I have not trained using the word 'no' because I was told it was better to tell my dog to do something else rather than just say no and expect him to know what it means. I'm happy with this but there are times when other people (usually my partner) say no to him ( usually when they're playing too rough). My question is would it be better to train loki to do something when people say no ( maybe lie down) or should I just work on training my partner (which is proving harder than training the dog)?
Haha, I would try to train your partner. We tried to distract our pup when she did things that she shouldn't, like chew our furniture or bite, we distracted with a toy out some training. We found this far more helpful as she didn't understand the word no.
Not a good idea, if rough means it results in the dog having to be told no. It's not fair to expect a dog to work out what is too rough and rough play that is permissible. Might I suggest you find a way to interact that does not inadvertently teach the dog that rough interaction is a norm when playing with humans. I am not against play, in fact, I'm increasingly a fan of it, especially when it is used as a reinforcement--we don't have to use food treats exclusively. For example, one can play by running backwards and forwards, clapping hands, have a very excited voice, maybe even gently bump the dog with your knee. It's important you put such play on a cue, such as party party or something that is unlikely to be used by someone else. You don't want your dog launching into such play with your unsteady grandparents. Look at around 1.18 for a snippet of what I have in mind. The Swedish trainer is using play as positive reinforcement for desirable heeling.
Just to be clear I don't like them playing rough and I don't encourage it . I guess I'll continue to work on ensuring nobody else needs to use the word '''no" and it won't be an issue.
He doesn't take any interest in training unfortunately. I like the idea of putting the silly games on cue. He also needs to train a 'safe word' for when it gets out of hand - rather than shouting hysterically 'ruth your dog's attacking me'!
I'd ask him to say OW instead.... that will give him something to say. Just as with dogs - think about what you want to replace the problem behaviour with
The"no" command is appropriate when they been conditioned to know what they're supposed to do when the command is given. I use it judiciously in situations when his natural instincts are likely to put him at high risk. It's a close cousin to "leave it". "Stop" is another but I use that on off-leash walks when I want him stop and let me catch up.
Will remember this for use on my OH. Though I am currently away for work and he is doing a very good job teaching Chewie that riding in the back of our station wagon is more fun than riding on the back seat, so I shouldn't be too harsh!
Here's an article Pippa wrote about saying 'no' and why it's not a good idea: https://totallydogtraining.com/dog-training-using-the-word-no/
I think Pippa has the most comprehensive and useful writing on training a lab. With that said, I this article is not her best...its get pretty 'new agey'.
Pippa usually tries to connect her statements with primary literature (scientific data) without over extrapolation. This can be tough, as their isn't much primary lit in dog training, and what does exist is often low quality with glaring statistical errors. But sill, she tries to keep it real. In the above article though, the connection of statements to the primary lit is completely tossed aside, and statements, many statements, have no connection to anything except opinion. Just one, of many many examples, is below. "Trying to combine mild aversives, with positive reinforcement training can be counter-productive. It’s all too easy to fall back on aversives, and for aversives to escalate and become more severe." I don't know of any evidence that saying 'no' is a gateway to escalating punishments. Indeed the world is full of people capable of saying no to each other without escalation.
Hi @alsbos I don't find your criticism to be a telling one. Peppa in the sentence you quoted is circumspect. She claims it "can be" the road to escalating aversives. She does not use the word will. You state you don't know of any evidence that saying no is the gateway to escalation. The word is, is too strong. She made no such claim. You can't unseat a conditional statement by introducing a claim that you can't find any evidence for a universal truth.
Lots to think about here and I don't think I've got time to organise my thoughts properly at the moment... Since my original post I've noticed how often I do say 'no'. Fortunately, this has not escalated into me using any other aversive techniques. I seem to mostly use it unthinkingly where i think Jean Donaldson would say 'too bad' and cancel treat (eg i ask for slippers he brings me wellies). This makes sense to me as my 'treat coming' word is 'yes' and I am not American so have never said 'too bad' in my life. I guess in these situations I could say nothing or could find an alternative. I also say it ineffectually when he's doing something he shouldn't do and then I say something more useful afterwards- usually ' leave it'. So, my feeling is, 'no' on its own without being backed up with something more aversive is not that useful for training but it is a normal English word that he will hear from me and other people so he maybe should have some meaning he can attach to it - something along the lines of ' stop what I'm doing and try something else'.
1. There is plenty of evidence that dogs experience the word 'no' as a punishment. 2. There is plenty of evidence that punishment gets escalated in training situations, with mild punishers being used to begin with and these getting escalated. Of course, EVERY mild punisher is not escalated - but when a mild punisher doesn't work, people move up the scale. PLENTY of research to support that. Therefore putting together 1 and 2 to make the statement Pippa made, is very reasonable and well supported by scientific evidence. You might want to have a read of 'Excel-erated Learning' by Pamela Reid for more information and for research and papers supporting this.
In these instances, you are using it as a NRM - a No Reward Marker. Which is a slightly different thing, although many trainers still consider it to be a punisher. Here is more information on NRMs: https://www.clickertraining.com/node/179 At these times, you are trying to use it as a punisher but it's not working. Luckily instead of escalating the punisher (which is what many would do), you instead tell him what TO do instead. Which you can then reinforce. This is the same idea as teaching a dog to Sit instead of jumping up: A dog needs to know and be trained to do what you WANT them to do - not just punished for doing what you don't want. That leaves a vacuum where the problem behaviour can easily return and reoccur.
In the modern dog training world the idea is exactly this...you don’t train what you don’t want, you teach what you do want. It’s so simple yet so many people people struggle with that basic concept. Training a dog is a long difficult path. The easy way out would be to train one simple all encompassing “command” (cue really, I’m being facetious) like the word NO or a grunt that the animal is supposed to understand and fall in line perfectly after hearing chosen “ command” and act perfectly thereafter. Not realistic and not gonna happen. The animal will just move on to another behaviour you don’t like and will keep hearing NO all day long which is detrimental to the training and bonding process. You reap what you sew. There’s no easy way about it. It takes Time and effective methods. When you see a well trained animal you can be sure it’s handled has spent hours every day for years to achieve that. Teaching sit and paw and then throwing them back in the crate doesn’t cut it. Sorry, my reply turned into more of a rant. Lol. Oops.
I'm pretty sure I'm not attempting to use the word no as a punisher, it's more a spontaneous outburst of disapproval/disgust/ disappointment depending on the situation (could be rolling in fox poo, trying to eat something disgusting, or doing something I thought he'd stopped doing like chasing chickens or humping me when I take my coat off). In all cases there is a better word he knows the meaning of but in the heat of the moment 'no' sometimes comes out first!
