves in particular) I will do two or three sessions per day initially. It is very important to me that the dog moves quickly through the first steps. I think it is a very bad idea to allow a dog to wallow in the same situation for an extended period of time.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Jax08 said:


> It wasn't talking about limiting per week but actually giving your dog a couple of months break in the 'off' season.


I do agree with this (for the most part) for a trained dog. There is a very large difference between this and only training a young dog once per week or only working that trained dog once per week while preparing for competition.


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

Zahnburg said:


> I know what a CGC is, but I am not familiar with an "RN" (Registered Nurse??).


I have to admit, I always forget what RN is as well, and often think registered nurse. In fact, it is Rally Novice:

American Kennel Club - AKC Titles and Abbreviations
RN	AKC Rally® Novice:
The letters RN may be added after a dog's name when it has been certified by 2 different judges to have received qualifying scores in Novice classes at 3 licensed or member rally trials.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Well, Heidi managed 97 in her last RA (Rally Advanced) leg, and a 97 (out of 100) on her RE (Rally Excellent) leg on the same day after being completely off of any training for months August to end of March/April. Both were first places.

I think people over train. If you are training for something specific, if you have a dog that needs constant repetition to be sharp. Maybe different dogs need different levels of training. I find that mine do pretty good with an hour once a week as a puppy and then a refresher now and again, as an adult. 

I have gotten CGCs at less than a year, but then I think you are not necessarily seeing adult temperament. I passed the test like four separate times with one of my dogs, just because I wanted him to be in some class and the test was given at the end. We do not have Schutzhund around here. not much of anything really around here. So we take whatever we can get. And as there really is not much out here, beating my dog about the head with the same old stuff, day after day after day after day would bore them to death.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

selzer said:


> I think people over train. If you are training for something specific, if you have a dog that needs constant repetition to be sharp. Maybe different dogs need different levels of training. I find that mine do pretty good with an hour once a week as a puppy and then a refresher now and again, as an adult.


 You can think whatever you want. If you are happy with the way your dog performs with that sort of work ethic, then so be it. However, I will say that those that I know who are most successful train routinely (Ie. every day). 

I will also add that I find it impossible to imagine bringing a dog to a trial with training once a week in a reasonable time. If you train once per week that is 4 times per month, I can do more training in a week. So how can you logically suggest that a dog would be ready just as quickly if it takes you one month to do what I do in one week? Even if my training is half as effective as yours, I can still expect to see the same results in half the time. (Ie. If it takes me 8 sessions to do what you do in 4, and I train 4 times per week to your one, I will accomplish the same thing as you in two weeks as opposed to your four weeks) Further more, I have seen numerous folks who do work the dog in this fashion, once a week at the club. These dogs, without fail, will spend months stagnating in exercises that can be taught in a matter of days.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Yeah, whatever, I am perfectly happy with scores of 97 out of 100 and blue ribbons. Perfectly happy with a dog moving up and getting two first places on the same day in two different classes, and the other dog taking 3rd in obedience. 

In 50 ring attempts, with ten dogs, 44 qualifying, 11 first place, 6 second, 6 third, and 2 fourth placements, often getting first and second or second and third in a show. Ten dogs with RNs, two with CDs, two with RAs and an RE leg. I am perfectly happy with the results. 

Rush, Arwen, Babs, Jenna, Heidi, and Whit, titled in 2007
Arwen and Tori in 2008
Milla and Ninja and Babs in 2009
Joy in 2010
Heidi and Babs in 2011, so far. 

I have had to be really selective on the shows I have entered for the last couple of years, due to employment.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Selzer,

Very impressive. I imagine that the competition must be quite ferocious if you can take 7 or 8 months (depending on whether it was March or April) off training and still manage such results.


----------



## DFrost (Oct 29, 2006)

My drug class is 10 weeks, 5 days a week, 8 hours a day. Seems to work pretty good for us.

DFrost


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

I would be very intersted in seeing the results of this done on several different breeds. I'm not really convinced that this is not a highly breed-specific issue. Beagels are not exactly known to have a high desire to work with and for people...whereas the opposite is true of GSD's. So, I wonder if that desire to DO SOMETHING for you and use their mind has an effect on how frequent the sessions should be. 

I do think that short sessions are way more effective. Previously, the classes I've done have all been these long hour ones. I'm doing private OB lessons right now that are only 20 minutes long (it's a whole night of lessons and you sign up for a slot). I find they are WAY more effective than the longer classes (although it also helps that this is probably one of the best OB trainers in the US, but who knows how much of each really plays into this)


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

And in my opinion, this makes the study completely flawed:

*"Beagles trained once or twice a week for a short period learn more between sessions than those taught every day in long lessons."*

You can't compare apples to oranges and change more than one variable at a time in the study because you don't know what variable it was the contributed to the change. 

They changed two at once...two that are HUGE to the study. Both the frequency and the length. They should have only changed one at a time and really needed FOUR groups to make this study valid.

Once a week, short
Once a week, long
Daily, short
Daily, long

This is part of the issue I've always had with social scientists--both human and animal. They are way too fast and loose with the way their experiments are structured.


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

GSDElsa- you didn't read the article, did you? I had the same concern about multiple variables being changed, but this was addressed in the article:



> By the end of the experiment, each dog had the same total number of training sessions, but those taught once or twice a week for a short period performed much better by the final session, than those trained several times a week for a short time, or those trained one to two times per week for a long time. The dogs coached daily in long training sessions fared the worst, the scientists reported June 15 in Applied Animal Behavior Science.


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

wildo said:


> GSDElsa- you didn't read the article, did you? I had the same concern about multiple variables being changed, but this was addressed in the article:


You're right, I didn't. But it's still got glaring issues.....(from abstract in another thread)

*The training schedules of the 4 groups differentiated in frequency (1–2 times per week vs. daily) and duration (1 training session vs. 3 training sessions in a row). *
First, they actually went back and forth between once a week and twice a week in the same group? No no! 

And their wide-sweeping claim is quite ridiculous:
*All dogs were taught by the same person, ate the same things, and had roughly similar motivation levels, to make the experiment as uniform as possible. Dogs too lazy or nervous to take an offered treat, for example, were left out. Though this study looked only at beagles, the same study done with other breeds would likely give the same results, Demant wrote in an email.*

So you think that a dogs temperment and motivation can effect the study, but not a BREED difference? Not really sure how THAT makes sense


----------



## FG167 (Sep 22, 2010)

I enjoy training my dogs every day for short periods. They enjoy it or they wouldn't be dancing around all demanding and excited to start. I like their progress and I'm pleased with the work I put into them.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Zahnburg said:


> Selzer,
> 
> Very impressive. I imagine that the competition must be quite ferocious if you can take 7 or 8 months (depending on whether it was March or April) off training and still manage such results.


No, but I give my dogs a good foundation, and I can warm them up for a couple of minutes -- literally, and they are right back into it. In fact, as I moved up with my girl, I taught her in the parking lot something we had never done before in a few minutes and she performed in the ring no problem -- moving stand walk around -- they do something like that in Utility. 

Actually, the competitions was not stiff. I won going away. It was against my own score, running a course with only three points docked in the whole of it, off lead, with jumps, it was a couple of nice runs. 12 months before, she took first and second place in Rally Advanced, hight nineties. 

There was a much larger entry in Cleveland the year before when I titled Babs. She got a first and two thirds, but the second third was a three way tie for first place at a score of 97. I was third because my time was slower than first and second place winners, which is fine, it is the score that I am looking at, not the seconds. 

With a number of dogs, I find it is better not to cram, not to rush, not to train every day. You find it different. Maybe that is the lines. Maybe the dogs that you are training require more repetition, require regular work. Mine do not.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Most studies of learning that I have been aware of would certainly contradict the original one cited above - maybe they were just really smart beagles and so didn't need much work? If the study were true imagine how it could revolutionize dog training? Train less and enjoy it more! The less you train the more the dog learns and retains!


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

I like this study. It gives me an excuse to be lazy. 

I have always found it amazing how well my dogs have retained their training, even when we don't do regular drills. The other day I wanted Luka to bring Daddy his slippers. It took *me* a while to remember how to do it... me standing there thinking, with slipper in hand, the dog looking at me questioningly, and finally I said "Take it!" And she did, without hesitation, and brought the slipper to my husband. It had probably been 6 years since I'd done any dumbbell training with Luka.


----------



## AbbyK9 (Oct 11, 2005)

I think Selzer and Zahnburg and DFrost are talking Apples and Oranges, IMHO.

Any dog with basic obedience (sit, down, stay, heel, pay attention to handler) can get a CGC, rally title, therapy dog title, etc. Those are skills that can be taught with work in little increments or in a weekly class.

Those are the titles Selzer is talking about. Zahnburg is talking about working titles like Schutzhund or Ringsport. And DFrost is talking about working K-9's, as in police dogs. Those are some pretty different levels of training and keeping up on training, IMHO.


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

AbbyK9 said:


> I think Selzer and Zahnburg and DFrost are talking Apples and Oranges, IMHO.
> 
> Any dog with basic obedience (sit, down, stay, heel, pay attention to handler) can get a CGC, rally title, therapy dog title, etc. Those are skills that can be taught with work in little increments or in a weekly class.
> 
> Those are the titles Selzer is talking about. Zahnburg is talking about working titles like Schutzhund or Ringsport. And DFrost is talking about working K-9's, as in police dogs. Those are some pretty different levels of training and keeping up on training, IMHO.


It is also a difference in TYPES of dogs. IMHO
I have a friend who raises Am Showlines. Her dogs are very compliant. She shows them "sit" and it is as if it never occurs to the dog to move. I actually get jealous sometimes.


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

AbbyK9 said:


> I think Selzer and Zahnburg and DFrost are talking Apples and Oranges, IMHO.
> 
> Any dog with basic obedience (sit, down, stay, heel, pay attention to handler) can get a CGC, rally title, therapy dog title, etc. Those are skills that can be taught with work in little increments or in a weekly class.
> 
> Those are the titles Selzer is talking about. Zahnburg is talking about working titles like Schutzhund or Ringsport. And DFrost is talking about working K-9's, as in police dogs. Those are some pretty different levels of training and keeping up on training, IMHO.


Yes, but the study specifically *decided* that their results apply across the board to basic training to police dog training.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

I thought that they were just teaching the beagles basic simple commands?


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

From their abstract:
"Most domestic dogs are subjected to some kind of obedience training, often on a frequent basis, but the question of how often and for how long a dog should be trained has not been fully investigated. *Optimizing the training as much as possible is not only an advantage in the training of working dogs such as guide dogs and police dogs, also the training of family dogs can benefit from this knowledge.* We studied the effect of frequency and duration of training sessions on acquisition and on long-term memory. Forty-four laboratory Beagles were divided into 4 groups and trained by means of operant conditioning and shaping to perform a traditional obedience task, each dog having a total of 18 training sessions. The training schedules of the 4 groups differentiated in frequency (1–2 times per week vs. daily) and duration (1 training session vs. 3 training sessions in a row). Acquisition was measured as achieved training level at a certain time. The dogs’ retention of the task was tested four weeks post-acquisition. Results demonstrated that dogs trained 1–2 times per week had significantly better acquisition than daily trained dogs, and that dogs trained only 1 session a day had significantly better acquisition than dogs trained 3 sessions in a row. The interaction between frequency and duration of training sessions was also significant, suggesting that the two affect acquisition differently depending on the combination of these. The combination of weekly training and one session resulted in the highest level of acquisition, whereas the combination of daily training and three sessions in a row resulted in the lowest level of acquisition. Daily training in one session produced similar results as weekly training combined with three sessions in a row. Training schedule did not affect retention of the learned task; all groups had a high level of retention after 4 weeks. The results of the study can be used to optimize training in dogs, which is important since the number of training sessions often is a limiting factor in practical dog training. The results also suggest that, once a task is learned, it is likely to be remembered for a period of at least four weeks after last practice, regardless of frequency and duration of the training sessions."

So they taught basic commands to a non-working (for all intents and purposes of what we, as GSD owners, consider working), but are implying the most emphasis on this study would be the benefit to working dogs.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

GSDElsa said:


> From their abstract:
> "Most domestic dogs are subjected to some kind of obedience training, often on a frequent basis, but the question of how often and for how long a dog should be trained has not been fully investigated. *Optimizing the training as much as possible is not only an advantage in the training of working dogs such as guide dogs and police dogs, also the training of family dogs can benefit from this knowledge.* We studied the effect of frequency and duration of training sessions on acquisition and on long-term memory. Forty-four laboratory Beagles were divided into 4 groups and *trained by means of operant conditioning and shaping to perform a traditional obedience task*, each dog having a total of *18 training sessions*. The training schedules of the 4 groups differentiated in frequency (1–2 times per week vs. daily) and duration (1 training session vs. *3 training sessions in a row)*. Acquisition was *measured as achieved training level at a certain time. *The dogs’ retention of the task was tested four weeks post-acquisition. Results demonstrated that dogs trained 1–2 times per week had significantly better acquisition than daily trained dogs, and that dogs trained only 1 session a day had significantly better acquisition than dogs trained 3 sessions in a row. The interaction between frequency and duration of training sessions was also significant, suggesting that the two affect acquisition differently depending on the combination of these. The *combination of weekly training and one session *resulted in the highest level of acquisition, whereas the *combination of daily training and three sessions in a row* resulted in the lowest level of acquisition *(Measured how?).* Daily training in one session produced similar results as weekly training combined with three sessions in a row. *(did this imply daily sessions or multiple in a single day?)* Training schedule did not affect retention of the learned task; all groups had a high level of retention after 4 weeks. The results of the study can be used to optimize training in dogs, which is important since the number of training sessions often is a limiting factor in practical dog training. The results also suggest that, once a task is learned, it is likely to be remembered for a period of at least four weeks after last practice, regardless of frequency and duration of the training sessions."
> 
> So they taught *basic commands* to a non-working (for all intents and purposes of what we, as GSD owners, consider working), but are implying the most emphasis on this study would be the benefit to working dogs.


Thanks for the info!

Maybe it is just me but before I would be able to put a lot of stock in the results of this study, I still have a number of questions about how the experiment went - i.e. how long a session did they train?, same length for all training?, how old were the dogs?, what commands did they teach (I assume that these were the exact same for all dogs), how did they measure retention and what was considered a "passing" score?, what training method did they use - i.e. sounds like they used Pos only maybe, instead of a more balanced approach.

I guess a basic question would be this - are the authors actually advocating that we train our dogs only 1 time a week rather than daily or even multiple short times a day? And that this will result in a better trained dog quicker?

Very non intuitive at least - reason for so many questions and lookiing to better understand the experiment.

Need to better understand exactly what they did and how and of course what results are they claiming.

A very interesting study at the least.


----------



## jesusica (Jan 13, 2006)

I'm sorry but I cannot have a discussion on this topic with someone who does not recognize that a CGC and schutzhund/similar events/real world working dogs are not even in the same stratosphere.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

jesusica said:


> I'm sorry but I cannot have a discussion on this topic with someone who does not recognize that a CGC and schutzhund/similar events/real world working dogs are not even in the same stratosphere.


Someone?????????????????


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Not me, I don't train police dogs or leader dogs, and I do not own sheep, so, I don't have anything to say about how working dogs are trained, if she is lumping the schutzhund with the working dogs, well, most dogs get a BH prior to going to SchH1, and a BH is similar to a CGC/CD so those dogs could be started the same way. 

A k9 officer seemed to have contempt for schutzhund dogs, like they were not even close. I guess everyone likes their own venues.


----------



## PaddyD (Jul 22, 2010)

selzer said:


> Not me, I don't train police dogs or leader dogs, and I do not own sheep, so, I don't have anything to say about how working dogs are trained, if she is lumping the schutzhund with the working dogs, well, most dogs get a BH prior to going to SchH1, and a BH is similar to a CGC/CD so those dogs could be started the same way.
> 
> A k9 officer seemed to have contempt for schutzhund dogs, like they were not even close. *I guess everyone likes their own venues.*


.... and there's the rub .....


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

Interesting. I train the foudation work early and often. My belief has been in number of reptitions to get fluency. That foundation training goes on throughout the day, several times a day,a few minutes at a time. It is how meals are consumed. The dogs love it and if I got one out right now they would run to the training room door most likely. This is interesting and fun and highly rewarding work for them. Of course, there are times that I am not able to get to it and I do think they bene fit from the breaks...consolidation of learning, building of desire etc. So perhaps a balance of grtting enough reps in for fluency as well as breaks?

With the dogs that have the basic skills learned, I have found over training to be detrimental. This is different than the learning phase though. Right now summer is too hot for much training. I am depressed, but having gone through these layoffs before, I know the dogs will be better for it come fall. I have seen the detriment of over training.

In those early learning phases it would be interesting to continue study as to how much on and how much time off was advantageous. I can believe there could be something to it.

Sorry for the typos, I have trouble on the iPad!

I am all for lazy, so am hoping this study is true. I remember one show that my friend and I entered just to support the entry. We had not trained much or often! We got first places, my friend got a club trophy. People were asking us our secret. We looked at each other and laughed. Told them the answer is obviously NOT to train much! Perhaps the study supports our experience!


----------

