I'm a funny guy. The title is a play on words in many ways. look at me!...because it's a video. look at me!...because it's a new thread. look at me!...because that's the command i'm working on with Captain. Anyway, here it is! I'd greatly appreciate any and all comments. Especially criticism and suggestions for improvements. Thanks in advance! (which kind of obligates you to respond since i already thanked you!)
Since you have thanked in advance--akin to bribing in instrumental conditioning--I will be bribed this ooonnneee time. I would stop giving a cue with you hand to look at me. What I really want is the dog checking in spontaneously. No verbal or hand signal. If the dog looks at your eyes. Yes and treat. Keep repeating it to get your dog to spontaneously engage with you.
If you decide that you do want to cue 'look at me', then I would mark it (with either 'Good' or 'Yes' or a clicker) but not say 'Good look at me'. The reason I wouldn't repeat 'look at me' is quite complicated. 'Look at me' is your cue -signal for your dog to behave in a certain way- and by repeating it when your dog is already doing that behaviour you are tending to weaken the cue. Eileen from 'Eileen and Dogs' explains this in detail in this article. (The article describes the problems with people saying 'Good sit' but the same thing applies to all cues.) https://eileenanddogs.com/blog/2015/05/24/good-sit/
@Michael A Brooks i would like to not have a hand signal, too. I was going to work on it this way for the first week because i REALLY want a strong connection for him to look at me when i ask him to. Even more, i would like the eye contact to come when he hears his name. When i say "Captain" the ideal reaction would be him stopping what he's doing to look at the source of his name. Like i said, i was going to work on it this week and then talk to the trainer about removing the hand signal. I imagine it would be as simply explained as, "yes. Just take away the hand signal. When you call his name, treat him when he looks at your face/eyes". Am i right in this assumption? Do i say thank you again even if i already said it in advance? hahaha. How about "i really appreciate your feedback!"
@Joy I don't use a clicker, and have used 'yes' as my marker. I read the article you shared, and it is very informative; one of the great things about this forum is the frequency to which responses include links or other information which further explain the response. What really caught my attention, and i believe it is a small piece of the article, is the statement about "one-to-one pairing of the cue and the action". I understand that we should reward and re-enforce positive behaviors, but never did it occur to me that a quid pro quo system should really be in effect. It's really got me thinking that if i praise Captain, i should refrain from saying the verbal cue, or using the hand signal, without rewarding him for the behavior.
Hi @Anthony Abrao I think you are more complicated than it need be. Adding verbal and visual cues and then needing to fade them. To get spontaneous attention you have to teach the dog to initiate the interaction. If you put it under various cues then it is not initiated by the dog. Go to the most boring room in your home. Just stand there. No noises. No movement. Zilch. If the dog looks at your face, then Yes and treat. Toss the treat over the dog so that the dog must have its back to your face. Let the dog automatically check-in. Let the dog reinitiate the interaction of looking at your face. You are using the treat toss to reset the exercise. Repeat 5 times. Then Play with dog. Repeat exercise in oodles of different environment with progressively more distractions. Getting you dog to look at you when you say the name appears to be an identical exercise. It isn't. You are initiating the connection. In check-ins it is the dog who initiates the connection. You need to be attentive so you can reinforce the welcomed check-ins. So no phone calls while training the dog. Lol. You should train both behaviours.
I don't understand your argument. Praise is a poor substitute for a food treat. It can be a reinforcer with sensitive dogs. So when should one use praise? When one has cued the dog to do something AND one has decided that the behaviour will be rewarded. Consequently once my dog knows the cue, and I am using random reinforcement I might ask for the behaviour and give no praise, no food treat, no pat, nothing for that particular repetition. There is no quid pro quo on such an occasion.
@Michael A Brooks there are two different behaviors described, right? One is spontaneous check-ins, and one when i get Captain's gaze from hearing his name(name-gaze?). These are two different behaviors, and i believe thats what you were remarking on when you recommend training both behaviors. Am i correct? Sailing on with the assumption i am correct, Captain and i work on both behaviors. His spontaneous check-ins are common, and i am comfortable with how frequent he checks in during training or other times. These trainings are usually outside on walks, in our front yard while the kids play outside, neighbors walk/run by with/without dogs, cars zoom past, other animals like squirrels and birds frolic. The name-gaze is what i really want to work on with him. When i say his name, i want him to look at my eyes (at least my face), and keep the look until given further guidance or released. For an example, i'll use fetch. I throw, he retrieves, i take the item, he sits next to me ready for the repetition. If i say "Captain, wait" or "Captain, stay" i want him to look at me when he hears his name. This is because i want to know that he is acknowledging me, that he sees the hand signal, and that he knows i am still engaging with him. Also, when outside unleashed, i want him to hear his name and stop whatever beavior he is doing to look at me.
@Michael A Brooks i did not mean to substitute praise for a food treat. Maybe i misused quid pro quo. I meant it as "i do this, you give me that". I say 'yes' as a marker word, and then often follow up with a reward. Sometimes the reward is a treat, a toy, or petting. I also say things like 'good sit', for example. Saying 'sit', 'good sit', and 'good boy' are easily distinguishable to us, but maybe not so much to Captain. The article shared by @Joy opened my mind to that. If i say 'sit', i want Captain to feel accomplished that he has executed it properly. When i say 'good sit', he hears sit and may not get a reward whether he is sitting, not sitting, or sits again. when i say 'good boy' i want Captain to understand he is being praised for the good behavior. So, i am making an effort to remove praise that includes the command in it. I try to not say 'good sit', for example.
