Leerburg / Dog Training Articles / Remote Collar Work / Comparison of Stress and Learning Effects of Electric Collars and Pinch Collars

Comparison of Stress and Learning Effects of Electric Collars and Pinch Collars

By Institute for Animal Welfare and Behavior

URL Copied!

Leerburg's Note: The Institute for Animal Welfare and Behavior conducted an extensive study on the learning effects of electric collars and prong collars in dog training. We have included the introduction, conclusion, and overall summary below. For full details on the study, you can download the 194-page PDF here which will outline how tests were administered and the results logged in various tables and charts.

Introduction

The partnership between human and the domestic dog (Canis familiaris) has had deep roots ever since the first taming of the wolf. Nowadays, a great number of dogs are kept by humans and, thus, the dogs are accepted as one of the most popular companion animals all over the world. It is for sure that the most of the dogs are trained by using a large variety of training methods. These methods used to train dogs range from the utilization of reward-based methods in the form of ‘’positive reinforcement’’ to the use of training aids as aversive stimuli such as electronic shock collars, ultra sonic devices, pinch collars etc. in the form of ‘’positive punishment’’ and ‘’negative reinforcement’’. The application of aversive stimuli, in particular via electronic training collars, in training is, however, a highly controversial issue. Even though the use of these devices is forbidden in several European countries, the debate on this issue still continues all around. On one hand, supporters claim that with respect to producing physical damage to the skin and/or the body, electronic training collars are relatively safe than the mechanical training aids (TORTORA 1982, LINDSAY 2005) and, further, they have no adverse effects at all (CHRISTIANSEN et al., 2001b).

Opponents, on the other hand, argue that the use of electronic training collar is painful, unethical and unnecessary regardless of the severity of the training situation or problem behavior (OVERALL, 2007). In addition, British Small Animal Veterinary Association (BSAVA) (2003) claim that even highly motivated behaviors such as chasing prey can be elicited without using electronic training collars.

There are some scientific researches examined effects of electronic training collars in the area of dog training. The studies conducted by SCHILDER and van der BORG (2003) and SCHALKE et al., (2006) should be particularly mentioned. Both scientific researches conclude that using electronic training collars is only in accordance with animal protection principles if the following criteria are met: The user must have sufficient practical and theoretical knowledge of these devices and must have undergone a test showing his capability to use them. Nevertheless, even if these criteria are met, the devices may only be used in specifically designated training situations.

All in all, both scientific studies conclude that alternative training methods imply less stress on the animal, thus they comply with animal protection policies. Up to this day, however, no detailed scientific research has been conducted that could prove this hypothesis.

The aim of this study is to investigate whether any stress is caused by the use of specific conditioned signal, quitting signal, and/or pinch collars as alternatives to electric training collars, and if they do so, whether the stress produced in the process is comparable to the one with electric training collars. Therefore, we set out to investigate the direct behavioral reactions of the dogs upon administration of above mentioned training methods. We are especially interested in finding out which method leads to less stress in dogs by comparing their behavioural effects.

Furthermore, this study will examine the learning effects of the above mentioned training methods, i.e., electronic training collar, the pinch collar and the quitting signal. Thus, the compatibility of the learning effect of the quitting signal with the learning effect of the pinchand the electronic training-collar, namely the compatibility of effectiveness of ‘’negative punishment’’ method with the ‘’positive punishment’’ method, in a training with high level of arousal and motivation will be assessed.

Conclusion

The results of the present study indicate that the electronic training collar induces less distress and shows stronger “learning effect” in dogs in comparison to the pinch collar. The quitting signal is on the other hand not found effective in police dog training although it causes the “least distress” reactions in dogs when comparing with the electronic training- and pinchcollar. Altogether, concerning the “bodily reactions”, the pinch collar was evaluated as the most distressful method and considering the “learning effect”, the electronic training collar was found to be the most effective method.

These results can probably be explained by that electronic training collar complies completely with the punishment criteria, which were defined by TORTORA (1982), in case of proof of the proficient and experienced user. On the other hand when applying the pinch collar, these criteria can not be met even though perfect timing is applied since reactions of the dog and effectiveness of the method depends on several different factors such as the willingness, strength and motivation of the handler, as well as his/her proficiency. In addition to that, the visibility of the administrator and, thus, of the punishment is another important factor influencing the efficiency of the pinch collar because the dog directly links the punishment with its owner. Therefore this method does not satisfy the ‘’punishment criteria’’ at all. The quitting signal on the other hand requires criteria, such as good timing and structured training procedure, on account of complete conditioning in order to achieve effective results. Even if these criteria are met, the personality trait of the dog is another factor, which influences the efficiency of the signal.

It should particularly be mentioned, that the quitting signal training was implied only on adult dogs within the frame of this study. Therefore, the results should not be interpreted as that the quitting signal can not be a suitable method in police dog training. As previously stated training of the quitting signal requires a hard and a structured procedure. Thus, if the training, namely the conditioning, begins at the puppy hood, the quitting signal can also be an effective method in police dog training.

Overall, the results of this study show that an efficient training which complies with the animal welfare principles should ensure the following punishment criteria: good timing, association with the misbehavior only and application of correct strength and/or dose. Therefore, the debates about training methods can only be reasonable in case that they comprise not only the training aids, but also all inputs which affect the training, such as the trainer, the training conditions etc.

Overall Summary

In the present study stress and learning affect of three training methods, i.e. electronic training collar, pinch collar and quitting signal are investigated. Additionally a questionnaire was addressed to the canine officers, who participated in this research as handlers, in order to gain information about dogs’ characteristics, past experience, health situation etc., and thus, to avoid incorrect assessment of the test results. Furthermore, body language of each dog during obedience exercises was filmed and analyzed, so that correlations between body posture and experience, body posture and characteristics, as well as between body posture and direct reactions of the dogs to the training methods could be detected.

The tests were performed on 42 adult police dogs of both genders (33 males and 9 females) and varying ages (3-10 years old) of the breed Belgian Malinois. 22 dogs, which were tested in Muenster, were recruited from different Police Departments in Nordrheinwestfalen, whereas another 20 dogs which participated the study belonged to Hannover Police Department. The dogs tested in Hannover and in Muenster were considered as two different groups. The main experiment took place on three test days for each dog. The time interval between test days was one week. ’’Within subject design’’ was used as experimental design for the study. Therefore, on each training day a different training method among the quitting signal, the electronic training collar and the pinch collar was administered to dogs in accordance with the subgroups to which they belonged. The subgroups were established according to the administration order of the training methods by using a randomized crossover design.

There was a high learning effect for the electronic training collar and the pinch collar and a low learning effect for the quitting signal. Compared with the electronic training collar, pinch collar appeared to have a lower learning effect in dogs. However, this difference was not found to be significant (paired sample t-test, p =0.16).

No significant difference was found comparing the learning effect of the electronic training collar between Hannover and Muenster, whereas a tendency towards significance was seen between the cities in comparison of learning effect of the pinch collar (Kruskal-Wallis, p=0.109***), as well as of quitting signal. (Kruskal-Wallis, p <0.05**).

A high learning effect of electronic training collar may be due to that this is the only method in police dog training, which satisfies the punishment criteria completely only if it is administered by a proficient and experienced user.

An important part of this study was the detection of stress related behavioral reactions to the above mentioned training methods. In order to achieve this, direct behavioral reactions of the dogs were examined. Comparing the first ear and joint reactions of the dogs to the pinch- and the electronic training collar it was found, that the correction applied by the pinch collar caused lower ear and lower body position than the one in reaction to the electronic training collar. Moreover, 2 dogs exhibited ‘’extreme ness of body posture’’ as a reaction to the pinch collar, whilst in none of the dogs this reaction was observed against the electronic training collar. No statistically significant difference was found when comparing the tail reactions between the electronic training collar and the pinch collar. However, it has been observed, that the dogs lowered their tails more often in reaction to the electronic training collar than to the pinch collar. The results of this study also indicate, that electronic training collar elicits statistically significant (t-test, p <0.01*) more vocal reactions in dogs than pinch collar.

Only 4 out of 42 dogs abandoned the behavior after having been given the quitting signal during the first session. Therefore, only the reactions of these 4 dogs to the quitting signal could be tested. Consequently, it was observed that 2 dogs showed low ear positions, while only one dog exhibited low body posture together with low tail position following the signal. The joint reaction of this dog was, however, scored as “extreme ness of body posture” and ”crouching”. None of these dogs on the other hand emitted vocal reactions reaction to the instruction of the signal.

All in all, considering the bodily reactions, pinch collar was found to be more distressful for dogs when comparing with the other methods. In accordance with the literature it seems possible to draw conclusions from bodily reactions to level of stress in dogs.

Download Full PDF

Shop Training Supplies