Beyond the Click

We heart clicker training
My dog Lila is a great fan of the clicker.  We use it for shaping, and make much more rapid progress eliciting precise, unusual movements.  I stay silent during clicker work, and a minimal amount of eliciting the correct answer.  I think, for her, the clicks provide a certain sense of independence, compared to the Lila-patter I use for encouraging her.  (I anthropomorphize shamelessly, I know, but it is my belief that the affinity of the two species hinges on the similarity of our social hierarchy, value system, and affective responses.)  I would describe myself as pro-clicker training, and even one step further, pro-marker training.

Did clicker training fail Tilikum?
As I understand it, the equivalent of the clicker (the whistle) is the tool of choice for training marine mammals, such as orca.  I expect that the recent death of the SeaWorld trainer will be cited as the ineffectiveness of such training.  And, I partly agree with the idea.  Training, of ANY sort, including traditional, e-collar, and other training does not make play, randomly volunteered behaviors, predation, or aggression inevitable. Given that this animal has killed two other individuals, I suspect a strong case could be made for this being predatory aggressive behavior.

Brains undergo natural selection for the specific behaviors in which they will engage
Eliciting predatory, aggressive, or just random acts resulting from boredom, frustration, anxiety, or psychological breakdown caused by prolonged exposure to the brain chemicals such affective states release is a simple matter of lifestyle.  

Although the killer whales & other marine life are touted as being trained by "force-free" methods, I take issue with this description.  These animals do not willingly arrive each morning to participate in this training program.  They have no choice or control over their living conditions. Physical force keeps these wild animals trapped in tiny pools.

While the practice of keeping dogs and other domesticated animals has resulted in a kind of natural selection for brains that can tolerate to some degree the type of (or, compared to wild life, lack of) stimulation associated with confinement, the brains of creatures that Nature alone selects for must not only tolerate but crave long periods of travel, seeking, stalking, chasing, killing, and consuming prey.  Occasionally, the brain demands reproductive-related behaviors.  I don't know enough about orcas to know if they have pods or territories, social interactions, play, defense of social ingroup or territory..., but if they do, those concepts demand certain behaviors from a killer whale.

While I am no expert, I do know that whatever they do in the wild, whatever capacities Nature has selected killer whales to perform:  those behaviors does not strongly resemble swimming around a tank for 20 years, taking fish from a human hand, leaping through hoops, carrying humans on their snouts, or any of the other show business they are being "asked" to do.  "Do you want to jump through a hoop and eat fish?  Or would you rather starve?"  Force-free?  I do use force in training dogs, and I call it what it is. 

But it generates interest and raises funds!
Our society as a whole has become disconnected from the natural world.  Could it be a result of believing that the "cute" are valuable, and the "scary" are not?  Killer whale.  Shark.  Koala.  Crocodile.  Could these ideas result from exposing children, not to the reality, but to an artificiality?  Can humans not be encouraged to be come connoisseurs of wild creatures being, behaving, exactly as they are designed by Nature to do?

Could these animals not be confined and displayed for human education and enjoyment for only a short period of time and re-released?

Could their willing cooperation in a seaside training program not be obtained if they were permitted to come and go as they pleased?  Can a reliable recall from freedom, of the type that most dog owners face as part of life, simply not be taught using reinforcers alone?

The Rejected Affective
Beyond behaviorism, there is a messy, difficult to observe, and all too real affective (emotional) domain, which no amount of whistles and fish, clicks and treats, can change. We cannot train the feelings out of an animal -- including humans. We can teach management, we can provide outlets, but we are powerless to force, "reinforce", encourage, discourage, or "punish" feelings, as if they are deliberate, occurring at the beckoning of the feeler.

We failed Tilikum, but we don't have to fail our dogs
Beyond training sessions, wild things and even "domesticated" ones, like dogs and humans, need a "life".  They crave the behaviors and experiences their brains are genetically "wired" to find chemically rewarding ("it just feels so right to gulp a seal") and often stumble upon other behaviors and experiences that feel just as good as a part of their exposure to environment. The sensations that arise as a result of the release of these chemicals are "intrinsic motivators".

Knowing that the vast majority of canine genetics were selected to do work, not for entertainment purposes, it is important to recognize that providing the right tasks means releasing "feel-good" brain chemicals in your dog.  Happy, contented dogs are least likely to engage in the behaviors we humans dislike.

But, to dog trainers, who sometimes tend to see training interactions as a dog's only need, I remind you of what you already know: apart from tasks, dogs can need social interaction, exploration of new physical environments, and, yes, freedom.  As trainers who enjoy working with animals, there is a tendency to assume that what we enjoy, the animal enjoys, too.  Trainers would be happy to train all day, morning to night!  The trainees, however, may or may not share those sentiments.

• Be sensitive to your dog's interest level during training sessions
• Manage your own interest level and emotions -- Quit while you both want more!
• Break or change up training sessions at least every 15 minutes Some may need more frequent changes
• Allow at least some sniffing on walks (but don't force it!)
• Provide sufficient freedom -- off-leash exploratory opportunities (amount varies by dog)
• Provide social opportunities -- even if you have to use a muzzle
• Provide access to tasks or sports the dog enjoys
• Address behaviors caused by anxiety or frustration: barking (more than 3 barks or continuous barking), pacing, circling, digging, lunging, leaping, destruction, etc.

Diamond needs a chance to shine

This adorable pup was scheduled for euthanasia because of her medical needs.  Hit by a car, she has a broken jaw,a broken front leg and a bruised pelvis.  Mary Illiano, of Mid-Atlantic Bully Buddies couldn't let that happen.  Diamond is safe from euthanasia, but will need a new home. 

To contact Mid-Atlantic Bully Buddies about Diamond or any of the other great dogs in their care, e-mail midatlanticbullybuddies@yahoo.com.

Positive Human Training

For me, "positive" is emphasizing the good, the desirable, the valuable.  Spending more time encouraging what should be done than correcting, cautioning against, resisting, or attacking. 

When I analyze any dog/human social or training interaction, I find that it is sometimes harder to find what the human is doing right than it is to find what the dog is doing right!  So why bother?  Positive dog trainers know the overwhelming effectiveness of finding, emphasizing, reinforcing what is right.  Overlooking, minimizing, replacing unwanted behaviors. What's good for the dog... well, if it works to teach a simpler mind, it will definitely work for the more complicated!  Whether teaching dogs or humans, good practice is good practice.

Most humans tend to be motivated by genuine attachment to their pets, even if they are at a loss as to how to elicit the behavior that is essential for the dog's participation in human society.  Most people inappropriately using prong collars, e-collars, yelling, hitting, choking, and other harsh tactics get sucked into the idea of "combat" with their pets; these owners are not hateful monsters!  By demonizing individuals, we create their resistance to our advice.  And, if what we say is true, that those tools aren't going to work when mistakenly and inappropriately used, those individuals will sooner or later be receptive to what we have to say. 

As positive trainers, we know that an attitude of combat creates resistance.  Listening without judgment, demonstrating alternatives, encouraging good decisions, and supporting our clients is the human equivalent of our approach to dogs.  Although we'd like to steer both away from making bad decisions, establishing our role as supportive partner is critical to making the changes we'd like to see occur in general dog training practice.  Trainers make mistakes.  Owners make mistakes.  Dogs make mistakes.  Fortunately, all of us are capable of learning from our mistakes. 

Focusing on the right answers is the key to creating receptive, willing, cooperative, and non-resistant partners, no matter what their species.  Teach humans like you teach dogs!

Positive Hypocrisy?

Are good, effective teaching practices for dogs equally good, effective teaching practices for humans?

Most "positive" dog trainers would say, "Yes!"  And I am one of them.

Are there dog training practices that are risky, both to the outcome for the dog and the human?

Yes.

How do we discourage their use?

The use of poor and risky dog training practices is a behavior I would like to see disappear, but I disagree with the premise of the question.

How do we encourage the use of safer, less risky dog training practices?

THIS is the right question!

Are strategies like personal attacks, philosophical attacks, and "pushing for acceptance" modeling the behaviors we want to see used in teaching?


Don't we teach that aggression and force are ways to create resistance?  And don't we seek to persuade, to lead, to set a good example?

By "pushing for acceptance", are we suggesting that there are people who would resist training through easier, more effective, and less risky methods?  

Dog owners I meet (and, granted, our perceptions are all shaped by the "populations" we meet) are generally reluctant to use the more objectionable methods, but feel as if they have no alternative.  Or, they live in fear of what will happen if those methods are not used.  Few people I meet find the techniques I dislike highly desirable.

I have certainly met resistant individuals.  Generally, these individuals are "experts", whose ego and family tradition are at stake.  Rejecting "the way it's always been done" is to eat crow, and turn one's back on one's family or tradition.  For these people, creating an opportunity to gradually transition from primarily punishment-based to primarily reward-based training is crucial. 

What are the strategies we know to be most effective?

Emphasizing the desirable.  Listening.  Acknowledging.  Communicating clearly.  Patience.  Persuasion.  Gradual transition.  Show, not tell.

"That Doesn't Look Like Training", the sequel

This Christmas, my 7-year-old lab/Weim Lila was first introduced to the puzzling human behavior called "cross-country skiing" by my brother, who she adores.

Lila finds it prudent to be extra-aware when encountering the stiffness, the unpredictable nature of inanimate objects.  Natural, organic objects move, they telegraph their intentions, and any threats.  Inanimate objects can suddenly come at you from any direction, sometimes at high speed.  Being careful has a great record at keeping Lila out of fights with inanimate objects-- 100% of the times she has done it, she has not had a fight with an inanimate object.

It was fascinating to watch her follow him, in the snow.  While he moved forward, he & the collection of objects attached to him exhibited a predictable pattern, and she stayed quite close.  When he stopped to chat with me, however, a few ducks and a greater comfort distance was necessary, as the poles moved in a completely new pattern.

I wondered how much she was learning.  I acted -- as I mostly do with Lila -- played it cool, like nothing was wrong.  I gave a few words of encouragement.  I was proud and impressed, but had no goal in mind.  If she hated cross country skiers, if she ran from all of them, for the rest of her life, I can deal with that.  I won't stop her.  Run as far as you need to make yourself comfortable, Lila.  I'll be there for you. 

Today, we encountered her second lifetime exposure.  Fortunately, she was on the retractable leash.  Her ears perked up as she spotted the couple.  (Lila mostly ignores people.  Smelling wildlife is much more interesting.)  She stood still and watched them.  Even though they were approaching her directly, she simply watched with interest.

I walked to the end of the leash and stopped briefly, waiting for her to lose interest.  Freezing and tired after our walk, I headed for the car.  The skiers were headed for their car!  Right by ours!  She wagged on over to check them out.  I actually called her back to me, laughing and chastising her nosy-ness, because I didn't want her to get so brave she scared herself.   Sniffing cross country skiers?  She's out of control. 

Teaching your dog effectively is about understanding your dog.  Understanding is the product of listening, observing, paying attention, with suspended judgment.  Trust your dog to show you what kind of support she needs.  Don't fall into the trap of thinking that your dog needs you to show the same kind of social support from you in every circumstance.  And never, ever underestimate what your dog is capable of learning!

NIMBY!

Northeast Philadelphia man, John William Fleet III. Charged with animal cruelty for allegedly pouring rubbing alcohol over a puppy and setting it on fire. The 5-month-old pit bull mix was burned. Its neck, ears, whiskers were burned off, and one of its corneas was seared. The animal also had been burned repeatedly with a cigarette.  It may be disfigured, and possibly blind in one eye.

Here is the addition I wrote:

"As PA's population shrinks, state revenues are increasingly dependent on sources of income like tourism. Going soft on animal abusers in a city's whose reputation is already besmirched by the employment of convicted animal abuser Michael Vick, not to mention a state known as the Puppy Mill Capital of the East? Is this the image of Philadelphia and of PA you want to present? The actions you undertake or fail to undertake will strengthen or weaken the accuracy of this image."

Hey, wonder why people are leaving this coal-burning dump?  

Ice skating? Isn't this blog about dogs?

I can ice skate.  I'm never as good as I want to be, so how well I skate at any given moment just doesn't really occur to me.  I do it purely for the feel-good chemicals.  For me, ice skating is the thing that just feels so right.  Even when it's really painful, it makes me feel fantastic.  I have been mistaken for a pro, which makes me giggle.  I'm far from being a pro.  I think it's that my passion that shows when I skate. 

So, last night on the ice, I watched a skater work on alternating forwards and backwards 3-turns.  I never criticize or give advice when it looks like someone is having fun, since FUN is the point, but she looked frustrated and worried, and I knew what she was doing wrong.  I skated by (ludicrously wobbly, as I was wearing hockey skates that are too painful to lace up. Long story.), gave some non-intimidating eye contact (yup, just like with a dog), and she said, "You're a figure skater, aren't you?" (Uh, yes, though you can hardly tell today.)

"Yup," I said, realizing after I skated off that I had failed to actually wait for the question.  "Lead with the shoulder.  Your rotation should be head, then shoulders, then hips, and let your foot follow.  You are starting from the feet, which is why it looks and feels forced.  Have fun!"  I smiled and skated off.

I surreptitiously watched her.  She caught me a few times, and I smiled, continuing to work on my own stuff.  She was getting it, though it was certainly not yet perfect.  Learning starts with theory first; it takes a bit of time to get everything you know in your head to find its way out of the body to practice.  I know she's got enough material to work with, she understood what I said, and she's not afraid to approach me again if she has more questions.  

And, it didn't occur to me that I did anything so far out of the ordinary until I watched a mother with her 5-yr-old daughter.  The mother is clearly an accomplished skater.  She is attempting to teach the girl a spin.  (In my opinion, this is not only a waste of time, but instills bad habits, as young children are physically incapable of holding correct body positions, and so are forced to compensate.  Physical compensation becomes cognitive bad habit to break later.  Another long story.)  What struck me, though, besides my issue with pushing young children beyond the limits of their bodies and coordination, is that the woman criticized EVERY repetition.  Not once did she smile at the girl, not once did she highlight what the daughter had done correctly.  It appeared that neither the daughter nor the mother were having fun.  How tragic!

It suddenly became very, VERY clear why figure skating clubs are not popular.  It's hard enough to deal with the intellectual complexity (timing, coordination), the physical demands, and, well, the pain (Things that look pretty are often painful.).  Add constant external reminders underlining every imperfection.  Who wouldn't deliberately choose to participate in a soup of pain, criticism, insecurity, competition, and thinly-veiled frustration -- even emotional aggression?  Ooh, yay!  Let's get kids in an environment like that!

Success at something difficult is its own reward.  Teach a kid, a dog, a human to do something that they know is difficult.  Help them to actually experience success?  You've got interest.  My grandmother taught 5th grade for something like 60 years, and she always claimed that, "Where there's interest, there's capacity."  (She noted that kids who "couldn't" memorize a multiplication table could recite stats for every player of their favorite ball team.)  When frustration, confusion, and exhaustion set in, interest provides an allure, a drive to continue, with focus, that NO force of will can match. 

People really think that telling someone what they are doing wrong is "teaching".  Any idiot can say, "That's not right."  Someone who knows what they are talking about can tell you what you SHOULD do instead, and identify what you DID do correctly, without getting hung up on the mistakes.   It started to remind me of dog training. Teaching is not about attacking errors, retroactively, but leading the exercise, proactively.

A bit later, my young friend was attempting some jumps.  She did a beautiful jump-- straight, plenty of height, plenty of rotation, very well centered.  "Good!" I shouted before I could stop myself.  Yeah, she two-footed the landing.  Who cares?  Work on that later.

And there I was, training dogs again.  I knew:  She should stop now.  The probability that she will do TWO jumps in a row that are that good?  Very low.  After a very successful trial on a difficult task (low probability of success) is always time to stop.  Stop while the brain can review the successful event.  Reflect back on what WORKS.  She had found what works.  It's difficult, because success makes you want to continue to work at something that causes you that good-feeling rush of success, whether you are the skater, the coach, the handler, or the dog.  But you should. 

She continues to skate around for a while.  She attempts the same jump again, and it's massively inferior.  She looks disappointed.  "It's ok," I say, smiling, "You should have stopped after the one before. That one was so good," doing my best to keep her brain focused on what DOES work, interrupting an emotional circuit of self-criticism and frustration.

Toward the end of the session, she asks if I am a coach.  She seems disappointed to find out I am not. 
"You're a really good teacher, " she says, "You should be.  Thanks for your help."  Color me warm and fuzzy.  I'm not immune to the feeling of success!

Less is More -- Should "COME" always be rewarding?

It's a common idea:  100% reward schedule is the most effective.  It makes sense to a human brain.  If I know I am always going to get something versus taking a chance that I might not?  Which will make me respond more quickly?

It's a typical and understandable human viewpoint, since our brains look for patterns, not probabilities.  Dog (and most animal) brains use probabilities.  On a multiple choice test, a human would look for a pattern, such as the correct answer to the question!  A dog would pick whatever was the most commonly used right answer on the last test, say, answer B, and answer all the questions with that answer.  (Actually, I do suspect that some dogs have pattern recognition capabilities, and I need to do research on this.  Or someone does.  Go for it, anyone who cares to "steal" this idea and run with it!)

The "variable reinforcement schedule", where only a certain percentage of correct responses are rewarded, in a random fashion, has been supported as most effective via thorough research. "Always", 100% of correct responses get rewarded, is a CONSTANT reinforcement schedule, and less effective. 

Why is it most effective?  Well, here's where I am out on a limb.  *crossing my fingers for acceptance to grad school -- Let me in, people, I got work to do!*  Research would be necessary to say that this is fact. 


A variable reinforcement schedule (NOT getting something every single time) may activate the emotion that Temple Grandin refers to as "seeking".  "Seeking" is one of the primary emotions she identifies, and dopamine is involved.  Dopamine is the brain chemical responsible for making things "just feel so right" -- some might call dopamine a reward your brain gives itself.  By withholding reward on some trials, we enable the activity to become a seeking activity, and therefore an even more rewarding activity.

The question is, what level of reward, percentage-wise, will activate seeking WITHOUT activating frustration?  Again, research is necessary, but I'd expect to find it varies by dog, although there may be commonality among groups -- breed, behavior tendencies, "IQ", or even personality type. 

What is your experience with your dog's recall?  Have you had different recall experiences with different dogs?  What about with different training approaches?

Organic Milk Appeals to a Conscience-driven Target Market

Some of you know that I am a recent vegan.  Not because I find the practice of milking cows or takings eggs intrinsically wrong, but as a boycott of the current production practices.  Having found a sick cow whose rear feet had been tied with twine and dragged on her side by a truck to a hidden corner of the farm, and left for 6 hours that I know of, without being milked, and without being able to stand.  I can't quite get the image out of my mind.  Every ice cream, sour cream, every drop of milk... I see her poor face, her spooked reaction to my touch (cows generally adore me -- dunno why).  My former nickname was "The Dairy Princess", because I primarily subsisted on milk and milk products.  Now, I just can't.

Here is the note I included in the letter I sent via the ASPCA website:

"Simple economics.  The target market for organic milk are people of conscience, who are willing to pay more for a product we find superior.  Getting consumers spending more money for a domestically produced product benefits producers, consumers, and the economy at large."

Click the title of this post if you'd like to send a letter of your own.