# What is a "positive dog trainer"



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

There are many misconceptions about the term positive dog training. Generally speaking this term is a bit misleading. "Positve " dog trainers also use punishment. It is virtually impossible even if you tried, not to use punishment . I will try to find more on this as time is a problem right now. But here is one article that explains it a bit. http://www.dogstardaily.com/blogs/punishment-–-bad-word I hope I can find more on this as it is important.


----------



## atsilvers27 (Jul 5, 2011)

Thanks Dave. There is too much confusion with the proper training lingo vs. regular English language, and people are throwing around the term "positive only" or are being lectured to unnecessarily. Here's an article I found that kind of goes with yours.

http://www.dog-secrets.co.uk/who-is-a-positive-dog-trainer-not-me/

This has made it clearer for me, there is nothing wrong with saying "No" to a dog and then removing them from the area, if applicable.


----------



## LJS58 (Mar 23, 2012)

Thanks to both of you for posting the links. I like the term "ethical training" that was used in one of the articles. My Hav Joey is 5 months old. He's my first dog, so I'm really trying to learn about training. He just started in a really good puppy K, but it's all about what you do at home. 

The overly idealistic "positive dog training" training is sort of like the "hooray for everything" approach that many elementary schools have. I love to congratulate my kids, but it's unrealistic for them to grow up always expecting congratulations. It's the same for puppies. He gets lots of rewards, but he needs to earn them. When he doesn't, then he gets no response at all. Never negative, just no response. It seems to be working so far.


----------



## curly_DC (Nov 27, 2011)

I took this excerpt from the article Dave posted, 

"Telling a child that they won’t get any ice-cream until they stop their tantrum is Negative Punishment! Negative Punishment sounds terrible, but when it’s explained, it is of course is the ethical way to deal with that situation. Slapping the child to stop the tantrum is called positive punishment – this is the addition of an unpleasant stimulus in order to reduce a specific behaviour. Punishment has become such a bad word and I believe undermines people’s ability to truly understand how their dogs learn."

Okay, but, telling a child they WON'T get any ice cream until they stop their tantrum, sounds a lot like telling a child they WILL get ice cream when they stop their tantrum. That to me sounds like bribery with food. It doesn't sound like negative punishment at all. 

A negative punishment would be picking the child up and putting the child in time out (with no access to tv or toyrs), or leaving the store with the child where the child is throwing the tantrum (most parents won't do this b/c it's too much of a hassle). 

I don't ever really understand the harm of picking up a small child that is throwing a tantrum and rocking them gently to calm them down, and then putting them in time out. Unless the child is never hugged, I don't think that encourages more temper tantrums. I DO however think that giving a child ice cream if they stop the tantrum will encourage more of the same.  

See, none of this stuff is ever really that easy when explained by scientific methods, or when trying to draw similarities with raising children and training dogs. Maybe we should get away from the emotional connections we have to how we raise children with how we train dogs?


----------



## krandall (Jun 11, 2009)

curly_DC said:


> I took this excerpt from the article Dave posted,
> 
> "Telling a child that they won't get any ice-cream until they stop their tantrum is Negative Punishment! Negative Punishment sounds terrible, but when it's explained, it is of course is the ethical way to deal with that situation. Slapping the child to stop the tantrum is called positive punishment - this is the addition of an unpleasant stimulus in order to reduce a specific behaviour. Punishment has become such a bad word and I believe undermines people's ability to truly understand how their dogs learn."
> 
> Okay, but, telling a child they WON'T get any ice cream until they stop their tantrum, sounds a lot like telling a child they WILL get ice cream when they stop their tantrum. That to me sounds like bribery with food. It doesn't sound like negative punishment at all.


Well, this wasn't explained well. You are right, if the child hadn't ALREADY been promised an ice cream, telling them they wouldn't get one unless they stopped would just be bribery. What the author meant was, if the child had ALREADY been promised an ice cream, then was told that they wouldn't get one if they didn't stop the tantrum, this would be "negative punishment" (withdrawal of something pleasurable)



curly_DC said:


> A negative punishment would be picking the child up and putting the child in time out (with no access to tv or toyrs), or leaving the store with the child where the child is throwing the tantrum (most parents won't do this b/c it's too much of a hassle).


These are a little more complicated. First it depends on how "time out" is used. If it is used as a cooling off period, it is not a punishment one way or the other. It is simply a way to help the child get themselves under control. (same is true about removing the child from a store or other over-stimulating environment) If the "time out" includes a period (past the cooling off period) of keeping the child from toys, TV, etc. (as in "Super Nanny") then you are right, this, too, is negative punishment. (withholding access to things the child wants)



curly_DC said:


> I don't ever really understand the harm of picking up a small child that is throwing a tantrum and rocking them gently to calm them down, and then putting them in time out. Unless the child is never hugged, I don't think that encourages more temper tantrums. I DO however think that giving a child ice cream if they stop the tantrum will encourage more of the same.


Again, it depends. If you have a child with sensory issues, and in this day of SO many children "on the spectrum" there are a lot of families who have one or more) sometimes they can need to be "hugged" quietly to get themselves under control. This type of child doesn't need "time out" or other punishment for losing control, because their behavior, especially at a very young age, truly IS outside their control. Once they gain control of themselves, over time you try to teach them how to manage their feelings better, and in the mean time, you, as the parent need to manager their environment so they don't GET overstimulated.

Other kids learn to get their parents in a state and get their way with temper tantrums. The fastest way to extinguish tantrum behavior in this type of child needs to be left to cry and kick on the floor with NO attention at all from anyone.You have to know your child. I've had one of each.



curly_DC said:


> See, none of this stuff is ever really that easy when explained by scientific methods, or when trying to draw similarities with raising children and training dogs. Maybe we should get away from the emotional connections we have to how we raise children with how we train dogs?


I don't know... I always told people that most of what I used raising my kids I learned from training horses.:biggrin1: Horse, dogs AND kids have a lot in common when it comes to training. Certainly there are difference, both cognitively and in terms of the type of animal. Horses are prey animals, dogs and people are closer to predators, and it makes a HUGE difference in how they react to things. And of course, all bets are off once kids enter adolescence!:biggrin1:

But my experience is that all 3 species respond best to kind, fair treatment, delivered calmly, within the structure of clear limit setting. Set things up, as much as possible, so that they can practice good behavior, and the vast majority of them do their best most of the time.


----------



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

this discussion reminds me of Ian's 7th and 8th criterion for the use of punishment. 

"The Seventh Criterion
The seventh criterion illustrates why punishment-training is much less efficient than reward-training. The dog must know what the owner expects him to do, i.e., if this is wrong, then what is right? Therefore, before punishing a dog for making mistakes, the owner must first teach the dog the appropriate response. Reward-oriented methods require little time because the trainer only has to teach a single response — the correct one. With a punishment-oriented method, however, the trainer must punish the dog every time he does something wrong. Now, without even straining their brains, most puppydogs can think of oodles of ways to err. Punish the puppydog for each mistake and he will come up with oodles more. Remember, a major effect of punishment is to increase the variability of responding. Basically therefore, to reliably train a dog using punishments only, the dog must be punished for making an infinite number of mistakes. This, of course, would take an infinite length of time — an impossibility. Indeed, punishment-training becomes a Myth of Sisyphus — a neverending laborious task. Remember, there is an infinite number of wrong ways, but… THERE IS ONLY ONE RIGHT WAY! Hence reward-training takes only a finite amount of time.

The Eighth Criterion
The eighth criterion illustrates why punishment training is less effective than reward training. In fact, when using punishment-oriented methods, it is virtually impossible to satisfy the eighth criterion. In order for punishment-training to be effective, the dog MUST be punished EACH AND EVERY TIME he misbehaves. The dog only has to get away with misbehaving just ONCE to learn that there are times when he is not punished. Henceforth, the dog will reserve hiss misbehaviour for times when the owner is absent (physically or mentally) and when the dog is off-leash and out of arm’s reach. The owner's control has become punishment-contingent. Owner-absent behavior problems are the direct product of punishments failing to meet the eighth criterion. 

On the other hand, using a reward-training method, quicker learning, better retention and improved motivation are all obtained via employing a differential reinforcement schedule, i.e., by NOT rewarding the dog each time it gets it right. Only reward the dog for above average responses, give better wards for better responses and give the very best rewards (jackpots) for the very best responses. Herein lies the difference. Without a doubt, reward-oriented training methods are easier, quicker, more efficient, more effective and certainly, more enjoyable than punishment-training methods."


Remember punishment simply has to work to be called punishment, if it doesn't, it becomes abuse.


----------



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

..." punishment may buy you a temporary suppression of a behavior but remember that you have not killed the behavior. You have merely brought about an emotional state that is incompatible with the behavior you want to get rid of. The dog is too upset to do anything for the time being ... Punishment is like a carpet bombing. The behavior you wanted to target gets hit but so does a huge portion of the dog's whole repertoire. Dogs that are punished at lot behave a lot less in general." - Jean Donaldson, "Culture Clash"


----------

