Got it!abndogos wrote:Sorry, I guess my interpretaion is different than yours of a time out....
Negative Reinforcement strengthens a behavior because a negative condition is stopped or avoided as a consequence of the behavior. Punishment, on the other hand, weakens a behavior because a negative condition is introduced or experienced as a consequence of the behavior.
Say you have visitors that come over and your dog is dying to say hi to them and jumps up on them and is a pain in the butt....you put the dog in a time out(sit stay or down stay) and do not allow it to interact with the people everytime it jumps up to say hi. No attention = negative condition until dog calms down:dog calms down,negative condition(no attention) stops. In some instances, though, a time out may reinforce the behavior you are trying to stop(like you said, depends on the dog's perception. Good example is a dog growling at another dog or person(dog is uncomfortable, hence why it is growling). If you remove the dog from that situtation and do your kind of a time out, you could be actually reinforcing the growling cause you are removing the dog from its stressor(whatever is causing it to growl), therefore, you are teaching it when it is uncomforatble and it growls,you will remove it from the situation it doesnt like in the first place.
In your example, the sit/stay would be an incompatible behavior (it's hard to jump up when you're focused on keeping all four paws on the floor), not a time out. Time out is simply removing the dog or you for 10 seconds.
Around here, we don't view growling as a negative; it's just another form of communication and should be listened to lest the dog go to more extreme means (biting) as a way of getting the I'm-uncomfortable-now! message out. Read here. In that situation, it might be recommended to slowly expose the dog to whatever it makes him uncomfortable until he no longer associates the stressor as a stressor but as a positive via counter conditioning and desensitization. If he's bound to fail and feel uncomfortable, then the dog won't be exposed to the visitors temporarily until he's finished the training. Forumers Noobs and Ladybug had similar troubles.
If the general public doesn't understand Skinner, then why would they think that +R trainers are +R ALONE if they don't understand what the concept is? In fact, many +R trainers, such as Karen Pryor and Pat Miller, are "cross-over" trainers, meaning they've been schooled the older methods and "crossed over" to better ways.When one advertises to the general public that they are a "Positive Reinforcement Trainer" that is what the general public only sees....they don't understand dog training, let alone Skinner's Psychology. They think that this trainer is +R ONLY, cause that is what is in thier face, so to speak. Plus,when a +R trainer goes on to say that all ecollar training and prong collars are bad, it sets up for people to be "prejudice" against trainers that use them, without actually knowing the concept behind training with those tools.
Since you're using an e-collar, they are electrodes involved. Similarly, the prongs are supposed to pinch. In order to be categorized as -R, there must be some unpleasantness involved. (See your definition above)I have this argument a lot with +R trainers, telling me I "electrocute" my dog or "stab" my dog.
Even on a "soft" dog?So,to answer your question, no, when those tools are used correctly(ie proper situation, etc), no, they will not cause harm, either physically or mentally,to the dog.
What kind of dogs do I think +R trainers usually deal with? Definately not a dog like this Presa, no offense. Nor like my Dogo Argentino, or Cane Corso's, Central Asian Ovcharkas, Caucasian Ovcharkas, Boerboels, Filas, Sarplaninacs, tc. All these breeds need their owners to be pack leaders, and the +R trainers that are saying the "dominace" theory is all wrong is setting up these dogs for failure.
Do you know why +R trainer say it is "wrong"? There a lot breeds trained in this forum. Nettle owns lurchers and terriers that she's trained to work, be hunters for her. Noobs has a Pit Bull/Lab mix. Jacksdad has a JRT mix, another working breed. Emmabeth owns variety of lurchers, sight hounds, and one terrier. Wvdip owns an Akita.
My interpretation was that Casper wasn't getting his needs met (exercise, training, owner time) and was thus, insecure. Furthermore, Eric wasn't sending clear signals about what he wanted to do, causing confusion between them. Casper needed to be properly trained hence Victoria's emphasis on entering the program and getting Casper neutered to do so. Insecurity can spawn from more than one cause or may have multiple causes. To say that Casper was "dominant" is just too simple of an explanation for me.Now, I am not saying to "muscle" these types of breeds around and to "alpha roll" these dogs to be your dog's alpha, BUT, there are many other ways to "dominate" your dog without physically doing it, its all by actions and attitude. I could see right away with Eric that he was letting Casper call the shots, and that he had not "proven" himself as alpha.
I agree that Casper was out of control, but not because he was trying to assert pack leader status but rather he didn't know what to do, didn't have the tools to cope. Read here about dominance myths.With breeds such as the above mentioned, if you do not promote yourself as the pack leader, your dog can become very insecure, I could see that Casper was insecure by his body language in this show, and being that he felt Eric was not in control, Casper felt that he had to be. Also, with these breeds, if you don't have outlets for their natural drives(what they were bred to do originally), they can also become very insecure and even aggressive.