The fact is ET is old school training - 25 year old school training.
There are, in my mind, two distinct stages that are often confused.
1. Teaching the dog what you want him to do.
2. Convincing the dog to do what you want when you want him to do it.
Ed, from what I've seen, believes that aversives - corrections - have their place in stage two. Lou I'm sure agrees. (I know more than a few from the purely positive crowd who disagree - but that's another rant for another time.)
Ed seems to think that using aversives in stage 1 is inappropriate or counterproductive. Lou disagrees.
Using excessively intense or improperly timed aversives can be enormously destructive, in any stage of training. I'd be surprised if either Ed or Lou disagreed with that.
Escape training has been around a long time - far longer than e-collars have been on the market. Many gun dog trainers have long used the ear pinch for teaching retrieves. It has worked well on many dogs. Dogs who became happy, well-adjusted, and effective working dogs.
Why have so many trainers used it?
Timing.
Most reinforcers can't provide instantaneous timing information.
When a trainer pinches a new dog's ear, he releases the pinch at the instant the dog opens his mouth to take the dummy. The dog learns the association that opening his mouth makes the uncomfortable sensation go away.
Giving a dog a stim on the e-collar, then releasing it the moment the dog begins to move towards the handler, gives the dog information about exactly what it was that he was doing that was correct. To a degree that rewards and praises do not.
Or did not.
What is new is the growing realization of the effectiveness of reward markers. I generally disagree with the purely positive crowd on a great many issues, but they've been popularizing the use of reward markers, and that's been a great benefit.
By conditioning a dog to a reward markers, you can provide the precise timing that escape training provides, while using rewards instead of aversives. The click, or the short happy "yes!" indicates to the dog exactly what he was doing right.
It's a very effective method for stage 1 - and it's a joyous one to behold and participate in. Watching a dog enthusiastically offer behaviors, actively and happily working with you to figure out what it is that you want is an unforgettable experience.
But I'd by no means consider someone who was using escape training to be abusive.
Truth is I think sometimes we forget one of the fundamental principles - it's the dog who decides what's positive and negative.
Is a stim stressful to the dog? Yes. And too much stress can make it impossible for a dog to learn.
Or rather, some levels of stim are stressful to the dog, and what level that is depends upon the dog and the circumstances. And how much stress is too much also depends upon the dog.
But a lot of dogs find offering behaviors and not having them rewarded to be stressful. My own dog will, when he's trying to learn something new, run through everything I've ever taught him, sometimes, just on the off chance that one of them will earn a reward. It's a sure sign that he's getting too stressed - too frustrated.
He, at least, seems to learn faster with a certain level of frustration. If he never fails, he's not learning. But if he's gone too long between successes, he stops trying. I have to watch him carefully. And we always start with things I know he will succeed at, so he's enthusiastic to start, and end with things I know he will succeed at, so he's eager to do it again the next time.
If you're not paying attention, it's easy enough to put too much stress on a dog with escape conditioning. But you can do exactly the same with reward markers.
You have to watch the dog.
Page 7 of 8 First<<5678>>
Re: The Theory of Corrections in Dog Training -
Top
Previous Topic
Index
Next Topic
.jpg)
