Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
persephone

I'll Just Throw This Into The Mix -

67 posts in this topic

LINK

excerpt :

operant-conditioning-cycle.png

False Statements about "Positive Dog Training"

False Statement by APDT: "Dog-friendly training is training that utilizes primarily positive reinforcement; secondarily negative punishment, and only occasionally, rarely, and/or as a last resort includes positive punishment and/or negative reinforcement."

Reality: The vast majority of Positive Dog Trainers use no more positive reinforcement than other trainers in their training and use just as much positive punishment in their training. The use of positive punishment is not occasional or rarely.

Edited by persephone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not comfortable with the word 'punishment'. I direct my dog's learning in a controlled environment and I reinforce the behaviours I want. I do not punish but I will change the environment if I think it is stopping the dog from learning. I am not sure if this could be described as positive punishment. It probably is but 'punishment' is the wrong word for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't think your link is working?

I dislike that graph. The terminology is confusing and difficult to keep straight in your head. I've seen punishment switched out with aversive in some - makes a bit more sense to me. Reinforcement confuses me too, because they're all reinforcing the presence or absence of a behaviour?

Mostly I wonder why it isn't straight up positive/negative encouragement and positive/negative discouragement?

But then, maybe I just dislike that the word punishment is associated with a "stern no" in some training groups ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
megan_   

I am not comfortable with the word 'punishment'. I direct my dog's learning in a controlled environment and I reinforce the behaviours I want. I do not punish but I will change the environment if I think it is stopping the dog from learning. I am not sure if this could be described as positive punishment. It probably is but 'punishment' is the wrong word for it.

positive punishment is a technical dog term that means "actively" punishing the dog - eg giving a physical correction. Negative punishment is passive punishment eg not giving a treat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not comfortable with the word 'punishment'. I direct my dog's learning in a controlled environment and I reinforce the behaviours I want. I do not punish but I will change the environment if I think it is stopping the dog from learning. I am not sure if this could be described as positive punishment. It probably is but 'punishment' is the wrong word for it.

positive punishment is a technical dog term that means "actively" punishing the dog - eg giving a physical correction. Negative punishment is passive punishment eg not giving a treat.

Thanks.I always get confused about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I think that's a ridiculous statement (in the OP) based on someone's opinion and no evidence whatsoever. It's a waste of time trying to argue it one way or another.

I am so completely fed up with this point scoring. Watch unedited videos of me training my dogs and look at my results, then make you're mind up!

Edited by The Spotted Devil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Redsonic   

The best way to understand the terminology is to think of positive and negative as maths symbols: +,-.

+ you add something

- you take something away

Reinforcement and punishment refers to the behaviour you are trying to encourage or extinguish. Reinforcement makes a behaviour more likely to happen again, and punishment makes it less likely to happen again. Unfortunately, punishment has all sorts of bad associations, and people don't like using the term, but in the context of classical conditioning, something you do acts as punishment if it means the targeted behaviour is less likely to happen again.

People who practice positive dog training are actually using negative punishment all the time. Every time they withhold an expected reward they are using negative punishment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JulesP   

People who practice positive dog training are actually using negative punishment all the time. Every time they withhold an expected reward they are using negative punishment.

It would be very, very rare for me to withhold a reward as I pay any try. The dog would pretty much have to piss off to not get a reward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Redsonic   

People who practice positive dog training are actually using negative punishment all the time. Every time they withhold an expected reward they are using negative punishment.

It would be very, very rare for me to withhold a reward as I pay any try. The dog would pretty much have to piss off to not get a reward.

Then how does the dog know that the latest try was further from your goal than the others he/she had offered you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kavik   

I will use negative punishment. Eg This morning I was holding a toy he really liked, and asked for a left spin, and he spun right instead (his preferred side). So I simply covered the toy with my hand, then opened my hand and asked for left spin again, and this time he got it correct and got rewarded with the toy. Just seeing if he can still respond to verbal cues when aroused.

Edited by Kavik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JulesP   

People who practice positive dog training are actually using negative punishment all the time. Every time they withhold an expected reward they are using negative punishment.

It would be very, very rare for me to withhold a reward as I pay any try. The dog would pretty much have to piss off to not get a reward.

Then how does the dog know that the latest try was further from your goal than the others he/she had offered you?

If the tries were moving away from the goal then I would be looking at what I was doing wrong.

The degree of reward varies. It would be pretty picky to say it was a negative punishment to give only one bit of cheese and not two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
huski   

If you watch the video, which you need almost an hour to do as it is quite long, he makes a point of saying that it's not individual trainers he's taking issue with but "spokespeople" and organisations who are damaging to the industry and unprofessional.

I am sure many people don't realise for example that Victoria Stillwell was sued for fraud by the network who produced her TV show because she is not actually a dog trainer like she claimed she was. When you watch her show (and parts are highlighted in the video for example) it is extremely clear she does not understand the four quadrants of operant conditioning and is exceptionally unprofessional, likely through lack of real experience. Yet she is held up by many in the training community as a spokesperson for "positive only" training. It's ridiculous and I think people like that should be questioned.

I haven't ever met anyone who only trains in the R+ quadrant all of the time. Is it possible? Maybe but I have never seen it. I think trainers need to have a solid understanding of what they are doing and why it works, this is across the board. For example, saying one type of aversive (or interrupter as they can sometimes be labelled) like saying UH UH or making a loud noise, is ok, but other aversives aren't ok when we know that the dog chooses what it finds reinforcing. That being said I think there are lots of ways we can argue the way a particular method can fit into each quadrant. Dog training is too complex IMO to not at least have a solid understanding of how each quadrant works and how to apply them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
huski   

Sorry I think that's a ridiculous statement (in the OP) based on someone's opinion and no evidence whatsoever. It's a waste of time trying to argue it one way or another.

I am so completely fed up with this point scoring. Watch unedited videos of me training my dogs and look at my results, then make you're mind up!

Have you watched the video TSD? I don't think the OP (the one linked to) was trying to say using rewards isn't effective or doesn't work, I think he was saying the opposite. It was highlighting the hypocrisy and areas for concern in what is a completely unregulated industry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I think that's a ridiculous statement (in the OP) based on someone's opinion and no evidence whatsoever. It's a waste of time trying to argue it one way or another.

I am so completely fed up with this point scoring. Watch unedited videos of me training my dogs and look at my results, then make you're mind up!

Have you watched the video TSD? I don't think the OP (the one linked to) was trying to say using rewards isn't effective or doesn't work, I think he was saying the opposite. It was highlighting the hypocrisy and areas for concern in what is a completely unregulated industry.

No I haven't huski and fair call absolutely! BUT it's a selective quote and in the hour that it takes to watch the video to gain a full understanding I'd rather be working through my agility handling course videos and actually be training my dogs :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
huski   

Sorry I think that's a ridiculous statement (in the OP) based on someone's opinion and no evidence whatsoever. It's a waste of time trying to argue it one way or another.

I am so completely fed up with this point scoring. Watch unedited videos of me training my dogs and look at my results, then make you're mind up!

Have you watched the video TSD? I don't think the OP (the one linked to) was trying to say using rewards isn't effective or doesn't work, I think he was saying the opposite. It was highlighting the hypocrisy and areas for concern in what is a completely unregulated industry.

No I haven't huski and fair call absolutely! BUT it's a selective quote and in the hour that it takes to watch the video to gain a full understanding I'd rather be working through my agility handling course videos and actually be training my dogs :laugh:

Fair enough! I watched it while I had a glass of wine last night after spending all day training dogs - rest time lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
corvus   

People who practice positive dog training are actually using negative punishment all the time. Every time they withhold an expected reward they are using negative punishment.

No, they are not, actually. For that to be true, the behaviour that precedes "no reward" would have to be suppressed. And in fact, "no reward" itself would have to be punishing, which would be challenging, because often the dog doesn't know when that is going to happen. Many of us do not even signal when there will be no reward, and many of us are using variable reinforcement schedules, so the dogs are not especially bothered by "no reward" in any context. What is actually taking place is DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT. i.e. some behaviours are reinforced and some are not. If I reinforce lifting a paw to chin height but I don't reinforce lifting a paw to chest height, then lifting a paw to chest height is not punished. It declines simply because it's not being reinforced as much as higher lifts are. Otherwise, I would have a hard time getting any paw lift, let alone the high ones I am after.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People who practice positive dog training are actually using negative punishment all the time. Every time they withhold an expected reward they are using negative punishment.

No, they are not, actually. For that to be true, the behaviour that precedes "no reward" would have to be suppressed. And in fact, "no reward" itself would have to be punishing, which would be challenging, because often the dog doesn't know when that is going to happen. Many of us do not even signal when there will be no reward, and many of us are using variable reinforcement schedules, so the dogs are not especially bothered by "no reward" in any context. What is actually taking place is DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT. i.e. some behaviours are reinforced and some are not. If I reinforce lifting a paw to chin height but I don't reinforce lifting a paw to chest height, then lifting a paw to chest height is not punished. It declines simply because it's not being reinforced as much as higher lifts are. Otherwise, I would have a hard time getting any paw lift, let alone the high ones I am after.

Thank you for taking the time to actually write that out as I couldn't be bothered :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
raineth   

"Reality: The vast majority of Positive Dog Trainers use no more positive reinforcement than other trainers in their training and use just as much positive punishment in their training. The use of positive punishment is not occasional or rarely."

What a bizarre statement. How does he know what 'the vast majority of Positive Dog Trainers' do?

Admittedly I have not sat through the video...

What is most important to understand about positive punishment is that classical conditioning is always co-occurring with operant conditioning. Ethics aside, in most situations you don't want your dog associating you or the context with something unpleasant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JulesP   

I

I am sure many people don't realise for example that Victoria Stillwell was sued for fraud by the network who produced her TV show because she is not actually a dog trainer like she claimed she was. When you watch her show (and parts are highlighted in the video for example) it is extremely clear she does not understand the four quadrants of operant conditioning and is exceptionally unprofessional, likely through lack of real experience. Yet she is held up by many in the training community as a spokesperson for "positive only" training. It's ridiculous and I think people like that should be questioned.

I am a bit over arguing about Victoria Stilwell but I can find zero evidence that she was sued by Channel 4. Channel 4 still has her on their website too. There were 7 series so I imagine that there would have been a fair bit of press around about it.

She also states that she was working as a trainer prior to the show on all official bios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×