Hi All, I am a bit confused. I treat Gaston very nicely, and am all for positive reinforcement, as I myself am a believer of kindness, be it to humans, dogs, the world, and I am this way without thinking, it is just the way I am. Still, I have been reading what seems to say that we should not say no to the dog, or make strange noises that would come across as aversive or punishment, and I am a little confused .. Where does one cross the line, and when do I know if I am being positive or aversive ? I don't want to feel guilty thinking I am harming the dog, but on the other hand I don't see how saying No, being firm in tone of voice or even scolding (scolding like you would a child, which is not yelling) a dog for doing something wrong is out of order.
Well, it depends where you draw the line, of course, and I think you have to consider the difference between using things like "no" in a training scenario rather than in everyday life. Of course, every interaction is a training interaction as far as the dog is concerned, but we do have to be realistic. Denise Fenzi (very highly renowned dog trainer of Fenzi Academy fame) wrote this article about this topic: https://denisefenzi.com/2016/03/08/the-perfect-trainer/ The definition of punishment is something that reduces the chance of the behaviour happening again. I say "no" all the time, "Luna, please leave my shoes alone", and sometimes "Luna get down off of there!". She normally looks at me and does what I ask. This isn't punishment because it doesn't stop the behaviour being just as likely to occur in the future. So it's not training, either. She just knows that, if she doesn't do anything, I'll get up and ensure she gets down, gives up the shoe or whatever. I do not give these sorts of directions within a training environment because they don't work. When I'm training the dog for something specific, I reward the things I like and set up the situation to make those more likely. The issue is, though, that it's not us that decide what is punishing, and how punishing it is. It is always the one that is on the receiving end. Take Luna and Willow. If I screamed "NO!" at Luna at the top of my voice, she'd look at me with contempt and it would have no impact on her. It certainly wouldn't make it any less likely that she performed whatever tiresome thing she was doing again in the future. So, that means it wouldn't be punishing; at best, it would act as an interrupter. On the other hand, if I sigh deeply and look displeased at Willow, her whole world can come crashing down around her ears. It would mean she gave up what she was doing, would be unlikely to do it again and, more than that, she'd be unlikely to offer any behaviour for a while. A sigh and a look to Willow is highly punishing and has a definite emotional impact. So I try my hardest never to do it. I roll my eyes all the time at Squidge. She loves the attention. So, you have to consider the dog in front of you and the effectiveness of what you are doing or saying. If you are being stern to your dog and it makes it less likely he will do whatever it is again in the future, it is punishing to him - I would look to find a way to train him to do something you do want rather than something you don't. If it has no impact on the likelihood he does whatever it is in the future, it is not punishing - but it is also ineffective. You're just nagging, and that can damage your relationship. So, again, find a way to train him to do the things you like. If it works as an interrupter, then that's great, but you're better off actually training an interrupter and making it amazing. For example, I have a "scatter!" interrupter where I throw a load of treats on the floor. The dogs will break off whatever they're doing to come over to get their treats, even if they're involved in intense play. I know people think of this as "rewarding the bad behaviour", but it's not at all if it has been trained as a cue. Your dog is responding to the interrupter cue ("scatter!") and that is what they are being rewarded for. We shouldn't feel bad for the odd "no" or "fortheloveofallthatisholywillyoupleaseSTOPTHAT!" that slips out because we're human. We just shouldn't kid ourselves that we're making any long-term positive difference when we do this. We should take a step back when we do use them, look at the problem we have and make a plan to fix it. Be proactive, not reactive. I hope that makes sense
I have two words I say to the dogs, I have trained them to mean ‘look at me’ or ‘come here’. The reason I’ve done this is that I use these words without thinking. So ‘no’ = look at me ‘Enough’ = come here I have trained this using tasty treats. Starting with a normal voice and progressing to a shouted ‘ENOUGH’ or ‘NO’ - both now mean good things to the dogs (usually stinky tripe sticks). So, when they are playing crazy rough and I’ve had enough of it my natural reaction - yelling (!) means something good to them. They stop on a sixpence and come to me, which reminds me to give them a treat! So my words are both interrupters and cues, deliberately trained because I’m human and can’t help using them from time to time - sometimes loudly! I also use ‘ah ah’ which is purely an interrupter, when they lift their head I give a treat. Eg, Keir, once or twice, has licked his stitches ‘ ah ah’ made him pause enough for me to treat and distract him.
Got that part, thanks Fiona. Yes, makes total sense. I think it gets worse though. I have been using the “tshh..” sound, which have no idea where it comes from but seemed useful and harmless enough. Yesterday I came across an article that the “tssh..” sound is used by traditional punishment trainers, as it imitates the sound of compressed air and is frightening in itself to a dog. I was reading the article with eyes boggling wide open. I had no idea. I use it when Gaston’s biting or nipping me, whilst sticking a toy in his mouth, and told OH and my son to do the same, and clap hands in the air to terminate the biting. This suddenly seems all very wrong. Besides sticking a toy in his mouth, should I be scattering treats rather then (as an interrupter, which is something I also do) ? Any other interrupter that would be nice enough, and proactive ?
That's a great example. thanks Boogie, I am going to use it. I wonder if you could help me with the pees and poos indoors too. He is not bad, and does do them mostly outdoors if I am attentive enough (I am saying that when he does them inside, it is my faut rather than his I know this is the case). I ignore the mistakes and compensate (treat) him doing them outside. I think I read that you can get your dogs to pee on command. I find that awesome. How in the world could I do something this good ? And should I continue ignoring the pees and poos inside ?
Yes we do. From the day they arrive, every time they wee or poo outside we say ‘busy busy’ while they are doing it - for about four weeks. Then we say it just before they do it - being certain they are about to - for a further four weeks. Then we say it when we know for sure that they are ‘full and ready’ for a few weeks. If they don’t ‘perform’ we go back a step for a while. By the time they are seven months old they will squeeze a wee out for us any time. Of course, they need to be needing a poo to do one. It means that, by nine months old, we are having totally clean walks. That’s the aim anyway.
Yes, just ignore the indoor ones. Lots of praise and treats for the outdoor ones. My Mollie was ages before she was clean and dry indoors. They are all different.
OK, but remember it's the dog that defines what is punishing, not you. So regardless of who uses it and in what context, it doesn't mean it's punishing your dog. Nor does it mean it's not. You have to see if it works. Does it? Does it stop him performing the behaviour in the future? If yes, it's punishing. If no, why are you bothering? Anything can be an interrupter if it's trained to be. You could train the clap or tsssh sound to be an interrupter. I know others who use "whatcha" or "hey you!" or "oi!". You just work on getting the dog to turn when you make the noise and rewarding him for doing so. Rather than using a noise/volume that might shock him to start off with, you can start by a simple pairing method. Play a bit of reorienting - throw a treat away from you so he has to turn his back on you. Once he eats it, he'll likely turn/look back to you to see if there's another. Mark (click or "yes" or whatever you use) and toss another treat. Once he has the idea and you're getting a snappy look back at you after he's eaten the treat, start introducing your interrupter noise/word at the point he's eating the treat. Remember to still mark him turning his head to you and toss away another treat. This way you're getting the action of "cue > head turns to you" paired together. You can then start using it when you know he's listening to you but just not staring at you. Make your noise and, when he turns, mark and reward. Like everything, you then slowly build up the complexity of it. The reason I like to scatter the treats is because it's more reinforcing than simply delivering a single treat. The dogs enjoy the game of sniffing them out. Because the reward is great, they are more likely to respond to the interrupter cue. It's a bit like the "magic word" that you might have seen talked about elsewhere. I tend to do this in very arousing situations where a simple "turn to me" interrupter isn't appropriate or enough. So, like I said, when the dogs are playing too rough (or too near the edge of a cliff!), or when someone comes to the door and Shadow starts alert barking. The way I trained this was slightly different to the above (which is more appropriate for a simple "stop doing that thing you're doing"). With the scatter, I just paired it on walks and at home. With the dogs by me to start off with, I'd drop a few pieces of kibble and say "scatter!". I did this a lot. It's got lots of additional benefits - it's enriching, gets them to use their noses (and therefore brains) and makes being right by me a really rewarding thing - great for recall and heel work. So I probably do this three or four times over the course of an hour's walk and a couple of times a day in the house, too. Keeping in mind that I use the majority of their daily allowance of food for training, including this sort of thing - make sure you're not over-feeding! So, you can see, it has a lot of reinforcement so becomes a super strong cue. And I gradually increased the distance and level of distraction, as always.
This is really interesting, I have, quite inadvertently done the same thing. Cassie was a serious crocopup and I tried the yelping idea which was an absolute failure, but I must have drawn in breath threw clenched teeth when it blimmin' well hurt and somehow that became the interrupter! And it's lasted because if she hears that noise or similar she will stop what she is doing and look at me, I had no idea it was associated with "traditional" training. She's 22 months old now. She's never had compressed air released anywhere near her, so would she still have any frightening associations? She doesn't look scared but then I've never really made any association that she may do.
I think some sounds are more likely to be naturally/instinctively aversive than others. I can imagine a hissing sound to resonate with those instinctive parts of the brain that sense danger, just like low rumbling noises. But, again, it depends on the dog. Does it make the behaviour she was performing at the time you made the noise less likely to happen in the future? That's your tell.
The other thing to consider is that dogs can easily become habituated to noises, even if they are mildly aversive to start with. Imagine if you lived somewhere really quiet and a door slammed nearby. It would make you jump - interrupt what you were doing. But if you lived in a busy building where doors were slamming several times a day, you'd become used to that and you wouldn't notice them. It's the same with the interrupters whether or not they are mildly aversive. If they don't communicate any other useful information (ie the threat of a real punishment or reward) then they will become "white noise" in time.
I feel I should be able to come up with some witty quip regarding my ability to do this but somehow I can't quite get it together Yes I see what you mean re effect on her behaviour. She still sometimes "over mouths" when excited so I wondered if I could give her a reward for stopping that behaviour in response to the sound.
Thanks. This is really good. Especially the having totally clean walks, yes, that is really great and something to aim at. Don't see a good enough translation into Portuguese for busy busy I guess any word can do, so I'll just use "xixi" which is what I have been saying (it means weewee, and is read shishi) Thanks very much Boogie.
No, it does not stop him doing it at all I see, so we distract the dog or redirect his behaviour from what he is doing that we don't want to something else we do want him to do which is positive in comparison. We treat him upon that different good behaviour and in simultaneous give a cue so that the cue sticks to that specific action we want to mark (yes). Geez, having a dog is hard since their last generation And still always totally worth it. Thanks Fiona, will do. PS. I am not too worried about the overfeeding as I don't see that taking form, Gaston seems tall and skinny at the moment, (though I haven't measured him yet), so I am even thinking that I could be underfeeding him. Am keeping an eye on that and lets see how it goes with the food for the next couple of weeks, I may decide one upping his quantity of food. .
I made the yelping sound with my previous lab, thinking it was something he would easily relate to, so true it does not work, they do not take any pity and just keep on biting
I have tried this, it took 12 months and is still not guaranteed! Maybe because he was 8 when we rescued him, but I still keep trying. Dimwit, though lovable, (me or the dog, make your choice!)
