I'm a 95% positive person. I don't think that punishment is needed to modify many behaviors with many dogs. Some? yes. But I've modified many things quite reliably through reward.

But if a dog is being obnoxious, well, I tell them that they're being obnoxious. And I wouldn't let it work. I usually only have to tell them once...

Punishment vs correction are two, "completely" different things but I understand what your saying.

My now gone Thunder was SAR trained in cadaver, live find, boat work, article search, CDX, SCHIII, HT, TT and CGC.

As to actual training He "never" had a physical correction from a leash or collar of any sort BUT it wasn't beneath me to scruff him as a pup during basic house manners and general manners all together.

The working dog club I belonged to didn't allow physical corrections.

I will add that markers or "traditional" training wont get you anywhere if your leadership/management skills aren't up to par.

I don't believe marker or traditional methods can teach that by them selves.

Trooper, my only dog now has always been so super handler soft that I couldn't dare do anything more then give him the stink eye to crush him.

Without understanding you dog's behavior training can be no more then monkey see, monkey do.

 Quote: Bob Scott

Punishment vs correction are two, "completely" different things

I always thought that in the dog training terminology Negative Punishment means withholding of the expected reward and Positive Punishment is a physical correction, as we are adding somethng the dog dislikes.

What is a physical correction then in this terminology? And in the practial sense? Stronger than leash correction? Beating or something like that?

I agree that the terms are as you say but my thoughts are that "punishment" has a singular purpose of inflicting pain to the dog for an unwanted behavior and no thoughts beyond that.

"Corrections" have the goal of reducing a unwanted behavior through training.

I know, it's semantics but it's what makes sense to me.

It does make sense to me too. But people understand different things when talking about corrections. I'm sure you'd never beat a dog. But how far would you go? I've seen a leash correction in a DVD of Ed Frawley and frankly I was a bit shocked how strong it was. But I guess he knows what he is doing. He says, it depends on the sensitivity of the dog and that it is better to give one strong correction than 100 little ones.

 Quote: Christina Stockinger

I always thought that in the dog training terminology Negative Punishment means withholding of the expected reward and Positive Punishment is a physical correction, as we are adding somethng the dog dislikes.
What is a physical correction then in this terminology? And in the practial sense? Stronger than leash correction? Beating or something like that?

Not in dog training terminology. Negative and Positive Punishment are terms from operant conditioning. Not all dog trainers use operant conditioning, or at least they don't apply methods based on adherence to an operant conditioning system. Most trainers in the real world only know classical conditioning using reward and correction. They may use escape/avoidance, but they have no clue how it fits into an operant conditioning system. They don't care to know. There is more than one way to skin a cat, there is more than one way to train a dog, and if a trainer has any kind of success, his way is THE WAY to train a dog.

A physical correction, or any aversive used as a correction, is always positive punishment. The definition of correction varies greatly from trainer to trainer. What one trainer considers a correction may seem like punishment to another. To P+ trainers, all physical corrections are punishment, and therefore unnecessary..

I honestly believe that all the terminology in dog training today has a lot to to with why folks can be so baffled by training.

I started pretty much with Kohler methods and it was simple.

If the dog didn't respond you Physically corrected it.

When you started teaching the heel you gave the command then gave a "correction".

If it started forging you did a quick about turn with a "correction".

In the about turn you did an about turn then "corrected" it so it would follow you.

These wee 'corrections".

To me "punishment" would be smacking the dog for crapping on the floor and tossing it out the door. No follow through.

"The dog should know better".

If we take the time and give it some thought training is nothing more then understanding what makes a dog tick and thinking about what your doing.

I told someone in a PM that Dr. Spock took away the next generations common sense.

I'm banging my head on the wall cause I figure there's a ton of folks here that have no idea who Dr. Spock is/was.

NO, he didn't work on a space ship!

Bob....I knew you could't let that one go....it was just too good. LOL

Thanks Duane. I'm accustomed with ckassical and operant conditioning and the according terminology because once upon a time I studied psycho, where the cognitive processes of the brain were an important part. I related this terminology to dog training, because it is nowadays commonly used, though ~ I agree - not by all trainers.

Although I know that corrections are positive punishment, I go with Bob, for in our normal language punishment is understandable for everyone. People don't need necessarily to know about pos. or neg. p. etc. They can be very good trainers without this. But I agree, lots of handlers or trainers think their way of training is correct just because they have success. Success you can have even by abusing a dog.

For me the question is: How do people understand correction and punishment? The opinions differ. For me the importante thing is, how far can we go with this, no matter how we call it.

Bob, "I honestly believe that all the terminology in dog training today has a lot to do with why folks can be so baffled by training. "

I agree fully, though it may help people, who participate in dog sports or something like this, so having and understanding and using the same terminology may be helpful. But I don't have experience with any dog sport.


"To me "punishment" would be smacking the dog for crapping on the floor and tossing it out the door. No follow through."

That's exactly how I'd use that word in everyday life and I reject this absolutely. I find it so nasty,hideous and unjust that I interfere if I see someone doing this, though mostly they do it behind walls.

Corrections: You take teachng Heeling as an example. But how strong this correction can be so that it makes sense but doesn't scare the dog? As far as I've learned about Heeling, Forrest and Michael use some leash pressure, in other words a slight correction.


But a correction always inflicts or some pain or other thing the dog dislikes. So that brings me into conflict. A strong correction once or a few times, so that the dog will not repeat the undesired behavior? - Or a lot of little corrections and it will have no more effect on the dog, as he gets desensitized.

About Dr. Spock: Poor you, you can bang your head again! Googling I could only find the Star Trek guy, that one with Kirk. (Besides this, he was not called Dr. Spock) Did you mean the pediatrician? I remember about him only faintly, but couldn't find him. Probably didn't search correctly.