Aidan3

Well that's exactly what I've been saying If you take a frightened dog, load it up on the stimulus that frightens it, then "tap" it in the inguinal region with your foot (I don't regard them as taps, btw), with the intention of surprising it - you wouldn't be overly surprised if the dog came back and bit you. And that is exactly what happens on some occasions. What sort of effect on the dog should we avoid, if not that?

Honest question, do you think those dogs are any worse than the dogs that behaviourists in Australia have to deal with? If so, what do you think the reason for that would be?

No, if they are a problem then food will not "snap them out of it". I think a lot of people try this and are disappointed, trainers included. It doesn't work that way, that isn't positive reinforcement, reinforcement means you increased the behaviour. The next time the dog is presented with the same environment, you see the reinforced response again which is what we all want. We need to build those responses without putting the dog over threshold too far, and a lot of people don't know how to do that, or are disappointed when something happens that is out of their control (and it WILL). Or they think that the only way they can do it is to control the environment too much, which isn't practical. Competent positive reinforcement training isn't particularly restrictive. We usually have dogs working with other dogs within a couple of weeks, and we get robust reinforcement - more of the behaviours that we want. There are always exceptions, but really most dogs fall somewhere on the bell curve, the extremes aren't all that common. The Michael Vick pit fighting rescues are up there with the worst of them, and the rescue org who took them on didn't do anything I wouldn't do (where is the love for those guys, btw?) If you're using corrections every time your dog is around another dog, then all you're really doing is interrupting. The behavior should be improving. You should be able to start to use food around other dogs very quickly, not to prove a point about positive reinforcement, but as a bit of a demonstration that your dog is not highly anxious.

I have no problem with any of that. I'm sure it doesn't produce redirected aggression either, and from your other posts, I'm certain it's not an over-used tool in your tool-box.

Do you think it's genuine distress at being separated, or just "if I bark for long enough, they might come back and get me too"?

:D Other way around "Hi there duckies! Come over here!!"

Personally, I have made a value judgement on some of the things that CM does. Other people are of course, free to make their own judgement. All I ask is that people have an honest think about where they draw the line, for e.g. what constitutes "physical violence"? Or to look at it from a different angle, if a dog responded to an e-collar the same way that some of those dogs responded to the "tap", would you continue on, or would you back up a bit away from the situation and turn the stim down? Things happen by accident (like being startled by something that we would consider to innocuous, like a sock), but that isn't training. What do we expect the dogs to learn from our conscious actions? Do we believe everything we see on TV? It's worth thinking about. Are we being truly objective when we want a result? I could argue that it doesn't matter, if we are happy with the results, we are happy, but unfortunately I've seen too many (and been through too many) "cycles" of opinion (and disappointment) to have much faith in anything but objective measures in the long term. Particularly with dogs, who truly are adaptive and creative animals. Why is body language important? Is there an innate understanding between dogs and humans? Maybe! Is it everything? I don't think so. Good subject matter to think about over a couple of wines though

Lol .... a sock fell off the line and fell on my dog's rump as he walked beneath it, a few days back. He tucked tail, cringed the haunches, shied away and then turned with very perplexed expression to see what evil beset him. Was he over-threshold in defence at the time (i.e already very fearful), and then did he re-direct his aggression towards you? Would you set him up so that happened?

Reinforcement: http://www.unc.edu/~eckerman/BarkerCh7.html Punishment and Aversive Control: http://www.unc.edu/~eckerman/BarkerCh8.html

Would you hit him in the inguinal region in the same way? Is it a good analogy?

Call it a tap, or call it a kick. Look at the reaction of the dogs, that's what matters. Pretend it's a trainer you've never seen on TV. Cesar does not have a monopoly on getting results with problem dogs. The dogs he works with are no different to the dogs the rest of us work with, and it's not a reaction I would seek or have ever found necessary.

Call them what you want, the fact is they both work extremely well and don't require body language at all. How does a Manners Minder or anti-bark collar work then?

How does a Manners Minder or anti-bark collar work then?

I don't think we should gloss over the fact that he does use physical violence, there was a video going around recently (briefly) of all the times he has kicked a dog in the show. I think this is something we should definitely not emulate. Of course, his more zealous fans will come in here and tell me that "it's only a tap", but no matter how gentle it is, the dog's responses tell the story.

Positive reinforcement training does work on every dog, it just not always the most practical solution. I think we can move past the extremes.

Thorndike and Skinner both concluded that punishment was an inferior (frequently ineffective, unpredictable) method of behaviour modification. The "latest methods" have an astounding amount of empirical support, I think if there is a problem it is in application outside of the lab. Avoidance, escape and punishment have more empirical support and are better understood now, and with a greater degree of theoretical understanding could be better utilised (humanely) in dog training.

I believe Gladwell also compares him to an athletic soccer player in that piece, which seems appropriate too.

The data, which is not very compelling, is that bitches in the same home are more likely, statistically, to have a serious fight than dogs in the same home. Anecdotally, this certainly rings true, and a recent thread here demonstrates the seriousness of some (thankfully uncommon) fights between bitches. Most domestic pet dogs get along very well in pairs if bred, raised and trained well.

They do, but interestingly, it is not set to 24 hour time! http://library.thinkquest.org/25553/englis...dy/rhythm.shtml

I agree with no concept of calendar ie days of the week but I am a bit confused when it comes to clocks. My boy sleeps in his bed in our bedroom and almost every day at 5.30 am he comes to my side of the bed and "tells" me to get up. I'm pretty sure he's not reading your clock... or am I?

Phew, this has the makings of a pretty deep discussion! I have very little faith in episodic memory and I doubt adults rely on it for learning either (although clearly, recalling an event can have a big effect on your behaviour, even if you recall it incorrectly!) I think dogs have a very poor concept of clocks. Which is very different to a very poor concept of time. Dogs seem to be able to time things just fine, watch a dog catch a ball or head off a sheep.

To be honest, it's all but impossible to work with someone who has already made up their mind. You either need help or you don't. If you don't, don't complain when you go looking for it and if you do, then put your opinions on the backburner for a while. If you've done your research and the help you have sought is known to get results, then maybe they deserve a bit of respect?

Qualifications are a good sign of competence, so is experience, both together are a very good sign. A guarantee is usually a marketing gimmick with holes in it. Board and train would require a considerable amount of trust, but in some circumstances (and a compelling reason should be given) it can have merit. Humane training methods that utilise scientific principles rather than vague, out-of-date, or disproven theories should be sought. If punishment is to be used, it should be undertaken for sound reasons and not because that is all the trainer can really do, or because of an opinion that dogs "need" punishment. Most of us who use positive reinforcement competently seldom have reason to use punishment in order to get results.

aiden2: that is hilarious Have you tried it? I've really got the wrong yard for it but I did think about buying one to hire out to clients. It might also be useful for retrieve training, or... tennis!

Hi ktb, have you seen this? http://www.godog.com.au/