# Study: “Does training method matter?”



## curlflooffan (Mar 27, 2020)

Oh yeah big changes. I can explain more when not on my phone but long story short. Dog A childhood dog, went to puppy class and given a choke chain. Seemingly wilfully disobedient, lousy recall, leash puller. Very independent, liked to find trouble on his own.

Dog B, mums dog but I lived with them for a while. Changed training approach, humane and positive. Perfect recall, most obedient dog we have ever had. Looks to us for guidance, never seeks trouble alone, prefers to seek trouble together haha. Checks in with us, communicates with us (my SO commented on this when he met the dog. Said he had never seen a dog who communicates his will and feelings like that).

You want to know what the funniest thing about this is?

Dog A was a labrador mix, dog B is a terrier!!! 😂


----------



## Dechi (Aug 22, 2015)

Well, I’ve lived the « nose in the pee » era where you taught dogs not to soil the house by putting their nose in their urine... That’s what everyone did at the time. That’s what we knew.

I’ve gone from this to using 90% praise with my dogs, with the occasional soft scolding. Never harsh, never yelling. I may have lost patience once or twice in the last 5 years but I always regretted it and profusely apologized, in tears. I just can’t stand them not feeling good.

Times are changing, and it’s a good thing !


----------



## Liz (Oct 2, 2010)

Thanks for sharing this study, PtP. When I got my first dog as an adult and dove into dog training, I was amazed at how much had changed. Like Dechi said, from nose-in-the-pee and tethering to a tree all day to positive training and doggy kindergarten, it's been a much needed revolution in pet care.


----------



## AliFenrisMom (Sep 14, 2020)

It's still different between countries. My family in Poland think I'm insane. I didn't even have a word for doggy daycare to explain to my family the concept. And classes with a dog? Don't you just walk them twice a day in the city? Or let them run around freely on a farm with no fencing? And of course the good 'ole smack their nose when they do something bad solution... I was in shock. 

(But then again my family in Poland shocks me on a regular basis on a variety of topics...)


----------



## scooterscout99 (Dec 3, 2015)

I was horrified recently when my sister stopped her 10 mo schnauzer puppy from barking by hitting it on the snout (following advice of a trainer). When I questioned this her response was, "well it worked. And I spanked my kids, too." She started out with this dog well intentioned, was reading Patricia McConnell and others. We disagree on many topics; this one is heartbreaking.


----------



## Fenix&Felix (Oct 21, 2020)

PeggyTheParti said:


> Patricia McConnell just shared this interesting summary:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you for starting this thread. I had a rather nasty fracture of my right wrist (dominant hand, naturally) when Felix was 4 months old. We were just starting to make good progress on loose leash walking when much of my training with him just had to stop—and now that I have the use of my right hand again, my little puppy is a big guy who can pull hard enough to lift me off my feet, plus has that adolescent thing going on where he needs to think about is there actually any point to doing that sit I asked for. 

I’ve been committed from the beginning to use positive training methods, but I feel sometimes that the whole world is pushing aversive training advice on me (one of my co-workers recently recommended the smack on the nose to stop his mouthing—that is something I will never do!) Met a neighbor with a beautiful English Setter wearing a service dog vest and a PRONG COLLAR! I asked and she praised the training center she went to; according to their website, they also train with shock collars.

We recently attended a basic obedience class at positive training center, but the trainer was really disorganized and some of the content was overly basic (week 3 was learning sit, down, and stand—Felix has known how to do those things since 12 weeks old, if not younger), so that was a disappointment. Right now it’s hard to even find a class that isn’t already full, so I signed up and just started Susan Garrett’s Recallers course online.

I really appreciate you sharing this information. I had a physically and emotionally abusive parent and I don’t want to treat my own child (never had one but my pets occupy the same plain of responsibility in my mind) that way. I’ll be interested to see what others have to say.


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

I imagine dogs navigating the human world like humans navigating a maze...blindfolded. 

Imagine a shock around one corner, a yank on the throat around another. You back up and someone shouts in your ear. You slam on the brakes and here comes another shock!

You may figure out the maze. You may even figure it out quickly because you’re running in a blind panic. Or maybe you shut down completely and someone has to guide you out...

Now imagine the same maze with the tantalizing smell of French fries, pizza, and freshly baked pie wafting towards you from the exit. You turn a corner and someone murmurs gently, “_You’re going the right way. Good job. Just like that._” Around another corner, someone rewards you with a cold glass of lemonade. When you’ve been walking a while, and start feeling overwhelmed, you’re allowed to remove your blindfold for a few minutes, to watch the birds soaring overhead and take a big stress-relieving breath. The worst thing that ever happens is you occasionally bump into a wall, but it’s soft. Forgiving. You just turn the other way and carry on. And when you reach the end of the maze, there’s a _party_ in your honour.

You can hardly wait to tackle the next maze!


----------



## Fenix&Felix (Oct 21, 2020)

PeggyTheParti said:


> I imagine dogs navigating the human world like humans navigating a maze...blindfolded.
> 
> Imagine a shock around one corner, a yank on the throat around another. You back up and someone shouts in your ear. You slam on the brakes and here comes another shock!
> 
> ...


Yes! 👍🥰


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

Fenix&Felix said:


> Thank you for starting this thread. I had a rather nasty fracture of my right wrist (dominant hand, naturally) when Felix was 4 months old. We were just starting to make good progress on loose leash walking when much of my training with him just had to stop—and now that I have the use of my right hand again, my little puppy is a big guy who can pull hard enough to lift me off my feet, plus has that adolescent thing going on where he needs to think about is there actually any point to doing that sit I asked for.
> 
> I’ve been committed from the beginning to use positive training methods, but I feel sometimes that the whole world is pushing aversive training advice on me (one of my co-workers recently recommended the smack on the nose to stop his mouthing—that is something I will never do!) Met a neighbor with a beautiful English Setter wearing a service dog vest and a PRONG COLLAR! I asked and she praised the training center she went to; according to their website, they also train with shock collars.
> 
> ...


First, I’m so sorry you grew up in a situation like that. I’m glad the cycle is stopping with you. That’s not easy. You have my deepest respect...and a big hug.

And yep, I can totally relate to the feeling of being out of step with the world when it comes to dog training (and caring for animals in general). But the bottom line is that they’re wrong—morally _and_ scientifically.

A neighbour recently asked a local forum for trainer recommendations. Her rescue dog barks too much and she wants help addressing it. I offered a local suggestion and also provided links to two directories of certified trainers, warning her that anyone can call themselves a trainer and that no training is probably better than bad training, so to proceed with caution. The _very next comment _was from a woman saying she used to be a “trainer” and the dog just needs a good whack on the nose with a newspaper.


----------



## Fenris-wolf (Apr 17, 2018)

I wish my Mom and Dad had realized this with our Aussie. They didn't use the best training. She was a extraordinary dog, but I think she would have done even better if they used positive reinforcement.


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

scooterscout99 said:


> I was horrified recently when my sister stopped her 10 mo schnauzer puppy from barking by hitting it on the snout (following advice of a trainer). When I questioned this her response was, "well it worked. And I spanked my kids, too." She started out with this dog well intentioned, was reading Patricia McConnell and others. We disagree on many topics; this one is heartbreaking.


What can you do, right? Especially when someone is so defensive.  I definitely have a few situations like that in my social circles, as well. It’s so hard watching from the sidelines when an animal is involved.

My goal is for Peggy to be a good ambassador for positive reinforcement, so I can organically influence my little corner of the world. It actually helps that she had kind of a rocky start, so people can see how far she’s come and how we’ve gotten there.


----------



## Fenris-wolf (Apr 17, 2018)

Fenix&Felix said:


> I had a physically and emotionally abusive parent and I don’t want to treat my own child (never had one but my pets occupy the same plain of responsibility in my mind) that way.


I'm very sorry you had to go through that. I understand you not wanting to do the same. Yes, your pets can be your kids. I had to deal with emotional abuse too. I want to treat my pets the best possible.


----------



## Rose n Poos (Sep 22, 2017)

When the recent thread mentioning an e-collar was posted I found this small study which I thought was set up interestingly.

Efficacy of Dog Training With and Without Remote Electronic Collars vs. a Focus on Positive Reinforcement








Efficacy of Dog Training With and Without Remote Electronic Collars vs. a Focus on Positive Reinforcement


We assessed the efficacy of dog training with and without remote electronic collars compared to training with positive reinforcement. A total of 63 dogs with known off-lead behavioral problems such as poor recall were allocated to one of three training groups (each n = 21), receiving up to 150...




www.frontiersin.org






Dogs may have descended from wolves and come to live around and with humans for the handy food but I believe that they stayed for the belly rubs and ear scritches .


----------



## Fenix&Felix (Oct 21, 2020)

PeggyTheParti said:


> First, I’m so sorry you grew up in a situation like that. I’m glad the cycle is stopping with you. That’s not easy. You have my deepest respect...and a big hug.
> 
> And yep, I can totally relate to the feeling of being out of step with the world when it comes to dog training (and caring for animals in general). But the bottom line is that they’re wrong—morally _and_ scientifically.
> 
> A neighbour recently asked a local forum for trainer recommendations. Her rescue dog barks too much and she wants help addressing it. I offered a local suggestion and also provided links to two directories of certified trainers, warning her that anyone can call themselves a trainer and that no training is probably better than bad training, so to proceed with caution. The _very next comment _was from a woman saying she used to be a “trainer” and the dog just needs a good whack on the nose with a newspaper.


Thanks for the hug, always appreciated. Well, I’ve had years of therapy and some very helpful and loving people in my life. Also, having dog and cat “kids” is extremely beneficial in that they provide someone to care for and that unconditional love thing is not insignificant, as everyone on this forum well knows. 

As far as your anecdote about advising your neighbor, you have to wonder if this “former trainer“ even _likes _dogs?! It’s amazing that people can still advocate violence as a way of teaching 🥺


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

Rose n Poos said:


> When the recent thread mentioning an e-collar was posted I found this small study which I thought was set up interestingly.
> 
> Efficacy of Dog Training With and Without Remote Electronic Collars vs. a Focus on Positive Reinforcement
> 
> ...


Thank you! I’ll take a look.

I think the study I shared might hit a nerve in some people, because it goes beyond the more controversial shock collar to everyday aversives, like loud vocal corrections and leash pops. Before Peggy came along, I will admit I did both.

On that note: If anyone reading this is feeling defensive, I get it. Honestly, I do. It’s uncomfortable reflecting on how I treated beloved dogs past. It would be easier to pretend all this comes naturally to me, but nope. I’m human. Anger comes naturally. Frustration comes naturally. Even aggression comes more naturally than some of the methods I’m currently learning. I think it’s okay to admit that. It’s maybe even _important_ to admit that.


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

Dechi said:


> I always regretted it and profusely apologized, in tears. I just can’t stand them not feeling good


You have such an empathetic heart.


----------



## Fenris-wolf (Apr 17, 2018)

PeggyTheParti said:


> like loud vocal corrections and leash pops. Before Peggy came along, I will admit I did both.


I did both with our Aussie too because me and my parents didn't know any better and we even used a choke chain on her😞. There was this one time where she got loose and went to play in a puddle (🤣) I got her back, but I yelled her.


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

Fenris-wolf said:


> I did both with our Aussie too because me and my parents didn't know any better and we even used a choke chain on her😞. There was this one time where she got loose and went to play in a puddle (🤣) I got her back, but I yelled her.


Yep, we used a choke chain on our family dog. I was probably 8 years old when I would walk her on that thing, popping and checking and imitating the British dog trainer I watched obsessively on TV.

I was a true animal lover. I lived and breathed dogs and horses. I just didn’t know any better.


----------



## Fenris-wolf (Apr 17, 2018)

PeggyTheParti said:


> Yep, we used a choke chain on our family dog. I was probably 8 years old when I would walk her on that thing, popping and checking and imitating the British dog trainer I watched obsessively on TV.
> 
> I was a true animal lover. I lived and breathed dogs and horses. I just didn’t know any better.


I was the same way!! I'm just happy that I didn't have access to Ceser Millan😬 Who was the British dog trainer??

Same!! I really wish I had known what I know now with training when we had our Aussie or Greyhound.


----------



## Fenix&Felix (Oct 21, 2020)

PeggyTheParti said:


> Thank you! I’ll take a look.
> 
> I think the study I shared might hit a nerve in some people, because it goes beyond the more controversial shock collar to everyday aversives, like loud vocal corrections and leash pops. Before Peggy came along, I will admit I did both.
> 
> On that note: If anyone reading this is feeling defensive, I get it. Honestly, I do. It’s uncomfortable reflecting on how I treated beloved dogs past. It would be easier to pretend all this comes naturally to me, but nope. I’m human. Anger comes naturally. Frustration comes naturally. Even aggression comes more naturally than some of the methods I’m currently learning. I think it’s okay to admit that. It’s maybe even _important_ to admit that.


My first dog got her CDX using the Koehler method (chose chain, ear pinches...), but our success in obedience competition was due more to her eagerness to please me rather than my training. The idea of rewards in training was anathema back then (late 70’s). There has truly been a revolution in understanding of how animals (including humans) process emotions and pain. When I graduated nursing school in 1986, baby boys were still being circumcised with no sedation, anesthesia, or even lidocaine to numb the tissue because it was believed that newborns didn’t feel pain. I got to witness this as a nursing student, it was downright barbaric! That was not really that long ago, 35 years.


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

Fenris-wolf said:


> I was the same way!! I'm just happy that I didn't have access to Ceser Millan😬 Who was the British dog trainer??
> 
> Same!! I really wish I had known what I know now with training when we had our Aussie or Greyhound.


----------



## Fenris-wolf (Apr 17, 2018)

PeggyTheParti said:


>


The puppy seemed very uncomfortable. I'm happy that the both of us are willing and eager to learn how to train dogs better. There are people who refuse to follow modern dog training methods. I'm gonna start a new thread because this brings up something else I wanted to share here that I was a week or 2 ago.


----------



## Fancypants (Jan 11, 2021)

Fenix&Felix said:


> Yes! 👍🥰


Superbly put!!


----------



## Fancypants (Jan 11, 2021)

PeggyTheParti said:


> I imagine dogs navigating the human world like humans navigating a maze...blindfolded.
> 
> Imagine a shock around one corner, a yank on the throat around another. You back up and someone shouts in your ear. You slam on the brakes and here comes another shock!
> 
> ...


Superbly put!!


----------



## Skylar (Jul 29, 2016)

Dechi said:


> Well, I’ve lived the « nose in the pee » era where you taught dogs not to soil the house by putting their nose in their urine... That’s what everyone did at the time. That’s what we knew.


 I had a toy poodle in this era and I regret that we didn't know better. I knew when she peed in the house because she would hide when we came home. She didn't have accidents often. 

Looking back the wisest thing I did was pass the dog training onto my 6 yo daughter. She adored animals, loved her little tpoo and she instinctively trained with the current methods. Lots of treats, praise and play time. No harsh words, no torture etc. She had that dog doing circus dog tricks and much more.

I'm thankful that I found trainers who taught me good training techniques.


----------



## curlflooffan (Mar 27, 2020)

The only thing that any of us can ever do is to do our best with the information and resources available to us at any given time. I think that being open to new information, especially when that information challenges long-held beliefs, is very admirable and I have a lot of respect for people who have had dogs for decades and changed the way they train as our understanding of canine behaviour and learning has evolved.


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

curlflooffan said:


> The only thing that any of us can ever do is to do our best with the information and resources available to us at any given time. I think that being open to new information, especially when that information challenges long-held beliefs, is very admirable and I have a lot of respect for people who have had dogs for decades and changed the way they train as our understanding of canine behaviour and learning has evolved.


Amen to that! As we get older, I think we have to recognize how long-held beliefs can get a grip on _us_. There’s freedom in outgrowing them, but it’s not always comfortable.

I was just saying to my husband yesterday that, even in my 40s, I find myself increasingly embarrassed when I realize I’ve been wrong about something my whole life. Even if it’s something small and silly like pronouncing a word incorrectly, it seems to take more and more confidence to push through the discomfort.


----------



## Raindrops (Mar 24, 2019)

I think these studies over simplify the issue to the point I find them not useful. It's true that training has evolved greatly over time. Old fashioned punishment-based training is undoubtedly not the best route. I think we can all say that. But I don't think that means aversives don't have a place. I think aversives can be used very well and very poorly. It's all in _how _they are used. When used correctly, they can be a huge asset to the dog training toolkit.

Over the years I've done a lot of learning from R+ trainers and balanced trainers. I've come to see that the _really_ good trainers are really not all that different from each other whether they be balanced or R+. Their toolkits are often a bit different, and their accepted timelines are different. But all the good balanced trainers I know use treats and positive reinforcement to teach everything they do. They are just willing to proof a behavior using some of the aversive tools that R+ trainers don't use. I know plenty of R+ trainers that do use aversives but simply don't call them that. For example, Misha can be bad about whining in the crate while at agility class if he is very excited to run the course. Our trainer uses two methods to work on this issue with dogs. A) treats for quiet behavior and B) block view for whining. This is a balanced approach. A positive and an aversive. I've seen many R+ trainers use this technique. They just don't call it an aversive. But you know... I tried just treating for silence for a long time and things improved but we hit a wall. After introducing the aversive... much more success. I think the two methods often work together very well when you hit a point that R+ can't overcome. Usually it has to do with a dog's drive being too strong for the R+ method to work. Maybe a year of working on it with only treating would work. Months didn't. I'd rather use the simple aversive in conjunction with the R+ to achieve the outcome faster. Better for Misha that way I think.

My method with Misha has been to use R+ methods to teach everything and put in a really really good effort to get behaviors as proofed as possible through constant reinforcement. BUT if we reach a point where it's clear that his drives are going to prevent the method from working to completion, and I feel the behavior in question is a question of safety or is affecting his quality of life, then yeah I'm going to try an aversive that's finely tuned to apply _just enough_ pressure to result in the desired behavior. I think that calculating the amount of pressure needed, timing correctly, and ensuring a dog understands what you want is incredibly important. It's a really difficult thing for an amateur to do with some tools like e collars, which is why we are right to be very cautious with these tools. But used correctly for things like recall, I find them incredibly useful and potentially life saving.

I don't have any involvement in protection sports, but it's also worth noting that it is really really rare for a protection-trained dog to be trained without tools like an e collar. Because these dogs have drives that are too strong for R+ only methods and safety is a huge concern with these dogs. Police dogs are trained using e collars and in countries where e collars are banned for public use, professional working dogs like police dogs are exempt from the law. There are just some things that are much more easily taught using balanced methods.

Regarding stress behaviors in dogs trained with aversives, that means nothing to me because I don't know how the dogs were trained. As I said, aversives must be used extremely carefully and only when the dog completely understands the rules and has the appropriate pressure applied. Aversives generally shouldn't be used to teach a behavior... they but they can be used to proof it. I could see a dog that is _taught_ behaviors with aversives displaying much more stress due to confusion. Or perhaps if the aversives used are too strong. But there is no way to know when there are no details on exactly _how _the aversives were being used.

I listen to the Canine Paradigm podcast which has a lot of discussion on this debate. They are balanced trainers but also host R+ trainers on the podcast from time to time. I find the discussion to be very thoughtful. I do find that I don't agree with the hosts on lots of things about dogs, but I do think they have a lot of good ideas about training and the practical applications of training for pet dogs vs sport dogs.


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

Raindrops said:


> For example, Misha can be bad about whining in the crate while at agility class if he is very excited to run the course. Our trainer uses two methods to work on this issue with dogs. A) treats for quiet behavior and B) block view for whining. This is a balanced approach. A positive and an aversive. I've seen many R+ trainers use this technique. They just don't call it an aversive. But you know... I tried just treating for silence for a long time and things improved but we hit a wall. After introducing the aversive... much more success. I think the two methods often work together very well when you hit a point that R+ can't overcome. Usually it has to do with a dog's drive being too strong for the R+ method to work. Maybe a year of working on it with only treating would work. Months didn't. I'd rather use the simple aversive in conjunction with the R+ to achieve the outcome faster. Better for Misha that way I think.


Is that method actually considered aversive? I assumed aversive implied postive punishment or negative reinforcement...but my brain turns into a pretzel with this stuff.

I do regularly use what I think you would call negative punishment methods, which don’t require the application of any sort of aversive. For example, the removal of reinforcing attention. So in that regard, I guess I’m taking a balanced approach?


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

Raindrops said:


> I don't have any involvement in protection sports, but it's also worth noting that it is really really rare for a protection-trained dog to be trained without tools like an e collar. Because these dogs have drives that are too strong for R+ only methods and safety is a huge concern with these dogs. Police dogs are trained using e collars and in countries where e collars are banned for public use, professional working dogs like police dogs are exempt from the law. There are just some things that are much more easily taught using balanced methods.


This is likely why the study focused explicitly on companion animals. It’s good they made that distinction.


----------



## Raindrops (Mar 24, 2019)

PeggyTheParti said:


> Is that method actually considered aversive? I assumed aversive implied postive punishment or negative reinforcement...but my brain turns into a pretzel with this stuff.
> 
> I do regularly use what I think you would call negative punishment methods, which don’t require the application of any sort of aversive. For example, the removal of reinforcing attention. So in that regard, I guess I’m taking a balanced approach?


Hmm. For negative reinforcement, you're removing something in response to a behavior with the intention of the behavior decreasing. With positive punishment, you're adding a negative effect in response to an undesired behavior. With negative punishment, you're removing something desirable in response to the behavior.

I guess a barrier in front of a crate is a bit of a conundrum as I could see it as either. I'm adding an unpleasant thing (barrier) or I'm removing a desired thing (ability to observe class). So possibly it's both? I think it's a matter of perspective. I think since I'm physically placing the barrier there I think of it as an aversive.

But yeah, you're right that removing attention makes you a balanced trainer in my eyes. That's kind of what I'm saying... most trainers do actually use balanced methods. I think the important thing is tailoring the training to the dog in front of you. It's not a one-size-fits-all kind of thing.

I get that there's a difference for pet dogs and working dogs. But when it comes to training methods... I think it still says something about the value of balanced training methods to teach things that R+ methods cannot. Does the average pet dog need to learn that? Definitely not.

I find the four quadrants explanation highly confusing. I've heard other trainers explain things simply as all a method of applying pressure, whether that be through treats, prong collar, or attention. It's all a balance of things dogs want vs don't want and the pressure just takes different forms. A hungry dog salivating while smelling food it can't have... is experiencing a negative state which is then alleviated by giving it the food. Also a form of pressure.


----------



## reraven123 (Jul 21, 2017)

Raindrops said:


> I think these studies over simplify the issue to the point I find them not useful..


This study in particular was way off base in that it did not test e-collars in the way they are meant to be used. They are not to be used to _teach_ the dog anything. They are meant to _proof_ behaviors the dog already knows well. They are not used in a classroom teaching a dog to "sit" or "come". They are used in a field setting where you have no other way to enforce a command because the dog is nowhere near you. I personally use it exclusively to proof recalls, because if my dog does not come when I call him he cannot be off leash on our daily hikes. I think if I could explain that to him he would agree that it's a good trade-off. Of course I would like to be able to explain the "if you do not come when called you cannot be off leash" to him in a different way, but I don't know of one. My dogs do not wear the e-collars other than for the short time it takes for them to "get" that they must come when called, after that the collar is put away.


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

reraven123 said:


> This study in particular was way off base in that it did not test e-collars in the way they are meant to be used. They are not to be used to _teach_ the dog anything. They are meant to _proof_ behaviors the dog already knows well. They are not used in a classroom teaching a dog to "sit" or "come". They are used in a field setting where you have no other way to enforce a command because the dog is nowhere near you. I personally use it exclusively to proof recalls, because if my dog does not come when I call him he cannot be off leash on our daily hikes. I think if I could explain that to him he would agree that it's a good trade-off. Of course I would like to be able to explain the "if you do not come when called you cannot be off leash" to him in a different way, but I don't know of one. My dogs do not wear the e-collars other than for the short time it takes for them to "get" that they must come when called, after that the collar is put away.


Which study are you referring to?


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

Raindrops said:


> A hungry dog salivating while smelling food it can't have... is experiencing a negative state which is then alleviated by giving it the food. Also a form of pressure.


That’s an interesting perspective. I wonder then if food-based rewards also spike cortisol.


----------



## reraven123 (Jul 21, 2017)

PeggyTheParti said:


> Which study are you referring to?


The bioxrv study.


----------



## Raindrops (Mar 24, 2019)

PeggyTheParti said:


> That’s an interesting perspective. I wonder then if food-based rewards also spike cortisol.


I imagine they do in some situations. Probably not in others. I imagine surely sometimes dogs are not thinking about food and then get surprised with a reward when they do something correct by accident or habit. But in training, we hope they will then repeat the behavior to achieve further rewards. Which maybe does create stress. Because of that expectation of reward. I've seen Misha express great frustration over lack of treats when he thinks he should get them. That's probably relieving a negative state for him when I do give a treat. He will also get very angry and upset if he has a puzzle toy he can't figure out so that's further evidence for treat-induced stress. I've also seen dogs that are so overly stressed by the presence of treats that they cannot train in agility using food rewards. A lot of trainers describe experiences with dogs that shut down if treats are not present because the treat bag is such a natural state for the dog and its absence gives them anxiety. It's going to be different for every dog. I don't have answers lol. I think there is just so much nuance and a lot of that gets lost when people try to choose sides. Personally I just feel I'm all about training that is done in a way that minimizes stress while maximizing learning and benefit to the dog's safety and quality of life. I don't like the vicious mischaracterization I see a lot when people argue about these topics. It's on both sides. In reality most good trainers have more in common than they do separating them.


----------



## Fenix&Felix (Oct 21, 2020)

' ' 1 1 1


reraven123 said:


> This study in particular was way off base in that it did not test e-collars in the way they are meant to be used. They are not to be used to _teach_ the dog anything. They are meant to _proof_ behaviors the dog already knows well. They are not used in a classroom teaching a dog to "sit" or "come". They are used in a field setting where you have no other way to enforce a command because the dog is nowhere near you. I personally use it exclusively to proof recalls, because if my dog does not come when I call him he cannot be off leash on our daily hikes. I think if I could explain that to him he would agree that it's a good trade-off. Of course I would like to be able to explain the "if you do not come when called you cannot be off leash" to him in a different way, but I don't know of one. My dogs do not wear the e-collars other than for the short time it takes for them to "get" that they must come when called, after that the collar is put away.


You have a point that all these tools can be very useful. The breeder I got my puppy from has a large property near train tracks. Her dogs wear e-collars to call them to the house when a train is coming; it’s for their safety. The problem I see is so many people use coercive or aversive tactics as a quick and easy way to get the behaviors they want from their dogs. But that may not get them the relationship they want with their dog.

I’ve watched probably 100’s of dog training videos and read up as much as I can stand to; the truth is purely positive training is probably beyond the skill level and patience level of most humans, myself included, and it‘s not practical to never correct your dog or establish boundaries. There’s a reason you have to pass through a 40” tall baby gate to enter my kitchen—I’ve chosen to manage my dogs environment because counter-surfing is not my biggest training priority right now. Also, positive training methods require real commitment and consistency. It may take weeks or months of patient training to get a dog to accept brushing and grooming. It’s probably going to take weeks to train my big spoo puppy to walk nicely on the leash, but I just can’t bring myself to go to a prong collar. I see dogs wearing them all the time, And they don’t seem bothered by them, but that’s just not a method I want to use with my dog.


----------



## For Want of Poodle (Feb 25, 2019)

Re the covering the crate at class thing - I think of it as a management solution, hadn't even thought of it as training at all, either negative or positive- my dog can relax when she can't see other dogs at class, and is more comfortable. 

And I think the discussion here is more about the difference between pain based training and not strict lack of aversives. I don't think it is possible to get rid of aversives. Theoretically not giving a treat for a sloppy sit would be aversive. 

Personally, I have a lot of regrets over how I trained dogs in the past. The level of trust between Annie and I is so significantly better than with previous dogs. I can imagine her personality and our relationship would be very different if I used different methods.


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

reraven123 said:


> The bioxrv study.


I asked because one thing I didn’t like about the study I shared is that it didn’t seem to specify the observed training methods, only “objectively classified” them as aversive:

_“We objectively classified training methods, extended the study of aversive-based methods to other techniques and tools *besides* shock collars, and used objective and validated measures for the assessment of both the short- (behavioral and physiological stress responses during training) and long-term welfare (cognitive bias task outside the training context) of companion dogs.”_

(Emphasis mine.)

It also noted—again without specifying—that methods “differed among the aversive-based schools.” I felt like that vagueness undermined the usefulness of their results, but maybe I missed something? Did it confirm elsewhere that shock collars were used? I did a key word search with no luck, but I’m admittedly hopeless when it comes to most things science.


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

Raindrops said:


> I've also seen dogs that are so overly stressed by the presence of treats that they cannot train in agility using food rewards.


This is timely. Lol. I just had a bit of cheese left over from a high-distraction training walk in another town. I asked for a simple sit when we got back home, before I handed it to her, and Peggy frantically offered up half a dozen tricks in rapid succession. In a situation like that, the presence of food can _definitely_ be stressful. I guess that’s why I have the most success training with kibble when we’re at home.


----------



## Fenix&Felix (Oct 21, 2020)

Raindrops said:


> I imagine they do in some situations. Probably not in others. I imagine surely sometimes dogs are not thinking about food and then get surprised with a reward when they do something correct by accident or habit. But in training, we hope they will then repeat the behavior to achieve further rewards. Which maybe does create stress. Because of that expectation of reward. I've seen Misha express great frustration over lack of treats when he thinks he should get them. That's probably relieving a negative state for him when I do give a treat. He will also get very angry and upset if he has a puzzle toy he can't figure out so that's further evidence for treat-induced stress. I've also seen dogs that are so overly stressed by the presence of treats that they cannot train in agility using food rewards. A lot of trainers describe experiences with dogs that shut down if treats are not present because the treat bag is such a natural state for the dog and its absence gives them anxiety. It's going to be different for every dog. I don't have answers lol. I think there is just so much nuance and a lot of that gets lost when people try to choose sides. Personally I just feel I'm all about training that is done in a way that minimizes stress while maximizing learning and benefit to the dog's safety and quality of life. I don't like the vicious mischaracterization I see a lot when people argue about these topics. It's on both sides. In reality most good trainers have more in common than they do separating them.


The trainers I’ve followed on line usually recommend training with both treats and toys. Also, they recommend phasing out treats gradually for commands/behaviors the dog has mastered. I’ve discovered that Felix is so excited when we go for walks that treats simply don’t interest him. Even a piece of chicken‘s got nothing on a squirrel...but he’ll turn his head at the sound of a small squeaky toy in my pocket!

I agree there’s no need to be acrimonious about training methods—everyone has to do what is best for their dog and their situation, and what most balanced trainers are doing today is probably miles better than how dogs were trained 30 years ago.


----------



## curlflooffan (Mar 27, 2020)

I would like to point out to any non-US members and lurkers that shock collars are illegal in some European countries. If anyone is considering their use its wise to check your local animal welfare laws.

I don't think the stress levels of using a shock collar is comparable to the occational dog who is so over-stimulated by food that it causes stress during training. In that, I think it is fairly safe to generalise that using painful aversives repeatedly in training causes stress in nearly all dogs/animals. Indeed a punishment by its very definition wouldn't work unless it causes some kind of distress to the animal to discourage the behaviour from repeating.

Additionally, I agree that the study and many like it are oversimplified in its methodology. But I don't mind, because I don't think they ever intend for them to be a complete guide to how to live with and train a dog. They have a hypothesis for a specific question which they then test. How those results are then generalised and applied in real life is a tricky thing. Indeed we have seen many of scientific research be misappropriated and overused in popular dog training. 

I don't feel that this means that a dog must never experience any kind of stress ever in its life. But there is a difference between being suddenly pulled back by the collar because the dog is a split second away from reaching the chocolate. Or play being stopped because the puppy used its teeth too aggressively. Compared to using punishment/aversive consistently for the purpose of training. 

Similarly, when I worked in childcare I would punish the children with a time out or a stern talking too. But I never laid my hands on them. Did being removed from their friends cause stress to them? yes but its not comparable to using corporal punishment.


----------



## Raindrops (Mar 24, 2019)

curlflooffan said:


> I would like to point out to any non-US members and lurkers that shock collars are illegal in some European countries. If anyone is considering their use its wise to check your local animal welfare laws.
> 
> I don't think the stress levels of using a shock collar is comparable to the occational dog who is so over-stimulated by food that it causes stress during training. In that, I think it is fairly safe to generalise that using painful aversives repeatedly in training causes stress in nearly all dogs/animals. Indeed a punishment by its very definition wouldn't work unless it causes some kind of distress to the animal to discourage the behaviour from repeating.
> 
> ...


I actually strongly disagree with your assertion that aversives are always taken more negatively by a dog than stern words or prevention of activity. An e collar applies stimulation from the level of barely felt to the level of very painful. When used in dog training they are fine tuned to a particular dog. When used for recall you would set it to a low level of stimulation that is equivalent to a light flicking sensation only barely felt by the dog. A bit annoying, yes, but I could easily endure an hour of it without more than severe annoyance. Being jerked away from chocolate on a leash is way more painful. The idea is you apply just enough pressure to let the dog know that it's going to be as unpleasant as he makes it if he doesn't return when asked. Do you sometimes need a stronger stimulation, yeah. Typically as a warning when the dog gets ideas about blowing you off because your light sensation isn't a big deal. But I've never had to use a stimulation that I'd consider painful. Most accurate is just a stronger flick sensation. When training recall I've only ever observed stress at the very beginning for those few times the dog is learning the rules. Maybe a brief couple seconds of confusion where they think maybe a bug landed on them. After they understand, they are perfectly happy and show no signs of stress. This is using an aversive properly that is fine tuned to the level of pressure a dog needs. Can a static collar be used wrongly? Yes of course. But so can a leash or a harsh voice.

Please don't make assumptions about tools you don't have experience with.

You say we shouldn't be willing to cause a dog any stress "just for training" as if that's different from being prevented from eating chocolate. Recall training to me is just as important. You never know when your dog will accidentally find himself free. Maybe he slips past the deliveryman or his leash breaks. Maybe you encounter an aggressive dog on your off leash hike. Having a 100% reliable recall can save a dog's life.

And the study suggested that the use of aversives of any sort are detrimental to a dog's welfare. So no, I do not think they supported that conclusion as there is no evidence that the aversives were used correctly. It sounds like they were not since aversives should only be used to proof behaviors. So I find the study potentially very harmful.


----------



## curlflooffan (Mar 27, 2020)

@Raindrops the collar comment was not meant specifically as pulling on a collar is less painful as a shock collar. Its more meant as demonstrating a difference between as an isolated emergency response and using pain consistently as for training. That would include leash pops on with a flat collar. Pain is pain regardless what tool is used.


----------



## Raindrops (Mar 24, 2019)

curlflooffan said:


> @Raindrops the collar comment was not meant specifically as pulling on a collar is less painful as a shock collar. Its more meant as demonstrating a difference between as an isolated emergency response and using pain consistently as for training. That would include leash pops on with a flat collar. Pain is pain regardless what tool is used.


I'm saying not all aversives cause pain. Unpleasant sensation or condition, yes. But many cause only annoyance that creates a situation where compliance is preferable. We don't know what aversives were used in the study and we don't know how they were used. You call a static collar a "painful aversive" but you don't know how they are used. I truly believe many dogs can be much more stressed by a verbal correction or presence of unattainable food than the sensation of a tiny static stimulation that literally feels like a barely perceptible flicking sensation. And almost all use of an e collar in training should be at a low level. There are situations that could warrant use at a higher level that does cause pain... like how they are used for rattlesnake avoidance training. That saves the lives of many dogs. But it's not general use of these devices.


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

What drew me to this study was the fact that it’s _not_ specifically about shock collars (in fact, I’m not sure it involved shock collars at all), and yet the conversation stubbornly returns to them. I find that interesting. 

I initially read the summary (the first link I posted), because it was shared by Patricia McConnell, and it got me thinking about how often I’ve yelled at and physically corrected past dogs, and how terribly ineffective it was. Knowing it also caused them stress makes the whole thing just feel so sad.

I think the average dog owner spends a lot of time shouting and yanking, and few if any of their peers would equate that with tools like shock collars. Shouting and yanking are just so commonly accepted in our culture. Dog sniffed a fire hydrant a split second second too long? Haul on its neck. Dog barks at the door? Scream bloody murder. I’d go so far as to say for _most_ people, that’s just life with a dog.

Because the study focused on training schools, that got me thinking about trainers who I initially learned from—folks like Barbara Woodhouse when I was a child and Cesar Millan in my 20s. Or that dreadful new show on Netflix, which I won’t even mention by name. I think about my neighbour who took the leash from my hand and showed me a “proper” correction, unsolicited and on a dog who was just sitting there. How she emulated Cesar’s vocal correction and popped the leash, hard. And how that, to her, was a perfectly appropriate thing to do, because those are the methods that still dominate the mainstream and no one—in her circles, at least—are talking about how _maybe_ they do damage.


----------



## Raindrops (Mar 24, 2019)

PeggyTheParti said:


> What drew me to this study was the fact that it’s _not_ specifically about shock collars (in fact, I’m not sure it involved shock collars at all), and yet the conversation stubbornly returns to them. I find that interesting.
> 
> I initially read the summary (the first link I posted), because it was shared by Patricia McConnell, and it got me thinking about how often I’ve yelled at and physically corrected past dogs, and how terribly ineffective it was. Knowing it also caused them stress makes the whole thing just feel so sad.
> 
> ...


Though the Vieira de Castro et al. study isn't specifically about e collars, I assumed they were one of the aversives used as their wording is they "expanded it to aversives besides shock collars". Also, they discuss them a whole lot in the intro/discussion so I don't see how you can discuss the paper without including them. They didn't mention any actual aversives that were used _other_ than e collars so I can't really focus on anything else.

I definitely agree that most owners I see are either completely unconcerned with their dog's behavior or use punitive measures that are much too harsh. I cringe when I see owners using punishment for behaviors that are painful and clearly misunderstood by their dog. I have seen people whip their dog with a tree branch, hit their dog, and even one time there was a couple that kept pinching their puppy's ear making him squeal because he was afraid of other dogs and was reactive toward them. I think e collars are just an easy example to bring up because they really expand the abilities of training tools and can be fine-tuned moreso than most aversive techniques. They also get more criticism than other tools that are arguably much more harsh and they are also the focus of legislation that I think is often misguided. Any conversation on aversives is eventually going to settle on e collars because they're the most precise aversive available. It's too hot button of an issue not to bring up when discussing aversives and animal welfare. I tend to use them as an example because I don't use a whole lot of aversives other than verbal correction. I think having a good verbal correction like "ah-ah" can be extremely useful. Misha used to have a whining-in-the-car issue that I resolved completely with the use of verbal correction. No amount of positive reinforcement for quiet was effective. If Misha makes a very poor social choice I will enforce a timeout where I require him to sit and be attentive and calm before he is allowed to return to previous activity. But that's about it. Aside from those methods I am just willing to proof a behavior with a very mild aversive to ensure a dog's safety... so that is where my mind goes on the subject of aversives.

Regarding yelling, I think most of the yelling I see people doing is pointless. Their dog doesn't understand what they want. To me it's about communication. If you've communicated to your dog what you wish them to do, then a verbal correction can be good enforcement. If I see a pile of cat poop I'm going to tell Misha to LEAVE IT. If he leaves it, he'll get a treat and praise. If he goes up to it anyway he's going to get a "AH-AH!" which will result in him stopping in his tracks and leaving it because he knows what that means.

People yell at their dogs to come back, to stop barking, to do all sorts of things. But they expect the dog to magically know why they are yelling. It doesn't work that way. Teach them a command that they understand. Then if they're choosing to not listen a verbal correction can be used without confusing them.


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

Raindrops said:


> expanded it to aversives besides shock collars"


That wording is tricky, too. “Expanded” (although they’re speaking in regards to other studies) implies shock collars were part of their study. “Besides” implies they weren’t used at all.

Big flaw.

On the topic of verbal corrections, yesterday Peggy came and sat right in front of me while I was eating lunch. I ignored her for a few minutes, hoping she’d realize she wasn’t going to be rewarded for that. But my patience eventually ran out and I gave her a “No.” She went straight to her bed.

This was a breakthrough moment for me, as I realized we’ve actually taught her acceptable alternative behaviours through positive reinforcement. She regularly gets rewarded when she’s on her bed. _That’s_ why the verbal correction was so effective in that case. And I think that’s the part a lot of people miss. They do the Cesar hiss or holler no, and then wonder why it doesn’t work.

There’s also a time and place for interrupting, for sure. I guess that’s technically aversive? An “ah-ah” when Peggy is eyeing my chapstick on the nightstand effectively breaks her focus and redirects it to me. But I always follow it up with praise. Same when I’m grooming. If I’m holding a paw and she tries pulling it away, she might get an ah-ah followed by another second of holding, but then a reward comes in the form of release.

Conversely, I think back to all the times Gracie whined in the backseat of our car. “No!” and “ah ah!” stopped her briefly but she always went right back to whining. So we got louder, she got anxious, and the whining got louder. It was a sad, useless cycle. I _never_ considered rewarding her for silence. Can you believe that? Oh to have a time machine.....


----------



## Raindrops (Mar 24, 2019)

PeggyTheParti said:


> That wording is tricky, too. “Expanded” (although they’re speaking in regards to other studies) implies shock collars were part of their study. “Besides” implies they weren’t used at all.
> 
> Big flaw.
> 
> ...


I know how you feel. Our family (highway-rescue, not well-bred) chihuahua was one of those little barky dogs that would drive you insane. We would always yell at him to PLEASE PLEASE stop barking but it never really did anything. I think yelling is just such a human instinct. I have no doubt that the confusion is stressful. Though to the chihuahua he probably thought "they're freaking out! It must really be something to bark at!" which clearly is counterproductive.

I think a good trainer always pairs a correction with praise. The aim of a correction should be to turn a wrong behavior into a right one, so I think it's very good that Peggy indicated she knew what the correct behavior was. It means your verbal correction was completely understood by her. In a case like that I do not believe it will cause stress because there is no confusion. Studies with aversives show stress is related to predictability of correction. So if an animal knows when and why the correction was applied, it will not be stressed because it understands how to avoid it in the future.


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

Raindrops said:


> Studies with aversives show stress is related to predictability of correction. So if an animal knows when and why the correction was applied, it will not be stressed because it understands how to avoid it in the future.


This bears repeating. And people need to think long and hard about whether their dog truly understands how to avoid the aversive stimulus. I hear a lot of people say “My dog _knows_ he’s being bad, but he does *____* anyway!” There’s so much wrong with that statement.


----------



## LadyRay (Apr 29, 2020)

I think at the end of the day, you have to be willing to use the method that works for your dog. If positive reinforcement isn't working, maybe you need to add some adversive methods. On the flip side, if negative reinforcement isn't working, then mabe try positive. 

For example, I consider myself balanced. I use food/praise (transitioning to mostly praise), but I need a prong collar for walks. My Xhosa is very stubborn and Her prey drive regarding squirrels and excitement when she sees other dogs is so strong.
I tired a buckle collar, martingale, chain/fabric martingale, harness, head halter, everything! Nothing swayed her. She may or may not take a treat then go right back to whatever it is. With squirrels, treats didnt even work. Her trainer recommended the prong after seeing her in action. In her case, she needed the extra "umph" to redirect her focus. I was apprehensive at first, but I cant deny the results. The prong finally got us to a point where I am able to get her to listen to the "Leave It" command and focus before she reacts. Now I am able to walk her on a martingale or harness and not react to other dogs (we are still struggling with squirrels). And any "leave it" or "aht aht!" Is always immediately followed by heavy praise or marker word "yes" or "good" when she listens. I rarely use the word "no" because the sound "aht aht" was sharper, not yelling.
I do not want to use an E collar on her. One, I'm not coordinated (hence why I try to do praise and minimize treats because my treat timing was all off while walking lol!!), but I also I believe she can listen with just a prong.

Not all dogs will need a prong, some may need more, some less. I always say train for the dog you have in front of you. Do what works for them! I know some trainers who use methods I wouldn't, but their dogs are very happy! So it worked for them. I've also seen people try to one use positive methods and their dog is still reactive after years of work. That isn't a happy dog. What I really don't like is the fear mongering/guilt shaming often associated with R+ trainers. You can advocate for a style of training without scare or guilt shame owners for using another form. In the end, we are all trying to do the right thing for our babies!


----------



## Ava. (Oct 21, 2020)

PeggyTheParti said:


> . Or that dreadful new show on Netflix, which I won’t even mention by name.


Dreadful show on netflix? which one


----------



## Ava. (Oct 21, 2020)

LadyRay said:


> I think at the end of the day, you have to be willing to use the method that works for your dog. If positive reinforcement isn't working, maybe you need to add some adversive methods. On the flip side, if negative reinforcement isn't working, then mabe try positive.
> 
> For example, I consider myself balanced. I use food/praise (transitioning to mostly praise), but I need a prong collar for walks. My Xhosa is very stubborn and Her prey drive regarding squirrels and excitement when she sees other dogs is so strong.
> I tired a buckle collar, martingale, chain/fabric martingale, harness, head halter, everything! Nothing swayed her. She may or may not take a treat then go right back to whatever it is. With squirrels, treats didnt even work. Her trainer recommended the prong after seeing her in action. In her case, she needed the extra "umph" to redirect her focus. I was apprehensive at first, but I cant deny the results. The prong finally got us to a point where I am able to get her to listen to the "Leave It" command and focus before she reacts. Now I am able to walk her on a martingale or harness and not react to other dogs (we are still struggling with squirrels). And any "leave it" or "aht aht!" Is always immediately followed by heavy praise or marker word "yes" or "good" when she listens. I rarely use the word "no" because the sound "aht aht" was sharper, not yelling.
> ...


Really love everything said here. I tried lots of things before landing to a prong, I stand by the information that it doesn't hurt, only causes mild discomfort. It was just a step we took to get to walking loose leash on a harness. I don't think it was the wrong choice, and I don't think my dog is any less trained because I used a tool as a crutch to make it much easier to handle my dog.

Train the dog in front of you


----------



## PeggyTheParti (Sep 5, 2019)

To bring this back to the study—

What do you think of the stress-related behaviours observed in dogs trained with aversive methods? Do you feel this stress is a warranted means to an end?

And those who use aversive methods, what stress responses have you observed? How do you manage and/or minimize them?


----------



## Ava. (Oct 21, 2020)

PeggyTheParti said:


> To bring this back to the study—
> 
> What do you think of the stress-related behaviours observed in dogs trained with aversive methods? Do you feel this stress is a warranted means to an end?
> 
> And those who use aversive methods, what stress responses have you observed? How do you manage and/or minimize them?


I really cant recall any Stress responses I have observed, my dog is very clear in his communication, and it would be clear to me if he where stressed. 

I HAVE noticed that the presence of a tool can make things a little bit more intense. As helpful as they are, today the pressure on the prong as deacon lunged at a dog, fired him up even more. On a harness, the pressure and the uncomfortable sensation wouldn't of been there.

So while i see no direct reaction to only tools, I do see reactions to tool + pressure. To eliminate it, I try and watch myself. If he reacts, its almost always my fault. I try not to allow the leash or tension to get too tight. I have gotten very used to shoving kibble in his face when we walk past a trigger. 

For other aversities, I have noticed confusion. which can be stressful. There have been times where deacon jumped on me during the play session, so i put away the toy. He looked at me, and then began pacing. To manage that, I moved onto a different activity.

For yelling, jeez. he gets so upset when somebody yells at him. I don't yell at him, but once my grandmas cat, and him got into a squabble, my grandma yelled "knock it off" and he was visually very shaken up, and avoided my grandma for eeks afterwards.


----------



## EVpoodle (Sep 25, 2018)

PeggyTheParti said:


> What do you think of the stress-related behaviors observed in dogs trained with aversive methods? Do you feel this stress is a warranted means to an end?


I think that to an extent some stress at first will happen, that is just a part of training. I don't recall right now exactly what the behaviors that were exhibited but if I remember correctly lip licking was one of them. As Raindrops said they will show some stress in the beginning when using any kind of aversive but IF they are used properly and proportionally to the particular dog they will figure it out. 

I do think it would be interesting if @dogsavvy would weigh in on this. 

In regards to those of us who do use aversive. How to manage it: Well you proportion the correction to the particular dog, you make the rules clear and stick with them, you always give a warning before you lets say pop a collar, praise when they do right, take it slowly, and just use them mostly for proofing. This is what I have to say in regards to that right now. I personally thing that aversive are both good and bad, it depends on the dog, the handler, and how they are being used. 

Ps. Sorry about any bad grammar, typos, or unclearness. It is late here and I just wanted to weigh in before I forgot.


----------



## reraven123 (Jul 21, 2017)

PeggyTheParti said:


> What do you think of the stress-related behaviours observed in dogs trained with aversive methods? Do you feel this stress is a warranted means to an end?


Depends on what you are trying to train. If you are trying to train something that the dog _has_ to know in order to live safely in a human-focused society then you do what you have to do. If you are trying to train your dog to do things in a show ring to win ribbons, then you make it fun and rewarding for the dog and avoid methods that are going to cause stress or pain. Living safely is for the dog's benefit, winning ribbons is for mine.


----------



## LadyRay (Apr 29, 2020)

PeggyTheParti said:


> To bring this back to the study—
> 
> What do you think of the stress-related behaviours observed in dogs trained with aversive methods? Do you feel this stress is a warranted means to an end?
> 
> And those who use aversive methods, what stress responses have you observed? How do you manage and/or minimize them?


I think it depends on the level of of stress. I live in a city. Xhosa was definitely showing levels of stress when we first started training. Our environment was definitely overwhelming for her. But what choice did I have? Give her back, or help her work through it? In this case, to help her work through stress (as long as she didn't shut down/not take food from stress), I would help her through it. Now, she's almost fearless (to a fault because she thinks she can approach everything lol!) and confident. Same with grooming. However, Xhosa hates clothing/jackets. That's a level of stress I do not put her through. So stress that will help them is necessary. I wouldn't overdo it though.


----------

