But it isn't "OC Tricks". That is what Operant conditioning is, IT'S TRAINING.

Dennis,

Are you telling me that you can just put a leash on a dog , give it a correction and it will sit and know the difference between whether it should sit or down?

 Quote:

Originally posted by Lee Baragona - Sch3FH2:

 Quote:

Originally posted by Dennis Hasley:

 Quote:

Still, the dog is in motion (involuntarily) as the result of the correction to avoid it.

Like the shock on leg and move away... it is no different.

It sounds like the term "involuntary" might be where you're getting confused. You're using it in the context of your post to mean the dog had no choice cuz you the handler forced him to comply. But "involuntary" responses in classical conditioning refer to responses OFFERED BY THE ANIMAL but which he cannot voluntarily control (at least not easily).

Not confused. As you said OFFERED BY THE ANIMAL but which he cannot voluntarily control.

answer: When the dog gets a motivational correction he can't control his response: Movement away.

Hear tone....feel shock on leg ... move away...cc

Hear command ....feel correction...move away...CC

Note that the warning signal is paired with shock. This is classical conditioning.

I know cc is about involuntary reactions like eye puff and hand move from shock.


Signalled Avoidance
Warning signal (tone)
Aversive stimulus (shock)
Avoidance response

Note that the warning signal is paired with shock. This is classical conditioning.

By definition Operant Conditioning. If you can't do it without training it is Operant.

The good thing is that you don't have to know what it is called to use it properly.

But sorry, you would have failed the class I taught on Operant and Clasical conditioning in College.

 Quote:

Originally posted by Richard Cannon:
By definition Operant Conditioning. If you can't do it without training it is Operant.

The good thing is that you don't have to know what it is called to use it properly.

But sorry, you would have failed the class I taught on Operant and Clasical conditioning in College.

Now Richard what makes you think I am not an educated man? lol

Look last time for you.

Nothing is being trained into the dog but for him to learn command means MOVE.


But if you want.

Here is a long run of how combine it all.

Avoidance Conditioning - Combining Classical and Operant Conditioning
By some flunky out there... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

Classical and operant conditioning often take place in the same situation.

We saw this in Rescorla’s fear conditioning experiment: Presenting a CS while dogs jumped back and forth to avoid shock increased or decreased the rate of jumping.

In Rescorla’s experiment, the avoidance procedure (operant conditioning) had no warning signal for the shocks; they came at certain times.

In another type of avoidance procedure, signalled avoidance, there is a warning signal before the shock.


If there is no avoidance response, the warning signal ends with shock.

Signalled Avoidance

Warning signal (tone)

Aversive stimulus (shock)

Avoidance response


Note that the warning signal is paired with shock. This is classical conditioning. The tone will become a CS and produce a CR of fear.


Signalled Avoidance

Warning signal (tone)

Aversive stimulus (shock)


Key Point: The warning signal will become an aversive stimulus because it produces a fear CR.


Signalled Avoidance


Warning signal (tone)


Aversive stimulus (shock)


Aversive stimuli are negative reinforcers. They reinforce responses that remove them.



If the avoidance response occurs before the shock, the tone goes off immediately and no shock is given on that trial.

Signalled Avoidance

Warning signal (tone)

Aversive stimulus (shock)

Avoidance response

Removal of the aversive warning signal negatively reinforces the avoidance response.


Signalled Avoidance


Warning signal (tone)


Avoidance response


The avoidance response occurs faster and faster on later trials because it receives negative reinforcement.


*****Whooo hooo....This is operant conditioning Cannon.***** <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

The 2-Process Theory of Avoidance Learning

Avoidance behavior is not reinforced by avoidance of the aversive stimulus!

It is reinforced by termination of the warning signal.


Process 1: Classical Conditioning: The warning signal becomes aversive through pairings with the aversive stimulus (fear conditioning).


Process 2: Operant Conditioning: Avoidance responses are negatively reinforced by termination of the warning signal.

The 2-Process Theory of Avoidance Learning

Key prediction: Delay of reinforcement weakens behavior. When an avoidance response occurs, if the warning signal goes off after a delay, the avoidance response should occur less often.


Pros
Warning signal (tone)
Avoidance response
Delay of reinforcement

This prediction was supported (Kamin, 1956).
The 2-Process Theory of Avoidance Learning


1. Unsignalled avoidance: Avoidance learning can take place without a warning signal (e.g., Rescorla’s experiment).


Cons


2. No extinction of avoidance response: Avoidance responding should stop because the warning signal is not paired with shock on these trials, but the avoidance response keeps going. Why?


Cognitive Theory of Avoidance Learning
The subject forms two kinds of “expectancies”:

1. Stimulus-Outcome: Warning signal leads to shock if there is no response.


2. Response-Outcome: Avoidance response leads to safety (no shock).


To weaken avoidance response, these expectancies must be weakened through disconfirmation.


Avoidance response keeps going because
Expectancy #1 not tested and
Expectancy #2 is repeatedly confirmed.


Supporting evidence: Response Prevention ( “Flooding&rdquo procedure. It’s used to eliminate an avoidance response when there is no longer a threat of being shocked.


Physically prevent the subject from making the avoidance response while the warning signal is on.


New expectancies are formed:

1. Stimulus-Outcome: Warning signal leads to NO shock if there is no response.

2. Response-Outcome: NOT responding leads to safety.


So you see a combination of CC and OC as friends but not lovers.

Thanks Laura, that sounds alot like what Ive been saying.Good luck trying to get anyone to admit they know enough about Ivans training methods to actually pass an educated opinion one way or the other.I think some people misunderstand his methods because they base their opinion on a "scratch the surface video" and come to the assumption of how what they see would apply to their dog. In doing this they are forgetting the things Ivan does would have either no meaning or different meanings to thier dog because thier dog does not have the same background training.Wich kinda makes thier opinion alot like bear hunting with a piano.....Im still waiting for some one to tell me that if Ivan does not have a method, then who does??,or tell me that no body has a method.Im not really on a crusade but I do give credit where credit is due, and to make a statement like, "oh thats nothing" is absurd, taking into account the acomplishments.Its even more phenominal that he has accomplished these things apparently with "no method".

This has gone so far a field and esoteric that I don't think that it has any further value. Properly applied anybody"s "system is going to work with a hard dog. The tough part is the proper application. Almost all moderen training has a basis is operant conditioning. Often peole looking to make a name will try and re-invent the wheel and give it a new name. The principles still fit the model. The Debate often comes down to "I want to call it something new and therefore it is new." No matter what you call it, if the principles are properly applied they will work.

If someone wants a new debate I guess they could open a new thread. This one is closed.