Someone help me out here. I'm having a "discussion" on another board with some clicker fanatics who are just so appalled that I support training with an E-collar and prong. Is there anyone here who could give me some insightful, legitimate thoughts on why the general Schutzhund public use the prong and e-collar? Along the lines of something like, we have alot more dog to deal with than the average pet dog, we're doing protection sport, stuff like that. You know, like any dog worth his salt in SchH isn't going to be called out of the blind for a click/treat. Maybe for a click/bite? LOL anyway...

I already informed them that I do clicker stuff (esp with puppies) and train with food and toys, but they refuse to agree to disagree and just let it go, so maybe someone else would be able to explain this better than I can and give them something to think about since I'd must rather just flame them LOL. Or just give me some ideas on good points to reiterate to them.

Much appeciated <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Tell them that just as we use a prong or remote collar for training they use the gentle leader for the same purpose. To apply negative reinforcement. And just as we can misuse the prong or apply electricity incorrectly, they too can injure their dog with the head halter. It's about using the tools correctly and not abusing them.

If you have a dog that's motivated, you can teach a whole lot through just positive reinforcement as you should but it doesn't cut it for all training. There are even also ways to increase motivation without having to apply negative reinforcement. The fact is we do an unpredictable environment and if a dog has not been taught to avoid certain stimuli either then it could possible mean it's life. How's that for a correction?

Tell them they need to get over seeing negative reinforcement and punishment with an extreme perception and that they can be used for positive purposes.

tell them to talk to Bart Bellon.

He can actually prove that he uses a e-collar as a +R!

in his system, the application of a light stim, increases the likelihood of his dog performing the desired behavior... taadaa!! +R

or "NePoPo"!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

hehe I quoted a few very good remarks on the use of compulsion (in addition to a good foundation on positive reinforcement). They're grasping straws now by hammering me with personal attacks totally unrelated to the subject because they've got nothing better to say. Not to mention accusing me of putting others down for the use of clickers when I have stated all along for I support it and use the clicker myself. lmao who's putting who down again when I'm the one under attack since I'm an evil prong collar user...LOL...my work there, is done.

Bwahahaha... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

I don't care what you tell those kind of people you are going to be wrong and be an animal abusing monster. It doesn't matter to people that I train Siberian Huskies who are known to run off. I balanced using a e-collar with my dog versus either not letting him run with some freedom or getting hit by a car. So tell them to go renew their memberships in PETA and leave you alone.

-F- them.


Now, I do have a question about the stim = positive reinforcement stuff.


Matt, how exactly does that work? What is the argument that he uses to prove it is +R?

Removing an aversive increases behavior as well.

I'm curious?

lol yes, F them. They got in such a hissy that they had the thread closed! HAHAHA

*sigh* It's always a losing battle. But a fun one to expose their fanaticism...is that even a word? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Yes, it's a word, and fits the bill quite nicely. I prefer "cult" myself <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> .

i'm a little foggy, too, on the possibility that the e-collar could deliver +R. if the e-collar increases the likelihood that the dog will perform correctly, then it must be administered in conjunction with the command. if that is the case, then it is nothing but operant conditioning which teaches the dog that the proper and speedy response is the only way to "avoid" unpleasantness, and that is anything but positive reinforcement.

It can become a conditioned +R. If you're constantly pairing very high level rewards (like a bite) with the very low level stim you can make it a conditioned reinforcer, like a clicker.

I believe in time the conditioning becomes context related because I'm sure they get correction type stims also.