Alan:

"avoidance is a behavior created by the defense instinct/drive"

Triggering the avoidance drive/behavior through defense thresholds is just one method. Abuse in obedience training is another.

"Can the dog reason the difference between two types of downs????"

Sure. My tone and speed of the command is different in both, which elicits separate behaviors. One is a quick down with the expectations of a short duration before release and the other is a slower down with the expectation of a longer duration before the release.

"We always need to think about what we are doing to/with our dogs."

Good point!

I hope you enjoy our exchange of ideas as much as I do.

 Quote:

Originally posted by Vince P.:

Compulsion techniques have worked since the beggining of time. But more and more trainers are training in drive these days.

And just last week Vancamp was calling Vince "Captain Correction"LOL

Who would ever have guessed.......LOL <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Well Vince, I just think Schnauzergirl has a lot more comprehension of the original question which is to down faster on the move. Timing is the most critical factor of compulsion because it makes the difference between avoidance or punishment training and requires a skillful and knowledgeable handler.
My understanding of K9 psychology is that dogs do not reason. Your ideas about the two types of downs seems anthropomorphic and illogical to me.
An exchange of ideas is what this bulletin board is about and I would be interested to read your other thread on corrections.
It is up to the readers then to separate the logical from the illogical.

Alan wrote: "My understanding of K9 psychology is that dogs do not reason. Your ideas about the two types of downs seems anthropomorphic and illogical to me."

I've been following this thread and it seems to be getting into the old school vs. new school thing.

The down command is something different when used in the drive exercises. It has to do with how you are training the command. You want the dog to stay in drive for a good show in the heeling stuff, right? So, that is when you are training in drive and working all the exercises with the ball/food reward. (mostly genetic in that drive action, like Vince said) You use corrections to proof these exercises, D=>C=>D, and make them sharper.

But, when working the "long down" or a dominate control down in other areas, like during dinner/sitting around the field waiting/ect., then you must use compulsion as the method to ensure control (i.e. the avoidance stuff, that is how I do it. "lehni or else") because you are not using a positive drive reward. The command must be a dominate one with no idea in the dog as to what he can do. The two are different, who cares if the dog doesn't "know" the difference. There is a difference in how you train, how the setup is, and how the dog is cued to the excercise. Your dog shouldn't be in drive for the long down or when you need a down for whatever.

(Note: downs in protection fall into the first catagory because there is a drive reward for the down, a bite. JMO)

If you are using the old school "Platz or else" you will not be getting the best, quickest, and most spirited work from your dog in the heeling exercises. That is what you want in the down in motion, right?

If I am missing something here, and you'all think I'm wrong, tell me. I kinda skimed some of the posts. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

That is what I took away from what Vince said, not anthropwhateverizing the dogs behavior.

VanCamp, there is a drive reward for the down in obedience too. The dog avoided any compulsion by downing and the drive reward is “here”-“sit”-“heel” or release command which should create more motivated behavior. If the compulsion that created the avoidance is no longer needed then you just work in drive all the time, you don’t have to continually correct the dog. It’s the trainer that is still using the same compulsion one month or one year from now that doesn’t understand timing and reinforcements. The dog is not smart enough to know the differences in downs so “I care” about it to be consistent and fair in my training. I suppose it matters what school you went to but old or new is not the issue.

Avoidance isn't a drive; it's simply a behaviorial response motivated by fear. That fear can come from the pain of our prong collar, the aggression of the helper, etc. The goal of the behavior is simply to avoid the aversive stimulus, whatever the dog perceives that to be.

There is a sound, scientific reason for teaching the dog new behaviors thru positive reinforcement FIRST - Pavlov's classical conditioning of emotions. The dog will develop, thru classical conditioning, an association of an emotion with each new stimulus ((command) we present to him. These emotional responses are extremely persistent, even when we introduce aversive stimuli later in training in order to achieve reliability. So if you want "freudigarbeit" (joy of working) in your routine, teach the exercises first in a motivational manner.

Even if you want to call it "drive-compulsion-drive", you are still talking about eventually switching to an escape/avoidance paradigm in the training. The COMPULSION in that formula is the aversive stimulus which the dog is motivated (thru fear) to learn to avoid. Whether you are speaking of the down out of motion or the "dominant down" at the dinner table, all of you are still saying you utilize avoidance conditioning.

Can a dog learn to discriminate between the down out of motion and the long down? Absolutely. Although the command is the same, that is only one stimulus in the total stimulus context which the dog perceives. In many other ways, the situations are very different (dog sitting vs walking/running, handler standing vs. moving, in the center of the field vs on the sidelines, etc). I require different responses to these two situations and the dogs are able to very reliably discriminate. On the long down, they instantly roll onto their left hip where they are required to stay for the whole exercise, but on the down out of motion, they land in the sphinx position, ready for the recall. Their MOTIVATION for both of these behaviors is the same - FEAR. It is a very mild fear, but fear nonetheless. In both scenarios, they drop like they've been shot, but the instant they realize they have successfully avoided the aversive stimulus (the prong), fear is reduced (drive reduction). This momentary fear in no way interferes with the high speed, happy recall; in fact, by pairing the two behaviors over and over, the dog learns that IF it successfully avoids the prong on the down command, the absence of the aversive stimulus becomes a signal that the recall (and thus the BALL!!) will come next, so the instant they hit the ground and feel no prong, they anticipate the recall and go extremely high in drive. (Sorry to be so long!)

Excellent Sch3FH2. It wasn’t that long but is extremely accurate and the principles of chaining are clearly defined.

That was deep.

Im going back to school, I didn't remeber a third of that stuff. Makes excellent sense.

Alan’s comment: “Can the dog reason the difference between two types of downs????"

VP’s response: “Sure.”

Sch3FH2’s response: “Absolutely.”

Alan’s critique of Sch3FH2’s response: “Excellent Sch3FH2.”

Alan’s critique of Vince P.’s response: “Your ideas about the two types of downs seems anthropomorphic and illogical to me.”

Does anyone sense that maybe Alan does not like me?