Showing posts with label NILIF. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NILIF. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 2, 2013

About Food, Other Rewards and Intrinsic Reinforcement





I said it before, and I say it again: Force-free works with every dog, not just the sweet-tempered, biddable ones. But it’s gotta be done right, and that is much more than having a clicker in a hand and an endless supply of tiny-sized food pieces in a treat pouch.
Applying positive reinforcement most effectively means to know: How to use food, when to reward with food, when to reward with something else, and when it is advisable to refrain from externally adding anything at all.
I want to talk about food first.
Food is, of course, an existential need for all animals, and hence all animals are motivated by food – well, almost all. For humans, though, food is much more than simply survival. In every culture, around the world, food sharing and eating is part of ceremonial and celebratory rituals. Food has religious significance, and is an integral part whenever families and friends gather: We have romantic dinners, and fund-raising ones to help the poor and downtrodden; conferences and seminars involve food, and they advertise what is served to attract more people - to wet people’s physical as well as mental appetites.
Compare that with how food is used in a laboratory setting, the place where behavior, including positive reinforcement, was established and is still studied. Scientists prefer food exactly because most animals are highly motivated by it, and especially so when they are artificially kept a certain percentage under normal weight, when they are purposely underfed to raise motivation, when there is food scarcity, deprivation, a limited supply.
How do our companion dogs fit in that spectrum? Obviously, they are not humans. Dogs eat for the sake of eating and not to celebrate a mating or the birth of a litter. But they aren’t laboratory animals either: animals in an environment that utterly disregards everything non-scientific, including the human/dog relationship, and yet, many dogs are treated as if they were.
The daily kibble, the basic need that is our responsibility to provide when we own a dog like we nourish our children, is used, often entirely, to reinforce specific behaviors. Nothing is life is free, right? Particularly not for the family pooch.
Not just that, but like traditional trainers who recommend placing the dog in a stimulus deprived environment hours before a training session so that despite harsh corrections he still wants to work with the handler, some positive reinforcement trainers suggest not feeding the dog prior to training to raise motivation and even, like the lab rat, to keep the dog a little underweight. In the first scenario, being with a human on task is the lesser of two evils; in the second, the dog is keen to be with the human only because the human has food. Neither is the relationship I envision with my dog.

Food, including sharing some of our good-for-dogs human food, is free in our home. No strings attached because sharing gives me pleasure, and because my dogs learn that I, the mighty powerful one, have access to all these amazing assets I periodically dole out just because we belong together. Food sharing is a very bonding activity, and I get a lot of offered attention when I prepare food, and eat food, and eventually anytime and anywhere. Belonging and attention develops naturally and becomes a habit. And by the way, we never had a dog who was overweight. And this might surprise you too, also never one who was unmotivated by treats in training situations.
Here is the thing: If you like really like something, you’ll still like it even when it happens again, and again, and again.
You think a dog will only work for food if he is hungry? Just like a person might only push a hypothetical red button that spits out five-dollar bills if she actually needs small change? A rich person wouldn’t be bothered with such a dumb activity you think, and yet wealthy people sit for hours in front of slot machines, and you have dogs who have many balls in a toy box, and daily play, and still want more. When I give Will 10 pieces of chicken, does she say “Nah, thanks, I had enough” when I offer her one more? No. She says: “What can I do for you to get another piece”?
The truth is that if a dog, and person, is motivated by something she will stay motivated even if satiated with other stuff. To figure out what that is, is taking interest in the dog, and that, too, is bonding and will bring your relationship to a whole new level.
Artificially limiting resources for training and shaping purposes isn’t necessary, and can actually backfire when the dog becomes so hyper focused on food that the attention is not with the owner, or task, or body awareness, but only with food. Connecting and working with her human becomes but an activity to get done quickly in order to get food.
A dog who has to work for every morsel won’t do anything unless she’s paid in the currency she’s been taught, like the 6-month-old poodle client who’d only pay attention when she saw the treat pouch hanging off her person’s belt.
Let me be very clear: I use food to teach, and influence, and reinforce behaviors I like to see again. Food is easy to use and opens the door to learning. But when food is part of every interaction, and when dogs are deprived of what I think is their right, people and dogs become fixated and dependent on food, and worst of all, the owner becomes lazy and doesn’t explore what else their pooch is interested in, or doesn’t want to do. That’s the problem.

Reptiles in nature aren’t used to eating small pebbles of food frequently and, in scientific behavioral studies, never faired very well because they aren’t very motivated by frequent small pebbles of food. Hence, they got a reputation that they aren’t very smart - we all know the term lizard brain: other than instinct and core body functions, no one is home. Surprisingly, when scientists reinforced with the warmth of a heat lamp, something reptiles deeply care about, behaviors could be trained and lizard-brain turned out to be quite bright.
There are many things other than food our dogs care about; things they are intrinsically, by virtue of their nature, motivated by: Playing, sniffing, trailing, moving, distance, fetching, chasing, pulling, jumping – the best reinforcement for boxers, barking, and even biting – the often preferred reinforcement for Schutzhund trained German shepherds and Malinois.
The instructor at the herding clinic Davie and me participated in didn’t need food or a ball to get his collies do his bidding. They heeded their handler’s commands because otherwise they lost access to the sheep, for the moment. The opportunity to control sheep’s movements was what made them obey every whim, because controlling sheep is what floated their boat the most.
A couple of months ago we took care of a young Australian shepherd while his people were on vacation. As a typical Aussie, and after a rather short adjustment period, he was so responsive to us that I felt confident letting him off his leash. He never ran out farther than about 20 feet, checked in with me, returned, circled around me and dashed off again. This was on day three, and I was really tempted to food treat to reward such impeccable behavior, but didn’t because I didn’t have to. Re-orienting to us, his new lifeline as far as he knew, returning and circling, were all reinforcements in their own right and I didn’t need to add anything to it – anything other than giving him my full attention and erratically dodging around a bit so that he could chase and circle me some more.
However, we also practiced formal recalls and that I did reinforce with food, even though typically I like to reinforce coming when called with a game, not food, or at least food being part of a game, but because we already played movement games a lot, I used food for this particular dog and situation. I could have used a ball as well the Aussie was über-passionate about, but there were icy patches – it was winter in Canada – and I didn’t want to risk an injury.

I think you are getting my gist: Think when you work with a dog instead of following a popular template. You don’t have to “make a dog operant”. The dog is operant by virtue of being alive. When an action is intrinsic, facilitating opportunities for the dog to do what is natural is hard to top with anything added externally.
Yes, food is easy to use, but not always the most effective reinforcer, so don’t shove a treat in the dog’s mouth if he wants to sniff and mark the local piss pole.

And then there are situations in which any reinforcement that comes from you leads exactly to the behaviors that you don’t want.
I can’t count the number of young obnoxious dogs I met who are shaped to go the mat, and promptly reinforced with a click and treat, and as soon as they gobbled it up self-release and are right back to doing something obnoxious again. Going to the mat, and being pesky, forever yo-yos back and forth, and the mat itself can become part of an attention seeking game. Same thing with jumping when greeting: The dog is shaped to sit and sits, is clicked, treated and released to say hello, and as soon as she gets to the person, jumps.
Sometimes your dog simply needs to do something because you say so. Bet you thought you’d never hear that from me, and of course I am not talking about inflicting pain and punishments, but about managing with a leash until a new behavior is conditioned - or popping the pooch in the crate provided it is not perceived as aversive.
I recently had clients with a boxer puppy who at one point was wound so tight, so incapable of settling on her own, that I did just that: I gently, but manually, put her in the crate after her owners unsuccessfully tried to lure her in with food. Literally within seconds, and without any crying or scratching at the door, she was zonked out.
When a busy and energetic dog finally settles, operant conditioning laws tell you to reinforce that so that the behavior is repeated and you’ll get more settling in the future. In reality, the opposite will happen: the sleepy pooch on the mat or in her crate, sparked by your attention and the reinforcement, becomes active again, and potentially annoying. Having a safe and cushy spot to rest undisturbed when tired is reinforced, just not by us, and the wise owner leaves it like that.
One last thing: I don’t externally reinforce, no matter how good my dog’s behavior, if my goal is that certain stimuli become irrelevant, for example ducks in one of the parks we periodically visit, or the horses in our neighborhood. Reinforcing when my dog focuses on it would make the stimulus too much of a big deal, so I simply habituate.

Reinforcement, and not some magical telepathic emotion exchange as heard on TV, creates behavior. Silent pride is a heap of crap. That said, if the humans set the stage for companionship by: being together instead of always doing together, sharing food, and unconditionally giving affection and protection, you don’t always have to use a stick or carrot, or rather a choker or cookie, to get the kind of conduct that makes living with a dog so pleasurable. Your dog will want to be with you and please you.
And you also get away with requesting something from your dog she might not be so keen on at the moment. You won’t mess up your relationship if you have, as Dr. Susan Friedman says, enough accumulated trust in your bank account.

Wednesday, June 20, 2012

NILIF




NILIF is an acronym for: Nothing in Life is Free. Notice that the emphasis is on nothing, which means that in its purest form the dog must work for everything: food, treats, toys, affection, freedom to sniff and play, to be let in or out, and so on. It is a widespread concept you likely have heard about one time or another - and regardless to which side of the training philosophy spectrum you belong. That a dog can’t possibly be well behaved if he has resource autonomy is the rare occasion where traditional trainers and positive reinforcement ones seem to be on the same page. NILIF is, actually, rather popular with the positive crowd, because it is perceived as a non-confrontational way to show yer dog who is boss.
Well, I don’t like it - for several reasons.
For starters, I object to the notion that we can’t have a harmonious and cooperative relationship with our companion canine unless we make a show of our absolute control over everything he wants and needs several times a day, and for life. On an ideological level, NILIF is not any different than the alpha pack dominance crap, except it is kinder – more humane. Instead of dishing out an unpleasant consequence to curb an unwanted behavior, it withholds something pleasant until a prompted action is obeyed.  And only a prompted behavior counts. Offered ones, even if desired, don’t, because responding when the dog makes the first move would put him in charge, and that is a no-no with pack leaders and some NILIFers. The latter, if they aim for companionship, typically don’t deprive the pooch of attention, but still ensure that he can’t ask for theirs, while they can demand his whenever they like. I have a problem with that.
Snubbing someone who attempts to talk to us is socially rude, including if it’s just the dog. It leaves the other confused and frustrated, and decreases his confidence in his social group members, and his own ability to communicate successfully. In addition and regarding our dogs, it rarely can be followed consistently. Think about it: if the human is supposed to call all the shots and ignore the dog’s requests, he should also not respond to “gotta go pee” barks or whines. Yet, I never met an owner who does that. Of course the person heeds to the dog’s “open the door” signals, because he doesn’t want a puddle on the rug. What does the dog learn? That politely soliciting for social contact is ignored, while barking gets him what he wants.
The micromanaging aspect of NILIF; the demanding that the dog must perform as told before he gains access to things he needs, including getting permission to live out intrinsic behaviors, causes stress - as it would in every being, and even more so in one who is innately self-governing. Albeit social, dogs in nature, even when they belong to a loose group, don’t have an overbearing alpha. They can walk and rest when they want, sniff and mark without restrictions, seek food and eat what they find. Many of our owned dogs are already anxious. That, not dominance, is the underlying cause of many problem behaviors. Adding more pressure is counterproductive.
And it’s not only the dog who is feeling the stress. NILIF can be difficult for owners as well. Recent clients of mine, guardians of two toy terriers, illustrated that perfectly. Their previous trainer advised the Nothing in Life is Free protocol to modify one of the dog’s fear reactivity toward strangers. Because nothing means exactly that, she recommended that the dogs’ social interactions with each other be structured as well, and permission for play and snuggle time only be granted after they performed obedience commands or tricks. My clients couldn’t stand the thought of segregating the very bonded pair all day while they are at work, and therefore didn’t follow through with that part, but also questioned other suggestions the trainer forwarded.
Above all, for me NILIF presents a moral conflict. When a person makes a conscious and deliberate decision to bring a dog into his life, it is his obligation to provide what the pooch needs to have good welfare. To turn this around, a dog, because of his absolute dependency once owned, has the right, albeit sadly not a legal one in most jurisdictions, to certain things for free: food, water, shelter and safety, a certain amount of physical and mental stimulation, and social inclusion, which includes being acknowledged when he communicates that he needs something. It is that foundation, provision and protection, that makes you important to your dog and sets the relationship in which he is willing to take his cues from you.
NILIF, in it’s worst form, is deprivation and abuse and falls in the same category as withholding food and social togetherness to get better performances. There was an agility trainer and competitor a few years ago in Alberta, where I used to live, who purchased littermate Australian shepherds he kept in separate crates and only released when they trained. Both dogs eventually faltered under pressure and did not perform to the owner’s expectations, and subsequently were surrendered to the local humane society in a complete socially inept state; just like some show dogs are who never learn or experience anything else but to stand pretty for the judge.

The thing is that the majority of dogs, including ones with behavioral problems, don’t need to be treated the NILIF way. Dogs inherently know that you belong to that fabulous, big-brained species who owns all the assets. They know that we have the anatomical tools to open the food can and car door, and yet many must jump through figurative hoops to receive 2 for 1 on-sale kibble, and some can't even enjoy that in peace because their person, so insecure about his status, removes the food a couple of times while they eat. Granted, taking a dog’s food away is not part of the NILIF practice, but I frequently meet owners who do it anyway.
I also periodically meet people who respectfully leave the room while the dog eats in fear of being attacked, and others who surrender the food even though boisterous Brutus impatiently bowls into them. That’s not it either. I am not suggesting to reinforce aggression or unruliness. No doubt, polite manners is what we want and no, don’t toss the treat when the pooch behaves badly, but understand that pushiness is not necessarily indicative of dominance. Perhaps the dog has never learned how to communicate appropriately with humans, or maybe he was ignored for prior subtle attempts to get attention. So, teach him to ask politely.
I am also not suggesting letting the dog run loose, giving him complete autonomy. That is not possible in our society, but we don’t have to warily ensure that we’re always the ones who begin an interaction. A dog can solicit, but should understand and heed your “later” signal, and accept when the interaction is over and not pester you further. That, too, can be taught.

Truth is that successful dog ownership is more fluid and dynamic than NILIF. The balance to aim for is giving the dog enough freedom and choice to prevent anxiety, and controlling the right resources at the right time to cement that humans indeed are the ones with opposable thumbs and bank accounts. It is nonsensical to make a NILIF, or alpha, point when something isn’t important to the dog at the moment, so pay attention in what context the pooch is misbehaving. If he impatiently tries to snatch the ball in your hand, making him perform 15 tricks for his kibble is silly, but waiting for a sit before you throw the ball is not. Would my clients’ little reactive terrier stopped barking at visitors just because her humans suddenly controlled social closeness with her buddy? I don’t think so.
I don't feel as strongly about NILIF as I do about pinning and shock collars, but I think it is categorically a bad idea. That said, I also concede that the rare pooch, the very confident and at the same time very unruly, determined and persistently obnoxious one, needs to learn that he lives with people and not the other way around, and in that case the Nothing in Life is Free concept is indeed a non-confrontational, acceptable and effective way to teach that lesson.
For every other dog though, understanding what is important to him at the moment, and making access to whatever that is contingent on behavior, is more effective.
Granted, it might take a little more effort to know your dog’s motivators than applying a blanket NILIF rule, but trust me, it’s worth it.