pure positive training - does it work??

[stale]

hey folks,

a while ago it was decided that my wife would take over the dog training, since she was clueless about dogs, and the training process would help ozzy bond with her. i've had no problems with oz listening to me at all, but she has. so off we go to one of the few local places that'll accept rotties.

now, the place we ended up is a purely positive training facility - and frankly, they're driving me nuts.

----------------------------------

little background on me - i'm 27, and have been involved with breeders and trainers since i was about 9. until now my dogs have all been labradors, and the training has been to a minimum of a CD on the dog, if not further gun-dog or other working dog venues.

throughout this, rewards and praise have played a large part, of course, but there were corrections as well. eg. dog is called in on recall. i call "back!" dog rockets to me. dog proceed to rocket on by me, the lead goes tight, dog get's a pop. once the pup is in the right place, treat, and praise. same basic idea for anything i've trained - show them the behaviour required, assosciate command with said behavoir. from then on, proper response gets a treat, wrong response gets a quick pop, "no" then the dog is placed as required for the command, followed by "good puppy!" and treat.

using this process, it only ever took 2-3 weeks to teach the basics. (sit, stand, wait, place/stay, recall, close/heel, etc)

------------------------------------------

now, fast forward to the current trainers we're at. they don't believe that you should ever pop your dog - i'm yet to hear the word "no" pass any one of the trainer's lips. quite frankly, their demo dogs are poorly behaved. (the "utility" demo dog spend the time before it's actual demo eating it's leather lead, then the handler's shoe, and was ignored for this.)

so far as i can tell, the harshest correction they believe in is ignoring the bad behaviour. the first time I took ozzy up, he came in with me in a perfect heel, on a pinch collar. you'd think i was driving him in with a cattle prod. apparently this is "cruel" and "will turn the dog completely off me and training" and if i need better control than the flat collar, "try a gentle leader - after all, it works on my dog. (toy poodle)"

now, i swapped oz to a martindale collar, since i finally drove through their heads the futility of putting a carting breed on a gentle leader, (there have been dozens of incidents of neck damage from the "gentle leader" - enough that my last trainer would kick anyone from the class if they brought their dog in with them) and the fact that it is purely power steering for your dog. where the nose goes, the dog goes, with no training required - and with the result of no training happening.

think my biggest issue is that, while there are a handful of dogs in the advanced class that are wonderfully behaved, they are all basically toy breeds, or smaller dogs (cocker's, beagles, pugs, bunch of toy poodles and min-pins and such) but not one of the "real" dogs shows what i consider acceptable behaviour for a higher level of obedience.

now, we'll be sticking with this course, since its paid for already, and it is helping my wife control ozzy some, but afterward, i think i'm out of there. quite honestly, i believe i was doing a better job at home, with my bag of treats, a happy voice, and a pinch or martindale for when he really isn't paying any attention.

thrust of my question is this - does purely positive training, with no corrections at all for anything, just rewards for good behaviour, actually work? i wouldn't trust it to work with any of my labs from years past, but i admit to a bias. was wondering about other's opinions. to me it comes across as new-age touchy feely BS. but again, looking for other's experiences with it.

sorry for the wall of text, and thanks for the chance to vent and ask questions,

peace, eh?

stale

[tla0126]

From what I've read on here, everyone that uses positive training, still throws in an "uh-uh", or "no sir". With out "no sir", my Beau and I would be no where with training. For dogs as strong willed as rotties, I think this class might be a bit too soft.

[moondog]

Originally Posted by stale

thrust of my question is this - does purely positive training, with no corrections at all for anything, just rewards for good behaviour, actually work?

Only if your dog never makes a mistake.

While I may not choose to use a pop for a correction (depending on the circumstance) and will rather redirect behavior using motivational techniques, I find that ignoring poor behavior that is self-rewarding to the dog (leash biting, scaring all passersby away, visiting a dog when they are supposed to be retrieving a dumbbell etc.) only serves as permission to continue.

I use motivational training. I keep the positive reinforcement VERY high and have found it to be extremely beneficial for my dog, however, I will (and do) also use corrections where needed.

For example, we were working on retrieves on the flat at class on Tuesday. Chili has NEVER failed to do this exercise well from start to finish from the time she first learned it about a year ago. This night, we were working on a bunch of different open exercises in groups of two so there was a lot of distraction with the different activities going on (much like you'd find at a dog show) so I kept Chili on a flexi just to make sure she understood this was training and not the free-for-all it must look like to a dog... . There was a new person and dog that had come to observe the class and they were sitting near the far end of the area where Chili and I were assigned to work. I set Chili up, tell her to "wait", toss the dumbell, and then give her the command "take it!". She charges out, as usual, to collect her prize and when she gets to the dumbbell, the new dog caught her eye. She dipped her head down to the dumbbell, paused for a split second, and then left it and started trotting over to see the new dog. That's a big no-no. I'm glad I had the flexi on her, because I was able to immediately give her a pop and call her in to me (without her prize) to correct her mistake, change our direction on the next toss, and set her up for the success she usually enjoys. Now what do you think would have happened if I "ignored it"?

[hokisteph5]

Originally Posted by tla0126

With out "no sir", my Beau and I would be no where with training.

Same here, but the magic words are "uh oh." According to my original trainer it lets the dog know they're not doing things exactly right.

[tla0126]

Anything said in a slightly deterring voice should make them get back on track. I can even draw out Beau's name a little longer than normal, and it will make him stop the unwanted behavior.

[IJF1]

There is no such thing as purely positive training - it's just marketing. It's also not helpful IMO.

Even if you use no 'corrections' at all you will still be using negative punishment and/or extinction which can be quite aversive (if they weren't they would not work!).

OC tells us that reinforcement cannot exist without punishment. The fact that teaching and training should involve as much reinforcement as possible and as little punishment as needed does not change that fact.....

[moondog]

Originally Posted by tla0126

Anything said in a slightly deterring voice should make them get back on track.

Not necessarily...that will depend on the dog and how much drive they have for whatever the transgression is. Most things (at this point) for my dog can be corrected with an "Ah! Ah!", but there are times when she's DRIVEN for "something" that she DOES need a proper correction.....and she gets it.

Is a correction just X measure of X thing, period? No. A correction can vary a lot in type and intensity, and should, depending on a dog's age, understanding through training of what's expected, and responsiveness to his/her handler in any given situation or for any given exercise.

[tla0126]

Sorry, my above post was not a complete thought. What I meant was any word can replace a "no sir" or "ah! ah!" I didn't mean that was all that was needed in a correction every time. I was just responding to hokisteph5's comment that her trainer used the word "uh oh" and I used "no sir".

[moondog]

Originally Posted by tla0126

Sorry, my above post was not a complete thought. What I meant was any word can replace a "no sir" or "ah! ah!" I didn't mean that was all that was needed in a correction every time. I was just responding to hokisteph5's comment that her trainer used the word "uh oh" and I used "no sir".

Whoops, sorry! I did misunderstand what you were trying to say. Yep, it doesn't matter what word is used as long as it is used consistently. Most people I know use "strut" for heeling......but it sounds so frilly to me, LOL, that I wanted another word for it. I discovered that Chili is very responsive to the word "hup!", so that's our word for heeling.

[sweetlee]

I love positive reenforcement training, but I don't believe that any training that doesn't include a correction of some sort will be successful. Just as I don't believe that a yank and yell negative reenforcement training will work either.
This class sounds a bit too touchy-feely, warm and fuzzy.
I use ah-ah for my sound, and yes my dog has been popped on collar a few times.
My trainer says the "least amount of force necessary to do the job". And I agree with her.

Sharon

[jlhnokc]

I completely agree with positive reinforcement, but am also in the camp of a correction should be used when needed. If you never correct your dog, or let them know you don't like a behavior, how will they ever know it's not acceptable? Where's the logic in that? If a dog is sitting around chewing on a leash and is never taught differently, he will never know that behavior is not acceptable and will never "not do it". A lot of posters post about their puppys biting so much and the advice is always to redirect, and I agree with that, but what I think needs to be added is something to let your pup no you don't like it. With Jaycee when she was a pup and would bite on my fingers or anything else, I would tell her "NO BITE", then I would find a toy and give it to her, and when she bit on it gave her praise and played with her...Using this way took only a few days before she knew not to bite me. I also never allowed people to engage her in play without a toy...

[stale]

Originally Posted by sweetlee

I love positive reenforcement training, but I don't believe that any training that doesn't include a correction of some sort will be successful. Just as I don't believe that a yank and yell negative reenforcement training will work either.
This class sounds a bit too touchy-feely, warm and fuzzy.
I use ah-ah for my sound, and yes my dog has been popped on collar a few times.
My trainer says the "least amount of force necessary to do the job". And I agree with her.

Sharon

that's how i learned to train as well - i'm doing my best to stay out of it this time, since the training is supposed to come purely from amy for the moment - to clarify, most of my training and corrections are done with tone of voice, with a collar correction as needed. amy (my wife) just get's squeaky when she tries to give a verbal correction, so the tone approach is out - and it seems beyond her to learn to check a dog properly. that's where this pure positive crud comes in.

what can i say - i view ignoring bad behaviour as rewarding it - that's why i swear by "command, correct (if needed) praise." the force of correction scaling with the infraction. ignoring a command or getting it wrong gets a light "no" and the dog is shown what i wanted. a serious infraction (lunging at another dog) gets a hard pop to restore focus on me, followed by some excercises - sit stay, or some such.

a great example of the philosophy of this class is with the lunging at dogs - there are two dogs, one a boxer, other a chocolate lab, that seem to take great joy at lunging at oz. the "trainer's" response to this is to "call your dog's name in a cheerful voice as often as it takes to restore attention, and reward them when attention is focused on you." in and of itself, there's nothing wrong with restoring the attention, but for the gods' sake, reprimand the aggressing dog!!!

i think it probably comes down to the difference in views we hold. mine is "thou shalt not do xxxxxx, because doing so rewards you with discomfort. doing as i ask gets you praise and a snack". a clear right and wrong - nothing to complex for his little doggy mind to hold.

their view is "oh, what a sweet boy, look at me, look at me, look at me, oh good smart puppy!!!!" in the (vain?) hope that the dog will become so attuned to wanting the praise that they will ignore distractions.

i'm coming very close to returning to my old method of training at home, and using the "oh, what a good puppy - you're breaking all the rules but you're such a good dog" thing in class.

[Cdn1050]

I enrolled my dog into a postive training obedience school and found that I have had better and faster results with training her. It is a clicker training class. I tried obedience classes where choke collars were used and didn't care for it. I will use a leash correction and find that I rarely will have to use one (maybe because she's matured more and has better focus), but only if giving an "ah ah" doesn't work. Usually just saying "ah ah" gets her attention. I guess it depends on the dog and their temperment as to the type of training tool and training methods used.

[poohbearsmom]

Use of all Operant Conditioning techniques are the best, IMO. By using as much Positive Reinforcement and Negative Punishment as possible to "teach" the behaviors. Eventually, correction and compulsion will need to be used to get the desired results of a TRAINED dog, but only as much as is necessary to get the job done.

A dog must know that there are both good consequences, and unpleasant consequences associated with behaviors. "If I do what I'm asked, good things happen; if I make a bad choice, I will know it". This is all part of being a benevolent leader to my dogs. I must say what I mean, and MEAN what I say.

Part of being honest with a dog is letting him know what is acceptable, and what is not.

[Maxxx]

Max has been in a positive reinforcement OB class since he was 11 weeks old. Once he hit puberty though, it wasn't enough. He'd take longer and longer and longer to obey. At first it was just a fraction of a second, then it got longer and longer and all I was supposed to do was stand there and wait until he did it, then praise him. No treats unless he did it quickly. Needless to say, I'd be the one standing there in a face-off with my dog waiting for him to obey. That didn't last long.

I moved over to schutzhund and was shown how to correct properly and we've been working on those same commands over the past 3 weeks and he's responding much quicker. I still believe and use positive reinforcement and will continue to do so (I love clicker training), but am not averse to correcting if I need to.

It wasn't always this way. It took me a bit to be convinced to use corrections but now that I have mixed it in with positive reinforcement, Max is so much better. Ignoring his bad behaviour was not at all negative in his eyes. The more I ignored him, the more he did what he wanted!