“There is no zealot like a convert.” It’s one of those bits of conventional wisdom that just happens to ring pretty true. A dozen or so years ago I learned some pretty important things about dogs and it changed me. For a short time, it changed me into something of an evangelist. Once I gained an understanding of behavioural science, reinforcement-based training, and what we know about the cognitive abilities of dogs, I suddenly saw, with impressive clarity, every single mistake and bad decision I had ever made with every dog I had ever owned.
Like most new converts to a new way of thinking, my ability to see mistakes and bad decisions regarding dogs and training did not stop at my own conduct. Each trip to the dog park, every weekend at a dog agility trial, each visit with a friend who owned a dog provided more opportunities for me to see that I was not alone in “doing it wrong.” Armed with my new-found knowledge, there seemed to be no end to the errors and problems that surrounded me. If that sounds really annoying, it probably was. Fortunately it didn’t last long. I worked hard to put it all into perspective.
Radical change of perspective
At an animal training conference I attended many years ago, I heard author and animal trainer Karen Pryor describe her experience meeting reinforcement-trained horses for the first time. She described them as a “completely different animal” from the horses she had met to that point. The facial features, posture, movement, the very “being” of these animals seemed fundamentally different to her. It was a perfect description of my own change in perception about dogs. It was like one of those crazy optical illusions where you see the picture one way and it suddenly changes, you see a different image that was previously hidden from you. And from that point on, you can’t not see it anymore!
A change like that can hit you on many levels. There are new questions to be answered. There are new answers to be incorporated into your thinking. There are new ways of doing and, ultimately, a new way of being. In my case, a new way of being with dogs. It doesn’t come without it’s downside, however. New knowledge also meant I could very clearly see what I had done wrong in the past. Because I had come to this change in thinking while we were raising a new dog, my mistakes were literally staring me in the face. Each time that dog looked at me, the grief and guilt over my bad decisions was almost overwhelming.
The power of guilt
Sigmund Freud believed that “guilt” was a state of internal conflict about something you believe is “wrong.” For me, everything I believed about dogs and dog training was “right” until one day it wasn’t anymore. Looking back at my relationships with dogs in this new context left me with a lot of inner conflict. Psychologists have long known that guilt brings with it a need for atonement and forgiveness. The victims of our actions must forgive us our wrongs in order to relieve our guilt. In the case of our dogs, that’s not an easy proposition. They can’t just tell us they forgive us.
I was fortunate in that I was able to get a sense of forgiveness relatively quickly in two important ways. First, the dog we were doing so badly with experienced a dramatic change of personality (for the better!) almost immediately after we started using reinforcement-based training. Secondly, we brought a new puppy into our lives and committed to using behavioural science and reinforcement training to bring her up. Both cases provided an overwhelmingly positive experience for both my wife and me. Perhaps, in retrospect, we might have been a little too positive about it all.
Evangelism
As I mentioned earlier, my efforts to learn as much as I can about modern animal training and canine science allowed me to see the human-dog relationship in a whole new light. But I wasn’t content to just explore my own relationships with dogs. I began to observe and take note of the problems in the relationships of the humans and dogs around me in my daily life. That began a short period of evangelism for me where I would enthusiastically offer observations, opinions, information, and advice to any and all dog owners within earshot. Unfortunately I was not particularly concerned whether the owner was interested or had solicited my input.
One day I was struck by another important realization. People who don’t know much about dogs or behavioural science still love their dogs very much. Sure they might have difficulties. They might have ineffective ways of training or dealing with their dogs. But that didn’t mean they didn’t love those dogs! They hadn’t had that same shift of perspective that I had and so, in their minds, they didn’t have that experience of feeling “wrong”; there was no guilt for them. They still felt like they were doing things “right” because of what they knew and understood.
That was an important realization for me. It changed me from an evangelist into a teacher. I no long felt that I had to “save” these dog owners from their state of being “wrong” on a moral level. I could teach them what I had learned. If I could give them the information that had changed my perspective, they would have an opportunity to change their perspective too. This wasn’t about morality or “right” and “wrong”, this was simply about more informed choices, better decisions.
The trap
Unfortunately there is a lot of folklore and misinformation about dogs and dog training. While I was feeling that evangelical fervor, it seemed that everywhere I looked there was some new bit of nonsense that I simply had to correct. The dog world seemed to be awash in ineffective, harsh, unnecessarily cruel practices all in the name of getting a dog to “behave properly.” It might have been easy to get stuck there. There are so many people doing so many questionable things to their dogs that there would scarcely be enough time in a day to address them all. But I got tired of looking for problems and got busy looking for answers.
Not everyone who comes to modern dog training can avoid that trap as quickly as I did. I came to my new perspectives before Facebook existed. Today the online world offers social networks like Twitter, Google+, Facebook, Quora, and many others where people can offer up and pick apart opinions, information, techniques, videos, and more. If I were so inclined, I could address all of the “wrongs” in dog training faster and on more fronts than ever before!
But where does that get me? Well, I get to have my say on such matters. But does anyone listen? I’m sure some do. I will get my share of “likes” and comments supporting my views. I’ll also get my share of opposing comments and views. But the online world allows me to limit who I associate with online. I can choose only those who share my point of view. A place where we can all huddle together and criticize all of those “wrong-doers” and wring our hands in dismay. It’s an easy place to get stuck, lamenting all that is wrong while never having to teach others what we know and helping them decide to change.
The danger of navel gazing
The real danger of that evangelical trap seems to be that it leads to nit-picking. It’s possible to become so involved in righting our past wrongs that we start to see everything as another form of the same wrong thinking that caused our guilt. For a short time I was looking so closely at dog training issues that I was unable to separate the important concepts from the fiddly little details. I began finding fault where none really existed.
It’s easy to be critical of things like shock collars and choke chains. These are tools that are frequently and easily misused to cause unnecessary pain and distress to dogs, often unintentionally. With a bit more thought we can be critical of certain leash walking techniques like using “leash corrections” to yank on a dog to stop them from pulling. No electricity or prongs involved but enough force to damage a dog’s windpipe if we do it hard enough or often enough. But then the arguments can get downright petty.
It has been suggested that using food in training can cause a dog to become aggressive even though we feed our dogs everyday without such danger. Recently I have seen articles suggesting that it can be dangerous to play too much with your dog because they won’t know enough to stop to take a break if they need it. Almost daily I see some comment or blog post taking a training or scientific concept to a ridiculous and impractical extreme just to prove that it is yet another way to harm dogs. Some days I just want it to stop. No more problems. Know more answers!
It’s a journey
I know from my own experience that I had to move from relative ignorance to understanding to advocacy to evangelism and then begin the road back to a more effective advocacy based on teaching those who are open to learn. I don’t have all the answers. I don’t know everything there is to know about dogs and training. But I’m trying to find out. And I’m happy to share what I’m learning and listen to what you might have to share as well.
What I am finding less and less time for is staring at the sins of the rest of the world as it relates to dogs. I don’t visit the latest shock-collar training web sites to post critical remarks. I don’t look for stories of inhumane treatment of dogs to share on my favorite Facebook groups. I don’t read blogs in order to find what’s wrong with that trainer’s particular approach to working with dogs. I look for the things I can add to my own body of knowledge. I look for those things that can make me a better dog trainer and better dog owner.
I understand that evangelical drive. I have been there myself. I understand the need to acknowledge all the things that we do to dogs that are harmful and unnecessary. I hope we can learn from those experiences. I hope that we can address such things and quickly find a way to use the information to make us better – as trainers, as dog owners, as human beings.
Until next time, have fun with your dogs!
Be sure to check out our Canine Nation ebooks in the Canine Nation store and Dogwise. Join our conversation on Facebook in the Canine Nation Forum!
The NEW Canine Nation ebook is now available –
“Relationships: Life with Dogs”
Photo credits –
Setter – /mrpunto copyright 2005 from Flickr
Beagle – Dan Buczynski copyright 2006 from Flickr
Kobi – Mark Sebastion copyright 2009 from Flickr
Looking – Tomi Tapio K copyright 2007 from Flickr
Recent Eric Brad CPDT-KA Articles:
- The Dog That Changed My Life
- Keeping Your Dog Informed
- Teaching Your Dog to Not-Behave
- The Simple Complexity of Dog Training
- What The Dog Wants
I would want to know how the horses Ms. Pryor was accustomed to were trained and how many she was referencing. Positively reinforced students are much better off than those taught with the threat of punishment but any training method that ignores the relationship between handler and student is not going to give as much as one that takes the individuals into account. I heard that Standard Poodles working on cancer detection are confused by the offer of food when they find disease. Rote reinforcement, Skinner Box style has it’s limits. Dogs I have met that were strictly clicker trained don’t think. They throw behaviors until they get a click, which is cute and fun but I want more. I want my dogs to work with me to solve problems. I get that by leaving the rules at the door. (I attended Karen Pryor Academy in MD 2010. I learned more there than in my entire course of study for a Master’s in Psych).
Horses trained traditionally vs. horses trained with R+. I have had three crossover horses in my barn. One has since died. None of them were harshly treated in the traditional world. However, all of them blossomed and their stress reduced because of R+ training.
It is not true that dogs that are trained strictly through R+ training don’t think. In fact, in your example, they’re thinking quite a lot. The problem is not R+ training. The problem is not putting those behaviors under stimulus control, that is on cue, so that they don’t offer behaviors off cue. Again, it’s not the problem of R+ training, it’s the application, or lack thereof, that is the problem.
And you haven’t left the rules at the door at all. In some way, on some level, you’re still using operant conditioning.
I’d be interested as well. . .Ms. Pryor is now a world-renowned dog trainer, and seeing those clicker trained horses was the beginning of one finger of her journey to enlightenment.
Eric,
I am only asking not judging this part of your article. I hear this statement a lot in Trainer circles and I don’t understand how it can be possible to use a shock collar or choke chain humanly?
(It’s easy to be critical of things like shock collars and choke chains. These are tools that, while they can be used humanely).
I am a cross over trainer like you. Please help me understand how we can use these devices humanly. I do understand that they are used incorrectly most of the time but even when used correctly how is that humane?
Thank you for your response:)
JT
Hi JT –
I think one of the things that gets lost in some discussions about the equipment we use with our dogs is how effective we are at communicating with them. Something I have struggled with in working with dog owners since crossing-over has been getting them to communicate effectively with their dogs. The confusion I sometimes see in relationships where the dog just isn’t understanding can escalate to its own kind of cruelty. The constant frustration must be terribly unpleasant for the dog regardless of the equipment being used.
Dog trainer Steve White has trained police dogs professionally and is sometimes invited to weekend workshops by shock collar manufacturers. Steve once told me that invariably 2 or 3 out of possibly 20 or 30 working dogs at these workshops will leave happier than when they arrived. He attributes this to the handlers being taught to be consistent and clear in their use of the shock collar. Yes, it’s punishment. But it is clear punishment that the dog can quickly learn to avoid with a skilled handler teaching them the desired behaviour.
The same could be said of prong collars or choke collars. A skilled handler who is an effective communicator could use these tools humanely to help their dog quickly learn to make correct choices to avoid the aversive stimulus. The choice of behaviour is still the dog’s and, used well, these tools can help the dog develop a sense of confidence and an ability to learn quickly. PLEASE NOTE: I said that this would be a scenario with SKILLED HANDLER!!! Incorrect or improper use of these tools is DANGEROUS!
Just because these tools CAN be effective does not mean that I believe that they are the best tools for the job. The potential for unintended behavioural fallout from these devices puts them on my DO NOT USE list! Skilled handlers should also have the ability to spot problems from behavioural fallout and would be able to address them. In the hands of someone not sufficiently skilled in dogs, training methods, behavioural science, and reading dogs these devices could cause a huge variety of behavioural problems ranging from a “shut down” dog to a dangerously aggressive dog. There are so many alternative methods for teaching dogs that do not have these risks of behavioural problems (e.g., clicker training, lure training, reward-based training, etc.). There are just better methods out there.
I believe that being “humane” to our dogs includes not frustrating them mentally and emotionally. It’s not just about physical discomfort. To be honest, I have seen cases where dogs have been very damaged behaviourally and had never been near a choke, prong, or shock collar. Repeated miscommunication, poorly timed reprimands, and just plain bad advice from “trainers” can create problems just as great as any of these collars.
I think we need to counsel dog owners to avoid anything that can potentially create problem behaviours or damage their relationship with their dogs. Equipment is one aspect of the equation. Methods, attitude, knowledge, and a willingness to communicate also play a very important role. Just as we wouldn’t hand a power saw to someone who is new to woodworking, I think we need to suggest the best tools for dog owners just learning to work with their dogs.
Hope that answers your question and thanks for reading!
Eric
Eric,
Thank you for your time and open minded explanation of your point of view. I know many Trainers that use shock collars/choke chains. Timing is essentially with any training but avoidance training even after your explanation about your views still reads inhumane to me. I don’t want my dogs/clients to have to avoid an unpleasant consequence in order to get the desired behavior. Why would we still use these tools when we now know it’s not necessary and has potential for fall out. As a Trainer I see fall out from these tools all the time even from the most respected of aversive based Trainers. I also don’t buy into every dog is different so they all require different tools to achieve results. They are now calling themselves Balanced Trainers when really they are still aversive Trainers. I agree that most Trainers are in it to really help dogs and their owners because they love dogs. I just wish there wasn’t such an avoidance to education in our field. I have been on both sides as like I said I use to train with these tools. I get frustrated with the disconnect and try not to contribute to it by arguing my views, sometimes though when I see a so called Trainer teaching a class with 8 German Shepherds on prongs or shock collars while she carries a horse crop and walks a clearly fearful pit around these dogs and whips or pops the choke if it even looks at one of the GS’s I cannot be silent. We need to learn to have compassion for fearful dogs and stop punishing them and what I am so clearly aware of is that most behaviors are based in FEAR. Most of the calls I receive from prospective clients describe to me fear based behaviors, dog/dog aggression, human/dog aggression, guarding, puppy/adult aggression, ect….
Okay off to walk my four dogs in the full moon light:)
Thank you
Yes, why would we use a tool that could cause discomfort when tools that won’t will work? We shouldn’t. But you might be missing what the author said in another post. Many handlers are not aware if a dog is feeling discomfort or not. This is the real doorway to mistreatment. If a dog is confused and we continue to deprive him of information or a path to a reward, even if that reward is the end of training** we are possibly mistreating the dog. Doesn’t matter what tool is in use.
**I would hope that no trainer would ever set up conditions that made the end of training the reward. But sometimes it happens by accident. And that’s the real shame of poor training techniques.
FWIW, I have clicker-savvy dogs who have been positively trained for competition in obedience, agility, rally and musical freestyle. But many years ago when my young male dog decided that he would rather run off and pee on things than come when called, regardless of the reward I had on offer, I turned to a shock collar. I worked with a careful professional (now a well-known positive trainer), and used the lowest level that was effective (and bought an expensive enough collar that it could be adjusted in small increments). I could have stopped doing anything off leash with that dog, or kept him on a long line for as long as it took to fix the behavior, but my experience with a dedicated bolter is that you could be doing that for a long time. The shock collar allowed me to be calm, enforce at a distance and teach my dog what he needed to be safe. He, in turn, got to continue doing the off leash activities that he enjoyed. I haven’t used the collar on him in many years, haven’t used it on any of my other dogs, and hope that I never feel the need to use it again. But I don’t regret doing it. It was an efficient solution to a very dangerous problem. And it actually improved my relationship with the dog, since it both meant that we could do fun, off-leash things together, and that I didn’t get in an anxiety-fueled fury when my dog ran off to potentially get himself killed by a car.
I attended the Michael Ellis School for dog trainers and asked this very question. The explanation I received was a revelation to me as were studies they referenced. I was told (and shown) that we need to remember that the use of equipment and whether or not it is humane or not is in the eye of the beholder. In this case the beholder is always the dog and understanding the drives and personalities of each animal
is key. For some dogs it’s more stressful to have a ball taken away or to continually fail than a quickly applied shock or pop off a prong collar. Studies have been done measuring he amount of cortisol and other stress-related hormones related to differing methods of punishment. The results were very interesting and although I believe in using less intense methods first, I will figuratively pull out the big guns when nothing else is working. I still don’t use shock collars at all because I haven’t encountered a case where it was necessary and I don’t feel my lack of experience in using them would make me a good candidate for their use. I do closely monitor the dog for stress (I video all sessions for review and carefully watch during sessions for signs of stress) when using a prong collar. I did not use prong collars at all until I was properly trained on the device. I hope this lends a different perspective-I used to feel the same as you.
I’m not home now so I can’t find the study but I believe it was specific to Malinois. Hope this helps!
I am often struck by the fervour of many trainers when it comes to avoiding stress in training juxtaposed against their poor understanding of the concept and inability to even assess it accurately in a dog right in front of them. So they end up partitioning every training tool and approach into “good” and “bad”, “humane” and “inhumane”, “compulsion” and “force free”, and this even begins to spread to behavioural indicators of arousal, which we know can actually be associated with a positive or a negative experience. As glad as I am that training dogs can be so much more compassionate and enjoyable for all parties these days, I am anxious that it not go too far. It’s possible to lose sight of quality of life in the desperate scramble to protect a dog from stress.
Agreed and well put.