Vocalization and self control (2013) - Page 5

Pedigree Database


by Centurian on 15 August 2019 - 22:08

Sorry for the previous text in the post _ I used the edit feature again , and still the text gets mixed up ?

Self control : not only do some dogs lack self control we inadvertantly teach them not to control themselves . Forging : [ this post is not in reference to Apple ] . 10 months ago someone from the PDB PM'd me because they had a problem with their dog forging . So let's forget about all the [ foolish ] lingo : drive promotion, leaking , capping the drive . To me they are code words for : I did not teach the dog correctly - for what I thought I was teaching the dog , was not what the dog was hearing , learning and understanding . If you have to stop leaking or cap drive then your communication to the dog was amiss. That simple and truthful.

So what this person was really asking me to do was stop the dog from forging . No , she was asking for the dog to control itself while heeling/walking and to be precise . What I stated was : the dog forges because that it was it learned and that is what was taught. Now that the dog has learned that it cannot unlearn that . If you use the word " Fuss' then everytime the dog hears that word the dog thinks , feels , and is motivated , as is associated with that word . Meaning the dog will do what it has been taught and learned , ' to Forge '. Everytime that dog was disciplined [ I do not say corrected because by forging the dog is correct ] , the dog continued to do the same. WHY , because that it what the dog was taught and learned. The dog will continually do that forging and the using the leash to discipline says nothing to the dog , who cannot figure out what is not right.

My help to that person : Dogs do not unlearn behaviors . However they can learn new behaviors. What is to be learned that I taught her to teach the dog : to heel 100% accurately without forging with self control [ BTW without a leash or collar for that matter too ] . My first comment : You will never ever ever allow that dog the opportunity to forge again and you will never ever ever mention that word ' Fuss ' again . To teach something new , you cannot allow what you are replacing to happen again and also to teach something new , then in the teaching at the right time , you must use a different cue/ word. So I stop here - I won't explain everything else that I did with that person/dog , as it is long to write.

Back to self control : 3 years ago I was in Germany and my friends took me to a club that I had not been to before. I have been to many in the past . So I see a policeman at the club doing the Sch heel and the dog forged , and wrapped around a bit. This dog he had was fantastic. Great bitework . But he was so frustrated with the obedience - so frustrated that he wanted to sell the dog !! what was he doing , using the dam ball to so call [ I hate this expression ] build drive , motivate the dog , reward the dog , whatever he thought he was doing. But in fact he did not know how to ' talk to the dog' . The problem as I wrote : the teaching and communication was amiss - the dog was correct .

Dogs gravitate to stimulus / stimuli . Dogs get stimulated knowing , whether they see , hear , smell the simulus. And the ball he was using was one hell of a stimulus for that dog . So he did not understand what he was say9ing to the dog : in the dog's head : : I want that stimulus /ball " and the man was saying to the dog , like a lollipoop to a child ," come get it " . The man was not saying to the dog " hold you position or move in precision with me step by step " . That is to say he was not teaching and saying to the dog : " move and control your movements in sync with me " . The term " drive promotion" , no he was not promoting the dog to heel in drive [ Oh boy , more foolish lingo ] he was teaching the dog how not to control itself , be frantic , frustrated and get out of position. I wrote : if you cannot master your self , your communication , then you cannot master the dog.

My point : Many times the flip of teaching nthe dog ' self control ' , is to not teach to begin with , the dog to be , ' out of control ' .... So much for forging ....

by apple on 16 August 2019 - 10:08

I wrote that eventually the conditioned reinforcers are faded to unconditioned reinforcers like desire to please the handler, etc. Whether a dog knows he is being reinforced or not is really not a concern of operant learning, especially with animals because operant learning in its purest form is not concerned with what is going on in the organism's head, only the behavior that is displayed.

by Centurian on 16 August 2019 - 12:08

Apple , yes I had seen what you wrote .. I agree 100% with your last post .

Apple , Having a Psych Degree , I understand perfectly the terminology and the concepts , insde out and backwards . But do unrderstand what I write is not intentionally or entirely at times , directed to you . I am utilizing your commentary so I can share ideas for other people . Many people do not know the 'Learning Theory ' lingo . I try to frame this dailogue in every day thought and language for everybody at every level of understanding and throw light on some ideas for people to think about who have no background whatsoever. Apple , I know that you have a lot of knowledge and experience- no doubt about that . .

Anyway , I use my mind to train dogs . What is in the dog's head is ' the First Feature ' that I look at even before I interact with or teach that dog . What is in the dog's head is the determining factor as to how , to when and to what I teach a dog , And what is in the dog's head is equally important AS I am teaching a dog. Personally , I am always aiming to understand : what the dog is thinking , what it's motivation are , what it is communicating to me , what is it's emotinal state .

30 years ago .. some of these people that currently wite books and make DVD's , one who I had even talked with , was so opposed to usinng food , operant conditioning / classical conditioning . He stated to me ' using food is a bribe ". And that is why to me it is important to understand what is in the dog's head. I want to know if I truly changed the attitude of the dog , it's motivation , outlook and mental picture associated with the correct emotional state too.

Apple you write , and you are correct about what is not concerned :
" because operant learning in its purest form is not concerned with what is going on in the organism's head, only the behavior that is displayed."

Personally , I say differently because IMOP there should be concern.

Yet aside from an autonomic response , behaviors emanate from what a dog is thinking and feeling. ie it's emotional state and it's motivation. People have to understand the difference , for example , when using food are you bribing a dog or is the working with and for you ... That was the reason for the policeman story that I wrote. All learning is either classical or operant . But forget the terms . What the officer did not know was twofold : what he thought he taught the dog , was not what the dog learned and the dog was not working for /with the officer but unto itself. The officer thought he was working the dog but in truth the dog was working him . Aside from the lingo , techniques and methods , this classical /operant conditioning , if he understood a bit of what I wrote , if he had just looked into the dog's head, if he had understood what the dog was doing [ it's behavior ] , he would not have been nso frustrated with that dog or would have taught that dog correctly in the first place. IMOP , what is in the dog's headis just as important as to what is going on in the dog's head .

For people that like the academic lingo , and who are very advance ... what I share for you is this : Many times when I have used Instrumental and Operant Conditioning , my end game goal, is to Change that operantly conditioned behavior to a Classically Conditioned Behavior in the dog . But this is a little complex for the average person without academic background..

by apple on 16 August 2019 - 12:08

I am just saying operant leaning principles are not concerned with what is going on in an organism's/dog's head. I think in training dogs you have to add other layers and I agree, you have to try to read you dog and try to understand why he is doing or not doing something. It is only a guess, but the better you are at it, the better your results will be. A classic example is the novice trainer who has trained his dog for a while and corrects the dog for not displaying the correct behavior because he thinks the dog is being disobedient when actually, the dog hasn't fully learned what is being asked of him. Too many people don't understand the amount of repetitions and the importance of rewarding the correct behavior required to get a quality result. The person who said food is a bribe had no basic understanding of operant learning. A bribe is not a reinforcer. A reinforcer follows a behavior and is only a reinforcer if it strengthens the behavior. A bribe comes before the behavior. I know you know this and I too, am talking to others trying to learn.

by Centurian on 16 August 2019 - 14:08

Apple .. good comment .... I like reading your commentaires .

Apple if tell you who I talked about Operant Conditioning years ago , and whom I had reccommended Karen Pryor's litertature to , your socks would go flying off. As a matter of fact your posts and writings are years beyond what that person could have ever considered . Talking to that person was like spitting into the wind . I tell you this as a fact , this was a leading person in the GS dog world and commercilaized the GS . Yes many novice people do not understand and wer don;g expecgt them to . I am surte that they read your poss trying to better themselves . People like yourself help many many new people, it is the seasoned people , even back then that I found difficult because they were the ' experienced ones ' and it was akin to ' the blind leading the blind'.

by Centurian on 16 August 2019 - 14:08

So sorry . I re read my posts. Again I had oproofed and used the edit , I have no idea why the posts that I write get changed even the scentence gets chaged ? Anyone have any idea why this happens ?

Another thought , yes Apple we add layers , I say dimensions , but yes. ... But I want for conversation sake to rewrite something :
Obedience : when a dog is asked to perform , the dog willingly , gladly , immediately with correct attitude executes what is asked of it without any other thought entering it's head.

To repeat when and where possible : Having given that deifinition then what better way is there to accomoplish that ? I say : when a behavior is operantly conditioned , try to go further and change that operantly conditioned behavior to a classically conditioned behavior. If you can do that , you will have one hell of an obedient working dog.

In simple English once you taught the dog something , try to have that behavior become a reflex action . The same reflex action as if it was blinking it's eye. Blinking an eye is an automatic action , an autnomic nervous system repsonse. That IMOp is the end goal ... Then you will have adding the topping to all the layers.

by apple on 16 August 2019 - 14:08

I am still learning a lot and much is from a guy I have been training with for over the past year who is half my age. I totally lucked out in getting a great pup and finding a small PSA club ten minutes from my house. This guy is a super talented and smart decoy and trainer. A canine division of Delta Force hires him occasionally to come to their base and help with training and decoying. I had mentioned how he is a big believer of not imprinting a dog by "begging" him to bite by putting a ton of movement in a prey object. Another of his basic tenets is that if a dog is struggling he has to work through it without the stress being reduced to help the dog along. Of course, you have know what amount of stress to introduce and when a dog is ready for certain areas of training, and not overloading the dog with stress form the start, but the thinking is if the dog is struggling and you reduce the stress, you are just reinforcing the dog to avoid when things get stressful. He has to learn that success make the stress go away rather than reducing the stress resulting in the dog being successful. These concepts seem pretty fundamental to me know, but prior to working with him, I had not been exposed to these philosophies of training and I think they are two concepts that a lot of trainers incorrectly apply.

by Centurian on 16 August 2019 - 16:08

Apple for the record this is not a commetnary about your post or the man you are working with his outlook and what you wrote has merit with some dogs . So I am in agreement.

But Apple allow me to share something : People make problems , not the dogs.

3O years ago when I was taught Sch , you now well ... what did we so call do with the dogs : " Agitation" yes ? But then a few years after I learned , as we all grow and learn , that Agitation was not what I needed to do , with some dogs.
First , not done correctly , yes it frustrates the dog , but a small bit beyond the state of frustration , lies teaching and conditioning the dog to be frantic and hectic. Also , with some dogs ,we may think that we are building motivation , but IMOp that is code for , trying to improve upon the genetics of the dog . That is to say , if the dog has the heart , simply put , to want to do bite work , then what I learned to do is to give one , two wiggles of the object and bam , let the dog in for the bite. I do not want the dog to have to be relying on ' repeated stimualtion ' for the dog to bite [ and many times having to , over stimulate the dog ] . I do not want to 'condition ' the dog to repsond only with a certain amount or level of stimulation to act. Nor do I want the dog to expect to be stimulated. Does this happen with every dog . No , not all , much in teaching JUST DEPENDS.

However I as a routine ,I don't even start to walk down the road of the dog needed to be stimulated. Even some of the show line pups I had - two wiggles and that dog will go for the bite . Yes , concepts are incorrectly applied because many times they do not understand the dog . They do not get into the head of the dog first. So my post is trying to add , that with over stimulating , he calls it begging , but in essence it is needlessly stimulating the dog . Many many times someone can with over stimulation , cause lasting problems - that is what I am adding . Conditioning the dog to be stimulated : they prevent the dog from working at it's most optimal capacity .

by apple on 16 August 2019 - 16:08

For me over stimulating the dog in bite work not only interferes with learning and covers up the dog's genetics, it is inconsistent with what a dog will see in a trial or on the street. There are no whips or people making prey with objects or themselves in a trial or the street except for escape bites and perps running away from the police.

by Centurian on 18 August 2019 - 11:08

Apple I want to write two comments to eveyone that you helped me think about ..

One of your comments you made a reference to ' delayed reinforcement '. That was in reply to the fact that I had mentioned : " to heel the dog out of an exercise " and then several moments later interact with the dog , give a tug for the dog to bite etc. So .... what constitites ' delayed reinforcement '. What I suggest ,IMOp , walking a dog waway from an exercise , then playing tug : is not exactly ' delayed reinforcement ' . I explained that we are better off , interacing with the dog , out of the scope and confines of the exercise , with certain reasons in mind ?

So one of the biggest mistakes I see people make is i " reinforcing the dog" and that they are not reinforcing exactly what they think they are reinforcing . Many times I see this in training and teaching the dog ! So what constitutes reinforcement . All reinforcement has to do with time , and timing , yes ? When and How long is 'delayed reinforcement ' , no longer is to be considered delayed reinforcement to the dog ? Also , dogs are specific in their learning , and does not only timeimg but also place association also play a role when the dog experiences a negative or a positive reinforcement ?

So when you indicate to a dog an exercise starts , as we should , and exactly when it ends , which we should and then so call , Release the dog , from the responsibility to perform . Is not that perfromance and request over and done with the dog on the spot , literally and figutartively . That is to say , it is over , in physicality and in time ? Then , when the exercise is over and done within a specific place and a specifice time, and you walk away from that place over the course of some moments of time and you reinforce the dog , by playing tug , what is it that is exactly the dog being reinforced for ? Is it the fact that he completed an exercise some [ time] moments ago in a different place ? Or is it in reality and also in the dog's head that since he walked with you to an entirely different place ,and time , that action of waling awayn to ma different place is what is EXACTLY being reinforced ? Delayed Reinforcement... ? for what .. which act of the dog ? One that was cued that was over and done with and a new action , having occured in a different time and place . Or something that happend in a different time and place prior to the new action ? Think about that if you all will ....

My point is that when we interact with the dog : we should always always always be asking exactly what are we Reinforcing and we are " saying to the dog " !

" Behavior -> Reinforcement .

Did you in the dog's mind reinforce that exercise you both peformed previously , that you had done with the dog moments ago in a different location ? Or was in reality, the behavior of the dog walking with you and stopping at a new location , being reinforced because after all did you not also say to the dog that the exercise was over and done with ?

My second comment :

I said the icing on the cake , sort of speaking is : when we can change an operantly conditioned behavior to a classically conditioned behavior . . yes? And I also said : " that we want the dog to be working with us and for us " , yes ? THEN consider this ...

1. Operant Conditioning and 2. Classical Conditioning [ reflex action ]
1. The dog working with us 2. The dog working for us

When they become one one being transformed to the other , then the dog works for us and with us ... understand ?


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top