# When does positive reinforcement become permissiveness?



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

I saw this question posed on a dog training site as a topic covered in a seminar they are offering. I thought it was a good question. I certainly feel like a vending machine a lot of the time. At what point is giving treats detrimental to training, if ever? And do corrections have a place even to those who follow positive reinforcement? 
I am very confused by all the different training methods. That may be a reason that Stella isn't progressing like I feel she should be. I am too back and forth with my methods???


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

If you are rewarding for behavior that isn't wanted or asked for, then yes, it is detrimental. If you are teaching sit and rewarding every time the dog sits, well after they understand what is required, it is detrimental. The idea to rewarding is to teach the behavior and then you should be weaning the treats by expanding on the original. Heal? Two steps - treats. 4 steps - treat. Not every step.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

katdog5911 said:


> I saw this question posed on a dog training site as a topic covered in a seminar they are offering. I thought it was a good question. I certainly feel like a vending machine a lot of the time. At what point is giving treats detrimental to training, if ever? And do corrections have a place even to those who follow positive reinforcement?
> I am very confused by all the different training methods. That may be a reason that Stella isn't progressing like I feel she should be. I am too back and forth with my methods???


When using treats as a reward, there is a time when the treats dwindle down to none. After a dog learns something, then treats are given whenever you feel like giving them. My dogs were all trained with treats/positive and now they rarely get treats, unless I want to give it to them. I rarely correct my dogs, but I will redirect them. For example if the GSD is chasing the cats, I don't say no..I will use leave it or call her to me and praise her for coming.


----------



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

So what do you do in this scenario?

Stella KNOWS sit. No doubt about it. I say sit. She does not sit.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

llombardo said:


> When using treats as a reward, there is a time when the treats dwindle down to none. After a dog learns something, then treats are given whenever you feel like giving them. My dogs were all trained with treats/positive and now they rarely get treats, unless I want to give it to them. I rarely correct my dogs, but I will redirect them. *For example if the GSD is chasing the cats, I don't say no..I will use leave it or call her to me and praise her for coming.*


The question for POS training then might become - what do you do if the dog *doesn't stop* chasing the cat? I.E. the self reward for that behavior is greater than whatever reward that the owner can give the dog (at that moment).

How does the dog learn that he/she is not allowed (by the owner) to make his own mind up about some of his behavior? How will the dog learn what is incorrect/bad behavior if the owner doesn't tell/indicate what is "bad" or unallowed behavior?


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

katdog5911 said:


> So what do you do in this scenario?
> 
> Stella KNOWS sit. No doubt about it. I say sit. She does not sit.


Once you are sure that she "knows" SIT, maybe from the fact tha she will do it when undistracted; then you train in an environment with small distractions.

And at least to me, you MAKE her sit with a correction (at a level appropriate to your dog to insure that sheknows what she is doing is wrong - i.e. to get her attention). Could be nothing more than a mild verbal one (i.e. AAAHHH!) up to a hard one wih a prong collar, or such.


I think that we owe it to a dog to let them know when they are misbehaving (BUT only after we are sure that they understand the command and sometimes this is tough to do).


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

katdog5911 said:


> So what do you do in this scenario?
> 
> Stella KNOWS sit. No doubt about it. I say sit. She does not sit.


How old is Stella? Does she really know sit or do you think she knows sit? Do you have a problem getting her to sit in certain situations or all the time? How did you train her to sit, what method?


----------



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

Stella is 19 months. She absolutely KNOWS sit. She does it with distractions or not. Sometimes she is spot on and sometimes she just takes her sweet time. She learned using positive training. Lots of treats and praise when she was young. BUT she doesn't always sit right away. And sometimes she just takes her sweet time to get her butt down. Or she will turn around in another direction before sitting. Or she will grumble before she complies. 
If she is focusing on me when I say sit and she doesn't, sometimes just a raised eyebrow will do it. Or I clear my throat and she does me a favor and sits. I am thinking she should sit when I say sit....


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

I"m making the assumption that this is happening when you are training and not just every day life? She should just sit. Are you rewarding her when she's slow? Or decides that turning around first is the best way to sit? If so, then yes you are being permissive. 

Sit means Sit, not mosey around the table first. At that point, I stop treating. I'll give her another chance. Sit and if she responds quickly she'll get a reward (usually a toy). If not, game over. Do you have her in a higher drive when training? That often helps to increase their response time. Is the treat high value enough?


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

katdog5911 said:


> Stella is 19 months. She absolutely KNOWS sit. She does it with distractions or not. Sometimes she is spot on and sometimes she just takes her sweet time. She learned using positive training. Lots of treats and praise when she was young. BUT she doesn't always sit right away. And sometimes she just takes her sweet time to get her butt down. Or she will turn around in another direction before sitting. Or she will grumble before she complies.
> If she is focusing on me when I say sit and she doesn't, sometimes just a raised eyebrow will do it. Or I clear my throat and she does me a favor and sits. I am thinking she should sit when I say sit....


I don't think that this is a big issue. Mine sometimes tries cheating when I tell her to sit...she doesn't put her butt all the way down I think that you should keep moving forward and be consistent. I have also seen some dogs do this that were having a problem with the surface...concrete floors, carpet..all of these things feel different to the dogs and maybe make them feel uncomfortable. I seen dogs in class that wouldn't sit on concrete, but when a mat was put down, they sat immediately. Just a thought


----------



## RowdyDogs (Nov 12, 2012)

If done properly, positive reinforcement is never the same as permissiveness. Problems like you are seeing with Stella most often come up when treats are used incorrectly. From what you've said, I'd put my money on you inadvertently rewarding undesirable behaviors. It can also be a problem if treats are used every time for too long, or you don't phase them out correctly (usually by suddenly going from a treat every single time, to never getting one at all).



codmaster said:


> The question for POS training then might become - what do you do if the dog doesn't stop chasing the cat? I.E. the self reward for that behavior is greater than whatever reward that the owner can give the dog (at that moment).
> 
> How does the dog learn that he/she is not allowed (by the owner) to make his own mind up about some of his behavior? How will the dog learn what is incorrect/bad behavior if the owner doesn't tell/indicate what is "bad" or unallowed behavior?


You find a way to redirect the behavior. For a problem like chasing cats, I keep the dog on a leash while I'm training them so I can always stop the behavior.

I don't think dogs really have a concept of "bad" or even "incorrect" behavior. They understand what is allowed, and what is not allowed. Consistently redirecting them when they try to do something that you don't allow, and reinforcing behaviors you do want, teaches them pretty clearly what is expected of them. I've never had a problem with it, anyway.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

RowdyDogs said:


> *If done properly, positive reinforcement is never the same as permissiveness. Problems like you are seeing with Stella most often come up when treats are used incorrectly. *From what you've said, I'd put my money on you inadvertently rewarding undesirable behaviors. It can also be a problem if treats are used every time for too long, or you don't phase them out correctly (usually by suddenly going from a treat every single time, to never getting one at all).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


:thumbup:


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

codmaster said:


> The question for POS training then might become - what do you do if the dog *doesn't stop* chasing the cat? I.E. the self reward for that behavior is greater than whatever reward that the owner can give the dog (at that moment).
> 
> How does the dog learn that he/she is not allowed (by the owner) to make his own mind up about some of his behavior? How will the dog learn what is incorrect/bad behavior if the owner doesn't tell/indicate what is "bad" or unallowed behavior?


I can't answer the first part because my dog does stop when redirected. As she gets older she has to be redirected less and less.

All my trainers have always advised me to let my dog think and make her own decisions(At first I did not agree with this)...they insisted that she would make right the right one and she always has. When you redirect a dog you are telling them that you don't want them to do this but you want them to do that. After a short time it becomes a routine and they understand. They learn to understand I don't get praised or a treat if I do that but if I do this then I get that praise or treat.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

katdog5911 said:


> So what do you do in this scenario?
> 
> Stella KNOWS sit. No doubt about it. I say sit. She does not sit.


Can you describe the circumstances where this might occur? I expect my dogs to sit a lot without actually giving the command to do so. For example, in order to come out of the garage pen when we get home, to go outside, to be released to eat after I've set the bowls on the floor, before we throw the ball at the park, before I hand them a biscuit or a bully stick, etc. Since I'm not using the "sit" command, if they DON'T sit, they're not actually disobeying, but they also aren't getting what they want until they sit. I've tied a default sit to things they value, and since they understand that those are the house rules, when I say "sit" they usually will. Since rarely is the sit command used in a life or death situation, if they were to not sit, I'd simply walk away and they'd have to wait for whatever it is they would have gotten right away if they hadn't blown me off. Enough of this over a period of time, and they learn that it's in their best interest to obey me, and I don't have to constantly reinforce it with food rewards either, it's just not an issue anymore. 

In cases where it might be more important that they obey, such as a recall command, or not chasing the cats, or jumping on people, or some other bad behavior, you manage the situation so they can't practice it, while teaching more appropriate behavior - use a long line for the recall, keep on a leash around the cats or when greeting people, etc. You don't let the dog just continue doing what they're doing and hope for the best. I do tell my dogs when they're doing wrong, I use verbal corrections all the time, but I also reinforce good behavior and redirect as appropriate. 

I am a big proponent of using food in training, but it's important to not lure too long or the presence of food may become a secondary cue, and it's important to move to a variable reinforcement schedule once the behavior becomes learned and generalized, and then phase out the treats for that behavior. The rate of reinforcement should be tied to the difficulty of the behavior. If you increase criteria, such as when you add distance, duration, or distraction, the rate of reinforcement would be higher, as it would be when training new behaviors. The rate of reinforcement would be lower (to the point where a simple "good dog" is sufficient) for things your dog has been doing correctly for a long time. That's also where I like to use real life rewards rather than food or a toy, such as access to things they value.


----------



## pancake (Oct 2, 2012)

katdog5911 said:


> So what do you do in this scenario?
> 
> Stella KNOWS sit. No doubt about it. I say sit. She does not sit.


It depends on the dog's age but if the dog is old enough to know sit and you are certain of it and she does not sit, that's disobedience and requires a correction. Whatever the correction may be. Positive reinforcement with treats is great but it's a paycheck. They get paid for something they do but if they don't do it in the first place that's another issue. 
PR with treats is completely contingent upon the dog's motivation for that treat. If your dog is not food driven it's much more difficult for the dog to go into more advanced levels of sports and usually requires more compulsion training than dogs that are crackheads for food or toys. In the case of everyday life, if your dog knows a command and he/she doesn't sit when you say sit, then that would require a correction. Also a correction must be adversive enough for the dog to comply and learn from it. However, it takes practice and experience to know the line where it's adversive enough for the dog to learn that he/she made a mistake AND not kill the drive (if you're competing or doing sport work that requires drive and motivation.) Still applies to pet dogs, substitute "drive" with your "relationship" with the dog. 
Also, if you give a correction and the dog complies, it must be followed by praise and treats. In this case, the dog did what you ask him/her to do (albeit with a correction) and receives a paycheck for doing so. 
The key to corrections is that you want to balance praise, treats with the not so fun stuff. Correction after correction after correction without any praise or treats will kill a dog's drive and it's not very positive or motivating. 
A correction should be something you do without emotion or anger followed by high pitched praise. I swear once you have it down you feel like a bipolar robot.


----------



## SFGSSD (Dec 28, 2012)

I suggest you get this book. It is written by Tammie Rogers a respected IACP Professional member. 
Dog Algebra: When Positive Reinforcement Fails To Solve The Problem

Dog Algebra: When Positive Reinforcement Fails To Solve The Problem (Volume 1): Tammie Rogers: 9781479170630: Amazon.com: Books


----------



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

Jax08 said:


> I"m making the assumption that this is happening when you are training and not just every day life? She should just sit. Are you rewarding her when she's slow? Or decides that turning around first is the best way to sit? If so, then yes you are being permissive.
> 
> Sit means Sit, not mosey around the table first. At that point, I stop treating. I'll give her another chance. Sit and if she responds quickly she'll get a reward (usually a toy). If not, game over. Do you have her in a higher drive when training? That often helps to increase their response time. Is the treat high value enough?


Both everyday life and training. If she is in higher drive she responds much faster of course. The problem is mainly in everyday life. And I guess it is very possible that I rewarded sloppy sits because I was just so happy she sat at all! As far as high value treat....liverwurst, steak or meatballs seem pretty high to me. Don't really know what she would like more. Well, I take that back. I bought cheez whiz the other day and she loves it. I was planning on using that for non reactivity reward only.


----------



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

pancake said:


> PR with treats is completely contingent upon the dog's motivation for that treat. If your dog is not food driven it's much more difficult for the dog to go into more advanced levels of sports and usually requires more compulsion training than dogs that are crackheads for food or toys. In the case of everyday life, if your dog knows a command and he/she doesn't sit when you say sit, then that would require a correction. Also a correction must be adversive enough for the dog to comply and learn from it. However, it takes practice and experience to know the line where it's adversive enough for the dog to learn that he/she made a mistake AND not kill the drive (if you're competing or doing sport work that requires drive and motivation.) Still applies to pet dogs, substitute "drive" with your "relationship" with the dog.
> Also, if you give a correction and the dog complies, it must be followed by praise and treats. In this case, the dog did what you ask him/her to do (albeit with a correction) and receives a paycheck for doing so.
> The key to corrections is that you want to balance praise, treats with the not so fun stuff. Correction after correction after correction without any praise or treats will kill a dog's drive and it's not very positive or motivating.
> A correction should be something you do without emotion or anger followed by high pitched praise. I swear once you have it down you feel like a bipolar robot.


This is the problem with Stella. If she isn't interested in the treat I am offering, well, she will just not comply sometimes. Of course if there is something she wants to do or eat, that butt sits right down. So that is really my question....*I say sit. She does not sit. I don't have anything she really wants at the moment. What do I do then? *


----------



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

RowdyDogs;2776937You find a way to redirect the behavior. For a problem like chasing cats said:


> Ok. But what if they are already in a bad habit. I know I have not done some things right and am paying the price now. So how do you undo a "bad" behavior? Example: Stella charges and barks the property line at other dogs and cats. Bad habit she picked up from my other dog. The difference is my other guy stops after a minute and goes about his business. Stella will continue to bark forever. I have been using an e collar for this and it is working well. But how would you use positive reinforcement only to change this?


----------



## Mary Beth (Apr 17, 2010)

Well, my Sting tried this, just like your Stella. What worked was that after I gave the command sit and he ignored it, I pressed down on the 2 pressure points on either side of his tail - he sat right away - I then rewarded. The other thing I do is to first picture in my mind, Sting sitting, then I give the command. I noticed when I do this, I get a fast response, and sometimes he will look at me when I am thinking of that picture. I read somewhere that dogs learn by pictures - and it sounds far fetched, but it does seem to work. I think the problem also is too many treats - too often. Put it this way - how long would you play solitaire or another computer game, if you won every single time? Same with your dog. There is no more challenge in it for Stella, if everytime she does something she'll get a treat. She has to learn that sometimes, it will be praise (verbal or a pet) - othertimes a treat (the jack pot) . That keeps her interested in pleasing you.


----------



## pancake (Oct 2, 2012)

katdog5911 said:


> This is the problem with Stella. If she isn't interested in the treat I am offering, well, she will just not comply sometimes. Of course if there is something she wants to do or eat, that butt sits right down. So that is really my question....*I say sit. She does not sit. I don't have anything she really wants at the moment. What do I do then? *


If you say sit and you are sure that she knows this command 100% then you would need to give her a correction. I.E. leash correction. Corrections are all different for dogs, you need to judge how hard or soft your dog is to give the right amount of correction. One of my dogs are very soft. A hard correction or even yelling will cause her to completely not want to do anything and kill drive. Which is counter productive because she really will not sit then. But she is higly praise driven. A correction for her is a small tug on the leash sometimes as a way of getting her attention but I stopped that a while ago with her. She respond to verbal correction more and simply changing my body language erect, pointing and giving her a "tst! sit." will cause her to sit. 
if she does not sit then, I step in close. Final step is leash correction. It never gets to this stage with her and hasn't in years. 

My other dog is a much hard dog. Hard and soft dogs can be judged based on how much pain or force they can tolerate and how fast they rebound. A really strong leash correction on her check choke doesn't even get her attention. With her, a prong collar is the final step. Everything should have a tier system. You shouldn't have to give her a leash correction on a prong that's real harsh or anything. At least not from the beginning. 

With my dogs if she doesn't sit and she makes me repeat it 3 times, the next time she is getting a correction strong enough for her to give me attention and sit. Then she gets lots of praise. 

So if your dog isn't sitting and is being disobedient (rather than not knowing what to do), then say sit 1 or 2 more times and then give her a leash correction and say sit again. Once again, adversive enough so the dog complies but not harsh enough to kill drive or ruin the relationship. The dog should be completely fine within 1-3 seconds at most. Especially when you redirect the correction to a "good job!!!!! high pitched" and a treat. Corrections should be momentary and made to be quickly forgotten. 

No need to try it with a prong or anything, you can always escalate to that later. Just get a pull tab that you keep on the collar or go put your leash on the dog right now and wait 5 minutes. Walk over to her and give her the SIT command. Do it 3 times and if she doesn't, pull up on the leash and say sit at the same time. Do it with increasing pressure until she does it, and have treats and your high pitched praise ready the moment her butt is in motion to hit the floor. Do this without distractions. Once you get a feel for it, you can add in distance, distraction, etc. 

I can tell my puppy to sit from across the room without holding onto a leash or anything because after your dog gets conditioned to respect you, you no longer have to give corrections too much. Kind of the whole "carry a big stick" mentality. 

I think there's something to be said about positive reinforcement training and respect. Your dog should be lured and do a motion for the food or treat to learn the command. But when you get to advanced proofing and start phasing treats out and the command is expected (because the dog knows it 100%), the dog should do it out of respect and get a paycheck for doing it well, not do it just for the food. (which results in the dog only performing when you have food) It doesn't hurt that the dog wants the food AND respects you, which is the best combination!


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

katdog5911 said:


> Example: Stella charges and barks the property line at other dogs and cats. Bad habit she picked up from my other dog. The difference is my other guy stops after a minute and goes about his business. Stella will continue to bark forever. I have been using an e collar for this and it is working well. But how would you use positive reinforcement only to change this?


I would take her out on a lead while other dogs/cats were on the property line and put her in a sit with focus on me, reward is continuous..she will try looking away, she will look at them sideways, but its up to you to keep her focused. It is not easy to do it this way..you shouldn't repeat the command either, wait her out. I would start further away and go closer every day. I would do this every time she goes out for several days. If she gets to bark just once it will set everything back and its a do over from the beginning. On day 3 use less treats, but enough to keep her interested. Every day less until she can focus on you without any treats. Has she ever been trained in classes? How about with distractions?


----------



## Mary Beth (Apr 17, 2010)

Your second question. Yes - Sting did this also. Timeouts worked. When he would charge that fence - I would dash out, and call him - he would come, the first couple of times, he didn't so I went and got him and marched him inside - no reward, after that he could come and I would have him go on the down/stay in the breezeway - give a treat. Shut the door to the backyard. And go inside. Finish my work. Say 20 minutes later - just take him out to potty. Otherwise if I let him out agin -he would just go back to barking. After a while, a new pattern was formed - he would bark - look back - and be quiet. If he kept barking- and I went out to call him, he would come right away. So - then I shortened the timeout - five minutes - and he behaved outside for the other twenty or so of his free period.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

Training happens throughout the day. Example of a real life correction: I was going to leave with WD and had the crate in the car open for him to jump into, which he does routinely. This time he sat ten feet away, I pointed to the crate and gave him the command to jump in after calling his name, waiting for eye contact which I had with him. He just sat there and watched me. I waited for about 5 seconds for him to respond. None. (I never give the command twice) I took him by the collar and brought him in the house, closed the door and waited outside for about 15 seconds. Then got him and pointed to the crate. Sure, he jumped in right away. He hasn't refused since then.
So I did not have to get upset with him or let the whole thing become a negative issue. I just let him deal with the consequences of his decision to not respond. 
I realize that this doesn't work for very situation. But after training like this for 15 years I can come up with very quick solutions.
It is fun and sometimes a challenge to outsmart them.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

wolfy dog said:


> I waited for about 5 seconds for him to respond. None. (I never give the command twice) I took him by the collar and brought him in the house, closed the door and waited outside for about 15 seconds. Then got him and pointed to the crate. Sure, he jumped in right away. He hasn't refused since then.
> So I did not have to get upset with him or let the whole thing become a negative issue. I just let him deal with the consequences of his decision to not respond.
> I realize that this doesn't work for very situation. But after training like this for 15 years I can come up with very quick solutions.
> It is fun and sometimes a challenge to outsmart them.



This is the good part about letting them make the decision, they learn real quick if it was the wrong one.


----------



## RowdyDogs (Nov 12, 2012)

llombardo said:


> I would take her out on a lead while other dogs/cats were on the property line and put her in a sit with focus on me, reward is continuous..she will try looking away, she will look at them sideways, but its up to you to keep her focused. It is not easy to do it this way..you shouldn't repeat the command either, wait her out. I would start further away and go closer every day. I would do this every time she goes out for several days. If she gets to bark just once it will set everything back and its a do over from the beginning. On day 3 use less treats, but enough to keep her interested. Every day less until she can focus on you without any treats. Has she ever been trained in classes? How about with distractions?


Yes, this is pretty much how I would handle that situation as well. It's still the same thing--you figure out what you want her to do (ignore dogs/cats passing by), and then you figure out how to teach them that it's what you want.

As far as what you do with Stella's sits, it really depends on what went wrong. Since you say she sometimes sits spot-on, I'd start by only rewarding her when she does sit correctly and quickly. That alone might be enough. If you've been rewarding her for any old attempt to sit, she may actually not really understand the command--if she gets rewarded for sitting promptly, but also for turning around, waiting 10 seconds, finally sitting after you've given the command 3 times, etc., then how is she supposed to know that any of those faults are actually faults? From her perspective, you've taught her that sit just means "eventually kind of put your butt on the ground, I guess." So you need to change that.

FWIW, I disagree with pancake that problems like this or that advanced obedience or proofing commands needs to incorporate corrections. I have trained many dogs (with and without behavioral problems) without the use of corrections.

It's also a very common misunderstanding that a dog trained with positive methods will always need food reinforcements. Unless I'm teaching a dog something new, I don't carry food or a clicker and my dogs are extremely obedient and responsive in any environments. If you do it right, once the dog understands the behavior you actually phase out food rewards fairly quickly. Using treats every time (or even most of the time) for too long is one of the most common mistakes I see people make when doing this kind of training. If your dog won't do the command unless you have food, you've screwed up.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

katdog5911 said:


> Both everyday life and training. If she is in higher drive she responds much faster of course. *The problem is mainly in everyday life*.





katdog5911 said:


> This is the problem with Stella. *If she isn't interested in the treat I am offering, well, she will just not comply sometimes.* Of course if there is something she wants to do or eat, that butt sits right down. So that is really my question....*I say sit. She does not sit. I don't have anything she really wants at the moment. What do I do then? *


Okay, that's why I asked about the circumstances this is occurring in. I guess what's different with how I do things is that I don't really offer my dogs treats for doing stuff in everyday life. If we're actively training a new skill, or working on increasing the difficulty of a skill that's not new, (distance, duration or distraction), that's different. But for everyday life it's up to them to know the rules without me constantly having to tell them what to do. 

I also don't usually tell them to sit for no particular reason - I do NILIF, so they're expected to sit to get what they want, and if they don't sit, the consequences are that they don't get what they want right now, or they don't get it at all. They learn this pretty quickly, like in wolfy dog's example. 

I establish a pattern from the time I get a new puppy that certain behaviors earn access to valued resources, so I don't need to offer a treat first, I just wait for the behavior to be offered. I rewarded very heavily for offered behaviors when they were young, so they have strong default behaviors, things that they do automatically because they know that's what "makes" me give them what they want. And I _always_ have things they want! My dogs want to be able to go eat out of that bowl I just set down on the floor, they want me to throw that ball I'm holding, they want to go outside or come inside, they want to go for a walk, they want any number of things throughout the day, so I use those as "rewards" for doing what *I* want. 



RowdyDogs said:


> It's also a very common misunderstanding that a dog trained with positive methods will always need food reinforcements. Unless I'm teaching a dog something new, I don't carry food or a clicker and my dogs are extremely obedient and responsive in any environments. If you do it right, once the dog understands the behavior you actually phase out food rewards fairly quickly. Using treats every time (or even most of the time) for too long is one of the most common mistakes I see people make when doing this kind of training. If your dog won't do the command unless you have food, you've screwed up.


Totally agree! :thumbup:


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Positive makes perfect, I guess.

I also guess that is why the positive trainers (pros) from my OB training club also told me when I asked about how to stop my dog from "counter surfing" - just don't leave anything he wants on the counter!

Great training advice! (except it wasn't practical, of course).

Or if he wouldn't do something for a reward (or a treat) - there is always the extremely practical approach of "get a higher value" treat/reward!


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

RowdyDogs said:


> Yes, this is pretty much how I would handle that situation as well. It's still the same thing--you figure out what you want her to do (ignore dogs/cats passing by), and then you figure out how to teach them that it's what you want.
> 
> As far as what you do with Stella's sits, it really depends on what went wrong. Since you say she sometimes sits spot-on, I'd start by only rewarding her when she does sit correctly and quickly. That alone might be enough. If you've been rewarding her for any old attempt to sit, she may actually not really understand the command--if she gets rewarded for sitting promptly, but also for turning around, waiting 10 seconds, finally sitting after you've given the command 3 times, etc., then how is she supposed to know that any of those faults are actually faults? From her perspective, you've taught her that sit just means "eventually kind of put your butt on the ground, I guess." So you need to change that.
> 
> ...


Hey, rowdycat,
Are you saying that your positive approach results in 100% obedience? If so, and I am not saying that you are saying that, just that it sounds like it.

Then I must really think about geting rid of my "AAHH" verbal correction and of course the slight jerks on the leash in favor of redirection and just ignoring the bad behavior in hopes that it extinguishes itself as soon as my dog realizes that I am not noticing it. He is smart enough to know when he did something wrong, I don't need to make it obvious.

It does sound like you have heard of and do approve of "Proofing" behavior (I think!) and that is very reassuring.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

codmaster said:


> Hey, rowdycat,
> Are you saying that your positive approach results in 100% obedience? If so, and I am not saying that you are saying that, just that it sounds like it.
> 
> Then I must really think about geting rid of my "AAHH" verbal correction and of course the slight jerks on the leash in favor of redirection and just ignoring the bad behavior in hopes that it extinguishes itself as soon as my dog realizes that I am not noticing it. He is smart enough to know when he did something wrong, I don't need to make it obvious.
> ...


NOTHING is 100%...whether it is positive or negative. Anybody or thing will react better to positivity versus negativity. Nobody ever said to ignore any bad behavior. Positive training keeps the handler on their toes as well. Why is the dog jerking on the leash? Once you figure that out, then you are 1/2 there to fix it. Instead of jerking that leash and continue walking, try to stop and put the dog in a sit...I can bet that if you keep putting the dog in a sit when it pulls it will figure out what its doing wrong and he will stop doing that because he wants to keep walking...the walk is his reward...yes they are that smart.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

Why do you keep complaining about the same crappy advice from trainers at your OB club over and over again in different threads? We get it, what's the point? It seems like you're just looking for new people to provoke into arguing with you. :shrug:


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

llombardo said:


> NOTHING is 100%...whether it is positive or negative. Anybody or thing will react better to positivity versus negativity. *Nobody ever said to ignore any bad behavior*. Positive training keeps the handler on their toes as well. Why is the dog jerking on the leash? Once you figure that out, then you are 1/2 there to fix it. Instead of jerking that leash and continue walking, try to stop and put the dog in a sit...I can bet that if you keep putting the dog in a sit when it pulls it will figure out what its doing wrong and he will stop doing that because he wants to keep walking...the walk is his reward...yes they are that smart.


Thank you for answering for rowdyone.

Actually, MANY positive advocates I have talked with have stated exactly that! Ignore it and/or redirect, but never "PUNISH"!

As if in their version of English, "Corection" is the same as "PUNISH". It is not the same!

BTW, my dog has never "jerked" on his leash. I am the one sometimes jerking on the leash.

BTW2, what if the dog also ignores the "sit"? then what - wait till he decides to sit and then praise and/or reward?

BTW3, just to show that a "correction" is not "punishment" and is a very effective method of training - do you think that someone could teach you how to drive a car or use a computer and use only positive methods - I>E> NEVER correcting you but letting you fumble around until it worked and then praising/rewarding.

Never say "No do it this way"? And then showing you what the trainer wants again?

Notice there was no "Punishment" (i.e. a slap to the back of your head) involved - only a "correction" to get you back on the right track.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Why do you keep complaining about the same crappy advice from trainers at your OB club over and over again in different threads? *We get it, what's the point?* It seems like you're just looking for new people to provoke into arguing with you. :shrug:


 
Who said I was "complaining"? Please do not try to attribute to me incorrectly.

_ I am very happy that you do finally "get it". Whatever it is that you now get._

_I would prefer that noone argues at all on this forum, wouldn't you?_


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Codmaster - why are you purposely getting Rowdydogs name wrong? Not once but twice? Why do you feel the need to insult her by purposely getting her name wrong? Why do you feel the need to hijack all positive training threads with insults and inciting arguments. You don't like or believe in positive reinforcement training...fine..who cares...to each their own. But why does it get under your skin so much that you have to start an argument on every single thread? It's almost like a personal vendetta.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

codmaster said:


> Positive makes perfect, I guess.


My clicker trained dogs have been the most obedient dogs I have ever owned. They actually love it, they have a happy body language and are not hesitant to make a mistake.
I prefer this method so much more over the old one we all used in the past (and some still do).


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

codmaster said:


> Thank you for answering for rowdyone.


Its RowdyDogs and Your Welcome


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Jax08 said:


> Codmaster - why are you purposely getting Rowdydogs name wrong? Not once but twice? Why do you feel the need to insult her by purposely getting her name wrong? Why do you feel the need to hijack all positive training threads with *insults and inciting arguments*. You don't like or believe in positive reinforcement training...fine..who cares...to each their own. But why does it get under your skin so much that you have to start an argument on every single thread? It's almost like *a personal vendetta*.


*Hmmm!* Could be one of these, huh?

Why do *you* feel the need to worry about someone elses name? I never even realized it was a her - for that matter. 

Do you also worry about other posters getting names wrong? If so and you think that is important, a few folks here have gotten my handle wrong.

Could you please point out where my "insults and inciting areguments" were in any of my posts in this thread?

*Please read the posts* - I was simply giving my opinion (and history) on the training problem posted by the OP - a perhaps different opinion than a few in the thread about what the poster should try with their dog.

Because a positive only approach did not work very well for my own dog (probably was me since it does seem to be pretty much a fool proof method according to a few posters here, of course).


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

codmaster said:


> *Hmmm!*
> 
> *Please read the posts* - I was simply giving my opinion (and history) on the training problem posted by the OP - a perhaps different opinion than a few in the thread about what the poster should try with their dog.
> 
> Because a positive only approach did not work very well for my own dog (probably was me since it does seem to be pretty much a fool proof method according to a few posters here, of course).


Please do repost where you had an opinion that would help the OP. Nothing but sarcasm all the way through. You were picking apart anything that you could(about Positive Training). You can have an opinion on your methods of training, but I haven't seen that here, just picking. And I agree with you..it didn't work because of you.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

llombardo said:


> Please do repost where you had an opinion that would help the OP. Nothing but sarcasm all the way through. You were picking apart anything that you could(about Positive Training). You can have an opinion on your methods of training, but I haven't seen that here, just picking. And I agree with you..it didn't work because of you.


 
*Thank you!*


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I agree that positive training shouldn't be permissive. I tell the dog the command, SIT, once, if they sit, good praise (treat only if it is a new skill, and then phase out by treating intermittently of the fastest or best sit position). If they do not sit, I help them. Early on, I will run my hand down to their waist area and slightly press. I do not push them into position, just move the hand down as the other hand is on the collar. Once the sit position is achieved, Good Sit. If I help, I don't treat. 

Later on, if they do not sit immediately, I point at the but as if I am going to help, and that usually does the trick. Usually I train so that the dog sits each time I stop moving whether walking or riding a bicycle. I do not say sit at this point, but the action of stopping my forward progress is the dog's cue to sit. By this point, all I have to give them is the hairy eyeball if they do not sit and occasionally look at their but. Then it's like, "Oh yeah, that's supposed to be on the ground, it's there now." 

Praise is our friend. It is free, you always have an unlimited supply, and dogs eat it up. But you can go overboard with praise. Treats are ok for a point, but always praise while treating. Soon it should just be praise. And praise can/should be intermittent as well. Praise for the quickest sit, praise for the sit in the most proper position. 

Psychologists have found that humans actually work better if rewards are intermittent rather than every single time. I guess it keeps up guessing and we will try harder and harder to please for that reward. Dogs are no different. They will do better if you phase the treats out, and praise intermittently. Praise may need to be measured, this is why people get positive results from a clicker, the clicker gives the signal that is the same every time, where a human voice can be excited, or bored, or anxious, or elated and give the dog the wrong vibes. 

But the hope is that the treats and the clicker are simply a training aide until we can master our voice to do it all for us. 

I am not against changing the tone of voice when my dogs do something I am not impressed with. I can give the an "EH!" or a "No." I prefer not to give them corrections using correction collars or leash jerks. I find it unnecessary. If my dog does not do a sequence properly, we may start over and go through it again. They figure it out that time and get praised. I just like that better than giving them a pop with the leash. That may be considered ignoring bad behavior, but it is not. We generally do not go on until we do it right. Then we move onward. 

I cannot remember ever correcting a dog for counter surfing. They don't do it. If they put their nose in the trash, I will say EH, Mine. And then they know. That is what I would do for counter surfing I suppose if it was a problem. 

I guess I prefer to train behaviors I want with positive techniques. If a dog is doing something I dislike, I have no problem with telling her, "Don't Jump on the Susie." But I also find that if I don't reward the jumping up, it goes away on its own. If I pet the pup when it jumps up, it will take a lot longer to over-come. So Ignoring the bad behavior would actually work a lot better than punishing it. Also, instead of ignoring, you can think ahead and instead of waiting for a dog to do something that you don't want so you can punish, you can tell the dog to do something you do want so you can praise. SIT! Good Girl.


----------



## DunRingill (Dec 28, 2007)

selzer said:


> If they do not sit, I help them. Early on, I will run my hand down to their waist area and slightly press. I do not push them into position, just move the hand down as the other hand is on the collar. Once the sit position is achieved, Good Sit. If I help, I don't treat.


If the dog knows sit but there seems to be some question in their mind as to whether they should do it every time, then I make sure to answer that question. The way it's answered depends on the dog! But I don't stand around waiting. 

I'm pretty hands-on with my dogs. But most pure positive trainers do not consider hands on help to be pure positive training.


----------



## SFGSSD (Dec 28, 2012)

WOW looks like a lot went on since my last post. :wild:
First I would like to say that there is nothing wrong with positive methods and there is nothing wrong with giving a correction when needed and deserved. There is however something wrong with not matching the right method with the right dog. 
All positive methods DO work! BUT it DOES NOT work on every dog.:nono:
Compulsive training (correction based) Works also! BUT forcing a dog when it is not needed or (FAIR IN THE DOGS EYES) creates avoidance behaviors.:lurking:
But when you dig in and go to extremes on either end you’re not able to get the best results from the majority of dogs you train.
I can understand the animosity towards the all positive crowd. Especially the extremists, but that would be a conversation for another thread.:surrender: 
I left my advice to the OP that would more than likely get the OP the best results with the issues addressed in this thread by offering solutions in a very detailed way. I think that is what the OP was ultimately after don't you think?


----------



## Chicagocanine (Aug 7, 2008)

SFGSSD said:


> All positive methods DO work! BUT it DOES NOT work on every dog.:nono:


Actually, if done properly, and you find a reinforcement that is rewarding to them it can. It also works on rats, humans, dolphins, chickens, goldfish, etc, etc...

I would not call any training "all positive" personally though, I do not think there is any such thing, as I don't think it is possible to use 100% only positive reinforcement-- for example, removing something "good" is negative punishment, so if you ever do that it is no longer "all positive".


----------



## julie87 (Aug 19, 2012)

I agree with codmaster using correction because my dog isn't always food motivated, I think correction prevents unwanted behavior from happening again and again. Train you dog on what to do and praise but also correct your dog on what not to do. I really can't imagine just positive reinforcement. I put my dog on time out after she misbehaves she comes out golden!lol just like a child, dogs are so smart and don't need to be constantly lured with treats and patting on the head to learn what u want them to do. Codmaster why are you also so sarcastic, rude and negative all the time? Each post I read from you sounds like you are talking to your enemies while everyone else is being friendly. I'm just curious where the anger comes from 


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## RowdyDogs (Nov 12, 2012)

codmaster said:


> Hey, rowdycat,
> Are you saying that your positive approach results in 100% obedience? If so, and I am not saying that you are saying that, just that it sounds like it.
> 
> Then I must really think about geting rid of my "AAHH" verbal correction and of course the slight jerks on the leash in favor of redirection and just ignoring the bad behavior in hopes that it extinguishes itself as soon as my dog realizes that I am not noticing it. He is smart enough to know when he did something wrong, I don't need to make it obvious.
> ...


I'm not saying that my dogs are perfect...far from it! I'm saying that with positive training, I have achieved a level of obedience equal to or greater than I achieved with other methods.

Those comments were in response to some implications that positive training cannot turn out dogs who are reliably obedient. That has not been my experience. I am not trying to say that my dogs are better than anyone else's, or that I'm some perfect trainer. If I'm coming across that way, I apologize. I've repeatedly stated that I don't even have a problem with appropriate corrections.

I am not sure why you seem to feel attacked by people stating that you can get reliable results with positive training methods in a thread where the OP specifically said that those are the methods she's trying to use, but I'm not really interested in explaining the basic concepts of positive training yet again. There are plenty of excellent books I can recommend if you're really interested in learning more.


----------



## RowdyDogs (Nov 12, 2012)

Chicagocanine said:


> Actually, if done properly, and you find a reinforcement that is rewarding to them it can. It also works on rats, humans, dolphins, chickens, goldfish, etc, etc...
> 
> I would not call any training "all positive" personally though, I do not think there is any such thing, as I don't think it is possible to use 100% only positive reinforcement-- for example, removing something "good" is negative punishment, so if you ever do that it is no longer "all positive".


I agree with this. As I use it, "positive training" is a popular but not-totally-accurate shorthand for methods based in operant conditioning rather than classical conditioning, and don't usually use physical corrections. I use it because people often don't know what operant conditioning is, but really I think it might be part of the reason so many people don't understand the concept and think that positive trainers just reward and hope for the best.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

codmaster said:


> *Hmmm!* Could be one of these, huh?
> 
> Why do *you* feel the need to worry about someone elses name? I never even realized it was a her - for that matter.
> 
> ...


Nope...just curious why you always behave this way. Same questions, to which you receive the same answers, in every thread. I wasn't sure if you didn't understand the answers or you just needed attention.  Go back and read your posts....any one of them is insulting and inciting arguments.


Now...back to the regularly scheduled program.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Chicagocanine said:


> Actually, if done properly, and you find a reinforcement that is rewarding to them it can. It also works on rats, humans, dolphins, chickens, goldfish, etc, etc...
> 
> I would not call any training "all positive" personally though, I do not think there is any such thing, as I don't think it is possible to use 100% only positive reinforcement-- for example, removing something "good" is negative punishment, so if you ever do that it is no longer "all positive".


100% agree! Nothing is all positive. You have to lure, put dogs back in position, withhold rewards when it's not done correctly. I really don't even like the term "all positive". I try to motivate my dogs to do what I want. It might be a toy, a treat or just the excitement of playing with me. I can "invite" Jax to jump up on my in play when she's done something right and get the same enthusiasm as with a toy or treat because I've worked on building her drive.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

Chicagocanine said:


> I would not call any training "all positive" personally though, I do not think there is any such thing, as I don't think it is possible to use 100% only positive reinforcement-- for example, removing something "good" is negative punishment, so if you ever do that it is no longer "all positive".





RowdyDogs said:


> I agree with this. As I use it, "positive training" is a popular but not-totally-accurate shorthand for methods based in operant conditioning rather than classical conditioning, and don't usually use physical corrections. I use it because people often don't know what operant conditioning is, but really I think it might be part of the reason so many people don't understand the concept and think that positive trainers just reward and hope for the best.





Jax08 said:


> 100% agree! Nothing is all positive. You have to lure, put dogs back in position, withhold rewards when it's not done correctly. I really don't even like the term "all positive". I try to motivate my dogs to do what I want. It might be a toy, a treat or just the excitement of playing with me. I can "invite" Jax to jump up on my in play when she's done something right and get the same enthusiasm as with a toy or treat because I've worked on building her drive.


Yes, and yes, and yes! :thumbup: What's bizarre is that even the _mostly_ positive people on the board are not _purely _positive, and yet anyone who so much as mentions positive reinforcement training is treated and argued against as if they are "pure". There are few people here who don't use corrections of some sort, (at the very least verbal), who don't use all four quadrants of operant conditioning, and many also use aversives. MaggieRoseLee is maybe our biggest clicker training advocate on the board, and yet she also uses e-collars.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN (May 11, 2005)

For Stelllllllllaaaaaaa: Why Does my Dog Ignore my Commands?


----------



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

*TIME OUT* I certainly didn't mean to create a debate thread! I just was looking for some opinions on something I read as I am somewhat confused about how best to continue training my dog. I found everyone's advice on here helpful. I just have to sort it out. My natural instinct is towards positive reinforcement. But this is not doing the trick with Stella. I am sure in the hands of someone else, Stella would respond wonderfully with positive training only. But I am not doing something or haven't done something right training-wise so here we are. 
1. What to do when food, toy, me etc is not something Stella is interested in at the moment? But I want or need her to do something?
2. How to undo a bad behavior. 
3. How to motivate Stella....she is not particularly food driven or toy driven. I really can't up the treats anymore, she already gets high value. She is picky about her food anyway. Toys...eh. I have tried tugs, balls, flirt poles...she likes them for a while. But they don't always rock her world. I can't make myself more interesting than I am. I have danced, jumped, sang, waved my arms around wildly, whispered, meowed, chirped, laid down, hid and who knows what else to keep her focused but a lot of the time she just looks at me and goes back to whatever I was trying to distract her from. 
4. Dog reactivity....but that is an ongoing issue and for a different thread. (and this is probably due to mistakes I made)

I take full responsibility for the mess I am in with Stella. I wasn't prepared for the time and energy she requires but have really tried very hard to learn quickly and give her what she needs. (and before anyone says I shouldn't have gotten a puppy, I acquired her by default from one of my children) I have learned more about dogs since having her than in my entire life. I love her to pieces and she has reminded me what great dogs GSDs are.

I think someone asked if she has had training in a class. Oh my gosh yes. We have been to lots and lots. And she usually does extremely well there. (unless other dogs distract her or come too close) Maybe I am just expecting too much from her. But almost every trainer she has ever worked with seems to think she is capable of so much more. I would agree. I think I am the one that needs training.


----------



## DunRingill (Dec 28, 2007)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> What's bizarre is that even the _mostly_ positive people on the board are not _purely _positive, and yet anyone who so much as mentions positive reinforcement training is treated and argued against as if they are "pure". There are few people here who don't use corrections of some sort, (at the very least verbal), who don't use all four quadrants of operant conditioning, and many also use aversives. MaggieRoseLee is maybe our biggest clicker training advocate on the board, and yet she also uses e-collars.


YES! Most trainers TEACH behaviors using a lot of positive reinforcement. In competition classes, we proof heavily but start out using only the very mildest of corrections that your average person wouldn't even SEE as a correction, it looks more like a bit of help. As the dog becomes more fluent and more confident in the exercises, the "help" gradually turns into a more traditional correction, but ONLY when needed and only as much as needed to make a point. Many dogs don't need more than basic help. But then there are the others....(looking at Monster Mike, who is giving me his most innocent eyes....)

If you have a highly trained dog who has needed no (or minimal) traditional corrections to get to that point, then thank the gods and enjoy the ride, but don't kid yourself....your next dog might be very different. There ARE dogs out there who aren't naturally cooperative, who wake up every morning thinking "Hmmmm....I wonder if she still means it?" 

--Regina (Glad that Mike is retired, and enjoying the 180 degree turn towards working with The Bunny!)


----------



## DunRingill (Dec 28, 2007)

I guess my question with Stella is....What DOES rock her world? What makes her do the dance of joy??

19 months is rough age. Is she spayed? Is she coming in season? I reluctantly had Bunny spayed in September, she was almost 2.5 years old and was coming in season EVERY FOUR FREAKIN' MONTHS! She has been so much easier to work with now that her hormones are stable and she's maturing.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN (May 11, 2005)

JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> For Stelllllllllaaaaaaa: Why Does my Dog Ignore my Commands?


Then in addition to the above, I'd take some time reading here:
Articles | Suzanne Clothier starting here:
*Relationship Centered Training*


----------



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

DunRingill said:


> I guess my question with Stella is....What DOES rock her world? What makes her do the dance of joy??
> 
> 19 months is rough age. Is she spayed? Is she coming in season? I reluctantly had Bunny spayed in September, she was almost 2.5 years old and was coming in season EVERY FOUR FREAKIN' MONTHS! She has been so much easier to work with now that her hormones are stable and she's maturing.


Most people that know her would say that I rock her world. And I would agree for the most part....but not if she doesn't like what I am asking her to do. It seems she is just blowing me off. But I skimmed through the article that Jeankbb.... referenced and maybe STella really doesn't *know* for sure everything I think she knows...food for thought. Maybe I am doing too much too fast??? More food for thought.
And yes she is spayed.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

julie87 said:


> I put my dog on time out after she misbehaves she comes out golden!
> http://www.petguide.com/mobile


There is a misconception that clicker training is always positive for the dog.
Positive reinforcement is adding something positive that enforces the desired behavior of the animal.
Time out is removing something positive (your presence) to get the desired result. This is negative for the dog and increases desired behavior. I consider it still gentle and good training since you let the dog decide what works for the next time without having to resort to painful tactics.: 
BTW: ten seconds for timeout is enough. Otherwise the dog may resort to destructive or other problem behavior. Clicker training is based on: positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, negative punishment, explained well in this link: http://www.complete-dog-training-and-supplies.com/positivereinforcement.html


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN (May 11, 2005)

> Most people that know her would say that I rock her world. And I  would agree for the most part....but not if she doesn't like what I am asking her to do. It seems she is just blowing me off. But I skimmed through the article that Jeankbb.... referenced and maybe STella really doesn't *know* for sure everything I think she knows...food for thought. Maybe I am doing too much too fast??? More food for thought.


Sometimes that what we have to do - a lot of - stopping and thinking. It really benefits us and the dog. It is much easier just to bull through than to think . 

My GSD is not food or toy motivated. She gets too nervous and shuts down. So I had to train just with our relationship/my leadership. It is much more difficult than a push button dog. I also have Chow mixes, again, not so much on the push button - a dog that is genetically and behaviorally motivated to be obedient. So I have had to think around things and obviously with all of them, the positive reinforcement was a big part of it. 

I have come to like "bad" dogs.  

Stella sounds fun, a little confused, and very sweet!


----------



## ponyfarm (Apr 11, 2010)

I did not read thru all the posts, but it sounds like you are having a hard time deciding on a "training method". You need to at least for starters to..pick a training system you like and stick thru it. It is too confusing for the dog to try different ways each time someone mentions.."try this".

I like renting videos on Bowwowflix. I highly reccommend Micheal Ellis..start with training with Markers and Training with food. This teachers your dog how to learn. If your dog is not food motivated, she needs to miss a few meals.  Yes, most working dogs become more toy driven, but luring behaviors to learn is much easier with food.

Another good motivation trainer is Bridget Carleson, I also like Janice Gunn. Lots of free training clips for all three of these ..and I would start with the puppy stuff to make sure you didnt miss a step. Dog training is a progression..you need the prerequisites!

Good Luck.


----------



## DunRingill (Dec 28, 2007)

I can't remember if you said this was your first dog, or first GSD, or what....but a very common new trainer mistake is thinking the dog fully understands far more than they actually do. That's why, in our competition proofing classes, we ramp up the proofing/challenges but help the dogs at first. If you change something, the dog doesn't necessarily understand it to be the same exercise or command! 

At first, sit or down away from home or the regular training location is NOT going to get the same response. The looking around and looking away from you sounds like avoidance. In some cases, it's a dog who wants to know if you really REALLY mean what you're saying. In other cases, it's a dog that is very confused. It's important to know your dog, but I'm not a trainer who stands around waiting for the dog to figure it out. I do a lot of hands on training, right from the start. "Sit!" and if I don't see some move in that direction, I put my hands on the dog and help them into a sit. "YES, that's it! Let's try again!" Wash, rinse, repeat. many MANY different places. 

Dogs that are confident and fully understand what you want are usually quick to respond. Dogs that are unsure look around, look away from you, lick their lips, look unhappy. Fortunately most dogs aren't like Mike, who would square himself up into a stand and make solid grinning eye contact, with a look that said "Who, ME? you talkin' to ME?"

When you say she doesn't really like food....how much does she weigh? Is she not interested in food because she gets too much food? 

OK I better get to work....


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

Sometimes we can inadvertently train something without knowing it. For example, I trained my first GSD to come when I yelled. Oops! I won't make that mistake again. But I had to learn this the hard way, lol.

Right now I'm trying to communicate my displeasure for non-compliance by becoming a statue. I know, this sounds stupid, but please don't flame me for it because it's actually working - for certain behavior - like lying patiently in his crate while I put on my layers of outerwear to deal with the weather. He moves, I stop, and he lies right back down. It's wonderful, I don't have to say a word.


----------



## DunRingill (Dec 28, 2007)

Blanketback said:


> Right now I'm trying to communicate my displeasure for non-compliance by becoming a statue. I know, this sounds stupid, but please don't flame me for it because it's actually working - for certain behavior - like lying patiently in his crate while I put on my layers of outerwear to deal with the weather. He moves, I stop, and he lies right back down. It's wonderful, I don't have to say a word.


no flames here, I do this with Bunny all the time! And she knows that if I freeze and squint my eyes at her, she is getting on my last nerve.....


----------



## Mary Beth (Apr 17, 2010)

For the OP, from more of what you have said, I am getting the impression that Stella is stressed, bored, feels under pressure, and is burnt out, so she has shut down. It could have started with the all the expectations - the trainers saying she could do more, of course, that made you feel she should do more, and that feeling Stella picked up on. If I were you, I would take a break from the training. Take her for loose leash walks, let her sniff - even praise her for being a good sniffer - go at an easy pace - stop let her look around - if you have an area you can take her off leash - do that. For the sit - as was said, make it mean something - just do it before you open the door to let her out, or before you put down her food dish - that is all during her training break. Take time to enjoy her and get to know her. Ease up on yourself - it is wonderful of you to take her when your son couldn't. I would recommend Turid Rugass "Calming Signals" book or DVD - that shows how dogs react when under stress and how one can understand their body language. Also, Stella may enjoy a dog massage - the Monks of New Skete "How to be your Dog's Best Friend" has a chapter on it and also on how have quiet times with your dog.


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

Blanketback said:


> Right now I'm trying to communicate my displeasure for non-compliance by becoming a statue. *I know, this sounds stupid, but please don't flame me for it because it's actually working* - for certain behavior - like lying patiently in his crate while I put on my layers of outerwear to deal with the weather. He moves, I stop, and he lies right back down. It's wonderful, I don't have to say a word.


That is the beauty of communication with your dog! You take the time and patience to figure out what works best for your dog. THAT is what a good dog trainer does!!!!!!


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

LOL, I just didn't want anyone making a snarky comment about how much longer my way will take - you know, you can always just kick the crate and holler at your dog to stay and he's suddenly perfect. Right? Lmao!


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

Blanket, in dog ownership and rescue we've learned you can either punish a dog all day for not doing what it's "supposed to do", or punish it for doing things you don't want it to do; OR you could work at teaching the dog what you want it to do. 

You've chosen the latter, to the benefit of yourself and your dog. What's to flame about that??


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Blanketback said:


> Right now I'm trying to communicate my displeasure for non-compliance by becoming a statue. I know, this sounds stupid, but please don't flame me for it because it's actually working - for certain behavior - like lying patiently in his crate while I put on my layers of outerwear to deal with the weather. He moves, I stop, and he lies right back down. It's wonderful, I don't have to say a word.


I do this with charging the door. She sits, I open the door. She moves before I'm through it, I close it. Unfortunately, no matter how many times we go over it, we have to start from scratch. But I think that has to do with everyone else not doing the same thing. And then she charges past me, over my feet and I have to do first aid on my toes.


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

Jax08 said:


> But I think that has to do with everyone else not doing the same thing.


Definitely! DH made a comment the other day, about how nice it is when my puppy is quiet while I'm getting ready to take him outside. If he's waiting in his crate, he's quiet. If he's rampaging around the room, he's yipping and carrying on like a maniac. But guess who lets him act like that? Hint: not me, lol! It's next to impossible to train the humans


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

It's not the humans I'm having problems with...just the MEN!


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

julie87 said:


> I agree with codmaster using correction because my dog isn't always food motivated, I think correction prevents unwanted behavior from happening again and again. Train you dog on what to do and praise but also correct your dog on what not to do. I really can't imagine just positive reinforcement. I put my dog on time out after she misbehaves she comes out golden!lol just like a child, dogs are so smart and don't need to be constantly lured with treats and patting on the head to learn what u want them to do. Codmaster why are you also so sarcastic, rude and negative all the time? *Each post I read from you *
> 
> (I hope that you don't feel that way about this post of mine as i sure wouldn't consider you my enemy!)
> 
> ...


No "anger" whatsoever on my part! Sometimes a bit of astonishment, perhaps.

*"Everyone else" is always friendly?*


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

Well maybe us (MEN) Jax  sometime feel that all the touchy feely stuff is just too much an overly complex.

I'm for and use positive training for luring and teaching new behaviors.
I also teach *NO* or whatever word works. No is easiest for me.

To use Codmaster's oft repeated example of counter surfing, I tell my dog no even if the dog does not yet understand it. I then remove the dogs paws and place the dog on the floor. Notice I did not beat the dog or anything else that is painful. Usually this takes from several to maybe ten times and the dog understands.
I do the same thing with other things like maybe getting on furniture I don't want them on. Say no, remove them from the furniture. After you have done this with a couple of things the dog learns that no means to quit doing what they are doing.

So if the dog then digs and I say no, the dog decides that digging is not o.k. and doesn't do it. This has worked for me for a dozen or more dogs without fail. It does not require treats, only praise and a good pat when the do what I want. 

To me it is far faster and doesn't require a bunch of redirection.
It does not destroy my relationship with my dogs, as a matter of fact I believe the praise and hands on the dog help the relationship.

To the Op if your dog really knows how to sit and doesn't, I think she is blowing you off and I would use a correction. If she has been in classes and trained 19mos. she is way to old to ignore you.

Both the dogs I have now knew the basics of sit, down and stand by ten to twelve weeks so if they decide at say 5 or 6 months not to sit they will be corrected. They were both taught these behaviors with positive methods.

Before these two dogs I trained all my other dogs with a choke chain and praise because that was the way dogs were trained at the time.
It did not cause any negative affects and my dogs still loved me

I think the reason some of the positive talk can get on peoples nerves is because there is an underlying idea that folks who don't do it are somehow mean or slightly abusive to their dogs. It is simply not true. You can train with compulsion and correction without being mean or abusive.

So I'm all for positive training but lets not be (holier than thou), because others may train differently. Just like religion there is room for many different beliefs.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Jack's Dad said:


> Well maybe us (MEN) Jax  sometime feel that all the touchy feely stuff is just too much an overly complex.


I know.  You are a species I will never understand. :wild:


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Jack's Dad said:


> Well maybe us (MEN) Jax  sometime feel that all the touchy feely stuff is just too much an overly complex.
> 
> I'm for and use positive training for luring and teaching new behaviors.
> I also teach *NO* or whatever word works. No is easiest for me.
> ...


 
* WHAT HE SAID!*

*Extremely well explained!!!!!!*


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> What's bizarre is that even the _mostly_ positive people on the board are not _purely _positive, and yet anyone who so much as mentions positive reinforcement training is treated and argued against as if they are "pure". There are few people here who don't use corrections of some sort, (at the very least verbal), who don't use all four quadrants of operant conditioning, and many also use aversives. MaggieRoseLee is maybe our biggest clicker training advocate on the board, and yet she also uses e-collars.


The derision and anger towards positive training is baffling.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Did I miss something? Who in this thread said you couldn't use correction or compulsion with positive reinforcement? Some may choose not and that is their choice. But a balanced trainer uses what works based on the dog, not propagandist from the next fad.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Originally Posted by *Cassidy's Mom*  
_What's bizarre is that even the mostly positive people on the board are not purely positive, and yet anyone who so much as mentions positive reinforcement training is treated and argued against as if they are "pure". There are few people here who don't use corrections of some sort, (at the very least verbal), who don't use all four quadrants of operant conditioning, and many also use aversives. MaggieRoseLee is maybe our biggest clicker training advocate on the board, and yet she also uses e-collars._

The derision and anger towards positive training is baffling. 


You are absolutely correct with the baffling part! Andequally baffling is the reaction of those on th other side (the Positive folks) - there is an equally strong reaction if a "correction" is mentioned.

There are zealots on each side of the debate on which approach is the one to use.

As an example, mention the name "Bill Khoelor (sp?)" in na group of some trainers - AAACCCKKK! One would think that you had mentioned the name "DEVIL" himself.

Yet if one reads his approach, it is actually a very rational approach and only uses Correction as a last resort and only after the trainer is convinced that the Teach phase works and the dog knows what the command means and simply chooses not to obey. he also advocated a very lengthy phase of "Proofing" the dogs behavior after a Distraction phase in introduced and escalated. but all one usually hears about "The Khoelor Method: is dogs choked etc. He also dealt with in his books extremely DA and HA dogs whose next step was the needle.

As I have maintained for a long time, I agree with the concept of a"Toolbox" of methods and approaches for a good trainer - the best of which to use depends on the dog, his/herpersonality, the trainer, and what we are trying to teach them to do.

I.E. i might use a very different approach to teach "Shake" or"Twirl" compared to a recall in which I am trying to teach a dog to stop and come even when he has started chasing a deer or another dog.

Just my thoughts!


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

short and sweet the answer should be NEVER


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

Just IMO - because I've had so many years working with horses, using positive methods come second nature to me. It just makes more sense to me. 

That doesn't mean I've NEVER used corrections - or would ever use corrections. I just think we live in a world that wants instant gradification. 

I think people's expectations are too high. How many times have we seen threads where people are at the end of their rope with a 10 week old puppy that won't potty train? Or a 9 week old puppy that is biting and being "aggressive"? Five month old puppies being placed in e-collars. 

I think it's sad.


----------



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

Wow. My head is spinning. 

So, I think that I concluded 2 things for sure.

1. I do need to decide which way to train. I have been to only positive, treats galore training and I have been to the compulsion training too. I think I am most comfortable somewhere in between. They only positive approach makes me feel like a vending machine. Perhaps I have not mastered the timing of treats and how to phase them out. The compulsion seems too harsh for me. It might be necessary for some dogs but I think Stella is too soft for that. 

2. I am going to take a break from training. I was going to 3 different classes a week. I just finished one and one is drop in. I will finish up the last one and see what happens. I might try a nose work class. We have done one in the past and it seems pretty stress free. Stella enjoyed it and even at home she loves a good game of find it. And it is a one dog at a time class so she won't have to be stressed by other dogs.

I am going to just take walks for a bit. Do some home box work or tricks for fun training. And continue on the reactivity.

And I know for sure she knows sit.... I recently bought Cheez Whiz or whatever that spray can stuff is. She loves it and I am going to use it for her dog reactivity and only that. Tried it today at a local field. Saw 2 dogs, both pretty far away. She started the intense stare, I told her to sit....*she sat light speed timing*...and I started spraying her mouth with cheese. When I stopped she didn't know what was better....staring at the other dog or looking at me and getting more cheese. Me and the cheese won. We called it a day after the 2 dogs, both of us happy.


----------



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

Lilie said:


> Just IMO - because I've had so many years working with horses, using positive methods come second nature to me. It just makes more sense to me.
> 
> That doesn't mean I've NEVER used corrections - or would ever use corrections. I just think we live in a world that wants instant gradification.
> 
> ...


i agree. but don't horses get corrected by the bit in their mouth?


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

Strangely...I've never seen positive training (as used in this thread) as "being a treat machine". 
You never give a treat every time a dog does something...it won't work that way.
Dogs, as a whole, want to please and it makes them happy to make their people happy. I see tapping into that as the key to successful training anyway.


----------



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

codmaster said:


> As I have maintained for a long time, I agree with the concept of a"Toolbox" of methods and approaches for a good trainer - the best of which to use depends on the dog, his/herpersonality, the trainer, and what we are trying to teach them to do.
> 
> I.E. i might use a very different approach to teach "Shake" or"Twirl" compared to a recall in which I am trying to teach a dog to stop and come even when he has started chasing a deer or another dog.
> 
> Just my thoughts!


I agree with this. I would never correct Stella for not spinning or twirling when asked. It is just for fun. But some of the other stuff....


----------



## Chicagocanine (Aug 7, 2008)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> There are few people here who don't use corrections of some sort, (at the very least verbal), who don't use all four quadrants of operant conditioning, and many also use aversives. MaggieRoseLee is maybe our biggest clicker training advocate on the board, and yet she also uses e-collars.


 I use clicker training and I don't use aversive/collar/physical corrections but I don't talk about it on here much because my suggestions either get ignored or shouted down, and so I usually don't bother replying on this forum very often because people aren't interested or they just keep repeating the usual myths about clicker/positive based training no matter what (such as: it doesn't really work, positive=permissive, you have to always carry treats, you can't have a dog truly trained with that, operant conditioning doesn't work on all dogs, and so on...)


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> Strangely...I've never seen positive training (as used in this thread) as "being a treat machine".
> You never give a treat every time a dog does something...it won't work that way.
> Dogs, as a whole, want to please and it makes them happy to make their people happy. I see tapping into that as the key to successful training anyway.


 
When mine were puppies and just learning, I did give treats every time. I had treats in every jacket, by the door, in the car, etc. I slowed down on them when I was able to see my dogs doing the right things. Now they don't really get any treats, unless I want to give it to them.


----------



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> Strangely...I've never seen positive training (as used in this thread) as "being a treat machine".
> You never give a treat every time a dog does something...it won't work that way.
> Dogs, as a whole, want to please and it makes them happy to make their people happy. I see tapping into that as the key to successful training anyway.


I just haven't figured out the whole when to treat, when to stop thing. I thought I was doing it right but sometimes it just seems that Stella won't do it unless she gets a treat. And that is one of my original questions I think....what to do when you know a dog knows a command but just won't do it unless you have a treat....


----------



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

Chicagocanine said:


> I use clicker training and I don't use aversive/collar/physical corrections but I don't talk about it on here much because my suggestions either get ignored or shouted down, and so I usually don't bother replying on this forum very often because people aren't interested or they just keep repeating the usual myths about clicker/positive based training no matter what (such as: it doesn't really work, positive=permissive, you have to always carry treats, you can't have a dog truly trained with that, operant conditioning doesn't work on all dogs, and so on...)


So what do you do when your dog wont do what you ask?


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

katdog5911 said:


> i agree. but don't horses get corrected by the bit in their mouth?


No, not at all. Using the bit to correct will create a horse who travels behind (or in front of) the bit. Not what you want at all. 

If you think about it in simple terms, how can I make a 1000lb horse move forward, freely, calmly, relaxed? If I were to take a crop and smack it on the butt - what would happen? 

A person who has developed a partnership with a horse can actually create movement by simply 'thinking' forward. The rider's body relaxes and begins to open for the forward movement. The horse feels it and simply moves forward. 

Same as when your dog is laying on the floor. You think, "well it's about time to go outside" you look at your dog and suddenly the dog looks right back at you and begins to get up ready to go outside. You haven't said a word - but the relationship between your dog and you is so that you've created that 'silent' communication.


----------



## RocketDog (Sep 25, 2011)

Lilie, my daughter is very involved with a gal who practices Pat Parelli's "Natural Horsemanship". But she talks a lot about "applying pressure" and the "release of pressure". Isn't this a bit like correction? I've not understood the horse training as well. (Of course, I don't do it so it's not like I know really much about it).


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

katdog5911 said:


> I just haven't figured out the whole when to treat, when to stop thing. I thought I was doing it right but sometimes it just seems that Stella won't do it unless she gets a treat. And that is one of my original questions I think....what to do when you know a dog knows a command but just won't do it unless you have a treat....


You've been taking 3 classes at once(?), has any of them explained if you give a dog a treat every time it sits it quits sitting for treats?
You only treat every 3-4 x you ask a dog to do something. 

Vegas works the same way. If people won every single time they played, they'd get bored quickly and lose interest. 
It's the chance aspect - "Maybe THIS will be the time I win/get a treat" that keeps dogs motivated/engaged.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I honestly think communication is just as if not more important than the method you choose. I am saying a general "you" here, not directing this at the OP (I've only read a smattering of posts). For example, if you use a clicker but your timing is off and/or you are not following clicks with the treat, the dog can get confused. An aversives trainer might be able to train the same dog a down in motion using -R in half the time, not *because* a dog cannot learned and be proofed with marker training only but if the timing is off, it just doesn't work. Before you get the dog out you have to really think through what it is you are training, what is the end goal, how can you break that into steps, what behavior should you be marking at each point in the training. If the dog doesn't understand the marker, the reward, the bridge...then you can't really train anything regardless of what's in the toolbox. 

You have to sort of train the dog to be trained. Familiarize the dog and yourself to whatever method you are choosing. How does the dog know when he's right? If it's clicker, then the clicker needs to be charged, and often charged repeatedly (maybe ten times at the beginning of every session). For -R a lot of people start with a place board or box and introduce the -R using a very simple behavior the dog already knows. I have one dog that I've done a lot of freeshaping with from very early on so he is very comfortable with freeshaping and I had another dog that I didn't do any freeshaping with and when trying to freeshape something (even though freeshaping is about as "purely positive" as you can get) the dog gets anxious and frantic because he can't figure out what I want and how to get the reward.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

this is great


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Lilie said:


> Just IMO - because I've had so many years working with horses, using positive methods come second nature to me. It just makes more sense to me.
> 
> That doesn't mean I've NEVER used corrections - or would ever use corrections. I just think we live in a world that wants instant gradification.
> 
> ...


Since i have almost never ridden a horse - please don't anyone think this is a dumb quesion.

When one rides a horse how do you tell them to stop? - just a verbal command or do you use your feet (spurs?) - or pull on the reins? Would the rider pull harder if they don't stop when told or don't go right or left when told to?

Obviously with a adult horse no one can physicaly overpower a horse so i would be curious as to what would be a physical "command" and what might be construed as a "correction"; similiar to a leash "correction" for a dog versus a "guide" or command with the leash i.e. a little tug to tell the dog to stop or turn?

Thanks!


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> The derision and anger towards positive training is baffling.


Who is angry or derisive about it. 

If I could get my dogs to do anything I wanted in a timely manner by pleading with them, reasoning with them. or spinning in a circle three times I'd go for it.

I have never seen anyone on here say they were against positive training.

There are aspect of it, like letting the dog decide that give some pause but if anyone chooses to relate to dogs that way It doesn't bother me. If it works for you (general you) keep up the good work.

To me dogs are a lot like human toddlers. At times they do not have the capacity or experience to know what is o.k. and what is not and it's up to us to show them.

So going back to my counter surfing scenario, I decide, and teach them it's not o.k. 

I could, keep the kitchen counters bare, not let them in the kitchen at all, give up and let them surf, redirect them away with a treat or toy, and probably any number of other ways.

What I have done works for me so why re invent the wheel. If someone else can stand on their head and the dog stops surfing and it works for them why imply that they should change what they are doing.

All we can share is what works for us and then let the OP decide what they think will work for them.

Again I have never seen any person on this site ever say that positive training in itself is bad or wrong, just that it is not the end all or the only way to achieve training results.


----------



## RowdyDogs (Nov 12, 2012)

RocketDog said:


> Lilie, my daughter is very involved with a gal who practices Pat Parelli's "Natural Horsemanship". But she talks a lot about "applying pressure" and the "release of pressure". Isn't this a bit like correction? I've not understood the horse training as well. (Of course, I don't do it so it's not like I know really much about it).


No, it really isn't. I'm actually a professional horse trainer and have been for about 20 years. I don't care much for the Parelli method but I use operant conditioning on my horses.

Pressure is an aid, as opposed to a correction (there are a lot of corrections you can use with horses--kicking, smacking with your hand or a whip, a stud chain over the nose, jerking on the bit, etc.). Horses actually have to be taught to move away from it, as their natural inclination is to lean into or fight pressure. Once they learn it, it becomes a means to communicate with them. They can lean into that pressure all day, or they can give into it and move onto something more satisfying.

Horses actually can be trained quite effectively with clicker training, by the way. It's just nearly impossible to do anything other than groundwork and trick training with them, because of the physical requirements of riding them! Positive reinforcement is still a big part of under saddle training though, it just looks a lot different than it does in dog training because of the nature of the work--hard to click and treat when you're cantering, for example.  The first animal I clicker trained was a BLM mustang who was adopted as a 9-year-old and was so feral that his owners couldn't get near him after months of trying. Clicker training worked so well for building a relationship with him that I tried it on a couple of other horses, then on my dogs, and the rest is history.


----------



## RocketDog (Sep 25, 2011)

Thanks RowdyDogs. She (the gal next door with the horses) doesn't use it much, my daughter said. Could you pm me your thoughts about it? I'd like to know what my daughter is learning although like she said they don't use it much, and opinions are good for me to consider.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Don't they (the trainers) also use only positive training with no punishment when they are training dolphins and even killer whales?

My guess is tha it would be very tough to punishm a killer whale!!!!!!!

Seems like i read about this somewhere.


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

RocketDog said:


> Lilie, my daughter is very involved with a gal who practices Pat Parelli's "Natural Horsemanship". But she talks a lot about "applying pressure" and the "release of pressure". Isn't this a bit like correction? I've not understood the horse training as well. (Of course, I don't do it so it's not like I know really much about it).


True - but since a horse is a 'flight or fight' type animal, "pressure" isn't considered the same as a correction. 

So if i were to walk directly towards a horse - head to head, the horse might take a step to the right or left. I'm applying 'pressure' directly towards the horse. If I continue and wave my arms, I'm increasing my pressure. If the horse moves off in a direction I don't want it to go, I'd re-direct the horse by applying pressure in a different direction (to the right or left) until the horse goes in the direction I'm asking, then I'll reward by taking the pressure off of it (like one would with a treat). But I wouldn't step in and touch the horse with my whip to 'correct' it. I COULD, but I don't. I get the same reaction, I just let the horse figure it out using a language it understands. 

In my head, it's the same thing as teaching my dog not to jump on the door. I can correct him every time he jumps on it. Or I can simply apply pressure to him at the door by standing at the door waiting for him to sit. When he sits, I release the pressure by letting him in. To me it's easier because I'm on the other side of the door. If I open the door to correct him, I've rewarded the behavior. He's figured out that if he sits at the door, I'm going to let him in. 

Or if I give the kennel command and my dog races through the house then zips into his kennel. I don't want him racing through the house. So my pressure on him is waiting quietly at the kennel. When he goes in, he gets a treat. He learns if he wants the treat, he needs to get into the kennel. Racing through the house gets him nothing but pressure from me at the kennel. If I were to chase him, or scream at him, where does that pressure drive him to?


----------



## RocketDog (Sep 25, 2011)

Gotcha. I knew they weren't exactly the same, but I understand it better now.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

How many folks think that their dogs "want to please you?" That is with no thought of any reward?

Versus that a dog wants to do what will get them something that they want at that particular moment? I.E. an opportunistic animal.

Now realize i am talking about regular daily obedience stuff - so no heroic tales of a dog sacrificing themselves to save their owner from something sinister. I have had a dog do exactly that so I realize that they can do that (Pack drive? or Love?).


----------



## stealthq (May 1, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> You've been taking 3 classes at once(?), has any of them explained if you give a dog a treat every time it sits it quits sitting for treats?
> You only treat every 3-4 x you ask a dog to do something.
> 
> Vegas works the same way. If people won every single time they played, they'd get bored quickly and lose interest.
> It's the chance aspect - "Maybe THIS will be the time I win/get a treat" that keeps dogs motivated/engaged.


Not the poster you asked, but I can tell you that I've been to three different classes taught by completely different groups using different training methods:

1) Beginner class given by a dog club focused on AKC obedience
2) An 'all dogs welcome' class given by an active SAR member (and his active search dog) focused on manners and obedience for companion dogs
3) A beginner class in agility given by a local and very competitively successful agility club

Each of them has you cramming food down your dog's throat about as fast as you can. Doesn't matter if your dog already knows whatever they are going over that day and can prove it (class #3 was so basic that in 9wks we learned one new trick - target the hand).

All of this is more annoying to me because my dog has next to zero food drive, so treats are motivating for a minute or two. Then he's done unless you think of something else to get him interested.


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

codmaster said:


> Obviously with a adult horse no one can physicaly overpower a horse so i would be curious as to what would be a physical "command" and what might be construed as a "correction"; similiar to a leash "correction" for a dog versus a "guide" or command with the leash i.e. a little tug to tell the dog to stop or turn?
> 
> Thanks!


This is what I find really interesting. You know how you can work a dog, one that you've been working with. And you have it at a heel. You can walk in any direction, turn, stop, nearly spin and that dog is glued to your side. No corrections needed. Like magic. Just fluid movement. 

Same thing can happen with a horse. Like a dog, once it's well trained. You can simply sit deep, heels down (almost like you're about to pop a wheelie on your bike, but without the arm movement) and the horse will stop. A reiner, would slide to a stop. Additional cues depends on the horse. But a well trained horse is like magic. Just fluid movement. 

How the horse got to that magic point, is along the same tracks as how the dog did. Depends on the trainer. There are training aids and tack just like dogs have prongs and e-collars. And just like dogs, you can end up with a wonderful mount & best friend - or a mess.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

stealthq said:


> All of this is more annoying to me because my dog has next to zero food drive, so treats are motivating for a minute or two. Then he's done unless you think of something else to get him interested.


That is training that can't think outside a box.
Did you watch the vid about clickers? They train w/toys too.


----------



## RowdyDogs (Nov 12, 2012)

RocketDog said:


> Thanks RowdyDogs. She (the gal next door with the horses) doesn't use it much, my daughter said. Could you pm me your thoughts about it? I'd like to know what my daughter is learning although like she said they don't use it much, and opinions are good for me to consider.


Sure, I'll send you a PM tonight or tomorrow morning when I have a bit more time...it's my off season due to snow so I'm doing some writing work, and just goofing off on here during breaks. 

Also I wanted to fix something in my last post...when I said I'd been training horses professionally for 20 years, that's a typo. I'm only 28 so that would be pretty impressive. LOL I went pro when I turned 18 so I meant to write that I've been training for 10 years. I just noticed it too late to edit.


----------



## stealthq (May 1, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> That is training that can't think outside a box.
> Did you watch the vid about clickers? They train w/toys too.


We're not allowed (in class) to do the kind of toy games he likes. He's a retriever, so he'd love some catch and fetch. But, we're not allowed to throw a toy even a couple of inches into the dog's open mouth. Instead we're supposed to build drive for a tug toy, which he's kind of lukewarm about what with the whole soft mouth thing. With food. You can see where that is kind of slow going for us 

But, we'll get there. I'm having some success building drive using 'chase-me' games and getting him to grab the toy and tug when he catches me.


----------



## MadLab (Jan 7, 2013)

> Don't they (the trainers) also use only positive training with no punishment when they are training dolphins and even killer whales?
> 
> My guess is tha it would be very tough to punishm a killer whale!!!!!!!
> 
> Seems like i read about this somewhere.


They use food with dolphins like; you don't jump through the hoop and you don't eat. It is extreme as well. Plus the dolphins can't escape into the wild as they are contained in a pool. It's funny how positive reinforcers use this analogy when it is really cruel to a wild dolphin, to keep it in such an enclosure in the first place. 

I've heard the US military use something to close the dolphins mouth so it can't go awol and catch it's own food, when they release.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

stealthq said:


> Not the poster you asked, but I can tell you that I've been to three different classes taught by completely different groups using different training methods:
> 
> 1) Beginner class given by a dog club focused on AKC obedience
> 2) An 'all dogs welcome' class given by an active SAR member (and his active search dog) focused on manners and obedience for companion dogs
> ...


Are those the only classes available near you? I do use a lot of food, but I wouldn't be rewarding every single repetition if my dog didn't need it anymore, no matter what everyone else in the class was doing. If my puppy/dog is more advanced than the other dogs in the class (which is often the case), I make it more challenging, and I've never had a trainer try to make me stop doing what I'm doing. If they did, I'd look for another class - I can't see wasting the time if we're not getting anything out of being there. If it were just minor differences in training styles that wouldn't necessarily bother me because class is just one hour a week, and most of the training will be done outside of class, however I want to do it. 

If we're working on a sit or down stay exercise, for example, and everyone else is going to the end of their leash while their dog is in a stay, I've dropped the leash and am walking around the room, returning frequently to reinforce the stay with a treat. Maybe I've been fortunate, but the trainers always seemed to appreciate that my dog was more advanced, and they'd sometimes ask to use him/her as the demo dog for an exercise, or they'd just point us out to the other people in the class ("everyone, watch Debbie with Halo" ). As they'd go around the room observing and assisting people, I'd usually get a "great job with Halo" called from across the room, while they focused on those who were stuck and needed help with an exercise, since clearly I had things under control. 

I can understand not wanting you to throw a ball in class as a reward, that could be distracting to the other dogs. And generally the goal of using toys as rewards is for the dog to remain engaged WITH you, hence the preference for tugging over retrieving, where the dog has to leave you to go get the ball and then come back.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

Three classes a week is a lot - are these all with the same trainer, or three completely different classes? I do train pretty much every day when I'm in a class, but we're only going to class once a week.



katdog5911 said:


> I just haven't figured out the whole when to treat, when to stop thing. I thought I was doing it right but sometimes it just seems that Stella won't do it unless she gets a treat. And that is one of my original questions I think....what to do when you know a dog knows a command but just won't do it unless you have a treat....


How old is Stella? How long have you been training her? As I said in an earlier post, the rate of reinforcement should be higher for newer and/or more difficult behaviors, so think about what she really knows, what she kinda knows, and what's still very much a work in process, because you're going to treat those things differently (pun intended!). Older, easier behaviors have a much lower rate of reinforcement.

If she learned "sit" months ago, in a low distraction environment such as your house, I'd consider that an older, easy behavior. Sitting on a busy streetcorner with cars whizzing by, at the vet's office, or in front of a supermarket with people and carts going by is more difficult, even though to us, it's still a sit. But for the dog, you've complicated things by doing it in a new and very distracting environment. That's how you need to start looking at things. Once a behavior is learned or mostly learned _in those circumstances_, you would move to a variable reinforcement schedule, which works the same way a slot machine does, as msvette mentioned. Not knowing when you'll get a reward or what it might be actually strengthens the behavior, which is why gambling can be addictive. If every time you put a quarter in the machine you won a quarter you'd not only be bored out of your mind, you'd stop playing as soon as quarters stopped coming out of the machine. 

Since I would consider sitting on cue around the house a learned behavior, it shouldn't need to be constantly reinforced with treats. Instead, do real life rewards, such as I described in an earlier post. I'm only using treats if I'm actually _training_, which is different for me than just day to day life around the house. They don't do what I want because they're going to get a treat for it, they do it because they won't get something they want - attention, affection, play, food, etc., if they don't. I also always pair enthusiastic praise with food rewards, and that continues after I start phasing out the treats. Eventually, I no longer need treats at all, at least for that behavior under those circumstances. For a newer, more difficult behavior, or if I increase the difficulty of a behavior by adding distance, duration, or distractions, I would again raise the rate of reinforcement, at least temporarily. 

Expect a sit (I like to get eye contact too) for everything. At first you can cue it, but eventually you shouldn't need to anymore, she'll learn what works and what doesn't. If you cue a sit, say, before you put her leash on for a walk, or before you open the door, or before you set her food bowl down, and she doesn't immediately comply, set down the leash (drop the other end if it's already hooked onto her collar), or put the food bowl out of reach, and walk away, ignoring her for a few minutes. You can use a negative marker like "oops!" if you like. Try again. Eventually she'll learn that what "makes" you put on her leash, or open the door, or put her food bowl on the floor is a sit, and she'll start doing it automatically, without you even having to ask. She's learning that compliance is in her best interest. 

My dogs know that if I stop what I'm doing and just stand there, they need to sit and look at me because that's the foundation I've built. A couple of times a week the dogs get bully sticks in the evening, which are in a cabinet in the garage. If I walk towards the door to the garage after dinner there's a high expectation they might get one, so they're very excited. We go to the door and I stop and stand there, I don't say a word. They sit. I fling the door open, but continue standing there, and if they remain in a sit, I release them to go through the door. Halo occasionally misplaces her impulse control and bolts through the door, 'cause that's how she rolls.  If she does, I stay where I am and let the door close. If she's quick she can run back into the house and sit again, if she's not, she's stuck on the other side of the door by herself, pitching a hissy fit. I let her stew for a moment, and open the door again. She comes in, sits next to Keefer, and looks at me. I fling the door open again. She stays in a sit, watching me until I say "okay". At no point have I told them what to do, but if I needed to tell them to sit (which obviously I did at first) and they didn't immediately sit, that door would not open until they did, and they might lose the opportunity until later unless I was feeling particularly patient and felt like waiting for them to figure it out.


----------



## SFGSSD (Dec 28, 2012)

Chicagocanine said:


> Actually, if done properly, and you find a reinforcement that is rewarding to them it can. It also works on rats, humans, dolphins, chickens, goldfish, etc, etc...
> 
> I would not call any training "all positive" personally though, I do not think there is any such thing, as I don't think it is possible to use 100% only positive reinforcement-- for example, removing something "good" is negative punishment, so if you ever do that it is no longer "all positive".


I wrote an article a couple years ago titled "The all positive movement not only effected the children of today it also is having an alarming impact on dog owners and trainers." 
A play on words to support your position does not change the reality of what it truly is. I am posting a link to a recorded debate on a dog talk radio show between a positive trainer and a balanced trainer. It was one of the best laughs I have had in a while.
http://caninedimensions.com/PublicPages/News-Trainers-Debate.aspx



Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

cassidy's mom- Stella is 19 months. She has been in one class or another since about 4 months. We have sampled a lot of different things...agility, nose work, freestyle and of course basic training and advanced basic training. The big issue for us became dog reactivity at about 9 months????Not really sure how old she was when this started. I went to a few different trainers. The first one was very into choke collars and correction. I just couldn't do it. Then there was one who was very physical with Stella when Stella didn't do as she asked. Dropped her. I found a trainer that I liked but she was a distance away and I just couldn't afford it. I floundered around a bit and went to a GSD breeder that is local. He had Stella for 3 days (not overnight) and then worked with me. This is when I started using a prong. It was like magic. Everyone thought I had a different dog. I started going to his classes when I could afford it. Also was going to obedience and fun stuff elsewhere. I liked his classes at first but sometimes I feel it is a bit too much stress for Stella. Anyway, he also got me an e collar for her yard barking. (which seems to be effective) I don't know where it all went south, but the reactivity returned and I was getting very frustrated. I should add that we had several very negative dog encounters that certainly didn't help the reactivity issue. But that's another story for another thread. 
I do make/ask/expect her to sit for things around the house. I guess I am just expecting too much from her. But it seems like everyone has super trained dogs that respond immediately and live to please their master. Plus I keep hearing how much more Stella can do. So, I am just floundering around trying to keep up with the Jones.... 
Aren't you glad you asked???!!


----------



## MadLab (Jan 7, 2013)

Katdog, don't worry about it.Your dog is still young. You saw your dog get better so she has potential. People here with well trained dogs have probably spent years training dogs or have been guided by some good trainers. You can learn too. A dog gets better with age in my opinion. You need to be stable and be projecting calmness and confidence for a dog to respect you and do as it is told. It is about body language and timing sometimes. Knowledge and understanding of dog behaviors is necessary to really train dogs so work on learning more and then you will get the results you want.


----------



## SFGSSD (Dec 28, 2012)

MadLab said:


> Katdog, don't worry about it.Your dog is still young. You saw your dog get better so she has potential. People here with well trained dogs have probably spent years training dogs or have been guided by some good trainers. You can learn too. A dog gets better with age in my opinion. You need to be stable and be projecting calmness and confidence for a dog to respect you and do as it is told. It is about body language and timing sometimes. Knowledge and understanding of dog behaviors is necessary to really train dogs so work on learning more and then you will get the results you want.


Well said 


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Chicagocanine (Aug 7, 2008)

SFGSSD said:


> I wrote an article a couple years ago titled "The all positive movement not only effected the children of today it also is having an alarming impact on dog owners and trainers."
> A play on words to support your position does not change the reality of what it truly is.


No, but using the term "all positive" is incorrect and in my experience is often used by people who either don't understand the methods or are trying to disparage them.
I am not sure how I was trying to change what my position truly is, can you tell me what you mean by that?


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

Katdog it's really important to remember that even good trainers and handlers can have issues with their dogs. Our first agility trainer was great, and her dogs counter surf.  
The key IMHO, isn't to train your dog so he meets the expectations of other people, it's to build a relationship with her that works for YOU. (and her) Use a training method you're most comfortable with or combine methods. It doesn't have to be an either or choice, just be consistent.


----------



## susanwrites (Jul 31, 2008)

Whiteshepherds said:


> The key IMHO, isn't to train your dog so he meets the expectations of other people, it's to build a relationship with her that works for YOU. (and her) Use a training method you're most comfortable with or combine methods. It doesn't have to be an either or choice, just be consistent.


I just finished reading all 12 pages of this thread and I learned so much. Thank you all for sharing. 

But this, just now, from Whiteshepherds really hit home for me. I'm so excited with my new dog and wanting to not only teach her but to enrich her life so she can live the best life possible that I was in danger of jumping all over the place, trying to do too much, too soon. This was a nice reminder to back up and just continue the basic obedience and having fun together with throwing in a few new things at a slower pace. Plus a reminder that every day living with her is filled with lessons for us both.


----------



## SFGSSD (Dec 28, 2012)

Chicagocanine said:


> No, but using the term "all positive" is incorrect and in my experience is often used by people who either don't understand the methods or are trying to disparage them.
> I am not sure how I was trying to change what my position truly is, can you tell me what you mean by that?


The term "all positive" was coined by the positive trainers. Not balanced trainers. It is used as a marketing ploy for trainers that truly know what they are doing, and trainers that don't as they both ultimately want to just appeal to the masses using the coined phrase. A good number that are on the positive boat went way overboard with it. If you listen to the radio debate I posted earlier in this thread, you might have a better understanding of what I mean by that statement. 
The "Gentle leader" product uses the same play on words to appeal to the masses. I have always described myself as a balanced trainer. I use all methods available that are effective and matched properly with the right dog to maximize performance. No smoke and mirrors, no play on words. It is what it is.


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## RowdyDogs (Nov 12, 2012)

SFGSSD said:


> The term "all positive" was coined by the positive trainers. Not balanced trainers. It is used as a marketing ploy for trainers that truly know what they are doing, and trainers that don't as they both ultimately want to just appeal to the masses using the coined phrase. A good number that are on the positive boat went way overboard with it. If you listen to the radio debate I posted earlier in this thread, you might have a better understanding of what I mean by that statement.
> The "Gentle leader" product uses the same play on words to appeal to the masses. I have always described myself as a balanced trainer. I use all methods available that are effective and matched properly with the right dog to maximize performance. No smoke and mirrors, no play on words. It is what it is.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


I don't think most of us will disagree with you here. As discussed earlier, even those of us who use clicker training on the board don't think "all positive" is an accurate description of what we do. And I agree there are trainers who misuse it--just like there are trainers who misuse every other method on the planet! 

The reason I don't describe myself as a "balanced trainer" is that IME that often describes someone who relies heavily on classical conditioning rather than operant conditioning, while "positive trainer" refers to the latter. Not that this is accurate either, but that's the association many people I speak to seem to have and hence my choice of terms to describe myself.



Whiteshepherds said:


> Katdog it's really important to remember that even good trainers and handlers can have issues with their dogs. Our first agility trainer was great, and her dogs counter surf.
> The key IMHO, isn't to train your dog so he meets the expectations of other people, it's to build a relationship with her that works for YOU. (and her) Use a training method you're most comfortable with or combine methods. It doesn't have to be an either or choice, just be consistent.


Well said! It's important to remember that training is a lifelong process, too. There's always something you can do better, or your dog will pick up a new bad habit, or need a tune-up. I see people say, "Well, we went to a training class when he was younger!" or "Well, she never had this problem until we moved house and now she does it all the time!" like that should mean that the dog shouldn't have any problems now, but that's just not how it works. Plus, if you're doing it right, training should be fun for you and for your dog, regardless of the methods you use.

(I mean, of course remedial training to fix a behavioral problem isn't always fun, and sport or work training can have its frustrating moments, but overall it should be enjoyable!)


----------



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

Thanks all for the excellent input. I guess I feel most comfortable with a balanced approach. At the moment though I am an unbalanced balanced approach handler??!!

I am following up with many of the books, videos, articles and websites mentioned. Very interesting stuff. I think I may also attend the seminar that is presenting the topic "when does positive training become permissiveness". I think it will be interesting. 

Had 2 great days with Stella. The cheese in a can stuff is working out very well for the dog reactivity training I have decided to try. I still intend to use a prong, if necessary. But will implement the cheese first!


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN (May 11, 2005)

RowdyDogs said:


> The reason I don't describe myself as a "balanced trainer" is that IME that often describes someone who relies heavily on classical conditioning rather than operant conditioning, while "positive trainer" refers to the latter. Not that this is accurate either, but that's the association many people I speak to seem to have and hence my choice of terms to describe myself.
> 
> Well said! It's important to remember that training is a lifelong process, too. There's always something you can do better, or your dog will pick up a new bad habit, or need a tune-up. I see people say, "Well, we went to a training class when he was younger!" or "Well, she never had this problem until we moved house and now she does it all the time!" like that should mean that the dog shouldn't have any problems now, but that's just not how it works. Plus, if you're doing it right, training should be fun for you and for your dog, regardless of the methods you use.
> 
> (I mean, of course remedial training to fix a behavioral problem isn't always fun, and sport or work training can have its frustrating moments, but overall it should be enjoyable!)


That balanced trainer thing is huge. It is kind of a code word. I look for it now. 

Denise Fenzi is another fun one to read. Definitely have fun - think of yourself as a teacher.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I usually line up more on the positive side, probably because of the people that are so avidly against it, but the trainer I use is very balanced. She uses the treats to train new behaviors, phases them out, will suggest prong collars to people, and suggests other tools as well. She does proofing and expects good behavior and gets it. 

One day we were in a line of people waiting their turn to do a meet and greet with her, and her dog was across the room, behind a small fence. It stood up. I was about halfway down the line, and she really didn't have a good vantage point to give the dog a command, so she told me to down her dog. I turned and gave the command and not only did her dog hit the ground, so did everyone else's dog in line. Kind of embarrassing as some of the dogs were kind of shaky on that command. 

I don't think she calls herself a positive trainer or a balanced trainer or a compulsion trainer. She is a dog trainer and a good one, I would say balanced. 

Balanced sounds kind of like mentally fit. 

Now, I have had the opportunity to work with someone who called herself a positive trainer. She was unbalanced to be sure (mentally that is). My first experience with her was a dog that was becoming mature and suddenly felt he should bark at everything around him. At the time, I did not know better. I took him to a day class with about 30 dogs and the trainer fitted a prong on him and showed me how to deliver a correction, and he was getting better by the end of the class. She told me to continue working with him and get him into some classes. So I found Little Miss Positive. Her first thing was to say he was afraid for his life and take that nasty prong collar on him and put this Halti on him. Keep him totally away from other dogs. 

It wasn't the right thing to do with him. I took him there for about six sessions and we kind of saw a duck once but no other dogs. Anyhow he got put on the back burner while I worked with another puppy with her in classes. The classes would start with 5 or 6 people, and by week three, there would be me and her. The woman would make such disparaging remarks about the dogs that most of the people just stopped coming. She was afraid of Jenna who was 10 weeks old and said she would be a fear biter. Totally batty. Jenna is neither fearful or bitey, but whatever. 

One day when Jenna was in heat I brought Babs, and as her other class members had already quit. It was just me and her, so she decided to train her Great Dane puppy who was about 9 months old, Babs was 8 months old. 

Her: Sit your dog! 
Me: Babs Sit. 
Babsy sat.

Her: Sit Hugo! Sit! SIT! SIT! 
Finally Hugo's butt grazed the grass. 

Her: Down your dog! 
Me: Babsy Down. 
Babsy assumed the proper down position. 

Her: Hugo DOWN! DOWN!! C'mon DOWN! LAY DOWN!!! 
She then body slammed the pup to get him in the down position. 

This woman who was little bigger than the Great Dane puppy was litterally laying on top of him, while Babs and I calmly looked on. To be fair, her breed of choice was shelties. Still, positive training??? If I was true to myself, I would have been on the ground too, rolling around, laughing my butt off. 

She told me when I left that her dog doesn't have the work ethic of mine. Really? 

I am kind of in the air about the balanced term. Most things in life are better if you use a balanced approach. I can see that term getting a fan-club. I guess I really don't care what people _call themselves_. Does what they are doing make sense? Can they explain it effectively? Does it get good results? Do they adjust methods for the dogs and the handlers they are working with?


----------



## stealthq (May 1, 2011)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Are those the only classes available near you? I do use a lot of food, but I wouldn't be rewarding every single repetition if my dog didn't need it anymore, no matter what everyone else in the class was doing. If my puppy/dog is more advanced than the other dogs in the class (which is often the case), I make it more challenging, and I've never had a trainer try to make me stop doing what I'm doing. If they did, I'd look for another class - I can't see wasting the time if we're not getting anything out of being there. If it were just minor differences in training styles that wouldn't necessarily bother me because class is just one hour a week, and most of the training will be done outside of class, however I want to do it.
> 
> If we're working on a sit or down stay exercise, for example, and everyone else is going to the end of their leash while their dog is in a stay, I've dropped the leash and am walking around the room, returning frequently to reinforce the stay with a treat. Maybe I've been fortunate, but the trainers always seemed to appreciate that my dog was more advanced, and they'd sometimes ask to use him/her as the demo dog for an exercise, or they'd just point us out to the other people in the class ("everyone, watch Debbie with Halo" ). As they'd go around the room observing and assisting people, I'd usually get a "great job with Halo" called from across the room, while they focused on those who were stuck and needed help with an exercise, since clearly I had things under control.
> 
> I can understand not wanting you to throw a ball in class as a reward, that could be distracting to the other dogs. And generally the goal of using toys as rewards is for the dog to remain engaged WITH you, hence the preference for tugging over retrieving, where the dog has to leave you to go get the ball and then come back.


Not the only classes, I'm sure. And I'm long done with the first two. They served their purpose, which was mainly for puppy socialization and later to work on Kohl's dog reactivity. I tend to do most of my training at home after doing some research  as I find that more useful than the classes. My point in bringing them up, is to point out that it isn't unusual to find classes taught by apparently qualified people where the only training technique is to use food and they don't teach how to use it effectively. So, not a surprise to get people feeling like they are vending machines.

My problem now is with the group from 3), because I'm interested in trying out agility and there are only two groups in driving distance with a class schedule I can make that can also prove that they know something because their handler-dog teams actually compete and win. The rest of the groups basically play at it but never compete. 

Now, it may be that they are not equipped to help me with Kohl, because he is NOT the usual toy-crazy, food-crazy candidate. In fact, their process weeds out the dogs that are not toy or food driven - they have tests you have to pass at the end of each class to get to the next, and one of them is how focused the dog is on a toy. I think they have enough interested parties that they do not have to deal dogs that require different training techniques and so they don't.


----------



## RocketDog (Sep 25, 2011)

Selzer, your post made for entertaining reading whilst eating my oatmeal.


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

I'm not sure why anybody has to be labeled..or follow a label to train their dog. They should have all sorts of tools in their training box. 

If I took my dog to a new training class and the first thing the trainer did was pull out an e-collar, I'd run. 

If I took my dog to a new training class and the first thing the trainer did was beg my dog to sit (sit.sit..sit..sit..) I'd run.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I have found that once I have paid my money, I can make ANY training class suit my purpose. 

But you have to know some things first:

1. The trainer may know LESS about dog training than you do. 

2. The trainer does not have to live with their mistakes, you do.

3. You do not have to do ANY exercise that you do not want to do with your dog. 

4. If the class is BORING, do your own thing with your dog in between whatever the trainer is working on. Some dogs are perfectly happy to assume a state of near-vegetation while everyone watches each dog perform a mundane task in various levels of bad to worse. Other dogs would be better off practicing tricks or doing push ups, or other stationary moves. I try not to be distracting, but this is MY time, MY money, and I am going to do what is best for MY dog. 

5. I have yet to be asked to not come back to classes. Most trainers need the body in their class to cover expenses. If I refuse to do a thing the way a trainer wants to be done they aren't going to chuck me out. 

Classes are an opportunity to work around distractions. They are an opportunity to be up close with people and dogs. You can make even a complete novice petsmart trainer's class work for you if you throw out what is not helpful, and use what you can, if nothing else the dogs, the people, and the environment (indoor/heated rather than muddy rainy field, or snow covered driveway).


----------



## RocketDog (Sep 25, 2011)

selzer said:


> I have found that once I have paid my money, I *can make ANY training class suit my purpose*.
> 
> But you have to know some things first:
> 
> ...



I did this. Last winter Rocket and I went to a class where the trainer was ok, But frankly wasn't doing anything that I wasn't doing. I didn't really feel like she knew a whole lot more than I did. Although she certainly liked him. They were small classes with just a few dogs, and several of the classes it was just her and I. So I took it as an opportunity to get some individualized one-on-one training. Also, if she did things a little differently than I wanted to do with him, she didn't mind at all if I did them the way I wanted to. She was most valuable in helping me figure out my timing and seeing things from a different perspective.


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

selzer said:


> Classes are an opportunity to work around distractions. They are an opportunity to be up close with people and dogs. You can make even a complete novice petsmart trainer's class work for you if you throw out what is not helpful, and use what you can, if nothing else the dogs, the people, and the environment (indoor/heated rather than muddy rainy field, or snow covered driveway).


 
Your right. My sister and I took an OB class just for fun. She had an older dog and I had Hondo. She hated it. She felt it wasted her time. I enjoyed it. I learned more about Hondo then Hondo learned in the class.


----------



## RowdyDogs (Nov 12, 2012)

selzer said:


> You can make even a complete novice petsmart trainer's class work for you if you throw out what is not helpful, and use what you can, if nothing else the dogs, the people, and the environment (indoor/heated rather than muddy rainy field, or snow covered driveway).


I actually often sign up for Petsmart classes with foster dogs and new dogs for this very reason--inexpensive and great for socialization plus a safe but very distracting environment! LOL

Thanks for sharing that story about the nutty trainer, btw...I definitely got a kick out of it!


----------



## SFGSSD (Dec 28, 2012)

JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> That balanced trainer thing is huge. It is kind of a code word. I look for it now.


Exactly what are you implying? That Balanced trainers are some sort of secret society? LOL

That statement is just as bad as me saying "those "all positive" trainers is kinda a code phrase for I have no clue but I want to appeal to the masses."

BALANCED means just that... Balanced enough to have the skill and knowledge to use all methods that are effective matched with the right dog. It can be a clicker/marker reward based to correction based and everywhere in between. 


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Looking at a training class that I would want to attend - if i couldn't or wouldn't be engaged with what the instructor was doing, I would not continue in the class.

I have been in a few classes (beginner to UD and above level) where there were a student or two who evidently wasn't too keen on what the instructor was covering at the moment or maybe just didn't agree with the way that she/he was trying to teach it to the rest of the class. So they would tend to do their own thing.

Would have been MUCH better just for that "student and dog" to leave the class (or talk to the instructor during a break or before/after class). Their selfishness (in most cases) really disrupted the class for the rest of the students who also "paid their money" (with the hopes of learning something).

Now if the instructor is truly incompetent that is one thing, but if it is just a disagreement about approach - then be a little polite and courteus to the instructor and esp. to the other students and at least do not disrupt the class during it. And if you really think that you know more than the instructor, then either get out of the class, help with the instruction (offer to teach it?) or talk with the instructor off-line about the situation.

Just some thoughts from my experience in attending many different dog training classes (and teaching just a few) from a wide variety of instructors.

And from many, many years of presenting technical IT and project management public seminars all over the country; if I ever had anyone who clearly did not want to be in a class I was instructing, then we would have a private conversation about that behavior when it approached the extent of disrupting the class and/or impinging on other attendees ability to enjoy and learn from the class! 

Wasn't ever a problem to handle such a student so as not to affect the rest of the students.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

codmaster said:


> Looking at a training class that I would want to attend - if i couldn't or wouldn't be engaged with what the instructor was doing, I would not continue in the class.
> 
> I have been in a few classes (beginner to UD and above level) where there were a student or two who evidently wasn't too keen on what the instructor was covering at the moment or maybe just didn't agree with the way that she/he was trying to teach it to the rest of the class. So they would tend to do their own thing.
> 
> ...


Ah, to be coming from a place where there are plenty of dog classes and everything is right there at your finger tips. It just isn't the case all over the place. 

If the instructor is working individually on recalls or heeling or anything, one student at a time, it is perfectly fine to work on stationary exercises with a dog while waiting for your turn. In fact, the instuctor has said this several times in the past few years. 

Also, not every dog is at the same level. If I am working with a six month old puppy that has never been to classes before, and everyone else is working on stays from across the room, I know my dog, if I want to stay closer to the dog, or return to the dog before the instructor says to return -- that is not being selfish, that is actually allowing the rest of the class to have the full-time they need while not forcing my dog into a position where I would have to correct it. 

I am a dog class veteran. I have worked my dogs through advanced titles. I have worked them in several different venues. I have worked with some awesome instructors who definitely know more than me. And I have worked with some who don't. I have never worked with any who know more about my dog than I do. And nobody should think that they should just listen to what the instructor tells them to do because they are the instructor. If they think that something is not right, they should flat out not do it, and get other opinions before going back and either trying it, or telling the instructor that they are not comfortable with that. 

Again, the instructor is gearing her class to the average level of the dogs in the class, and the average level of the people in the class. It is not like I am suggesting a loud game of tug when the instructor is explaining something. I guess it is something I learned from the batty-lady who was afraid of my puppy. When there were other people in that class, she spent a lot of time individually working with one, then the next, then the next, the whole time telling them how rotten their dogs were. But the majority of the time Jenna and I were standing around doing nothing. Jenna had a ton of energy, and with this dementor making the class a very unhappy thing, it was being a negative experience. Finally, I started doing some things on my own while they were working together, fun things. to keep Jenna on, and to make it positive. I took what would have been a waste of money or a negative experience and turned it into a good thing for she and me. 

Anyone can call themselves a dog trainer and sign people up for classes. Anyone. You do not need to be able to read and write. You do not have to have titled a dog in anything. You do not have to OWN a dog. There are NO rules about who can call themselves a dog trainer. You can watch a few episodes of the dog whisperer, and set up training in your back yard. You do not need to know a hound from a bird dog from a terrier. Just advertise, take the money, and go. When you suggest people just accept what a trainer is doing because they are the instructor, you are actually making a dangerous suggestion.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

selzer said:


> Ah, to be coming from a place where there are plenty of dog classes and everything is right there at your finger tips. It just isn't the case all over the place.
> 
> If the instructor is working individually on recalls or heeling or anything, one student at a time, it is perfectly fine to work on stationary exercises with a dog while waiting for your turn. In fact, the instuctor has said this several times in the past few years.
> 
> ...


I guess everyone is certainly entitled to have their own opinion of what is proper and respectful behavior in a group situation.

*That is, each individual must decide what is ok in such a setting, and what may be disrespectful and rude to both the instructor and the other students who have also paid the cost of the course and invested their time.*

BTW, I never said that any student in ANY class *"...just accept what a trainer is doing because they are the instructor.."!* (or if you may have interpreted what i said as meaning this, please let me know where).

What I would recommend to anyone who finds themselves in a class where they may be uncomfortable for any reason - stop going, and maybe try talking to the organization or to the instructor about their concerns!

Sounds like you have had a great many bad training classs experiences - more so than anyone that I have ever heard of! 

That definitly is very unfortunate for you certainly. 

With all of those unfortunate experiences, I could easily see where you would be much better training all by yourself.

Also, sounds like you have encountered some VERY bad dog trainers! No wonder you seem so very upset with dog trainers!

*"You do not need to be able to read and write."* - have you actually had some trainers who could not even read and write? Guess that they wouldn't have even been able to have any written handouts or summaries of the lessons that they covered. That would be a real problem as the class instruction summaries that we have gotten have turned out to be very useful in our training at home.


----------



## RowdyDogs (Nov 12, 2012)

SFGSSD said:


> Exactly what are you implying? That Balanced trainers are some sort of secret society? LOL
> 
> That statement is just as bad as me saying "those "all positive" trainers is kinda a code phrase for I have no clue but I want to appeal to the masses."
> 
> ...


I want to say first that, based on your posting, I don't think that this applies to you, so please don't take it personally.  I say that just because I think it's easy to feel accused if you identify with a certain label and someone uses it negatively--it happens to me all the time with "positive trainer." LOL

But I really understand what Jean is saying about code words. I know several trainers who I would consider flat-out abusive (and, contrary to what some may think, I truly, honestly have no problem with well-placed corrections, in spite of very rarely--not "never," mind you--using them myself in day-to-day training; it takes a lot for me to say someone is abusive), but who have attempted to rehabilitate their images by latching onto the "balanced" moniker. I know even more trainers who don't even seem to understand what operant conditioning is, yet condemn it, call themselves balanced because they use rewards as well as corrections...even though it is all classical conditioning.

I really do think that labels are kind of BS, and am wary of anyone who uses them...which I realize is very hypocritical. LOL I'm wary of positive trainers, as it definitely can be code for, "I have no clue but want to appeal to the masses." I'm wary of balanced trainers because IME it is usually, "I use exclusively classical conditioning but want to keep up with the times so call myself balanced." But I'll listen to anyone who catches my fancy (by coming well-recommended, being famous, or just something in their presentation/marketing catches my eye), and I can always find something of value in it...whether it is "OMG I will never ever ever do that with one of my dogs!" or "Wow, that is great!" or (often) "This isn't something that I can use right now, but I'll remember it in case I run into a dog it might help."

As I said in a previous post, I think that labels like "positive" or "balanced" are shorthand, and very inaccurate. Virtually all decent positive trainers I've met routinely use negative punishment, and at the same time, no one wants to call themselves a "corrective trainer" or something of that nature, because it sounds way too harsh! So people of either extremes (relying totally on aversives, or being a permissive treat-vending-machine) gravitate to the "positive" or "balanced" labels. But, at the same time, I'm not sure how else to say it and be understood outside of dog-nerd forums.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Anyone can label themselves a dog trainer and collect fees. Anyone. That is my point. You do not need ANY qualification. 

Lots of trainers have excellent qualifications and I have trained with them. And they have students getting titles. And they suggest we work on stationary exercises (come front, finishes, down stays, Look or watch me, stands) while we wait our turns. 

No one is suggesting being disruptive to the class. 

I have been to a lot of classes and get something out of ALL OF THEM. But that is because I make sure that is so. I have had only a couple of seriously bad trainers, but of course, they are the memorable ones. 

Only my current instructor ever gave handouts. My point about reading and writing, is that you do not have to be on the internet researching dog training, you do not have to read dog training books, you do not have to be able to pass a high school equivalence test. All you have to do is label yourself, and collect the money. 

There are some really, really bad trainers out there and some of them are not connected to ANY organization. So who would you discuss it with? 

Some trainers will perform corrections, etc, on dogs they have in their classes. People let them because they feel the trainer must know what they are doing. I am suggesting that this is not necessarily the case. It is kind of like patients' rights. Dog owners need to own the fact that THEY are responsible for what happens in training. They will have to live with the results of training. If a trainer takes the leash out of your hands, you had better trust this person enough that you know they are NOT going to do something that will negatively impact your dog. Because, unfortunately, they are out there.

When we pay for advice on training, it gives it a higher level of credibility. Somehow the fact that cash has changed hands the advice is worth more. Most of us will not just listen to our vets when they tell us something about spay/neuter, vaccinations, nutrition, behavior and they have a lot of education and licensing and a board where you can go that regulates them. Why would we just hands down believe that trainers know what they are talking about. Some of them do, don't get me wrong. But some do not, and you have to make yourself knowledgeable enough to know the difference.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

selzer said:


> Anyone can label themselves a dog trainer and collect fees. Anyone. That is my point. You do not need ANY qualification.
> 
> Lots of trainers have excellent qualifications and I have trained with them. And they have students getting titles. And they suggest we work on stationary exercises (come front, finishes, down stays, Look or watch me, stands) while we wait our turns.
> 
> ...


aha.


----------



## SFGSSD (Dec 28, 2012)

RowdyDogs said:


> I want to say first that, based on your posting, I don't think that this applies to you, so please don't take it personally.  I say that just because I think it's easy to feel accused if you identify with a certain label and someone uses it negatively--it happens to me all the time with "positive trainer." LOL
> 
> But I really understand what Jean is saying about code words. I know several trainers who I would consider flat-out abusive (and, contrary to what some may think, I truly, honestly have no problem with well-placed corrections, in spite of very rarely--not "never," mind you--using them myself in day-to-day training; it takes a lot for me to say someone is abusive), but who have attempted to rehabilitate their images by latching onto the "balanced" moniker. I know even more trainers who don't even seem to understand what operant conditioning is, yet condemn it, call themselves balanced because they use rewards as well as corrections...even though it is all classical conditioning.
> 
> ...


 I have a friend that is a "Positive" trainer but does use negative reinforcement and positive punishment. YET, when corrections are discussed, it gets ugly as she will dig in then I dig in and we go at it:laugh:
The misunderstanding from her or lack of IMO is corrections that are based on pack behavior. The reason this gets ugly is the buzz around both camps (So I hear) is the rejection of pack behavior concepts and pack behavior in general from the "Positive" crowd. This is IMO limiting and the cause of a lot of the flaw in the "Positive" approach that leads to the permissiveness. 
I apologies if I got too deep for some of you, but this is the only way I know how to respond to RowdyDogs valid points.


----------



## SFGSSD (Dec 28, 2012)

selzer said:


> When we pay for advice on training, it gives it a higher level of credibility. Somehow the fact that cash has changed hands the advice is worth more. Most of us will not just listen to our vets when they tell us something about spay/neuter, vaccinations, nutrition, behavior and they have a lot of education and licensing and a board where you can go that regulates them. Why would we just hands down believe that trainers know what they are talking about. Some of them do, don't get me wrong. But some do not, and you have to make yourself knowledgeable enough to know the difference.


This is the old street smarts VS book smarts argument. I would not trade a minute of the 10 years I spent under my father for a CPDT-KA. Why? Because in this field being "Book Smart" does not cut it. No book will ever teach you the timing and ability to read an actual living dog to hands on apply that so called knowledge. * I call it "So called" because a 25 question simplistic test and $500.00 a year IMO is a waste. But for the first year well.... I could see why they would see value in it.:laugh:
How do you know who is worth it? There is only one real way... evaluate the finished product... Not just the dogs they trained alone but the dogs they trained for/with the client and that clients ability to understand what they learned from the trainer to maintain the performance of the dog after the training is complete. When a you can clearly see performance with that combination. Then I would say it is worth it if you have not acquired that skill already
Simply, the proof is in the dogs and clients.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

SFGSSD said:


> This is the old street smarts VS book smarts argument. I would not trade a minute of the 10 years I spent under my father for a CPDT-KA. Why? Because in this field being "Book Smart" does not cut it. No book will ever teach you the timing and ability to read an actual living dog to hands on apply that so called knowledge. * I call it "So called" because a 25 question simplistic test and $500.00 a year IMO is a waste.


There is a lot more to a CPDT-KA than "book smarts". You cannot get one by simply taking a test and paying a fee. Your implication that there is no requirement for hands on knowledge and experience is simply false. These are the eligibility requirements to take the test:



> Eligibility
> 
> *At least 300 hours experience in dog training within the last five (5) years. Two hundred twenty-five (225) hours (75%) of experience must be actual teaching hours (group class, private lessons) as a Head Trainer or Instructor. Seventy-five (75) hours (25%) of experience can be in other related areas such as working with shelter animals, assisting in classes, working as a veterinary technician or groomer (bather position not applicable).*
> 
> ...


The written test topics are Instruction Skills, Animal Husbandry, Ethology, Learning Theory, and Equipment. 

I get your general point, but you are grossly mischaracterizing what's involved in getting a CPDT-KA.


----------



## SFGSSD (Dec 28, 2012)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> There is a lot more to a CPDT-KA than "book smarts".
> 
> I get your general point, but you are grossly mischaracterizing what's involved in getting a CPDT-KA.


 Sorry, let me rephrase that to "Book smarts and 300+ hours of hands on experience that can translate to under 6 months minimum hands on experience on a part time basis."

There are a lot of "titles" out there in the dog training world. I know a lot of professional trainers with decades of experience. They including myself get annoyed when rookies get some kind of perceived glorified title that the public views are "more competent trainers or worth more." When they did not spend a 10th of the blood sweat and tears trainers without that over glorified title put into dog training. 
That was my point without getting into specifics. The "KA" behind the CPDT-KA means "Knowledge Assessed" to be even more specific.






Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Here I was thinking, Kennel Assistant -- Oh well, I never did like acronyms all that much.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> There is a lot more to a CPDT-KA than "book smarts". You cannot get one by simply taking a test and paying a fee. Your implication that there is no requirement for hands on knowledge and experience is simply false. These are the eligibility requirements to take the test:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


300 hours in 5 years. That would come out to at least 60 hours experience a year of which about 45 (or so) have to be as an instructor (I think)

*So that is almost 1 hour per week of actual training experience!*

Whoops - I misread the quote. That is dog TRAINING INSTRUCTION not actually training a dog. I must have missed the actual dog training requirement.

So I would ask - to get this certification title - how much actual experience in training a dog themselves does the prospective certification recipient have to prove? 

Does the person have to have actually earned any OB/Performance Titles on their dog?

Does really sound a little like a "book" title - like so many in a lot of fields are.


By way of comparison - to even apply to take the 4 hour exam, an applicant for the PMP (Project Management Professional from PMI) certification title must demonstrate 4500 hours of PM experince (with a Bachelors degree) and 7500 hours without such a degree.

Granted, this is a professional level certification!


----------



## SFGSSD (Dec 28, 2012)

codmaster said:


> 300 hours in 5 years. That would come out to at least 60 hours experience a year of which about 45 (or so) have to be as an instructor (I think)
> 
> *So that is almost 1 hour per week of actual training experience!*
> 
> ...


Good point! 
It says *"At least 300 hours experience in dog training within the last five (5) years"*
Unless someone can clarify... the word here is "Within" and to the best of my knowledge that can also translate to a lifetime experience level of a whopping 5-6 months or less on a Part Time basis to be certified by them to be called a "Certified Professional Dog Trainer-Knowledge Assessed". 
As a Professional in this field that is just insulting to the Professional trainers that spent 10+ years of blood, sweat and tears to gain the skill and knowledge they have. I am not saying all of the certs are over glorified but a lot of them are. 
Technically you do not need some organization taking $500.00 a year to certify you as a dog trainer. You could be certified under an apprenticeship from another good veteran professional dog trainer that will teach you everything they know and make sure you can apply that knowledge yourself in real situations. IMO nothing beats hands on experience under a good veteran professional to get certified and learn the ropes. It might not have a flashy org behind it, but you will come out of it with more real knowledge and skill with dogs then you could ever imagine.


----------

