If You Punish Your Dog, Make it Negative

My chosen method how I train and relate with dogs is positive reinforcement/negative punishment combination (plus plenty of other things that are in a positive trainer’s toolbox). Trainers worth their money know exactly what I mean, but laypeople often don’t. Folks that follow my writings regularly  might even be a bit puzzled that I put the word “punishment” in my mouth.
Behaviorally speaking, punishment isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It means that a behavior decreases in frequency and intensity, eventually ceases. And negative means that something is removed. Applied, we remove something the dog wants to make a behavior we don’t want disappear.
World-renowned veterinarian, behaviorist and puppy guru Ian Dunbar illustrates negative punishment wonderfully: Whenever he plays with a pup, and the babe is too rough with his teeth, Dunbar steps out of the exercise pen. By removing himself, he also removes what the puppy seeks – social interaction. The removing part is the “negative” aspect, and the goal that the pup won’t bite down that hard the next time, the “punishment” one. Since the pup is still learning, he will get another chance momentarily, and if he blows it the person steps out again, and so on.
Ian Dunbar uses the same approach to stop his dogs from making a ruckus in the house. When their roughhousing becomes annoying, he yells “outside” – threatening them with being figuratively kicked in the yard, and because his dogs rather stay inside with him, they tone it down.
Negative punishment is effective if indeed, in the future, the undesired behavior decreases, and is replaced with a better one: the pup becoming softer and more self-controlled in play, the rowdy dogs toning it down a bit inside the house.
Although in real life negative punishment works, one must use it wisely. Let’s say your dog is hogging the place next to you on the couch and growls when his canine cohabitant wants in on the loving. Intuition dictates that the grump should lose his favorite spot as a consequence for behaving undesirably, but in that scenario there is a drawback: If punished, the already competitively feeling pooch will dislike his furry companion even more and will increasingly become more suspicious. And not just regarding the couch or bed, but in other situations as well, and from a greater distance. Although the growling might stop, the anxiety and/or aggression is still there, and if you confirm to the offending dog that the other’s appearance is indeed bad news, true animosity can form. Punishment, negative and positive = inflicting pain, although intuitive, would be counterproductive.

Equally counterintuitive to not punishing a growling dog is, for many owners, the advice to ignore a bad behavior. And there are situation where ignoring is also counterproductive, despite the operant conditioning law that states that behaviors ignored become extinct.
The problem is that life with a dog doesn’t happen in the controlled conditions of a laboratory. In real life, just because you ignore a behavior doesn’t mean that it is ignored. Something or someone in the environment might reinforce it, plus there are natural drives that are intrinsically reinforcing.
Let me explain that. When I teach “leave-it”, I have the dog leashed so that he can’t access the treat I tossed out. There is only one way he can get it, or an even better reward: he has to completely disengage from the loot on the floor and connect with me. I don’t help, don’t give the dog any clues. He has to come up with the solution, and I can wait until he does exactly because I control the situation, and therefore can ignore any pulling, barking or staring at the treat – any and all behaviors I don’t want when I say “leave-it”. Don’t worry: it is not as mean an exercise as it sounds - it takes most dogs only about 20 seconds to figure it out.
It is a different story when a dog barks out the window at a passerby. That I can’t ignore, because the person’s natural moving along is reinforcing if the dog wishes distance. In addition, barking itself feels good to some dogs, beagles and Shelties come to mind; it is in their genes, intrinsically reinforcing. The result of me ignoring the barking in that situation is that the barking will worsen.
In that case, and any other one when the dog’s undesired behavior is reinforced by something that is beyond my control, my choice of action is to interrupt the behavior I don’t want and direct the pooch into one I do want.
The interrupter is verbal, for the obvious reason that a dog focused on something else but me will not see my hand signal.  “Oops” is the word many trainers use. My dogs understand “ah”,  “knock it” and “oh yoohoo”.  Whatever word it is, it should never be a warning sound that announces your wrath, but information for the dog that he’s strutting the wrong trail, and that he should pay attention. Once he does, I guide him into a behavior I like better, and he likes a whole lot too. That the new, better behavior feels good is important, because then it will become the one the dog will choose in the future.
That’s the plan anyway, and typically it works - other than that the very clever pooch, when bored, might deliberately use the undesired behavior to elicit an “oops” and the followed treat or game. Our Aussie Davie mastered that. On an off leash walk, whenever she felt snubbed, she’d find some deer poop to sniff, eyeballing me from the corner of her eye, checking if I see her and interrupt her behavior, so that she could obey and reap the reward of fetching the ball or finding tossed treats.
Thinking dogs amuse me, and so I never minded, but it can be a problem if such brilliance involves another animal. One of my clients has a sweet-natured collie/retriever cross who “mauls” the cat to get his owner’s attention. Never aggressively, he holds her with his paws and gums with his mouth, and although the kitty doesn’t struggle or vocalize in distress, my client feels that she is not always a willing participant, and so she stops the pooch with a “no”, and he promptly releases, gets a treat, just to catch the cat again to elicit another. In that case, I would not wait till he has the cat in his mouth, but condition a new response when he sees her.

Repetition creates a new habit, and the stimulus that once triggered a bad behavior can become the cue for the new one. Anything is possible. The sight of a deer became Davie’s cue to play a chase game with me, and not the deer.
Especially during the learning stages, and depending on the dog’s degree of motivation, you want to redirect into a prolonged activity. With a dog who’s fixated on the Sunday dinner ham, an “oops” followed by a piece of kibble when he stops ogling it, won’t cut it. If the redirected interaction is too brief, the dog will be left in a mental “now what?” vacuum, and return to the last behavior, or stimulus, he found important.
The prolonged alternate activity can be anything the dog likes, and is not limited to food, but can include food. Should include food. Don’t be afraid to use food. It is handy, and most dogs are motivated by something they can devour or gnaw on. There is nothing worse that a work-driven dog not motivated by food in a pet home. He will forever pester you to be on task together: to play Frisbee, or train, or locate birds, and you can’t even redirect him into quietly emptying a Kong or finding “hidden” kibble or cookies.

So, if you catch your dog doing something you dislike, instead of: “no” ignore, punish or even click and treat when he stops his behavior, try: don’t do this, but do that instead.
Ensure that the dog receives a lot of social attention when he redirects and behaves desirably.
Interrupting and redirecting is also your best shot with a dog that is compulsive. I don’t mean to trivialize a complex issue; of course stereotypies have many facets that need to be considered and addressed, but studies with people locked in a behavior showed promising success when they are redirected into a different activity. Not just any activity – it had to be one they liked.

Disciplining someone for wrongdoings is deeply ingrained in our culture. It is intuitive and emotional, and regarding dogs there are two contributing factors: we expect that they are grateful for the care we provide, and we have an innate fear of teeth and worry that the pooch might harm us if we slack off. Not surprising then that people find it easy to follow the “rewarding the good behaviors” part of training, but have difficulty not disciplining him for his misdeeds. But withholding access to something the dog wants until he pleases you, and removing something the dog cherishes as a consequence of unwanted behaviors, should be your dog’s worst punishment. Humans don’t have to correct. Really.
Neither negative punishment nor interrupting a behavior is oppressive, but constructive. It effectively influences behavior and has a great impact on the dog without the risk of instilling or increasing fear, anxiety or avoidance. It fosters social cooperative bonding, learning, and voluntary attention and obedience. Don’t correct, but redirect. It is absolutely possible to have a well-mannered dog who has never been corrected.

I'll be focusing on other dog stuff in August, so the next post won’t be published till September. It'll deal with a problem so many owners are struggling with: barking and lunging on the leash.

Common Mistakes that can Delay Training Success

The idea behind positive reinforcement is to cause dogs to repeat actions humans desire, and in time have a repertoire of behaviors that make them good companions and canine citizens. It is a realistically achievable goal. In theory, positive reinforcement is as effective as positive punishment, which in operant conditioning is the delivery of something unpleasant to stop an unwanted action from recurring. More importantly, positive reinforcement strengthens the relationship between dog and owner, dog and his social group, and generally dog and the environment, while positive punishment comes with a high probability of ruining it. I argue that one cannot have true companionship with a dog if one chooses to train with force and pain. In addition, punitive training suffocates the dog’s welfare and potentially leads to side effects like aggression, anxiety and avoidance. It is well documented, and I talked about that in the past.
In laboratory settings and scientific studies, positive reinforcement leads to reliable and self-directed  behavior quickly, but dog owners aren’t scientists or savvy trainers. Dog owners come with diverse levels of experience, skill and know-how, and some are completely new to dogs and reward-based training. Even though neither is very complicated, they make mistakes, like anybody new to anything would. The good news is that with positive reinforcement mistakes won’t have long-lasting or irreparable negative consequences, but it can delay progress and cause enough frustration in the impatient person to give up on the concept altogether.
Here are the most common errors I see people, including some trainers, make.

Your intended reward is the dog’s punishment.
Not only can a pooch feel “Meh” about a reward, but it can be perceived as an aversive, and when that happens you get the exact opposite of what you’re aiming for: when your reward is the dog’s punishment, the behavior you meant to happen again actually decreases. A perfect example is taps on the head or hearty pats along the ribcage. Most dogs don’t like it and shy away.
If your dog avoids or refuses a reward, it isn’t a reward in his mind and won’t reinforce the behavior you are after. Don’t offer it again if he doesn’t want it. And that can include food. Don’t shove a treat into your dog’s mouth if he wants distance to a worrisome trigger, or play ball, or read peemail.
Not long ago I had a cattle dog client who perfectly demonstrated that: he brought the ball right back into the owner’s hand, who promptly gave him a pat on the head, with the result that the dog first snapped at the hand, and then refused to bring the ball all the way in the next time. The dog was labeled aggressive and erratic, when in fact he just acted that way as a result of being “punished” for bringing the ball back. When we “rewarded” him with throwing the ball again without delay, he stopped snapping and eagerly retrieved the toy all the way in.
The reverse also happens in many households: your punishment is the dog’s reward. The best example for that is the inadvertent reinforcement when the jumping dog is pushed off. That is attention, and from the dog’s point of view perhaps even an invitation for a wrestling game, and exactly what he wanted. Jumping is reinforced and therefore will happen again.
So, the take-away message is that a reward is what the dog wants, or it won’t reinforce the behavior you are after. Be creative. You don’t always have to be elaborate, although sometimes your pizzazz can greatly impress your dog, but know what he wants and use it to your advantage.
Right now, on walks, Will wants me to get rid of the pesky deer flies that bury themselves in her coat. I comply and pluck them off, but each time before I do I say “halt”, which in our world means don’t move and wait till I get to you. Her halting on command is powerfully reinforced with me killing the insects, plus we have many naturally occurring opportunities to practice, and because of both I can use the command in situations when it matters to me that Will stops in her tracks.


Your timing is off.
It means that your dog doesn’t form an association between behavior and reward. Especially for fleeting moments, a reward marker, for example a clicker, helps because it bridges action and reinforcement and clarifies to the dog exactly which behavior made the reward happen.
Along that train of thought, holding a grudge, although understandably human, is counterproductive.
If you are still upset about the dug-up flowerbed and gruff when your dog comes straight away when you called him out of the planters, you punish a perfect recall and he might not be so keen to return to you in the future.
It is the last action that counts, and if it is one you like, reinforce it. There is a hitch though: when a bad and a good behavior are lumped together, so when two actions occur very close in time with the first being undesired, but the second reinforced, there is a risk that the dog connects both and will always perform them in sequence. The best example is a dog who lovingly celebrates your homecoming with jumping, but a flash-moment later is sitting – either self-corrected or obeyed your command. Of course you want to reinforce the sit, but not the jump/sit combination. I deal with that by keeping the dog mentally engaged for a few seconds while she is in a sit, followed by asking her to do something else desirable, which I then reinforce. In other words, I give the sit some attention, but then invite the dog into a short, fun, interaction I like and that is rewarding, and/or rewarded. After that I inform the pooch with the “all-done” word and hand signal that I’m about to disengage and that she’s on her own for entertainment for a while.

Your reinforcement schedule is off.
Without getting too technical, reinforcements have to happen in rapid succession, right away, when the dog learns something new.
When the dog gets it, connects the dots between cue and a certain action – a good rule of thumb is the dog complying instantly and correctly 9 out of 10 times when prompted, but also deliberately offering the behavior to elicit a reward - you have two options: If it is the end goal behavior, continue to reinforce randomly, without a fixed pattern. That cements the behavior. An end behavior would be reliably coming when called. It doesn’t get any better than a dog returning to you enthusiastically. You should always acknowledge him for being so accommodating, but you don’t have to toss a handful of treats his way each time.
If it is an approximation, so just a step toward your goal, stop reinforcing altogether and raise the bar by a small increment. For example, if you shape a lie down on a mat, glancing at the mat, or having one paw on it, is not the final behavior, but you must reinforce each step constantly until the dog gets it, and once he does, so once you have the 9 out of 10 times reliability or he seeks out the mat when he is bored and proudly puts one paw on it, stop reinforcing that step and raise the criteria to bring you closer to your end goal, and then you reinforce that constantly until he gets it, and raise the bar again, and so on.

You are not orchestrating enough opportunities for your dog to earn a reward.
In other words, you are not practicing enough. If you can’t find reward-worthy behaviors often, lower your criteria and/or change the situation for the dog so that he can succeed.
The more you do it, the more the action you are training becomes a habit, and then your dog has one more good one up his sleeve. Habit means that the behavior learned with the help of operant conditioning becomes classical conditioned. Steve White, one of my favorite dog gurus, says: “ Anytime you use operant conditioning, Pavlov is sitting on your shoulder. And that is one dude you really want on your team.”

Not managing the dog wisely before a behavior is solid, thus setting him up for failure.
Don’t put your dog’s favorite bed near the picture window when barking at passersby is a problem. Their moving along is reinforcing for your dog and maintains barking at the window. If he has opportunity to do that all day long,  the little bit of “quiet” practice you do when you are home won’t have much of an effect.

Communicating unclearly.
For example using the same command for two behaviors, or not enforcing a command.
In that category also falls making unreasonable requests and raising the bar too quickly – in other words, being impatient and asking for more than the dog can do, but also chaining behaviors together before each one is solidly learned separately. If you work on a position stay, reinforce when the dog is still in position. If you call him out of position and reward him when he comes to you, you are practicing come, not the position stay. I will write more about command clarity sometime in the future, but for now remember that dogs are brilliant, but not mind readers. Say what you mean and reinforce when your dog does what you say. If you can’t enforce what you say, don’t say it.

Taking good behaviors for granted. Dogs offer behaviors we like all the time: don’t ignore, but capture and reinforce them. Don’t ignore the dog calmly chewing a bone on his blanket, and give attention when he steals your leather Italian pump.

If you made mistakes, don’t beat yourself up. The beauty of force and punitive free training is that you can’t really mess things up too badly. Positive reinforcement can be adjusted without creating unwanted and unexpected fallout. But if you can avoid making those common errors in the future, you’ll accelerate your training success and reach your goal faster.
When I see clients, positive reinforcement is a big part of the consultation, and the humans receive all the information they need to do it effectively. Just about everyone I meet gets it. It makes sense to them and is aligned with how they feel: most people don’t want to hurt their dog.  Yet, at times and typically after a prolonged pause, I hear the question: “Yes - but how do I correct my dog when he misbehaves?” Indeed, how do we punish? Or should we?
That, I will sort out for you in the next post. Look for it the end of July.

Positive Reinforcement: The Fasted Route to a Well-Behaved Dog

I am glad that I know a thing or two about dogs for two reasons: I get to work with my favorite species almost daily, and that constant overflow of, often contradictory, information how to successfully live with dogs doesn’t confuse me.
Dog owners must be puzzled these days. Thanks to TV and social media everyone is a dog expert and has an opinion not shy to share with anybody who wants to hear it – or not. As a result, there are many misconceptions circulating, and one is that positive reinforcement doesn’t work, or only with mild dogs.
Positive reinforcement is one of the four quadrants of operant conditioning, and it states that reinforcement creates behavior. In operant conditioning positive is not a judgment label, but simply means that a consequence is added after an action. Law means that it is not an opinion, but a scientifically studied, proven and documented fact. Positive reinforcement is my preferred method to train and treat dogs. Let me explain why.

An organism’s actions are driven by motivation: simplified, to access something that feels good or avoid something that feels bad. The dog is no exception. Newsflash! Dogs function like every other animal, including humans. They want and seek pleasure. It’s a fact, but one that clashes with humans’ infantile belief that a dog’s nature is to love unconditionally regardless how we treat him. Wishful thinking. Relationships between humans are conditional, and dogs behave in the same normal mammalian fashion.
Owners that refuse to facilitate pleasure have to inflict pain to get obedience. It is either-or, and in both cases it has to impress the dog or it won’t work. A lame “good dog” is just as ineffective in increasing a wanted behavior as a limp choke collar correction is in curbing an unwanted one. There is an analogy floating around for a long time that illustrates that brilliantly: The speeding ticket one.

People who exceed the posted speed limit are fined, but we all know that that punishment doesn’t deter folks to drive faster than permitted in the future. They might slow down for the moment, perhaps even for a little while, but the good behavior doesn’t last. Fines only teach people to be vigilantly on the lookout for cops to avoid getting caught again.
If fines don’t work, what might be a more effective solution? Well, we could manufacture cars that won’t drive faster than 100 clicks an hour - the dog equivalent is lifelong micromanaging. That is indeed the method some trainers choose: They advise to snap on a control tool, for example a shock collar, as soon as the dog is released out of his crate, and to take it off as the last thing before he’s put back in. I am not making this up.
How appealing is a preset slow car to you? A dog always controlled unless contained? Personally, I don’t want either, and thankfully, there is another way.
Let’s hypothesize what would happen if, instead of fining speeders, drivers who obey traffic laws received a reward. If cops were to randomly hand over 50-dollar bills, would lead foot ease up on the gas pedal? It depends if he needed the money and why he was driving too fast. A millionaire, or someone who is late for an important job interview, likely wouldn't, but I bet that overall rewarding good drivers instead of punishing bad ones would be more successful. In addition, that approach has two really great side effects: people would seek out law enforcement and not avoid it - that underlying queasy feeling when we see a cop car would disappear, and doing the speed limit would become a self-directed behavior, independent of surveillance. We’d try hard to comply not to miss out on the loot that might be lurking around the corner.

When we punish a dog, we are like the traffic cop. The dog might behave when we’re in the vicinity, for the moment, and only if the punishment we inflict overrides his drive to act. On the other hand, if we reinforce behaviors we like, we build a whole repertoire our dog will offer again, and again…
Are dogs really able to self-direct, to reliably act in ways that we desire but might be against their impulse? I say yes, but believe it is only achievable with positive reinforcement, and it must be applied correctly. There are two key aspects to remember: reinforcement happens after the behavior, and a reward is what matters to your dog - not what you think should be good enough.
The first one is straightforward. Don’t wave your cookie in the air and say come, but call your dog and when he comes the party begins. If the behavior doesn’t happen, neither will the reward. Self-explanatory, I hope, is that during the learning stages the dog must be managed wisely to prevent that he has opportunities to act in ways we don’t want but are externally, or intrinsically, reinforced. In other words, the dog should not be able to misbehave, because if it feels good to him, he’ll misbehave again.
The second point isn’t complicated either if you keep in mind that a reward is only a reinforcement if the behavior you are after happens again. Think back to the 50 bucks for doing the speed limit. That amount of money means nothing to a CEO who is regularly showered with huge perks, so it wouldn’t do much to keep him in line on the road. But it means a lot to someone like me who straddles the middle class, and even more to someone on a low income.
Similarly, the reward you offer your dog must mean something to him, or it will not reinforce the good behavior. When I see an obedient pooch patted on the head combined with verbal “good boy”, I wonder if his person schleps to the office each day for glass marbles and a bear hug from the boss. Even if they love their job and verbal approval, it is generally not enough. The big motivator is hard cash.
For a dog, the big motivator can be food, but isn’t always food. I could hardly impress Will with a milkbone shoved in her mouth when a hare pops out of the bushes in front of her. When she chooses to stay connected with me and ignore the bunny, she is working hard – and I hand out a bonus check. I reinforce with a chase game that might include me, or a special ball, or I might engage her in a seeking game and throw a handful of extra yummy treats for her to nose out.
You have to find your dog’s currency before you can put him on a payroll, and I’ll give you a tip: daily kibble isn’t it for most dogs. Don’t use kibble on the first day of the group obedience class, when distractions are high and your pooch has to work hard. Use chicken or garlic roast beef. People food. Good people food, not hot dogs.

Even though food is practical, think outside the box and be creative. The smarter the dog, the more creative the owner has to be. Be attuned. Attuned is the magic “a” word, not assertive. Understand what your dog wants at the moment, and whatever that is, is the reinforcement that will cause your dog to repeat the behavior that you are teaching. Examples of functional rewards are: riding in the car, a game of fetch or catch-me-if-you-can, distance to a stimulus the dog is fearful of, or the opposite: permission to greet and play.
An interesting walk is high on the wanna-do list for many dogs. Studies with rats showed that when given the choice to navigate through two mazes, with only one resulting in a food reward at the end, they alternated between both. Curiosity and avoiding boredom are powerful motivators for actions, and permission to explore a powerful reward for your dog after he’s paid attention to you, or walked nicely on the leash.
When you join your dog in investigative fun, perhaps even point out where you think interesting scents are, you are creating a deep bond. In the wintertime, we follow animal tracks we spot in the snow, and in the summer we pick berries together on hikes. When you do stuff like that, your dog will want to be with you, and is less and less inclined to seek stimulation away from you, and all training becomes much easier.

Whatever floats my dogs’ boat is what they’ll get when I want to reinforce a behavior I particularly love and want to see again. That makes me mighty powerful in their eyes. My dogs become addicted to me. The skeptics’ warning that reward-based training leads to a dog that behaves for rewards, not the owner, doesn’t hold true if you use positive reinforcement to establish that bond between you.
Yes, ultimately your involvement should matter most to your dog, but you only get that if he experiences that being with you feels better than anything else, and providing material things is a crucial part of it, especially with a new dog and before you meshed together. The dog first has to understand that you own all kinds of amazing assets, then you can put them under your control and make access contingent on behavior. If you orchestrate many opportunities for him to earn feel-good moments, he will try hard to please you. Please you to be released to what pleases him, and hopefully that includes you somehow as well. Trust me, that IS the fasted route to reliable obedience, a well-behaved dog, and a relationship with your canine friend envied by others.
Oh – one more thing: Because every dog wants something, obviously positive reinforcement does work with every dog.

Trainers and Methods on my Mind

There’s been a lively discussion on Facebook lately that started with someone posting that we, the positive reinforcement proponents, ought to be as positive with people as we are with dogs, and not say anything if we have nothing nice to say. It was an interesting thread and packed with, as it is typically the case in dog circles, polarized opinions. Some feel that if we don’t point out what compulsive and punitive treatment does to dogs, we become collaborators, enablers and facilitators. Others argue that we can accomplish more with educating instead of criticizing, and that we should keep the communication lines open. One person even questioned how credible a positive reinforcement trainer one is if she doesn’t extend those values to humans?

That one rang a bell. It’s true. Not all dog pros, and regardless what philosophy they follow, are pleasant with people. But when positive reinforcement trainers aren’t, there is a bigger contrast between how they treat dogs and how they treat humans, and the lack of people social skills becomes more obvious.

I pride myself in being my very best whenever I am with clients. My mission is that no dog should experience force, pain or intimidation at the hands of humans. I know, a lofty goal, but I am über-passionate about it anyway. Education trumps, and I am as patient, positive and gentle with people and their offspring as I am with their pooch, and don’t lay blame for mistakes they made in the past, because in all likelihood they followed somebody’s advice.

When I encounter colleagues who feel that I might have something to offer, I never hesitate to share what I know. And I do it nicely. I answer emails, return phone calls, meet for coffee and am welcoming when they attend my public speaking events.

That changes when folks try to convince me that dogs can’t be trained without corrections, discomfort and pain. No thank you. I’d be wasting my time, and theirs.

I have no interest in discussing their punitive and coercive ways, and I will also not stay silent. Why? Because I believe that punitive trainers cause, or contribute, to behavioral problems, violate the dog’s sense of emotional safety in his home, and do little to strengthen the relationship between dog and his people.

I am not alone. Scientific studies, published in Applied Animal Behavior Science, showed that aggression is a possible consequence of confrontational methods, both traditional - Koehler style, and hierarchical pack dominance – the stuff Millan does. Let’s have a detailed look:

With choke or prong collar corrections, 6% of dogs became aggressive.

Removing something forcefully from a dog’s mouth 15%; pinning, the alpha roll, 11%; hitting or kicking 12%, and I wonder if the “attention touch” with a foot or hand, the “bonker” with a rolled up towel or newspaper, and the “tap” with the flyswatter is included in that.

Millan’s famous tsst-sound that announces a correction unless the dog gets it together right away, 2% reacted to, and I suppose it might be the same with the warning tone that precedes a shock.

The stare-down was 16%; spray bottle 10%, and I suggest you quiz your dog’s daycare provider about that; yelling “no” 18%. Maybe it’s 18% with the shock collar tone as well, not 2%, or maybe somewhere in the middle.

The forced dominance down, which is when a leashed dog, typically on a choke or prong collar, is forced to lie and remain in that position for a set period of time, made 7% aggressive. The same with grabbing the jowls or scruff, and growling in the dog’s face was 9%.

Here is an interesting tidbit: During a 3-year field study in which a group of feral dogs was observed, the researchers noted that only 2% of hostility was directed against social group members. That indicates that aggression against someone the dog lives with is not normal dog behavior. Believe me that I meet many dogs that lash out against the people they live with; the adult male if the dog is confident enough, but more often aggression is directed toward the female owner, children, or other animals in the family.

Above study gives you a possible, I say probable, explanation. Dogs can become aggressive when confronted with intimidation and pain, and if they can avoid it with aggression, then aggression is powerfully reinforced. And keep in mind that only aggression was studied, not other anxiety expressions like emotional coma, hyperactivity and obsessive behaviors, inhibited learning and avoidance. Also note that you can’t predict the outcome accurately when you begin training.

Jim Ha, Research Associate Professor of Psychology at the University of Washington, and one of only a few handful of Ph.D. Certified Applied Animal Behaviorists in the US, states that certain individual dogs of certain breeds develop no anxiety with aversive training, provided it is done by an experienced trainer who applies the right amount of punishment at the right time. Those people, according to Ha, are highly skilled professionals often found in the assistance dog and K9 fields. They select the appropriate dog for their needs, and reject all others, which are the majority; the assistance dog facility Dr. Ha visited rejects about 70% of their already intentionally, for the job, bred puppies.

Is your neighborhood traditional, hierarchical, balanced or shock collar trainer that qualified and skilled? Do you have the right individual dog who can handle aversive training? Are you savvy enough to select the appropriate dog for your needs?

My hunch is: No, No and No. Some trainers are very skilled handlers, but based on my experience, not one rejects a dog, but accepts everyone in his group class or for private training. They accept every dog because they have to make a living. It’s about money.

Ha argues, and most behaviorists agree, that in unskilled hands, which are almost all dog owners, aversive methods are disasters in the making.

One more thing: The highest level of anxiety was observed with dogs that were trained and handled with the punishment/reward combination, which is the way of “balanced” trainers: traditional ones that jumped on the bandwagon of increasingly more popular clicker training. Can’t say that I am surprised. If you needed to be on guard to gauge which of your partner or boss’s side you have to deal with at any given day or moment, you’d be stressed out too.

I am sure there’ll be more studies like these in the future that prove that correcting, intimidating, startling on purpose, and applying force and pain does harm to dogs, and people by extension – the ones the dog lives with and society at large.

Intentionally inflicting discomfort is unpopular with many people. Dog owners rather not punish their canine companion, and I opine that trainers know that, and therefore often don’t lay all the cards on the table for you. They are not always frank about what they do, and what potential fallout it has, and use deflecting euphemisms: vibration collar, balanced approach, following nature’s rules, discipline, leader of the pack, training collar, stimulus, rules and boundaries, attention touch – relaxed or calm even when the dog is visibly stress panting or exhausted.

Trainers go to great lengths to explain the low settings of a shock collar, even let you experience it on your arm, but rarely offer information what the high settings are for. Let me guess: A dog who doesn’t respond like a robot with the low settings.

They circulate YouTube videos of an “aggressive” German shepherd who is “cured” in 5 minutes, or a reactive mastiff miraculously pacified after a short time wearing the company’s own collar. Those clips show the before and after behavior, but not how they got from point A to point B.

Punitive trainers’ websites often don’t reveal the methods they use, or describe them as unique and secret but unbelievably effective, or they speak in tongue most layowners don’t understand, like: using operant conditioning, applying all four quadrants.

Membership with a professional organization might flag their homepage, but they won’t tell you that the association is all-inclusive to begin with, or doesn’t screen their members very thoroughly.

There are clever PR moves to attract clients. Some offer a free in-home consultation, which sounds great but in reality typically means that they diagnose the dog’s issues in 15 minutes or less, and spend the rest of the time promoting a costly training package.

Some trainers guarantee that the dog will be rehabilitated for good. Sounds great too, but being 100% rehabilitated is realistically impossible. Dogs are not programmable computers, but living beings with a nervous system and emotions. Nobody can guarantee their behavior 100%, and nobody can guarantee the behavior of people that interact with the dog. No psychologist or therapist would ever make that claim. That is not how experts behave.

I am sour about all that. It feels like someone’s pissing on my leg and tells me it’s raining. And so I speak up. Not because they get clients and make money – protectionism is something trainers who are openly critical of others are often accused of, but because they are hurting dogs and the average layowner doesn’t know they do.

My loyalty is with dogs and their people, not other trainers. I don’t willy-nilly bash local ones, but when directly asked, I will forward first-hand knowledge I have about that person. Only first-hand stuff I witnessed or heard from my clients, their failures and fallouts.

The famous TV dog wranglers are, voluntarily I should say, in public view several times a week and are, as far as I am concerned, fair game to be criticized like any other public figure. There has to be an equalizer to a show that demonstrates a person walking assertively into even the meanest dog’s home, forcing the even strongest dog into submission, subduing every undesired expression permanently with a few easy corrections, and having a well-mannered dog in the end, even if he has caused trouble for years.

Behaviorists know that what people watch is unrealistic and has side effects, and some high-profile ones say so. And they should. And now a number of positive reinforcement trainers suggest we should keep da gob shut? Under the guise of professional conduct we have doctors, lawyers, soldiers, priests, scout members, police, politicians and so on covering for each other, and we dog trainers should do the same? Not this one.

Of course education, informing people about the power and benefits of positive reinforcement, is the most important aspect in creating welfare; making life better for dogs. And I do a lot of that: Seeing clients, writing blog posts and columns, my book and an another one I am presently working on, radio shows and articles, and giving lectures and seminars. On that note, my spring lecture series is posted on my webpage.

But in itself, without weighing the potential fallout of compulsive methods against it, and pointing out people who made a conscious decision to use them, the public mind believes that one approach, one trainer, is a good as the next one.

Thanks to the above-mentioned study you have verification that that is not the case. You have an idea about the possible risks, percentage-wise, involved with aversive handling.

I admit, sorting out dog professionals is not an easy task. My advice is to ask your groomer, daycare provider and dog walker what they do if: Your dog doesn’t obey right away. Growls. Plays rough.

Check out dog trainers’ websites. You can glance over niceties such as memberships, certification from a private school – even if, no especially if it is from one the TV personality’s academy, and guarantees, but pay more attention to the training philosophy they believe in. It should be very visibly listed on their site. If not, ask. Don’t be intimidated. If you feel intimidated by a person, how you think your dog will feel? Ask. It is your dog; it is your right and responsibility. A trainer and behavior consultant should deliver answers honestly before you hand over hard-earned dollars. Ask, especially if you have a dog who already has issues.

My question would be: “What equipment do you use?” If it is anything that can deliver pain, I’d walk away. If the answer is: “Whatever you use is fine. I will show you how to use it correctly”, I’d walk away.

If your trainer doesn’t want your children present, ask why. A dog is part of the social group he lives with, and observing the dynamics and interactions of all members is important information for me. There might be a valid reason why the professional you selected doesn’t want children to be part of the consultation, but if it is because what he’ll do to the dog would upset the kids – walk away.

Ask: “Which of the four quadrants do you apply?” If they don’t know what you’re talking about, walk away. If the answer is: “All four” or “Whatever works”, walk away. All four likely includes pain, delivered before and/or after a behavior, and whatever works might work for the trainer, but rarely the dog.

A dog professional’s priority should be dogs’ welfare. What you want to hear is: Positive reinforcement/negative punishment combination. You also want to hear that it is up to you to put time and effort into modifying your dog’s behavior, that you might have to make a few changes, and that you probably will have to manage the pooch until new behaviors are established, but that you will get the skills and information, including ongoing support, you need to succeed. Those are the realistic expectations owners can have of a behavior consultant.

Fact is that not everything is fixable, and for sure not right away. In reality, we are not action heroes for dogs as implied on TV. We are normal people who know a lot more about dogs and behavior than you do, and help you with some M and M – manage and modify; help you understand your dog's behaviors and lay out how he can become the best pooch possible.

Here they are: my thoughts – my rant. Accuse me of not being collegial if you like, but I take offense being called unprofessional for speaking up. I am a dog expert and act on behalf of dogs. Yes, I could play it politically correct, and be critical of method and not the person who applies it, but you can’t really separate the two, can you. It is the person who makes a conscious decision to choose one method over the other.

Warning Sounds and Non-Reward Marking

In my last post I discussed reward marking. How telling your dog with sound, word or body that what he does at the moment will be reinforced can expedite training success.

Do we have an opposite to that? An equally helpful… non-reward marker? The good news is that, indeed, we do. The bad news, that it is not as simple as merely vocalizing disapproval with our dog’s action.

Expressing disagreement with someone’s actions is a deep-seated behavior, and the human choice word in English is “no”. I have a T-shirt with a print of a smiling, goofy looking, tongue-lolling-out dog, with its voice bubble saying: “Hi, my name is No-No Bad Dog. What’s yours?” Sadly that comes close to what I hear regularly in my line of work: many “nos” and a lot of very popular “tssts”. Articulations meant to warn the pooch that his behavior will surely be disciplined, corrected, punished – you choose your word cause it is all the same, so he’d better knock it off. NOW.

Even though the “no” and “tsst” are clearly indicating that unruly Rover is certainly NOT getting a reward, they are not considered NRMs, non-reward markers, precisely because the intent is to threaten the dog with a punitive consequence. Unlike NRMs, such warning sounds, other than perhaps giving the owner the illusion that he’s the pack’s leader, are useless. Useless, because typically an action that impresses the dog does not follow the warning, and if there is no consequence the dog doesn't change his behavior, learns to ignore the warning, and eventually will tune you out. The fact that most people “no” or “tsst” all the time, day in and day out, for the same misbehaviors, for the lifetime of the dog, is evidence that they’re ineffectively nagging.

Warnings do work when backed up with something that hurts or frightens the dog in a big way. Then, indeed, a verbal sound or shock collar tone might be all it takes to remind him to toe the line. But aversive consequences intense enough that it stops an unwanted action permanently is abuse, and has fallouts most owners don’t bargain for. The dog avoids the misbehavior, and by extension you and where he lives, or where the punishment took place. Your companionship is in the ditch; your dog resists you, might attack you, or if too intimidated redirect aggression against someone weaker. A dog who fears the power of hands, who feels conflicted and uncertain when his person approaches him, reaches and touches him, or whenever he opens his mouth cause it announces possible imminent pain, will not want to be a human’s faithful friend and working partner, and the owner is missing out on something beautiful he could have had.

The purpose of a NRM is not to warn the dog that something unpleasant will happen, but like the reward marker is meant to strengthen your relationship. It does that by giving the dog clarity with a precise piece of sound information, many trainers like “oops”, that tells him that what he is doing at the moment will not yield a payoff and he’d better think of an alternate behavior to gain access to the resource he is after. So, the fundamental difference between “no” or “tsst” and “oops” is that the end result is not a punishment, but a reward, and with the NRM you’re helping your dog get it.

The Law of Operant Conditioning states that any behavior ignored will become extinct, so couldn’t we just ignore the dog’s unwanted behavior and wait till he comes up with the right one on his own? Patiently let him self-learn what pleases us; what causes us to release the resource he wants and we have control over? We could, and in fact some trainers argue that ignoring is better than non-reward marking, but in my opinion, a clear directional when the dog needs it can decrease frustration and increase attention. To understand when your dog really needs information and then give it, or when self-learning is better, can be a bit tricky and takes practice, but is the fine nuance between good, and fabulous dog training.

Ideally, be attuned to your pooch and apply both, with the caveat not to overuse reward and non-reward marking. Micromanaging can lead to a dog who becomes perpetually dependent on some sort of sound that tells him how to function; he operates purely mechanically and might disconnect from you.

In addition, non-stop noise is annoying. A friend and colleague shared with me a story she heard at a lecture with Certified Applied Animal Behaviorist Kathy Sdao. During a training session with dolphins, in which she used a NRM as information, one of the aquatic mammals became so irritated that he threw the speaker out of the water. He knew exactly where the constant clatter came from, and so does your dog, and you never want to be perceived as an irritant to be avoided or get rid of.

If the dolphin was that frustrated with simply getting information, can you imagine the impact constant warning sounds have on an animal? If you decide to give non-reward marking a go, ensure that you don’t use a word that was a threat in the past your dog has learned to ignore or fear. That word is spoiled and you need a new one. “Ah” works for me, but if you used “ah”, or a sound close in tone as a warning before, try “oops”, or “oh-oh”, or whatever falls naturally on your tongue. It doesn’t matter what you say, important is how your dog perceives it. How he should perceive an NRM is: “Mom says I’m barking up the wrong tree – better do something else to secure the loot.”

Trainer and author Gail Fisher, who calls the NRM Lost Opportunity Marker or LOM, uses a visual signal. She turns her head. Averting the head is also part of a dog’s natural communication and signals that he’d rather not deal with the situation; that he is worried, or not granting audience. Although I really like the subtleness of body language, the head turn obviously only works if the dog is watching you while being baaad. And I see another problem. Because it is dog-speak and expresses avoidance, I wonder how he’d perceive my head turn? Disengagement, displeasure, disinterest in further interactions? If that is the case, the LOM changes from informative to aversive – back to a warning. Even though no real punishment ever follows, but a reward once the dog changes his behavior, a sensitive pooch, for example one who was treated harshly and is shell-shocked, or a very timid one like our Will, could lose the courage to work and connect with that person right away. For that reason, I rather stick to my neutral “ah”, and if I want to add a visual signal I shake my head, cause that is not natural to dogs and my intention can’t be misconstrued.

After you tell your dog with an NRM that he’s strutting the wrong trail, should you use a command that tells him what he should be doing instead?

Gail Fisher gives the dog a second chance right away and cues the desired behavior. She explained that she does so because she aims for immediate command response, but also because she wants to keep the dog in the game; prevent that he gives up if he feels that the window of opportunity to earn the reward closes for good.

For the most part, I like to give my dog some 20-30 seconds to think of a way to get the booty, thereby combining information with self-learning.

You can play around with cuing or waiting, verbal or visual, as long as you remember the two fixed and crucial aspects: the information you give your dog should never be threatening but assisting, and your dog’s next best behavior has to be reinforced, rewarded, and ideally with what he wants at the moment. Then the NRM becomes one more tool that helps make you and your dog an awesome team.

Clicker and Reward Marking

If you’ve been following my posts, you might have noticed that I believe that positive reinforcement done right, combined with non-punitive, brainy leadership is the fasted way to a reliably well-behaved dog – regardless of dog or problem behaviors. I don’t compromise on that, and luckily don’t have to even when my clients want to pursue group training I don’t offer anymore, cause in my neck of the woods are several like-minded trainers whose philosophy latch hand-in-paw with mine - and if you want to know who they are, email me.

Most of them are clicker trainers, and the common believe is that we all are; that positive reinforcement is synonymous with clicker training. But that is not so. There are some who apply the method without the clicker. I am one of them.

On that note, one could assume that, because the clicker concept in itself is incompatible with punishments, that all clicker trainers apply the reward-based method exclusively, but that is also not so. Some are incorporating the trendy gadget more as a calculated PR move than authentically shifting away from compulsion and correction training – so something to be aware of.

In case you have no clue what I am talking about, let me explain the clicker briefly. It is a small sound making device that marks the exact moment when the dog performs a desirable behavior, which gives the person a few seconds to hand over the real reward, which, with clicker trainers, is often a food treat. In other words, the clicker is a communication tool, with the sound clarifying to the dog that she’ll be paid for the brilliant thing she just did.

Why is reward marking with a clicker important for the layowner? Or is it? Should he even pay attention to such a technical detail?

In my opinion, reward marking is über-handy when shaping a new fancy trick, capturing a funky body movement, and in the beginning stages of teaching a new task. It can really speed things up, because the dog is not ambiguous what the bulls-eye action is. That is especially true if a frisky dog switches from one behavior to another quickly, or if the human is a tad slow in handing over the paycheck. So, a clicker makes a lot of sense if the correct moment is important but fleeting, cause it helps the dog to understand what exactly it is you are after.

A clicker can also be helpful for an owner eager to change from the traditional choke and jerk training method to positive reinforcement. Habitually used to notice the mistakes a dog makes so he can correct them, a clicker forces him to shift his focus to what his pooch is doing correctly which, of course, is the idea behind positive reinforcement training: teaching the dog a repertoire of behaviors that please us she can use to elicit what pleases her.

But in day-to-day life, or whenever you want prolonged connection and behavior duration, the clicker can actually present a hurdle.

For example, what I regularly see is an owner sending the pooch to her mat with the intent that she chills for a bit. The dog typically complies and lies on the mat alright, but instead of relaxing, tensely expects to be clicked and rewarded and, because she’s learned that the sound ends the exercise, self-releases right after. Not every trainer teaches that the click signals the end of the exercise, many of my friends don’t, but others do, and when they do, position duration stays with a dog who anticipates instant gratification can become difficult. If the click doesn’t manifest when expected, the dog becomes frustrated and fidgety, barky or whiny, and if it does, it is the dog’s cue that she can leave the mat and do what she wants, which often is returning to the behavior the owner sent her to the mat for in the first place.

We have similar problems regarding coming when called and eye contact. The recalled dog typically returns to her person, but doesn’t hang close for long and splits as soon as she’s received the click‘n’cookie, and rather than prolonged eye contact and true connection, the owner gets an automated quick glimpse. Eye contact attention is such a natural behavior for dogs that can so easily be fostered, that it is a shame to teach it as a trick, an artificial exercise.

I am also not convinced that a clicker is particularly useful in behavior modification. Here is my thing: if my imaginary three-year-old child is hyped to watch her favorite TV show, and I tell her to do something else first, and she does, and then I click her, fetch cookies and milk and then turn on the TV, would that decrease her anxiety, or would she be annoyed with the delay? Following that thought, if my fearful of dogs pooch stays calm and attentive to me when she sees another dog, the sensible and effective reward is to increase the distance to the other dog immediately, not to click, treat and then walk away.

Because kids are humans, it is easy for us to get what they want; with dogs that can be a little harder to figure out, especially for the more inexperienced rookie owner. There is a risk that the beginner clickerer focuses too much on the device, and not enough on what the dog’s motivators are. Yet, taking the time and interest to find out what drives the dog pays off, cause if she associates her person as the facilitator, her bond and connection increases, and with it obedience. The best behaved dogs are the ones whose individual and species-specific needs are understood and met.

Dogs, by virtue of their species, are very attuned to us and expert readers of our body and verbal communication signals. Dog owners, since forever, inadvertently or deliberately convey with a “good dog”, or a nod, when they’re pleased with their pooch’s behavior. The problem that delays training success is that many people stop with the praise, believing that to be good enough a reward. But if you follow it with a for your dog desirable consequence, your verbal “attaboy” or “yes”, your smile and gooey way you look at her, becomes a natural reward marker.

Clicker proponents argue that consistency is lost when we use our self to tell our dog that exactly this or that is what we want to see again, and yes, that is possible. And yes again, consistency is crucial in scientific studies, and important in our relationship with dogs and really anything we do in life, but I doubt that when I tell my dog with emotion, words and gestures how happy I am with her performance, that I adversely impact her future behavior. In addition, non-clicker reward marking might not be inconsistent at all. We all have an intrinsic and subconscious, yet habitual way in which we express ourselves that our dogs are, or at least should be, able to interpret.

A clicker-conditioned dog doesn’t have to observe the owner. I want my dogs to observe me. Our dogs connect the dots between their behavior, our human-typical responses, and what happens next. If we involve ourselves in a positive way, they’ll be wanting more of us. It is that voluntary, deeper connection I want to foster, and not an artificial approval signal.

Before clicker aficionados jump me, if you are successful with it, of course continue. If you and your dog are a team, and everything is cool, don’t change. And if you are looking for trainer, don’t rule her out because she clicks.

But if you feel that you and your pooch are stuck somewhere, it is not because you’re not correcting enough, or because she is dumb, defiant or dominant, but perhaps because she is on autopilot like a Skinner rat, and you might wanna rethink some aspects how you relate with her.

And you owners who embrace positive reinforcement but not the clicker, don’t worry that you're doing things wrong. Think KISS and Keep It Simple, Stupid. Use your voice and body to tell her how brilliant she is, and how happy you are that you partnered up; but do tell, and reinforce the desired actions with something she really wants, and you’ll be applying the reward marking concept very effectively.

Maybe, by promoting the clicker as one of the wonderful tools available to us, instead of the only or best one, more people might embrace positive reinforcement as the sole way to raise, teach and live with their canine companion.

What If You Are Not Calm-Assertive?

Cesar Millan, National Geographic’s famous dog trainer, is touring major Canadian cities to tell people how to become calm-assertive. I’ll bet that tickets to his events sold out in a flash, cause many people want to know exactly that. I know that, because my inbox is regularly peppered with “Dog Whisperer” lingo, like red zone, submissive, pack leader and yes, often the question: “Can you help me to become calm-assertive”? Canadian owners will be thrilled having the chance to hear the real pop-psych for dogs explain them how. If I’d ever meet Cesar Millan, I have a question of my own. What if you are NOT calm-assertive?

Even though Millan claims that everyone must, and can be calm-assertive, in reality most lay owners fall short. Someone who is by nature hesitant, softhearted, a bit unsure, cautious or sensitive, and whose body language reflected that for all her life, cannot switch suddenly and assume a different persona on a dime, even if she visualizes being some strong-minded celebrity.

And faking it for 10 or 15 years, or however long the dog lives, is just not functional – and counterproductive. Imagine you observing someone you live with acting a certain way all day long, and the moment he addresses you he becomes this mock alpha. Would that confuse you? Maybe make you a tad anxious and suspicious?

Never mind the physical aspect. Just recently I had an inquiry from a couple who were convinced that their 16-week-old pup was striving for pack leadership. They wanted my help to demote him a few pegs, cause the lady of the house was already afraid of him, and hubby not very successful. They described this pup, a giant breed who’ll eventually weigh around 150 pounds, as a born 10 on the alpha scale and wanted me to bring him down to an 8. Aside from the fact that their diagnosis was probably inaccurate, it mystifies me why they thought that would do them any good. A male adult livestock guardian dog with big teeth who’s an 8 is still a huge problem, especially if his people set the stage for, or were feeding, a confrontational relationship.

The average owner failing the corporeal aspect of the calm-assertive mantra is typical.

Corrections look so easy when applied by a professional skilled in applying corrections. Things done by experts always look easy, no matter what the field. Dog training isn’t an exception. If one practices for twenty years, one gets very good at it. A punitive dog trainer with decades of experience manhandling dogs is very proficient. That doesn’t mean that you, your grandpappy, or your 10-year-old can mimic that.

I mean, who can do the left-turn leg-thrust while jogging? How do you pin a struggling Great Dane till he capitulates if you’re 5’5”? Or lift him off the floor on his choker?

Millan, and other experienced handlers look good cause wrangling dogs is what they’ve been doing for many years. They are physically skilled to overcome any dog – and don’t mind getting bitten in the process. Chances are you do mind. In fact, for most people a bite is a deal breaker and gets the dog a one-way trip to the veterinarian.

Life’s reality is not someone blustering about with a straight backbone saying “Ssht”. It is normal for people to periodically be tense, frazzled, tired, or anxious. Dogs live in neighborhoods where they are liked by some and feared by others, and looked at even if you tell someone not to. Dogs live in our midst, and naturally experience the colorful palette of people’s personalities, and that is what they should habituate to.

So, quit stressing out if you can’t pull it off like Millan or the punitive trainer near you. Luckily, and unlike a dog who can neither choose how he is treated, nor can he express anything but what he feels, humans have alternatives.

One could, for example, be calm-cognizant. You all have a cerebral cortex, right? So, use that. Rationalize that people and dogs are individuals and learn at different paces. Learn about behavior, communication, positive reinforcement and reframing, conditioning and counter-conditioning, desensitizing and habituation….

And calm-compassionate. Compassion is a human thing, too. It's seeing the world from someone else’s point of view, and offering refuge and safety if that someone is anxious or frightened. It's releasing pressure with the overwhelmed dog, pushing a little less and progressing at the his comfort level, even if it takes time.

How about calm-confident. Cognizance combined with compassion leads to success and success builds confidence. Automatically, without the person having to pretend anything. Failure destroys confidence, so manage and orchestrate situations that set you and your dog up for success.

Static assertive, strong, and physically skilled humans don’t represent the real world. Dogs live with young and old people; physically and emotionally stronger and weaker ones; people who have good and bad days, and not with a charismatic male whose aptitude is to fearlessly overpower dogs.

Your dog understands that. So be yourself when you interact with him cause that is what you do best. But know how to manage space and control resources, how to teach without errors and how to get voluntary attention, and offer safety, and you will still be the leader in your dog’s eyes, even if you can’t knuckle-bite as effectively as Cesar Millan.

Unpredictable Results of Corrections

I got an e-mail the other day from an owner of a reactive, mixed breed, dog. She is not a client, but visited my website a few times and wanted to share some positive feedback, which is great, cause that is what my website is meant to do – change people’s minds and approaches, and offer a few how-to tips.

The person had hired a local trainer to help her with her dog’s reactive outbursts whenever she encountered dogs on the walk, which is a common problem. The trainer’s method was to put a prong collar on the dog and apply a strong correction each time the dog flipped out. I’m not going to say who that trainer is, cause it’s not appropriate to bash a colleague, but it also doesn’t matter because that method is used by many, especially cause it is also the one Seen On TV, and has become very popular again.

As a good owner should, the person who sent the e-mail followed the “expert” advice - and saw her dog’s behavior deteriorate. Now, she is not only afraid of other dogs, but also of her person. The trainer, so the e-mail says, at that point threw in the towel, stating that some dogs are just like that – are happy alone hiding in the basement.

One of the profound differences between forceful correction training, and purely positive reinforcement, is that when you begin correction training, it is impossible to predict the outcome, and with positive reinforcement, you can always, accurately, predict the consequences.

With correction training, the handler suppresses (or tries to) expressions of fear and stress, and coerces obedience. The unanticipated results are:

The dog lashes out and aggresses – against the owner or others - or

Secondary problem behaviors develop, because fear and stress is increased - or

The existing ones intensify, which requires to correct even harder, and things spiral out of control - or

The dog avoids and tries to escape out of fear, for example hides, bucks, pulls - or

The dog becomes neurotic and develops compulsive disorders like obsessive licking or tail chasing and biting.

Some dogs shut down, deflate, and emotionless and mindlessly obey with precision, but other than that do nothing anymore. They are the ones called well behaved, obedience titled and shown as success stories; the ones the public sees. The fallout, dogs that respond in any of the other ways and are euthanized, dumped somewhere or with someone, surrendered to a shelter, or delegated to a lifelong solitary existence in the back yard, the public doesn’t see.

The person who wrote me the e-mail deals with an outcome that is all too common.

I see it dealing with dog owners. I witnessed it at an aggression seminar where a pooch, reactive to dogs but super friendly with people, at the end of two days also reacted to people.

Even the mighty Dog Whisperer is not immune to that. A beagle mix, a case in season one, was terrified of the garden hose and ran away, but tolerated being bathed in the bathtub. After Millan forced him with corrections to deal with the hose, he began to offensively aggress when bathed in the tub. The behavior changed from fleeing from one trigger, to fighting in a general sense, whenever water was involved.

When Positive Reinforcement is applied, the consequences are 100 percent predictable.

Although changing the reactive dog’s mind about a trigger stimulus can take time, and some dogs need to be managed for life, during rehabilitation following things always happen:

The dog becomes increasingly motivated to work with the owner – and

Stress and fear decreases – and

The dog is learning acceptable coping skills – and

The dog is learning to trust the owner, and once that is accomplished, she begins to feel safe at home and in novel situations - and

The dog is eager to learn - and

The relationship improves and as a result the dog’s behavior.

I commend owners that don’t give up and search for a different way after their last trainer deemed the dog incurable; after the trainer failed the dog, then blamed the dog. Such trainers keep us positive reinforcement pros in business – unfortunately, cause I would rather see all dogs treated kindly, even if I’d have to look for another job.

Whenever I do meet a correction trained “fallout”, the first step is to reestablish the relationship with the owner, cause as long as the dog doesn’t trust that her person is a refuge, she will feel alone when in conflict and express that in emotional outbursts.