When I started with my first K9 the patrol dog class was mainly compulsion in obediance work . Actually it was a secret form called Strict Macho Positional Compulsive training .

I fell right in line with it . But over the years it's gotten less and less compulsive . Having limited time though to train the dog 10-13 weeks in our case some compulsion in OB is necessary . If there was more time things would be different .

Funny thing looking at the other areas that are trained , suspect searches , tracking , bite work they all start out motivational . Too bad we didn't see the relation to motivation OB work sooner .

 Quote: jennifer marshal

I use mostly positive reinforcement, marker training, and really love what I am learning about SATS. I try to utilize PR and markers into everything including aggression cases but when faced with the choice of teeth in flesh and heavy correction I can will and do choose correction.

For those of us who are not dog trainers (just ask my dogs, heh)... can you define those two terms? I believe the second one might be "positive reinforcement" but really not sure on the first. Thanks!

Angela, it's Syn Alia Training System:
http://www.synalia.com/

I've just ordered this manual; looking forward to learning more about this method...

In my mind:

Compulsion:

"Hans, go find mom." (Hans goes to dad. Grab Hans, haul him over to mom.) "Good boy."

Correction:

Hans, go find mom. (Hans goes to dad.) "No. Go find mom." (At "No" Hans stops and looks around. At "Go find mom." He goes to mom.) "Good boy."

Gets a little more complicated when you have more people in the room

Yes, Lynne beat me to it. It is Syn Alia Training System. I have not used it much but have seen great results. I was unsure I could use it with Duke but Kayce talked me through it and he is doing very well. SATS is my current learning curve. I don't doubt Duke's abilities and intelligence, its my ability to use the method that I got hung up on. It is deceptively simple in concept but it does require good timing and an ability to be fluid in its use. I am not there yet but I hope with Kayce's guidance I can be.

I want to become certified in SATS. It is just incredible what you can accomplish. If you like traditional marker training (marker word or clicker, then reward) then you will love SATS. It is a lot to wrap your head around but the manual is very worth purchasing.

I had a good read through her website (SynAlia). There is a certified trainer a couple hours from me and I think it might be worth having them work my dogs.

Back on topic. One of my current foster dogs, I had him compulsion trained by a trainer with a very impressive resume. (retired Police street K9 and detector dog training). (Well I went with the dog and we did one on one instruction). At the time, knowing nothing about dogs, I thought it was my only option left since the dog wasn't food OR toy driven but was too strong for me to control, and also very reactive and fearful. He is a handful to say the least. The dog "learned" his basic obedience commands but I felt bad in my gut, like the poor dog was confused and I was correcting and forcing him for something he didn't really understand. Lesson learned, I didn't like that method.

I joined him with a obedience class and found that he DID like treats, as long as he was in a relaxed frame of mind (which isn't often). He performs exceptionally well with food if relaxed.

Unfortunately, I find I fall back to the compulsion method when I get exasperated or if the dog reacts suddenly (bolts or goes off at another dog, for instance). He probably gets a lot more leash corrections than he really deserves.

I am really trying to do better but it is slow going (for me). I get frustrated very easily and it doesn't help that I have 4 large, untrained, reactive dogs. My "compulsion" (leash corrections or pulling the dog away, etc) method, I have found, mainly serves to relieve my frustration but IT HAS NOT CHANGED THE DOGS' BEHAVIOUR. They are just as out of control as ever. Now mind you, I am probably the farthest thing from a dog trainer as you will get.

I have begun the Leerburg method of praise and using food to lure the position as well as the learning and proofing phases. This has worked better and my compulsion trained guy is a lot happier doing his exercises (in fact, food is the ONLY way I can get him to lay down, he will do it with enthusiasm. If there is no food he will not lay down out of fear/uncomfortable. I think it is because of the way I trained it). Now if only I could learn how to make them stop doing something (going off at the neighbors would be a good start) without compulsion.

My dogs and I clearly do not have good communication. I do not think compulsion training helps dog-owner communication. Yes it has fast results, but I do not think it helped my dog trust me. At least not the way I learned it. I am looking in to this SynAlia thing as it sounds like just what my dogs and I need!

Cindy,
Given the definitions you've held the two words to, I also like Alyssa's very condensed take on the context you've set.
I think the confussion happens between the two words because they can both mean the same thing in some hands.

Note, reading on in the dictionary; Compulsion--n. 2. the state of being compelled. (now for how I think many of us here use the term) 3. Psychol. a strong, usually irresistible impulse to perform an act, esp. one that irrational or contrary to one's will.

That word compulsion leads invariably to compell-- to have a powerful and irrisistible effect, influence

Correction--n. 2. the act of correcting 3. punishment intended to reform, improve, or rehabilitate, chastisment, reproof. skipping to #5 definition--a quantity applied or other adjustment made in order to increase accuracy, as in the use of an instrument or the solution of a problem.

Plenty of room for misuse on the end of a leash in both those words. And on the other side of the coin, I believe an arguement could be made that you use compulsion when training with PR. (don't take that the wrong way. lol It's only one definition of the word)

In some hands either word can mean the same thing....a poorly trained dog, or abuse.

If my dog isn't learning, I'm doing something wrong.
Randy

Randy makes a good point-

Some folks use compulsion as a form of correction.

For example, suppose Spot refuses to sit.
Spot's handler "corrects" spot, by lifting up on the leash until Spot's butt drops.

Was that a correction, or compulsion?

IMO, it was both. It was correction via compulsion.
Correction isn't a specific thing. It's more the circumstance under which something is done to the dog.

I verbally chide my puppy, as a form of correction.
A person could give a pop on the leash.
A person could (unfortunately) smack the dog.
A person could use compulsion.

All forms of correction.

In my mind, compulsion is any applied force-action that DIRECTLY causes the behaviour in an effort to eliminate the unpleasantness of the force-action. CORRECTION on the other hand is a "communicator" that says that was wrong, you know what to do, now do it.

So pulling up on the leash for a sit is compulsion. A "sit", pop/no, "sit" was a correction, with the assumption being that the dog knows what the response to a sit command is. JMO.

 Quote: rich pallechio

In my mind:

Compulsion:

"Hans, go find mom." (Hans goes to dad. Grab Hans, haul him over to mom.) "Good boy."

Correction:

Hans, go find mom. (Hans goes to dad.) "No. Go find mom." (At "No" Hans stops and looks around. At "Go find mom." He goes to mom.) "Good boy."

Gets a little more complicated when you have more people in the room

Very good analogy. It's like I say "Raise your hand" (I lift your hand/arm up), I do it 10 times, then I ask you "Raise your hand" and you do it on your own, first half-way up and I have to help you the rest of the way, then praise you. Then I ask you again, if you don't, I raise it for you again and then slap your hand. LOL, I am joking.