Can Electric Pulse Collars Be Used Humanely

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

http://www.examiner.com/article/the-true-killer-ill-informed-professionals-lacking-critical-thinking-skills

(there's a graph comparing different methods too)

A popular study from the School of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania found that implementing many of the methods “balanced” trainers teach and encourage cause the dogs to react aggressively. Confrontational methods such as leash jerking, alpha rolling, growling at, and staring down produced up to 40% of the dogs reacting aggressively while non-confrontational methods topped out at 6%, clicker training being at 0%. (Herron, 2009)

Remember, veterinary behaviorists work solely with the most aggressive, fearful, and severely behaviorally abnormal dogs. The methods they use are congruent with force-free methods and they continue to vehemently speak out against punishment in training while “balanced” trainers support their usage of abuse as necessary for extreme cases. If vet behaviorists are doing better then balanced trainers, with much harder cases, and using force-free methods then what is the remaining reason for the unnecessary punishment?

In fact, American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior officially released a position statement against the use of punishment in animal trainer.

Here is an important excerpt: Punishment can suppress aggressive and fearful behavior when used effectively, but it may not change the underlying cause of the behavior. For instance, if the animal behaves aggressively due to fear, then the use of force to stop the fearful reactions will make the animal more fearful while at the same time suppressing or masking the outward signs of fear; (e.g., a threat display/growling).

As a result, if the animal faces a situation where it is extremely fearful, it may suddenly act with heightened aggression and with fewer warning signs. In other words, it may now attack more aggressively or with no warning, making it much more dangerous.”

Position statement in full.

http://www.avsabonline.org/avsabonline/images/stories/Position_Statements/Combined_Punishment_Statements.pdf%20The

[sas]

With our Rescue we have had experience with Vibration collars and have found many dogs take to them well BUT there are a handful who get a hell of scare, take months to recover from that and can never have them again.

An e-collar set at a level that the dog only just notices it would have been more effective and less scary.

[mita]

Mita I think one thing that is important to remember is that we don't decide what a dog does and doesn't find aversive. It might sounder kinder to use a vibration as opposed to a static pulse but like it has been pointed out many dogs find the vibration more aversive.

You're right, Huski. The stats that Roger M supplied above about his method with the gas hiss collar, shows variation. The majority were diverted from the chasing/barking behaviours, but of 2 smaller groups, one lot were severely distressed by it & another group didn't give a damn about the hiss!

That's why even when something is found to be statistically successful, it doesn't predict for individual dogs, because there'll be variation.

I appreciate you & Cosmolo spelling out your case so clearly for using the e-collar & with whom. And answering questions.

I understand you both are not arm-chair thinkers about the collar (as I am), but get called in to help dogs that don't seem to have responded to whatever quality/quantity of rewards/absence of the reward training they've had. May even face PTS or being dumped.

I still have grave reservations about the use of e-collars ... but thanks to this thread I understand better how/why the trainers use them.

My reservations still come from things like the use of shock is out of step with what we know about learning in general. In humans, the group that lobs up with anti-social behaviours that 'normal' management hasn't touched, are least likely to change with aversive methods. But are likely to get worse. The levels of cortisol studies for the e-collars are a big worry, too. But I noted how Cosmolo said her use was to move quickly as possible to positive reinforcements.

So i honestly can't see they're something that just any pet owner should use. So maybe restricted use, like Cosmolo supports?

Given that research studies so far don't tend to support their use, I'd like more research on the actual mechanics of the dogs' learning. Maybe uncover other options???

Edited August 7, 2013 by mita

[corvus]

There are a few different things being discussed, here.

1. E-collars for avoidance training where R- is the main quadrant in use.

2. E-collars for aversion training, where the aim is to create a negative association with a stimulus with the expectation this will teach the dog to avoid them in future. One could argue that P+ is the main quadrant in use, but classical conditioning presumably plays a large role.

3. Humaneness of using e-collars.

I don't know that all three issues belong in the same discussion now that I think about it. I'm assuming that as far as snake avoidance training goes, we're really talking about using the e-collar to create a negative association. Same problems with punishment fallout we already know about apply i.e. possibility of the dog generalising to non-target stimuli, possibility of the dog responding in a problematic way (increased aggression, going at the snake instead of avoiding it, negative emotional states, shutting down etc.) This is not to say it's going to happen often or that the 'right' level of punishing stimulus won't do the job nicely. Just that it can be complicated. For example, if I were doing it with my dogs I'd want something mild for one, but I honestly couldn't say what I'd want for the other. He's super alert and attends to stacks of different stimuli at once, and he's crazy smart, and prone to anxiety and high arousal AND has a proactive coping style. To me this suite of traits is kind of tricky when it comes to positive punishment. He gives me reasons to use it from time to time, but I'm damn careful about it.

As far as avoidance training goes, there is a fair bit of literature about it and I don't have an especial problem with it. To me, best practice is to use functional rewards in the environment because it aligns nicely with research. This also ties in with safety signals, which have been shown to be quite effective in modifying aggressive behaviour, and have in fact been trained with e-collars in dogs in the past with great results. The relevant study is by Tortora (1983). It's worth a read.

As far as humaneness goes, like you say there is little support for it in the literature. A LOT of people in the field are distinctly uncomfortable with their use. The reasons why are no mystery. They are often misused, the output isn't necessarily trustworthy, they have the capacity to cause serious pain and emotional trauma, and there is evidence they are quite stressful to the dog when paired with poor timing, which is often. But as far as delivering precise and carefully metered aversive stimuli go, there is probably no better tool available. A friend hunts birds in the States in an area where poisonous snakes are common and tells me the dogs seek out the snakes. In cases like that it seems worth the risk to instil a snake aversion.