Unsure about negative dog trainers

[DuckEggy]

I think I know the answer to this and need to trust my own gut, however ...

Situation 1: dog trainer shouted at my dog for doing something

Situation 2: I was advised to harshly reprimand my dog and avoid them seeing an animal they were barking at by obstructing them

Both were professionals with a good reputation locally.

My stance tends to be rarely to tell my dogs off as such, reward for good behaviour and try and avoid or ignore bad behaviour or ask for a more positive one instead.

There are exceptions, because I'm human! - if my pup jumped up and hurt me I'd probably shout out in pain - or if they were about to push past me to get to something dangerous in the food bin, I'd say a harsh 'no'.

Generally though, I don't want to shout at them. If they are being stubborn or bolshy, I will be firm but not loud. They are not lap dogs and come from working heritage.

Am I being too feeble? Out of text book and in real life, is it necessary to raise a voice? Barky dog would have continued to bark whether I shouted at them or not.

So called “Balanced” training so often means the likes of Adam Spivey aka The Southend Dog Traîner who has NO dog training credentials and who uses phrases he has no idea of the meaning of. Absolute bellend of a man.

You’ve not had much contact with independent breeds have you 🤣 They don’t do things to ‘please you’. They do it because it’s in their interest. You can create a ‘please you’ relationship over time but to begin with that requires heavy reinforcement and repetition and building value in a behaviour. Any hint of force or fear and they’re off. They’re not like the handler focused breeds at all. I have yet to see a ‘balanced’ trainer do anything other than force a dog into a shut down state. They are often the trainers who write off the terriers, hounds, utility dogs as untrainable. Theyre so trainable but they don’t take harsh treatment and those ‘balanced’ trainers often lack the understanding and experience of how dogs learn in order to teach them.

20 years ago I trained with force. Then I got myself a terrier hound…

Awful trainer.

We could have shouted at her, put her on a cheese wire slip lead and yanked her in repeatedly until our strength and overbearingness stopped that behaviour. We could also have written it off as somewhere we couldn’t take her.

you wouldn’t have had to do any of those things to teach her to be calm.. there are other ways that don’t involve any of these things..

i think your system works for you, but it has limitations, like on the beach it is only distracting her, you are never able to break her out of that excited state enough for her to choose to the display the calm behaviour that you want in order to stay longer.

I've got a family member who does the same as you with her dog, but the next time she sees something exciting it’s the same thing again, distract reward, distract reward.. it doesn’t stop her getting excited and some walks she spends the whole time distracting her dog, it’s exhausting to watch to be fair but it’s her choice to make.

imo dogs do better when they know what behaviours you want and don’t want and have the freedom to work within those parameters.

But you’re never training them to do literally nothing, which is what you’d be doing if you trained them not to do something.

thats not for you - leave
dont jumo up - off or sit, depending on what you want.
stop tearing round like a bat out of hell while I put my shoes on because it gets in my way - bed, lie down, wait, sit… whatever.

and so on

Even if you mean stop and stay still, you’re still actually training them to do that.

Cool idea, but I doubt she'd be fooled.

She's all about scent and movement, though real fur gets her going too. I've tried fake pheasant scent. That was a waste of money.

The problem with your family member isn’t that she’s doing positive training it’s that she’s not training anything… distracting would be a short term management solution while you train the behaviour you want.

i think your system works for you, but it has limitations, like on the beach it is only distracting her, you are never able to break her out of that excited state enough for her to choose to the display the calm behaviour that you want in order to stay longer.

I don’t think I said that? We have been able to build up the time on beaches from 0 minutes to 2 hours hunting for seaglass. We break her out of the excited state by giving her a Job, so she knows the expectations.

Genuinely, how would you approach it? What method would you prefer that works much more quickly than a Pattern game? If it’s negative then that’s fine, I’m not going to judge anyone else’s training method. But telling her No! isn’t a solution for this dog and any physical pain or discomfort is not something I’ll ever do, even if it meant peaceful beach strolls for the next 10 years (which it wouldn’t, it would be a betrayal of the contract I have with her, that I’ll guide her but never hurt her).

I have to say that on walks in all other environments she is excellent. Cafes, pubs, farmers’ markets, Lakeland towns…….she is amazing. Just a bag of nonsense on the beach, probably due to unfamiliarity and/or allowed too much freedom on our nearest beach when she was a puppy so we are having to unpick that behaviour from scratch. Our fault entirely.

@sandyhappypeople yes you have - you've made several comments about how every badly behaved dog you know is like that because their owners only use positive training.

Except you then go on to describe doing it yourself

Any training method will fail if the owners aren’t consistent and don’t put the time and effort in.

The problem with your family member isn’t that she’s doing positive training it’s that she’s not training anything… distracting would be a short term management solution while you train the behaviour you want.

Exactly.

I'm not sure why positive only training is being blamed for poor behaviour when the reality is that these owners aren't actually doing any training at all.

But you’re never training them to do literally nothing, which is what you’d be doing if you trained them not to do something.

But you are.. With kindness, I think this is the bit that people are failing to comprehend, you are teaching the dog what behaviour is acceptable and more importantly what is not acceptable, and forging a bond based on trust, if you've done it successfully a dog will work within those parameters because it understands the rules.

They know what to leave and what to go after, they know when they are allowed to run and when they should stay with you, they know not to bark at passing dogs/cars/people, because you've taught them that they aren't a threat, they know not to jump up people because that behaviour is rude, there are so many facets of behaviour that need to be taught, but once they understand it IME that remains there forever and they will be happy calm dogs.

They may push the boundaries now and again, but you've always got the original training and words/actions to use which they understand.

For instance, I've trained my dogs to walk calmly beside me on a walk off lead, unless I give them a command to run off and explore, then they get recalled back once I need them to come back. so now they just walk with me unless told otherwise.. I'm not constantly micromanaging them .. heel, heel, heel.. as that is not enjoyable for me personally, I want my dogs to enjoy their walk as much as I do and have the freedom to decide as much or as little as they want to do.

I've had dogs all my life, all different breeds and temperaments, and have three now and while positive reinforcement is a big part, I've never used distraction/redirection as a technique, as I personally don't think it helps the dog to understand what you need from it.

My toddler on the other hand is a different story...

I’m going to go at this the other way…

Which bits of that do you think aren’t in positive training?

@sandyhappypeople but every single thing you have described is positive training

You seem to think distractions are a method of training, they’re not they’re just an interruption.

I use a distraction to teach new dogs to leave my cat alone, they’re on a longline, cat comes in the room I give them food, using the longline to make sure they’re at me with the food instead of going, ooh, wassat?

But I’m doing that because the dog has no relationship with me, often no training at all and no commands, sometimes not even a name and no idea I even want it to do anything at all, ever.

It’s a basic starting point so they never get to practise chasing or harassing the cat.

I then start training it to do what I want, which is ignore the cat, it’ll take a few different bits of training, including sit, recalls and leave and some time until they work out that the end goal is them ignoring the cat and then I no longer have to micro manage them.

Both my current dogs and all the previous dogs she’s outstayed and outlived have learned fairly quickly that they’ve to leave her be…with no stress to her or them.

Which bits of that do you think aren’t in positive training?

Positive reinforcement only - which is what is being described by OP,* doesn't teach the dogs what you don't want, it focusses on what you do *want, and normally includes ignoring bad behaviour or managing the dogs environment so they are unable to choose to do the wrong thing, or distracting them to do something else instead, which can then be praised positively.. IMO they are never really learning what not to do, and if done slightly incorrectly can even learn to do the bad behaviours to get a reward.

I use positive reinforcement, obviously, but I will actively correct my dogs for behaviours that I don't want too, I will use my body language to block, and will use a specific tone and hand gestures, during phrases or sayings like 'Ah!' or 'leave', I will remove a dog out of the room if it won't be calm, there's no need to hit or shout but as well as rewarding my dogs for good behaviours I want my dogs to be able to fail and be corrected so they know what is right and what is wrong, and what behaviour is expected of them.

but manners or sense around bikes/horses not well developed enough to let her off.
We could have shouted at her, put her on a cheese wire slip lead and yanked her in repeatedly until our strength and overbearingness stopped that behaviour. We could also have written it off as somewhere we couldn’t take her.
What we did was stick with a Pattern Game (based around scattered treats and the command ‘Find It!’). Now all we need is the command occasionally if something particularly exciting is happening

The flaw is, you never took your dog out of that exited state. All you did is replace one excitement with another.

Your dog will always display exited behaviour in that place and needs an outlet rather than having learnt that a bike/ horse/ other dogs are off limits. And beeing cool & calm is what's needed.

So when you go to a new exiting place, the pattern starts again. What if you don't have any treats on you?

Teaching your dog the firm No command and using it when he wants to go off and chaise or investigate, a horse for example, is far more effective in the long run. Because next time he sees a horse, he will remember its no to chasing that one, instead of getting all excited for the treats game.

I am not sure why people are so against saying a sharp firm no to a dog. There is nothing scary about it it's one syllable in a relatively low voice. It won't have a departmental effect on your dog. It's just a tool to stop them doing something dangerous and cuts out unnecessary time wasting.

@sandyhappypeople body blocking and teaching commands like leave or off are all part of positive training though

And saying ‘no’ in an assertive tone? And physically removing a dog from the room if it is failing to comply with a request? Is that positive training?

The issue is I think, that you’re misunderstanding what positive training is tbh.

Yes as far as possible you set them up to succeed, but you can’t manage the entire world.

Sometimes managing the environment is putting them out of the room to stop them getting to decide to be wee gits.

Sometimes you do have to interrupt a behaviour physically.

I say no all the time, I just don’t expect dogs to know what it means because it’s a real vague word, but you know, sometimes that’s the noise that comes out.

But if they’re I don’t know - about to roll in something disgusting and what comes out is a loud no!!!! It’s an interrupter, they recognise I’m going to get them to do something and I can then recall them. (I mean ideally I’d have seen them get interested in it and given a leave command, but assuming I missed that point)

None of that sort of stuff is going against positive training.

Expecting a dog to know that no means no because you said it aggressively enough - even though this time you mean don’t roll, last time you meant stop, the time before that you meant drop… or adding in something negative to reinforce what you’re trying to teach them wouldn’t be positive training. But I’m pretty sure that’s not what you’re on about?

@sandyhappypeople it would depend how you do it 🤷‍♀️

But your posts just seem incredibly contradictory - in one breath you're saying positive training is ineffective and then in the next you're describing how you use it on your dogs, lol.

Any training will be ineffective if the owners don't practise it properly.

I’m not sure what’s being lost in translation here. Pattern games, Find It in our case, take my dog out of her excited state. She stops focussing on the Thing, whatever it is, it takes seconds and when she refocuses it is on me, not the Thing.

”No” doesn’t mean anything on its own. It’s just a word. “no” to what?If I say it angrily, what is the dog anticipating I’m going to do as a follow up? Hit it? Shout louder?

An action, on the other hand “Find it……wait…….sit…….lie down……..heel……”. is a positive thing.

I always have treats on me. Even when my dog isn’t with me, bit like poo bags. If by any chance I didn’t, Find It works without them. It now means Hey, let’s explore this area/my hand! I barely need to use it. It was just an example of positive training - Do This! rather than Don’t Do That!

You wouldn’t be able to tell my dog had been trained using that method, because she walks by my side, she checks in with me, she’s calm and settled. On the rare occasions she isn’t (very rare) it’s a redirect and a reset which takes a second.

I’m not contradicting myself at all, you’re just not comprehending, I’ve never said positive training is ineffective.. but imo positive training only is ineffective.. I’ve said it 10 times, you’re just ignoring it so you can argue -and pull silly confused faces for some reason.

positive reinforcement imo should be a part of balanced dog training, not a complete training method.

the reason I think people are misunderstanding is because any actions that are aversive like blocking, no commands and physically removing a dog (which are negative consequences) are actually part of balanced dog training.. NOT ‘positive reinforcement only’ training.

so if you do any of those things you’re actually doing balanced dog training (positive and negative consequences) but calling it positive dog training.. No wonder you’re confused.

I think a lot of the misunderstanding here comes from thinking you can train a dog only using positive reinforcement. You can't. It's not actually possible to only ever interact with a another individual using only PR. Inevitably, you use NR (negative reinforcment), NP (negative punishment) and sometimes even PP (positive punishment).

Remember, positive does not mean good. It means addition. Negative does not mean bad, it means subtraction. Positive punishment is the addition of something the dog doesn't want (a harsh word). Negative reinforcement is the subtraction of something the dog doesn't want (removal of the lead at the start of a free run).

It's the DOG that decides what is reinforcement and what is punishment. We guess, but it's the dog's individual prefefences and goals that determine which category our actions fall in.

e.g. If a greet a dog that walks up to me calmly - that's probably PR (assuming the dog wants to be greeted). If I then ignore him for jumping up, that's NP. I have removed something he wants (my attention) to get him to stop a behaviour (punishment).

If I ask him to come here and then wash his ears out, he is being Positively Punished for coming to me (he is getting something he doesn't want which is making him less likely to do the behaviour again).

If he barks and I look at him, depending on the dog that may be a PR or a PP. It depends on whether or not my gaze is something he wants or doesn't.

We use all 4 all the time. We attempt to use the magic 5th which is an entirely neutral repsonse - but this is rarely what we achieve, just because we cannot control all the elements.

FWIW I think very few dogs understand the concept of the word 'no'. I think you could say the word 'cod fish' in the same tone of voice and get the same reaction. I think it is the tone of voice that is the PP. If you then remove the dog from the room, that is NP and probably a bit of PP thrown in.

i.e. the dog no longer gets to stay with the humans and we assume that's what they would prefer = something has been removed that they want = NP. And they've been manhandled which they probably don't really want = PP.

Anyway, I'm droning on now. Where I was trying to get to was the point that everyone training a dog is using all four tools, even when they don't actively mean to. It's worth being conscious of that because there ARE times your dog is being punished in some way no matter whether you think you are using positive training or not. As humans, I think our moral duty is to recognise it and ensure it happens as little as needed and as mildly as needed.

I’ve worked with a few positive only trainers, because I do like to collect the dogs with issues 😐

They mostly use positive reinforcement, with the odd bit of taking away positive stuff… which technically means if you’re looking at the operant conditioning quadrants there’s no such thing as a purely positive trainer.

What they mean by purely positive is you’re not going into the aversive or punishment stuff. Balanced trainers use all 4.

It's worth being conscious of that because there ARE times your dog is being punished in some way no matter whether you think you are using positive training or not.

My dog would agree, as she is not allowed to swim across to Denmark or steal other dogs’ tennis balls