Thought this was interesting... considering how most people (especially those involved in Schutzhund/IPO or in training LE and PP dogs) train, or believe they should train, their dogs in short sessions, multiple times a day, multiple days a week, while these experiments seem to show that dogs learn better when trained using short sessions, once a day, one to two times a week. So, we got the length that the training sessions should be down (short and sweet!), but it looks like we may have it wrong with how often we should be working our dogs? What are your guys' thoughts?
The first experiment involved 18 laboratory beagles divided into 2 groups.
Group A: Trained once a week
Group B: Trained 5 times a week
Each dog was trained to perform the same task using shaping and marker training and trained by the same trainer.
The results suggested that the dogs trained once a week (Group A) learned the task in fewer sessions than those trained 5 times a week (Group B). However, the dogs trained 5 times a week (Group B) did learn the task sooner than the dogs trained once a week, even though it took them more sessions.
Reference: Meyer, Iben; Ladewig, Jan (2008). The relationship between number of training sessions per week and learning in dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 111(3-4), 311-320.
The second experiment involved 44 laboratory beagles divided into 4 groups.
Group A: Trained 1-2 times a week, 1 session
Group B: Trained 1-2 times a week, 3 sessions in a row
Group C: Trained daily, 1 session
Group D: Trained daily, 3 sessions in a row
Each dog was trained to perform the same task using operant conditioning and trained by the same trainer. Each dog was trained for 18 sessions total.
The results suggested that the dogs trained 1-2 times a week (Groups A and B) performed better than the dogs trained daily, and that the dogs trained for 1 session at a time (Groups A and C) performed better than those trained for 3 sessions in a row. Four weeks later, all four groups retained what they had learned without much difference.
Reference: Demant, H., Ladewig, J., Balsby T.J.S. and Dabelsteen, T. (2011) The effect of frequency and duration of training sessions on acquisition and long-term memory in dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 133, 228-234.
The first experiment involved 18 laboratory beagles divided into 2 groups.
Group A: Trained once a week
Group B: Trained 5 times a week
Each dog was trained to perform the same task using shaping and marker training and trained by the same trainer.
The results suggested that the dogs trained once a week (Group A) learned the task in fewer sessions than those trained 5 times a week (Group B). However, the dogs trained 5 times a week (Group B) did learn the task sooner than the dogs trained once a week, even though it took them more sessions.
Reference: Meyer, Iben; Ladewig, Jan (2008). The relationship between number of training sessions per week and learning in dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 111(3-4), 311-320.
The second experiment involved 44 laboratory beagles divided into 4 groups.
Group A: Trained 1-2 times a week, 1 session
Group B: Trained 1-2 times a week, 3 sessions in a row
Group C: Trained daily, 1 session
Group D: Trained daily, 3 sessions in a row
Each dog was trained to perform the same task using operant conditioning and trained by the same trainer. Each dog was trained for 18 sessions total.
The results suggested that the dogs trained 1-2 times a week (Groups A and B) performed better than the dogs trained daily, and that the dogs trained for 1 session at a time (Groups A and C) performed better than those trained for 3 sessions in a row. Four weeks later, all four groups retained what they had learned without much difference.
Reference: Demant, H., Ladewig, J., Balsby T.J.S. and Dabelsteen, T. (2011) The effect of frequency and duration of training sessions on acquisition and long-term memory in dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 133, 228-234.