Positive vs Negative

[alexav]

This is taken from another thread that was closed. I sincerely would like this discussion to continue WITHOUT pointing fingers, naming names, or advertising anyone's business as I am very interested in people's opinions.

I would like to discuss the idea of Positive punishment and negative reinforcement vs. Positive reinforcement and Negative punishment. I would like to discuss the idea of Positive punishment and negative reinforcement vs. Positive reinforcement and Negative punishment.

A dog can learn SO much through positive motivation and reinforcement, and be corrected through the absence of the positive reinforcer.
A smart dog will need some proofing by a negative means, such as a collar and voice correction, to learn that sometimes there are negative consequences to thier actions, but it is through training positively and the bond they develop with thier handler that they learn what is expected.

Can someone please explain to me how it can be "humane" and fair to the dog to deliberately cause positive punishment with aversive techniques such as an e-collar, prong collar, or forcing into position to "teach" the dog? The dog learns. yes, but is all to make the pain errrr, "discomfort" stop.

Let's use some human examples;
I am teaching a foriegn language class. If I am using positive methods, I would first, help the student to say the new word. If he says it correctly, I say "Good!". If he is having trouble or pronounces the word incorrectly, I say "Oops, let's try that again." At the end of the class, my goal would be to end on a good note where perhaps the student says a whole phrase and his reward is a "great job!" and "Class dismissed!"

If I am using the methods of the type of trainer that I distain, I would say the new word to the student and then begin pinching him until he pronounced it correctly. If he tries to complain and leave the room, I would slap his face and physically place him back in his chair. This student would only be released when he could say the entire phrase of the lesson.

While both of these students could learn a foreign language successfully, our society would not permit the second teaching method for humans. In fact, anyone trying this would be fired quickly and probably prosecuted for abuse and assault!

The subject of my dismay is basically the "Khoeler Method" with or without electricity.
Anyone who truly understands dogs, respects and loves dogs, sees that these methods are unfair and inhumane.
Others that just want the animal to obey and they don't care how or why, will persue these methods and will go with the trainer that promises them the fastest results.
It's the dog that has no choice...

[Muckdogs]

While I think that utilization of p+/p- is the optimal way to train for numerous reasons, I think that people overreact waaaaaay too much when discussing the horrors of n+/n-. To train in this methodology all the time is disingenuous, but as a filler it does not sicken me, nor am I hesitant to employ it. The fact of the matter is that n+/n- is a faster way to train, generally speaking. That is why some people call the ecollar the mocrowave of training. But, misuse of n+/n- is stupid.

[K9-man]

Not the algebra again!

[excellrott]

This was where I got into lots of word play on this site and just stopped talking about it.
Now since you brought it up again......I like the Koehler method, with my own modifications. I have read the book over and over and as far as I can tell it employs showing the dog how to do something over and over before the corrections. I am speaking on the ob part of the book after the 'attention' training. (which does not get to the part where the dog flys, unless the dog is especially stuborn)I used the attention training on my older dog and the treat, talk, talk, talk method on the puppy. My older dog is much more attentive. She does not cringe and she is so happy to go to work, that when I take out the prong collar her little nub goes 100mph. She loves to go to work.
No negative until the positive is thorougly learned, that's my method.

[FredAl]

Training a dog is a matter of inducing the behavior, shaping the behavior, and controlling the behavior. The inducement stage should be motivational so that the dog will associate the exercise with something positive, and would therefore repeat the behavior. In the shaping stage, there could be some corrections introduced in order to make the dog understand when it is doing something wrong, but it should still be positive in nature in order to keep the dog�fs interest, plus compliance to the command. In the control stage, more compulsive methods may be applied if necessary so that the dog is made to understand that a given command is compulsory and not a mere request.

For pet owners, the shaping stage may be enough for their needs in training their dogs. However the control stage is necessary in service dogs where the dog�fs compliance can mean life or death. Service dogs have different traits that need to be harnessed and controlled. Some may require �gunpopular�h punishment methods because of their hardness, �gstick-to-it-ness�h, drives, thresholds, etc. It just depends on the dog and the task. This also goes for many sports dogs.

I am all for positive reinforcement and reward-based training. However I would not fault other training methods if it were necessary to be used on certain dogs for certain tasks.