Vocalization and self control (2013) - Page 3

https://essentiallydogs.com/dog-creates-formations-using-toys  One could argue the dog in the video has OCD, but even so, there is some higher level thinking going on. Of course dogs are not able to think exactly like humans. They can't figure out how to develop a rocket. They are also limited by their anatomy. For example, they don't have hands. But dogs clearly have a sense of future thinking ability. From an evolutionary/instinctual point of view, dogs' undomesticated ancestors would have to have some sense of the future in order to be successful. "There are facts about dogs and there's opinions about them. The dogs have all the facts and the humans have the opinions."

Apple , nice link :

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/decoding-your-pet/201806/dogs-and-humans-have-similar-social-and-emotional-brains

For the record , in the accompanying side list of articles for recommended readings i.e. The article about whether one should get a second dog : That article makes reference to , ' self- control ' , for whatever this is worth .

Animal Behavior Service, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania

apple, there are army of animal behaviorist.
do you really expect that their colleagues on higher level of career would tell that what they are selling is a snake oil?
the more sophisticated theories - the merrier income for business :)

Innate intelligence and self control are totally unrelated

the deeper in the jungle - the more fatter partisans :)

genetics determine the thresholds and intensity of traits/drives a dog possesses, training is all about manipulating those thresholds which is essentially teaching self control.

what about situation to which dog haven't been trained for, but shows selfrestrain instead of respond in typical for dog way?
there can happens many unforeseen things, in which training does fail to prevent dog from involvement and which can end 
in trouble or even tragedy.
if i recall correctly it was emorig who mentioned about trained police K9 jumping from the car and i believe was killed or injured.

Valk,
Animal behavioralist are scientists and are using the scientific method to try to understand animal behavior. They are not selling anything. You are simply making baseless assumptions based on what you think you know. Regarding your inference that innate intelligence and self control are related- that is again, more of an expression of your bias toward a certain type of dog. You have to harness the drives of a high drive dog. and again, a hyper dog and a high drive dog are not the same thing. While a high drive dog (which your refer to a dog lacking self control,) might be more at risk in certain situations, it is my opinions those types of dogs are somewhat of a double edged sword in that in some ways they are easier to train due to their motivation and in other ways, more vigilance and thinking is required of the handler such as anticipating certain potential problems the dog's drive could leads to. They are more of a challenge to raise and train.

A thought :

This is not fact but I have found through observation empirically after having worked dogs for years : The more a dog's behvaior's origin is from the innate , instincts [ ie the autonomic genetic predisposition of the dog ] as opposed to a dog using it's brain's frontal cortex i.e it ability to think and problem solve ] , the harder ** it is for the handler to Control that dog and to instill Self Control or Impulse Control within that dog. On one hand I love GS that are 100 % geared up geneticaly to do teir work , then on the other hand , stupid dogs that don't think aren't always to my best liking. Dogs that think , I love to work with , but then on the other hand I dislike spending my time having to motivate a dog [ or in the 'ol lingo- do Drive Promotion , which I thought was so stupid and a foolish of an endeavor, I want a dog with then heart to perform ]

So I have to agree with Apple : I often say to other people ,the dog that has 100% instinct is so much easier to train . As a matter of fact it takes so much less teaching. practically no teaching , [ for the dog is genetically programmed to bite , to scent etc etc ] . However , I have to be diligent in channelling those instincts in the dog. A dog that is more pensive ,rather than instinctual , this takes more effort from me because I have to keep this dog's motivation up , shaping the dog's thoughts , yet at the same time this dog's bent lend's it to be so much more easier to instill self control . Because a dog that thinks .. I personally can get right into the head of that dog and have it choose to do what I want , as opposed to a dog that doesn't think and is more instinct based. If a dog doesn't think before it acts ..well ... then I have to and I will , do it's thinking for it , sort to speak .

We are on the same page regarding this matter. I have said before, I think the area some trainers miss the boat with higher drive dogs is that they think the dog always has to be in a very high state of drive during training and my belief is that being in high drive can be counter productive when teaching new or certain behaviors because the dog has much more difficulty attending while trying to learn. There has to be a balance. That is why I start a pup off using food and later use a toy after the dog has showed he is starting to understand what I am asking of him. I have also mentioned the use of the whip before. I think it is way overused. I never use it in protection, and only occasionally in obedience. I find having someone hold the dog back on a long line to build frustration during obedience works well depending on the dog. With the toy, I don't make prey with it, but rather, teach the dog to come into drive by holding the toy at my belt buckle and teaching the dog to come into drive via barking and denying a bite of the toy. My default is generally to call the dog to heel and then heel in motion, do in motion sits and downs, etc, rewarding the dog with the toy when he is precise. When I come on the field for bite work, the dog has to walk calmly and then I put him in a down, then a sit with a focused heel, then pass auf, and the dog explodes into drive. So you have to cap and channel that drive or else, the dog will become a spaz and not be able to learn or be under sharp control. I am fortunate with my current dog, in that he has a very nice level of drive, I have laid a proper foundation, and he is a very smart dog. I also believe it is important to teach a dog certain behaviors when he is not in a high state of drive using sentences and phrases. For example, I will tell my dog, "Go around to the front door," and I will go meet him there from the inside of the house and then use the Premack principle and have him do some type of short obedience and reward him by releasing him into the house. He can't just barge in when he wants to. He has to earn his way in. As a pup, I wouldn't even let him in the house because he was too wild. Now when he comes in, I tell him "lie down and chew your toy," and happily lies down and chews his hard chew toy and is easily managed in the house. When he was a pup, he was very destructive. I house him in an attached garage with a doggie door. He has stopped being destructive and biting me all the time due to maturity, training and consistency. So I can say he has learned self control.

centurian, contrary to your thought, i found smart dogs much easier to handle
all dogs, independently of intellect, do have innate instincts. difference only that some of them has ability to assess situation and act correctly without handler's input.
some not, thus become lost or act impulsively as instinct force them to do it.

as for handler's control and dog's willingness to cooperate in work - that's absolutely depends on bond and trust between two.
with smart and dominant dogs it's sure is harder to earn respect, subordination and loyalty. particularly if it's already adult dogs.
but once you achieve it, dog would become sort of extension of you.

and look, with dog, who has innate ability for selfcontrol, you don't need a taught selfcontrol imitation.
it's already in there, just use it cleverly.

Valk,
These dogs you refer to that exude innate self control and patience simply sound like low drive dogs to me. That does not mean they are bad dogs or lack confidence or are not good at man work. They simply don't have a lot of motor. All dogs need to be trained, so they never assess a situation correctly without the handler's input at some time. That does not mean the handler has to be present. Higher drive dogs are more impulsive and need to learn self control through training and because they are so motivated to be trained, provided the handler knows what he is doing, it makes for a very strong bond. The dogs you are describing sound more independent and dominant than highly bonded to the handler. If all dogs didn't need to learn self some degree of self control, no dogs would ever need to be housebroken. Self control is self control. There is no imitation self control. But there are lower drive dogs who don't need to be taught much self control.

Apple exactly ... couldn't have written or stated that better than you have .

      Just one little tweek ... I do not let the dog see ' the toy , or in my case a bite tug , before anything. That is to say , I desire , I expect ,  the dog to come into [ I don't prefer to use the word drive ] performing , to' turn on ' [ I instill in the dog to look for and to respoind a cue anytime , anywhewre , anyplace - ] , to execute when I appropriate cue it. THEN .... and this is very important to me .. THEN after, several moments after  the dog has perfromed the dog will interact with me or have it's needs fulfilled . We had discussions about REWARDS . So a slight I have a slight difference. I want the dog to work not 'thinking' about  'reward' .

     So , if I go by and hold myself to , my own defintion of Obedience : " a dog performing willing , gladly , immediately without anything else entering his mind '...... then ' immediately and without anything else entering his mind IMOp means , also thinking about a reward. But that is not to say that AFTER the dog executes , a little time afterwards ,  ie several seconds whereby there is no assocaition then this becomes something other than a 'reward,'.  After the fact , we can celebrate with a little playing .. after the dog has done what it has to do . How caan I lkken this : a teenager can go to out to play ,  after he has done homework and that does not have to take place immediately after his homeworkis finished.  . He does his job because that is expected , something nice comes about AFTER he has completed what is expected of him amd that does not mean that very very instant he finishes his homeowrk.

    This is a subtle difference than holding a toy for the dog to see , peform and then immediately rewarding. . In other words if the dog sees the toy /tug , that creates the expertation to dog that he will get  it. But without that toy / tug in the dog's view, that gives me the option just to walk away with the dog or to celebrate with the dog a few moments after we walk zwayfrom the dog perfoming it's task. . So a toy /tug in the vision of the dog creates certain expectations/ thoughts in the dog's mind,  and then we do not meet those expectations... what do you think the dog thinks ? However , if I do not present the toy /tug at the onset to motivate the dog , then the dog performs on it's own volition and without expectation ...

   ....IMOp precison ..... precision is attained at the very very very very first time you teach a dog and EVERY single time thereafter. That is to say Precison is always ..If I terach the dog a precise sit the first time and every time thereafter... that is what gets conditioned and learned - A precise exact sit. That is the exzpectation of the dog that it has to do .Therefore when I continue thereafter that is the expectation that I have and that is what the dog has been classically conditioned to do and will do . Therefore , I do need not a toy or tug , for precison or to motivate.  If you incporporate 'reaerds / reinforcement ' as part of the performance and the dog executing.. that is what the dog comes to expect. When those expectations are not met, that is actually a demotivator for the dog. So you have a dog up then doen , dopwn then up in it's expectations and motivations. So .. tghere pften goes the same wityh performance ,an up peformance then a  so so peformance. Although as I wrote, yes  there are some dogs  by their temperament , that you have to contimually motivate  or they go down in motivation fast.. So yes.. as you wrote " DEPENDS " .....What I just wrote may not work for all dogs but for a dog with good appropriate for the task gentic make up , you would see non reward , non immediate reinforcement training can be super. 

   The difficulty : many  guru dog trainers put out DVD's , something becomes gospel , the buzz , the method , and cliche . As a result  we lose how "to see into the dog" , how to teach that individual dog because  we follow the pied piper gurus that commercialize the dog world.