# What is the purpose of the clicker?



## mab05 (Mar 1, 2015)

We've had our 4.5 month old since he was 10 weeks.
At this point we have the basics down and he's well behaved and obedient. But he is a bit wild with other dogs. He barks at them, he isn't aggressive but obviously this barking comes off as aggressive. 

So I signed him up for puppy training school mainly for the socializing and I thought it would be safe place to work on his focus. 

But the trainer teaches us to use clickers and I don't understand what the reason for it is. She explained it as something like it takes too long for us to give a puppy a treat so the clicker tells them right away they've done something good and the treat is on its way.
But then she says we phase out the clicker.

So what's the point. If I'm in the middle of training I have a treat at the ready. It doesn't take me that long to get it into his mouth. He's not an idiot. He knows it's coming.

I just don't understand and find it a detriment while I'm working with him. I've already spent the money so I feel obligated to continue going.

So maybe someone can enlighten me?


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Dogs will learn quicker if you can mark the exact behavior you're looking for.

I'll use sit as an example:

With clicker:

You tell the dog to sit, and click the moment his butt hits the ground. The dog knows it's getting a treat for putting the butt on the ground.

Without clicker:

You tell the dog to sit, he sits, you more than likely mark it with a word (yes, good, ect), then reach for a treat and give a treat. That works, but you also throw in emotion due to using your voice. So the dog might get up, jump up to get the treat, and then the dog (in it's mind) is getting a treat for doing that rather than the actual sit.

A clicker is a tool that shows the dog exactly what you want from it. So in the situation with a sit, if all you do is give a treat, it still takes you 1-2 seconds to give a treat. Dog learns that sitting for 2 seconds is what gives it a treat, not actually sitting the moment you say sit and as fast as possible.

A dog will learn much faster when you can mark the exact thing you want from a dog. Then its pretty easy to phase out the marker.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

Read this book :"Don't Shoot the Dog" from Karen Pryor. It is best to thoroughly understand the concept besides doing what the trainer says.


----------



## EazyEandME (Apr 14, 2015)

To mark a behavior!


----------



## angelas (Aug 23, 2003)

To mark the exact behavior you want, exactly when you want it (if your timing is good). The closer to the behavior that the reinforcement (even the secondary) is given the stronger and more consistent the behavior will become. So if the dog gets a click 1/10th of a second after it obeys a command it will learn it faster than a dog that gets a treat even just 2-3 seconds after it commands. Also it helps to eliminate rewarding the wrong behavior in such case as the dog changes position to get the treat (ie comes to you from a "STAY" to get the treat, or stands up from a "SIT").


----------



## FALCON z (May 10, 2015)

Never thought of it that way. I never wanted to deal with a clicker but the faster reward makes perfect sense.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

You can mark a behavior, as others have said, with either a clicker or a word (like yes). The advantage to the clicker is that is contains no emotion. I tend to use both. My voice mostly, since it is always with me and never left at home, but the clicker when my voice causes too much drive or makes the dog too high. My dogs work for both.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

What if the consistency of a verbal marker such as "yes" is always the same and void of emotion? Not that it takes a highly skilled athlete to operate a clicker in one hand and a treat in the other but if you are working on leash, you do have your hands full...reward, clicker and leash. I appreciate the consistency of the clicker as it is exactly the same every time versus a verbal marker which might include emotion but if the delivery speed of the treat is paramount. wouldn't there be times when working with the dog on leash with a clicker and a reward run the risk of the delaying the delivery of the reward?

Just asking since I have a clicker but use a verbal marker much more often than the clicker especially when working with my dog on a lead.

Oh, one other thought...does a verbal marker have merit to it in a situation when the dog is struggling a bit on accuracy and the emotion of a "yes" might be a bit of a plus when the dog finally nails it?


SuperG


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

I use marker words, simply because I'm completely incompetent with using a clicker. Mainly the reasons that SuperG says. 

The click or marker word is what counts most, SuperG. It doesn't matter that it might mean it takes a couple seconds longer to get the treat because the marker is what tells them that they did right. So they know that they will be rewarded, even if it is several seconds before you get the treat to their mouth.


----------



## gsdheeler (Apr 12, 2010)

When I first started my other dog w/ the clicker my instructor took it away from me and she clicked the dog, guess I'm an idiot. 
Now with this dog I'm much better. He gets excited when I pull out the clicker and starts offering behaviors. Just started weave poles and he's catching on quickly using the clicker. You can just see he's working it out, what he has to do to get the treat.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

gsdheeler said:


> Now with this dog I'm much better. He gets excited when I pull out the clicker and starts offering behaviors. Just started weave poles and he's catching on quickly using the clicker. You can just see he's working it out, what he has to do to get the treat.


You know what you posted is a interesting observation...the actually physical presence of a clicker is recognized by the dog and puts the dog in a mode which it understands as a logical/learned progression leading to rewards per its proper execution. Since I am not a religious user of a clicker...is there such a thing as dogs which exhibit "clicker dependency" when it comes to learning ? This kind of reminds me of people who use an e-collar and say." All I have to do is show the dog the transmitter and the dog comes on line". I know we all strive to have a dog obey after the learning phase by just our presence and not rely on any tools.


SuperG


----------



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

SuperG said:


> Since I am not a religious user of a clicker...is there such a thing as dogs which exhibit "clicker dependency" when it comes to learning ? This kind of reminds me of people who use an e-collar and say." All I have to do is show the dog the transmitter and the dog comes on line". I know we all strive to have a dog obey after the learning phase by just our presence and not rely on any tools.


Since you'd only use a clicker (or a verbal marker) when you're in the teaching phase, because that's when you're going to be marking behavior, your question doesn't really apply. It's not about _making_ your dog obey, it's about teaching your dog what a particular cue means. Once you've done that, (and generalized and proofed it of course), you're past the learning phase, so a tool that facilitates learning would no longer be necessary. At least for that particular cue anyway.

Like Lisa mentioned, I use both a clicker and a verbal marker, and my dogs understand them both.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Since you'd only use a clicker (or a verbal marker) when you're in the teaching phase, because that's when you're going to be marking behavior, your question doesn't really apply. It's not about _making_ your dog obey, it's about teaching your dog what a particular cue means. Once you've done that, (and generalized and proofed it of course), you're past the learning phase, so a tool that facilitates learning would no longer be necessary. At least for that particular cue anyway.
> 
> Like Lisa mentioned, I use both a clicker and a verbal marker, and my dogs understand them both.


I think you missed my point..... I appreciate when a clicker is used and what it is used for. My thought was regarding what gsdheeler mentioned
" He gets excited when I pull out the clicker and starts offering behaviors. " This to me seems the same when I might bring out the frisbee but hold it across my chest or the tug over my shoulder...the dog knows what this means simply by the placement of these objects and the dog offers behaviors and attitude which to me suggests it understands its training time. If I am carrying either of these objects in my hand dangling by my side the dog offers different behavior, more of a " yes, we're playing " mentality. So, the mere physical presence of a clicker seems to be a catalyst of sorts which sets the tone for the ensuing session of training which gsdheeler described.

One other thought..different subject, let's say I just taught my dog to jump over a box in my backyard per my " over " command...now I am out on a walk and want my dog to jump over a water/mud puddle...dog executes per my command, so I mark with my "yesss" and dog knows it performed properly. This is why I use a verbal marker much more often because as someone said earlier, one's voice is always with them. I suppose I could take my clicker with me everywhere I go as I proof and generalize the desired behavior associated with the command but I don't maybe clicker advocates do??? I just have found that "training" a dog expands well beyond training sessions and can happen anywhere, everywhere and at any time.

SuperG


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

The idea behind a clicker is that you can keep the treats in your pocket and then click to tell the dog it did it correctly. Then take a treat out and give it to your dog. The click gives you time to reward the dog because you have marked the behavior that you wanted from your dog. This is also something that has been proven to work faster than just a marker word, especially for novices that have trouble using the same marker word.

Train a wide variety of dogs and people and you'll understand why trainers recommend a clicker. It removes a lot of inability on the handler's part to be consistent.

Stop thinking about a clicker/marker word as it relates to yourself, and understand how it benefits the majority of people. Just because one person is able to use a marker word, doesn't mean that others can.

You can't imagine how many times I've had people tell me they use a marker word, and yet when they get their dog out and do some obedience the dog clearly doesn't understand the marker at all. Mostly because the handler isn't consistent and will sometimes use yes, sometimes use good dog, sometimes use yay.

It is also something that is much more applicable to competitive obedience, when timing and position really matter. For obedience "for fun" it's not as big of a deal because you're not really chasing points and needing exact positioning on your dog's sits and fronts and everything else.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

martemchik said:


> Stop thinking about a clicker/marker word as it relates to yourself, and understand how it benefits the majority of people. Just because one person is able to use a marker word, doesn't mean that others can.
> 
> .



Ummmmmmm...I guess I am a selfish person then as I really don't care what benefits the majority of people when it comes to my dog since the majority of people do not share their lives with my dog. I'm a "to each their own" mentality and in all honesty am rather resistant to following the herd. Since I own a clicker and have used it, I feel confident in my choice to utilize a verbal marker predominantly versus a clicker. I'd be a liar to suggest that a clicker is not effective as I have seen wonderful examples of clicker training just as I have seen wonderful examples of verbal marker training.

Your example of the inconsistency of a handler fumbling with a verbal marker has merit which supports the reason why I have a tendency to not follow the herd as it is a sad statement of fact about the "herd". 

I noticed you and a couple others have mentioned that the delivery of the reward after marking the behavior is not that critical regarding timing. Perhaps, I am wrong once again but I have read and seen many methods which preach the benefit of the quickness of delivery of the reward after marking the appropriate response so as to ensure there is absolutely no doubt in the dog's mind and in doing as such it reinforces the marker becoming synonymous with the marker and displayed behavior. Once again, it's probably different for those "chasing points".

SuperG


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

When discussing things on a public forum, you have to discuss them in a way that will benefit others, especially when you don't have the knowledge about what kind of trainers the other people are, and what their goals are.

To give the advice..."I don't do this with my dog so you shouldn't have to do it with yours either" is incorrect when someone is asking for training advice or clarification. You need to think about what has proven to be more successful and not just worked for one person with one dog.

"Selfish" advice doesn't benefit anyone. You can be as selfish as you want with your dog, but to expect someone else to do it the way you do, especially without meeting them, seeing their dog work, and evaluating the handler's ability, is not beneficial to the person asking the question.


----------



## gsdsar (May 21, 2002)

I don't physically use a clicker. I use a marker word "yes". I am abominable with clicker timing, but I am good with a marker word. Same concept, mark the behavior you want and reward when capable. 

I reward a lot, all the time, even long after a behavior is known. I would prefer my dog to be expecting a reward and if one isn't immediate, then it's more of a "one off" in the dogs head. It's how I have always done it.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

martemchik said:


> When discussing things on a public forum, you have to discuss them in a way that will benefit others, especially when you don't have the knowledge about what kind of trainers the other people are, and what their goals are.
> 
> To give the advice..."I don't do this with my dog so you shouldn't have to do it with yours either" is incorrect when someone is asking for training advice or clarification. You need to think about what has proven to be more successful and not just worked for one person with one dog.
> 
> "Selfish" advice doesn't benefit anyone. You can be as selfish as you want with your dog, but to expect someone else to do it the way you do, especially without meeting them, seeing their dog work, and evaluating the handler's ability, is not beneficial to the person asking the question.


Great point, I appreciate all you have said except one thing...I can only describe my experiences and observations and in order to that, I can't lie about what I have done, well I suppose I could but it's of no value. My "selfish" advice is my honest description of what I actually have done....that's all. Whether one chooses to scrap it or run with it is their choosing, so why should I lie? I have no notion or delusions of expecting that someone else should do as I have done. 

I have heard all kinds of advice in here regarding numerous topics and many times the different advice given is conflicting, so the onus is on me to sift through all the advice and perform my due diligence and proceed as I deem fit.

I think the best post I ever read regarding what you are talking about was when the topic of a raw diet was being debated...someone posted in regards to simply just taking anyone's particular advice, that for all they might know, the giver of the information, "might not even own a dog"....and I let the bluntness of that simple response guide me accordingly.

I have crossed a bridge or two where even after gathering all the information I could via numerous resources, including this forum....when it came time to implement the solution, I chose to use the services of a pro to give my dog the best chances to prevent me from screwing up. I'd consider it irresponsible of me to tread in waters with my dog if I wasn't assured of my competence in a particular department....I would hope all might do the same as I value my dog way too much to shoot from the hip.


SuperSelfishG


----------



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

SuperG said:


> I think you missed my point..... I appreciate when a clicker is used and what it is used for. My thought was regarding what gsdheeler mentioned
> " He gets excited when I pull out the clicker and starts offering behaviors. " This to me seems the same when I might bring out the frisbee but hold it across my chest or the tug over my shoulder...the dog knows what this means simply by the placement of these objects and the dog offers behaviors and attitude which to me suggests it understands its training time. If I am carrying either of these objects in my hand dangling by my side the dog offers different behavior, more of a " yes, we're playing " mentality. So, the mere physical presence of a clicker seems to be a catalyst of sorts which sets the tone for the ensuing session of training which gsdheeler described.


No, I do think I grasped what you were getting at, but you also said this: 



> I know we all strive to have a dog obey after the learning phase by just our presence and not rely on any tools.


 and used also the phrase "clicker dependency", which implied (although perhaps that's not what you actually meant) that a dog could become dependent on a clicker to the point where they would not obey without one, which is why I made the distinction between actively training a new behavior and obeying in general such as with a previously learned command. Again, perhaps your wording didn't accurately convey the point you were trying to make.

Understanding the concept of a clicker to where the dog immediately grasps the context of "we're going to train now" when s/he sees one isn't what I'd consider "dependent". For that, it would be more along the lines of the dog NOT switching into training mode UNLESS you had the clicker in clear view. And I just don't see that happening.

Dogs are very good at making associations, so absolutely they do know that a ball or frisbee will mean play time and a clicker will mean it's time to train. I don't think that creates a dependency. Heck, my dogs will sniff my shoes and know something's up, lol! Halo knows when I bring out the shoes I've worn to flyball practice, and both dogs know the shoes that mean a hike or a trip to the park - they'll sniff and get all excited in anticipation.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> No, I do think I grasped what you were getting at, but you also said this:
> 
> and used also the phrase "clicker dependency", which implied (although perhaps that's not what you actually meant) that a dog could become dependent on a clicker to the point where they would not obey without one, which is why I made the distinction between actively training a new behavior and obeying in general such as with a previously learned command. Again, perhaps your wording didn't accurately convey the point you were trying to make.
> 
> ...


Totally agree on the quickness a dog associates with many of our human habits, particular clothing, collars, leads, clickers, toys, rewards, training apparatus, our body postures/gestures, our voices, our moods etc. 

My comment " I know we all strive to have a dog obey after the learning phase by just our presence and not rely on any tools." was more aimed at a thread I started a while back which was titled " Am I Cheating? "...which hinged on fading out the reward. So my use of " ...not rely on tools" was very general, I apologize for the confusion. My question regarding " clicker dependency " was generated by the poster who mentioned that the sight of the clicker somewhat created an attitude in the dog that it was time to get busy and train and the dog started offering behavior before the clicker was ever clicked....and made me wonder if I might be doing the same ( which I believe I am ) to my dog with the tug or frisbee when I display it in a specific fashion...this is the "dependency" I am wondering about, as it seems there are many items which might be a precursor of sorts to indicate to the dog, it's time to train and in this association the dog makes with whatever it might be ( maybe a clicker, a tug toy, a pocket full of treats, a particular collar or lead etc ) the dog is more inclined or gets revved up to learn and train because of the mere existence of this precursor. Of course it might be a minor difference but if from the very beginning of a particular scenario the dog knows it's training time versus something else, I find that setting the stage properly from the get go does make a difference as the dog starts out with the proper mindset and is already in the proper mode. So, my curiosity asks, is this a good thing, bad thing or of no consequence regarding the overall productivity of a training session?

The OP asked a great question regarding clicker training and had a bit of reluctance because the OP figured the dog is not stupid and knows there is a treat in hand ready to be rewarded upon compliance. The OP's reservations were addressed with good answers describing the benefits of a positive marker regardless of what form it might take.


SuperG


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

I like to use a clicker when I don't want the focus on me. Something like articles in tracking. I don't want his attention to me, I don't want to take it off the article. Its probably not the exact same as clicking the completion of something, or a release when I use it, its more in line with being a bridge.


----------



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

SuperG said:


> So, my curiosity asks, is this a good thing, bad thing or of no consequence regarding the overall productivity of a training session?


I think it's a fine thing (neither good nor bad) _as long as_ that obedience will carry over into non-training situations too. Dogs make associations, that's just the way it is. But in the end, they're hopefully getting that a training session is not the only time they have to obey, and there are ways to make that happen.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

The clicker "marks" the behavior and tells the dog what he did *at that exact instance* was correct and will get a reward. You ALWAYS reward if you've clicked, but you can reward without a click (you never click and then refuse to deliver a reward). The clicker is helpful when shaping behaviors and/or training things that are actually a chain of several behaviors (like a formal retrieve). For example, say I am working on my formal retrieve and during my training session, I am trying to work on the dog's speed to the dumbbell. If I like the speed, I can click while the dog is running out to the dumbbell, but then let him finish the behavior (pick it up, run it back, hold it) before I reward. I can also use it to send my dog out to a mat or place away from me and practice changing from stand, sit, down, or stay at a distance. I click/mark the behavior as the dog does it, but then walk back to the dog to give the reward.

Clicker dependency is not really thing, that just means the dog doesn't actually know the command/behavior yet. Think of it this way, a lot of parents will "mark" their toddlers for using the big boy potty and even give rewards. As adults, are you still dependent on your parent to tell you when you've done potty correctly and deserve a piece of candy? Ah, no  The clicker is using during *training* to mark behaviors, it is not a cue or a reward.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Liesje said:


> . As adults, are you still dependent on your parent to tell you when you've done potty correctly and deserve a piece of candy? .


Speak for yourself, I have a sweet tooth which has no shame.......


SuperG


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Liesje said:


> You ALWAYS reward if you've clicked, but you can reward without a click (you never click and then refuse to deliver a reward)............ The clicker is using during *training* to mark behaviors, it is not a cue or a reward.


So, if you always reward after clicking, every time, 100%... does not the sound besides marking the proper behavior also imply a reward is coming? Dog hears "click" dog knows it's scoring a reward. I understand the reward cannot happen without proper execution by the dog just as the "click" cannot happen without proper execution. To me, the "click" indicates two tangible events..one is, the desired action was accomplished and two is, a reward is coming neither can happen without both occurring in your scenario. Perhaps, my error is..there are times when I use my verbal marker after the behavior has been exhibited numerous times that a reward does not always follow. I somewhat believe my "yesss" at that stage reinforces the proper behavior and in essence is a reward of sorts, dog appreciates my approval....don't know that my dog feels the same way but I might be best served to further investigate your version. 

SuperG


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

SuperG said:


> So, *if you always reward after clicking, every time, 100%... does not the sound besides marking the proper behavior also imply a reward is coming?* Dog hears "click" dog knows it's scoring a reward. I understand the reward cannot happen without proper execution by the dog just as the "click" cannot happen without proper execution. To me, the "click" indicates two tangible events..one is, the desired action was accomplished and two is, a reward is coming neither can happen without both occurring in your scenario. Perhaps, my error is..there are times when I use my verbal marker after the behavior has been exhibited numerous times that a reward does not always follow. I somewhat believe my "yesss" at that stage reinforces the proper behavior and in essence is a reward of sorts, dog appreciates my approval....don't know that my dog feels the same way but I might be best served to further investigate your version.
> 
> SuperG


Yes, it does (to the bolded statement). The benefit of the clicker is that you can instantaneously mark a behavior if your reward is slightly delayed. If I'm training my dog a start-line-stay (for agility), I can mark his staying behavior and then walk back to him to give a reward. I don't train stay/wait by allowing the dog to break the stay/wait for the reward, I *always* go back to the dog during the training phase. The clicker means I can communicate more clearly during this process. The OP mentioned that they always have treats available so why the clicker. I'm trying to give examples of how I use a clicker and food reward together where only having the food reward isn't the communication I'm looking for.

I believe your "yesss" marker word is what is called a bridge? Though I'm not 100% sure. "Clicker Training" (which is not exactly the same as training with a clicker) means that the marker is always a clicker, not a marker word, and that a reward is always paired with a click.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

I know a guy that uses the clicker during the blind search. Each blind done correctly gets a click. The reward...the helper. The theory of the clicker is as Lies states but it can be used in different ways.


----------



## WesS (Apr 10, 2015)

Liesje said:


> Yes, it does (to the bolded statement). The benefit of the clicker is that you can instantaneously mark a behavior if your reward is slightly delayed. If I'm training my dog a start-line-stay (for agility), I can mark his staying behavior and then walk back to him to give a reward. I don't train stay/wait by allowing the dog to break the stay/wait for the reward, I *always* go back to the dog during the training phase. The clicker means I can communicate more clearly during this process. The OP mentioned that they always have treats available so why the clicker. I'm trying to give examples of how I use a clicker and food reward together where only having the food reward isn't the communication I'm looking for.
> 
> I believe your "yesss" marker word is what is called a bridge? Though I'm not 100% sure. "Clicker Training" (which is not exactly the same as training with a clicker) means that the marker is always a clicker, not a marker word, and that a reward is always paired with a click.


My interpretation is this. People do these things in different ways. Without a clicker, you can have a duration marker, and a terminal marker. Anyways it really depends on how you chose to train. As long as it follows the operant conditioning principles. You seem to have a different approach. I think consistency is key, and for the message to be sound coherent and consistent. At the end of the day, people use the clicker/duration marker/namings/terms in different way. So its actually quite hard to discuss these things and keep on the same page.

A marker is another word for a bridge. But if training without clickers. A word can replace the purpose of the clicker. The way SuperG is using the word yes, i a duration marker i believe. He is using it to praise, and say keep doing what your doing. I dont believe you always have to treat this word. That is perfectly ok. The clicker however, or the terminal bridge, denotes you got it. command over, your free. Come and get your reward. (I am sure there are different interpretations here.) But this is how I follow it.

Terminal markers are great, because you can reward dog in movement (helps make reward higher value), he gets reward faster, and therefore is more effective in saying, hey you got that reward for that marker. (If you say yes and reward, 3 minutes later, dog does not get it. Similarly with seconds passing has less effect. Faster for dog to come and get his reward, and is also engaged on his next command.) Creating distance on sit/stays is also a bit harder in rewarding on time, without using a terminal marker. Gets dog to run to you. Gets dog excited. You can meet him. He gets his reward faster. Etc.


----------



## WesS (Apr 10, 2015)

Terminal markers also get dogs in habit, of re-engaging you, or comming to you when command is over. Like an invisible leash, where dog is constantly trying to come to you.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

You know this gets more interesting as more people add their concept of the processes at play using a clicker and/or a verbal marker but the use of the clicker seems to be more strict than the use of a verbal marker to a degree or at least my application.

And then Steve Strom throws a curveball into the mix... his description of how he utilizes a clicker makes me think even more. One question regarding your use....is it exclusive to the task of tracking or have/do you use it other ways? And....did you use a process to " load" the clicker?

FWIW, I took out the clicker today and trained with the dog, haven't done that in quite a while but the dog remembered better than I did. martemchik would be having a good laugh at my expense, rightfully deserved because it took me 2 clicks to finally lose the simultaneous "yesss". Anyway, it's different for the dog and kind of captivated the dog's attention....I'll go with it and learn a lesson the dog has taught me...clicker, verbal marker, treat every time, a tug, a frisbee, a fetch, a spirited wrestling match or maybe a piece of food...keep it interesting and less predictable at times..dog seems to hone in on what it hasn't seen in a while but knows all about it.


Superg


----------



## WesS (Apr 10, 2015)

SuperG said:


> You know this gets more interesting as more people add their concept of the processes at play using a clicker and/or a verbal marker but the use of the clicker seems to be more strict than the use of a verbal marker to a degree or at least my application.
> 
> And then Steve Strom throws a curveball into the mix... his description of how he utilizes a clicker makes me think even more. One question regarding your use....is it exclusive to the task of tracking or have/do you use it other ways? And....did you use a process to " load" the clicker?
> 
> ...


Yep all tools, all methods are good, as long as they have a reason behind them, are consistent, and can back up why you are doing something, based on operant conditioning principles and behaviour studies. I personally dont like clickers. They take up a hand. I lose it, and spend more time searching for it than doing what I want to do with dog. Personal opinion. But I dont like it, for my own use. I have more reasons why I dont like them, but those that do use them probably have just as many reasons why they are better and support to back it up. Would be a nice discussion thread topic on pro's and cons i guess, based on everyones opinion.

'Clicker training' implies the use of a physical clicker. But a voice can replace a clicker to good effect. Some would argue its better, others would argue not. As I said I prefer the voice.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

WesS said:


> Yep all tools, all methods are good, as long as they have a reason behind them, are consistent, and can back up why you are doing something, based on operant conditioning principles and behaviour studies. I personally dont like clickers. They take up a hand. I lose it, and spend more time searching for it than doing what I want to do with dog. Personal opinion. But I dont like it, for my own use.


I'm probably less of a subscriber to clickers because I never used them with my previous 3 dogs...don't even know if they existed...they most likely probably did. You seem to have a strong opinion and some of it I subscribe to..I think it is a good debate comparing the emotionless click to a verbal marker which at times could be used sparingly to impart more than a robotic type click or the physical limitations of an adjunct interfering with your goal.


SuperG


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

As usual, there is a ton of lingo and theory wrapped around training things that most people do (to some extent) without naming it or without even realizing it.

I use clickers for some things, but not all things. My youngest dog which I am training for several types of competition is now 18 months and has never seen/heard a clicker beyond a few sessions of "charging" it when he was less than 3 months old. The clicker is not really valuable in the areas where I am currently training this dog. I use it mostly for precision work in obedience, or things that involve a behavior chain, and I use it with dogs that like to "freeshape". Nikon had a LOT of clicker work, but he did SchH/IPO and I was serious about his obedience. These days, verbal markers are all I need for all my dogs. Haven't use a clicker in over a year, but I do think it's a very valuable way to train and valuable to understand what is happening when it's being used even if one is not a strict Clicker Trainer.


----------



## WesS (Apr 10, 2015)

Liesje said:


> I believe your "yesss" marker word is what is called a bridge? Though I'm not 100% sure. "Clicker Training" (which is not exactly the same as training with a clicker) means that the marker is always a clicker, not a marker word, and that a reward is always paired with a click.


Just for clarity. A clicker(or a word instead). is a bridge. A clicker is a marker too. Marker and bridge is the same thing. The term bridge (conceptual reason behind name) is used to figuratively denote the process of building associations. Without the clicker you would need to immediately feed. So what it does it creates a hypothetical bridge between Action-click-Reward.

The click denotes you got it. But a click is meaningless without the reward. Similarly the food reward may come too late, or excite the dog if dangled in front of its face. Impossible to feed fast enough without the clicker, or the mark/bridge and you may lose opportunities to mark/bridge/click that you got the right behaviour.

So the clicker lets the dog know that they 'got it'. Now the clicker only works because it bridges, and 'predicts' food is coming. Concept is Pavlov's dogs. (Dogs salivate to stimulus of a bell(with or without food), when dogs are conditioned to the bell before feeding. Ringing after meal time, is meaningless. Ringing during feeding is meaningless (dogs already have what they want.) Ringing before feeding time, consistently, conditions the expectation, that food is coming and therefore elicits the same salivatory response as the food itself. This is why they say you should just 'click' then 'feed' at start.

Feed before the clicker, and clicker is useless. Feed same time as the clicker. Clicker is useless. Feed after the clicker and suddenly the clicker predicts the reward. This is what we we want. A hypothetical bridge, that associates the click with the reward. 

The word marker makes more sense to most, as it 'takes a snapshot in time' (that is easy for dog to understand). But the bridge, is pretty much describing the process of association the dog has between action and reward, and the hypothetical 'bridge' it has to cross to get there.

All that said and done. Bridge and Marker means the same thing. Clicker is just a sound with associative meaning and is considered a bridge/marker.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Liesje said:


> As usual, there is a ton of lingo and theory wrapped around training things that most people do (to some extent) without naming it or without even realizing it.



Yes.....


SuperG


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

What cracks me up is when people say stuff like "oh I NEVER do that sort of thing, that's way too gimmicky, using all those fancy words...." and then I watch them train and they are very clearly using marking training, various quadrants of operate conditioning, etc. The point of using the fancy words and lingo is that for whose who also enjoy discussing the theory and science behind dog training, it helps be on the same page. I don't really care what people do or don't do; I personally like training *and* discussing it and trying to understand why it works or doesn't work. The only thing that really bugs me is when people use words that have clear definitions and use them wrong. I went to an IPO seminar put on by some popular people/trainers in IPO and several of the terms they defined and demonstrated in their PowerPoint were not being used correctly. You don't get to take a word or term and then redefine it and call it your own thing.


----------



## WesS (Apr 10, 2015)

Liesje said:


> What cracks me up is when people say stuff like "oh I NEVER do that sort of thing, that's way too gimmicky, using all those fancy words...." and then I watch them train and they are very clearly using marking training, various quadrants of operate conditioning, etc. The point of using the fancy words and lingo is that for whose who also enjoy discussing the theory and science behind dog training, it helps be on the same page. I don't really care what people do or don't do; I personally like training *and* discussing it and trying to understand why it works or doesn't work. The only thing that really bugs me is when people use words that have clear definitions and use them wrong. I went to an IPO seminar put on by some popular people/trainers in IPO and several of the terms they defined and demonstrated in their PowerPoint were not being used correctly. You don't get to take a word or term and then redefine it and call it your own thing.


By that logic we should not be using the term Marker at all. The original word by clicker training purists is bridge. You are probably right though. Creates some confusion, in discussing such things, when people are using different words, for different meanings, and each person changes it up based on how they were taught.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I learned Clicker Training based on Karen Pryor's book, methods, and lingo, where she calls it "event marker" or "marker" (but also reference the term "bridge") so for me it has aways been a "marker", but "bridge" works the same way.


----------



## WesS (Apr 10, 2015)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Dogs are very good at making associations, so absolutely they do know that a ball or frisbee will mean play time and a clicker will mean it's time to train. I don't think that creates a dependency. Heck, my dogs will sniff my shoes and know something's up, lol! Halo knows when I bring out the shoes I've worn to flyball practice, and both dogs know the shoes that mean a hike or a trip to the park - they'll sniff and get all excited in anticipation.


This is a good point. When training without a clicker, probably even with a clicker, its good to have a cue word to annotate the start of training. Another for the end. A treat bag also does the tick, although you dont want them focused on it during training, just the act of picking it up could put them in training mode. Just a visual cue, sight, smell. Or even a toy reward, can get the attention. 

So although I believe there is an effect. There are many ways to create this effect. You could get the same effect by wearing a certain training jacket. So although an important consideration, I don't think there is any negligeble effect of not having a clicker as an item, or a significant benefit that cant be replicated in numerous ways.


----------



## WesS (Apr 10, 2015)

martemchik said:


> Train a wide variety of dogs and people and you'll understand why trainers recommend a clicker. It removes a lot of inability on the handler's part to be consistent.
> 
> Stop thinking about a clicker/marker word as it relates to yourself, and understand how it benefits the majority of people. Just because one person is able to use a marker word, doesn't mean that others can.
> 
> You can't imagine how many times I've had people tell me they use a marker word, and yet when they get their dog out and do some obedience the dog clearly doesn't understand the marker at all. Mostly because the handler isn't consistent and will sometimes use yes, sometimes use good dog, sometimes use yay.


I think one of the biggest mistakes dog trainers make, is that they assume that its easier to communicate and train dogs than it is to train people.
People can learn just like dogs. Much more easily under the correct guidance. So the point I am making here is that if gangmanstyle can record a billion hits on youtube, people can also be trained to say words consistently. In fact I would even suggest that many training sessions should be done without the dogs entirely. When you have the knowledge, its a case of practise makes perfect. For you and the dog. You need to be an enabler. Not create dependent followers on your guidance.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Trained again with the clicker today...clicked and the dog ate the clicker...well crunched it up and spit it out but she sure liked it as a reward. I can see this getting expensive.....


SuperG


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

SuperG said:


> Trained again with the clicker today...clicked and the dog ate the clicker...well crunched it up and spit it out but she sure liked it as a reward. I can see this getting expensive.....
> 
> 
> SuperG


I don't think you understood the sequence.

1) lure, command, shape behavior
2) Click to mark behavior
3) Give a food treat

NOT
1) Click
2) Give the clicker to eat
3) Have a beer


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Jax08 said:


> I don't think you understood the sequence.
> 
> 1) lure, command, shape behavior
> 2) Click to mark behavior
> ...


Oh, great...where were you before I gave her the clicker as the reward the first 15 times??

SuperG


----------



## WesS (Apr 10, 2015)

SuperG said:


> Trained again with the clicker today...clicked and the dog ate the clicker...well crunched it up and spit it out but she sure liked it as a reward. I can see this getting expensive.....
> 
> 
> SuperG





Jax08 said:


> SuperG said:
> 
> 
> > Trained again with the clicker today...clicked and the dog ate the clicker...well crunched it up and spit it out but she sure liked it as a reward. I can see this getting expensive.....
> ...





SuperG said:


> Jax08 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think you understood the sequence.
> ...



Lol. Brilliant.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

SuperG said:


> Oh, great...where were you before I gave her the clicker as the reward the first 15 times??
> 
> SuperG


Drinking Beer


----------



## WesS (Apr 10, 2015)

Jax08 said:


> SuperG said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, great...where were you before I gave her the clicker as the reward the first 15 times??
> ...


Dog has been clicking 15 clickers to their last breath to try condition you into giving him treats or beer. So disappointed in his human.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

WesS said:


> Dog has been clicking 15 clickers to their last breath to try condition you into giving him treats or beer. So disappointed in his human.


All I read on the instructions was click and reward after clicking...dog seemed fascinated with the clicking noise, so why not reward the dog with the clicker..seemed perfectly logical to me. Which reminds of a heated debate I am in with someone regarding a " Chuck-it" toy. I buy the thing and it looks like something you obviously throw plus it says " chuck it" right on it, why one has to put a tennis ball in the cupped end didn't make any sense to me but I did...I figured it would get the dog used to fetching the Chuck-It since a tennis was stuck in the end of it. So, I put a tennis ball in the cupped end and throw the entire contraption, dog goes after it, wrestles the tennis ball out the holder and just brings the ball back to me, now I have to walk and go grab the Chuck It gizmo....seems counterproductive to me as I just as easily could have thrown the tennis ball without this chunk of plastic attached to it. I'm thinking some of these dog toys and training aids are just money making schemes...you know what I mean?


SuperG


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

lol


----------



## dogma13 (Mar 8, 2014)

Super Literal G


----------

