German Shepherds Forum banner

1 - 20 of 88 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,651 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
This was brought up on another board I frequent and I was just sort of curious as to the opinions of working/SchH GSD owners. It seems a handful of the people there are under the impression that working line (Czech, DDR, etc.) dogs, police K-9s, and top-SchH dogs cannot be successfully trained using positive reinforcement methods alone. (I do not believe 100% positive training exists but for lack of a better qualifier, I will use positive reinforcement training.)

Firstly, I want to state that I am not looking to start a debate about the various training methods one can use. We don't need another clicker/prong/whatever debate. I'm just curious as to whether or not you feel aversives are a necessary part of proofing a dog for SchH, police work, or other working jobs. That these dogs require a different approach than the average pet dog when it comes to training.

I'll be the first to admit I do not know a lot about Schutzhund. I am fairly certain one could train a dog for a BH and the OB portions of Schutzhund with just a clicker and treats. I assume that one could also do the same for the tracking portion. However I am not as well-versed in the protection phase so I'm not sure I can make a judgement there.

I know there are some K-9 trainers and SchH enthusiasts who do train with positive reinforcement methods, though they are in the minority. I don't see why it can't be done. But I also do not own a GSD so perhaps I am missing something.

Thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
For me, same tools, same basic methods working or pet. Some type of compulsion/adversives at some point yes. What, when, and how much depends on the dog.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,245 Posts
I am a newbie in SchH, but I believe the pups foundation should be positive training for confidence building, then maybe go w/ some compulsion depending on the dog. It all depends on the dog, IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,415 Posts
There are people out there training to a very high level of competition using primarily positive reinforcement. It CAN be done. Most people don't do it, however, and I think in part it's because they don't really have the knowledge to work through the difficult parts and they don't want to take the time to learn it - it's easier just to go with the corrections that they already have had success with.

There's a guy training police dogs who has switched to primarily positive methods and he's had great success with them. And there have been a couple of people who have trained dogs (one was a Tervuren) to obedience trial championships using +R. But unfortunately, going by a competition obedience email list I'm on, most still use a high level of corrections.

I think nearly all "positive" trainers use some corrections - even a verbal "no" is a correction. But those who have chosen to go the positive route try to avoid corrections as much as possible. My Service Dog hasn't had much in the way of correction, and she's wonderful.

Melanie and the gang in Alaska
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,483 Posts
I've never trained a dog in Schutzhund but have worked with dogs from the same lines. I don't see why you couldn't train at least all the obed and tracking with positive reinforcement. Clicker training and e-collar training work on pretty much the same (if inverse application) principles after all. I think people invoke aversives a lot sooner than they need to claiming "it's a tough dog" but actually because they don't understand how to use positives correctly and effectively (or typically do a good job with aversives either).

You didn't mention SAR. I don't have a lot of experience there but I did almost all positive training when we were working on that as did most of the other handlers. I did have to go to aversives to deal with crittering however.
 

·
Administrator & Alpha Bitch of the Wild Bunch
Joined
·
13,571 Posts
I think one needs to first determine what constitutes "positive methods". Does that mean primarily positive or all positive with no corrections, verbal or physical ever being given? Big difference between primarily and all.

Also, one needs to look very closely beyond the surface, because frankly some of the things I've seen done in the name of "purely positive/no correction" training for competition churn my stomach... like starving a dog for 2-3 DAYS to make sure he's hungry enough to do anything for food. Cruel, IMO. But it's considered all positive! And proponents of it will brag that they've titled X number of dogs in Y number of venues without ever needing a collar or so much as a verbal "no".

Likewise, one needs to determine what constitutes non-positive training. If you have on the one hand a verbal "no" and on the other a pinch collar pop, most would say the first is "positive" training and the second is "compulsion" or "force training". But to really know which is which, you need to look at the dog. I've seen softer dogs completely shut down by a simple "no". And lots of harder, higher drive dogs getting pinch collar pops with absolutely no loss of drive, enthusiasm or attitude whatsoever. So before passing judgment on any training method, tool, or anything else, look beyond the surface and see what else is there. And most importantly, look at the dog. He'll tell you through his attitude and performance quite honestly what he thinks of the training in terms of it's "positiveness" or "negativeness".

Can SchH and just about any other form of training be done using primarily positive reinforcement? Absolutely. And in fact most SchH people do use primarily positive methods. There are a few old school types out there, sure, just as there are in any training venue. But the vast majority of training is positive utilizing food and prey drive.

But can SchH, or anything else, be done *reliably* with all positive methods and without any corrections? No, I don't think so. There may be the odd case here or there that is the exception, but in general no. Well, maybe with things like the starvation method, but I don't consider that positive. I don't think my dogs would either. Bet they'd rather here the occasional "no" or get the occasional collar pop than be forced to skip meals for days on end. But at some point there is going to come a time when a competing, higher motivator is present and the cookie, clicker, praise, toy or whatever else the handler offers is not going to be enough. This is when correction is necessary. Admittedly, this sort of scenario is more likely to happen in some training venues than in others (or in every day pet life) which can lead to the perception that some venues are more compulsion oriented than others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,348 Posts
We don't get to choose what our dogs need. So, my mind has been forced open by my first workingline dog.


It really depends on the dog. How would you feel if you met a dog, began "charging the clicker," and as you were doing this, he was cataloging your secondary weaknesses, because he had already mapped out your primary weaknesses? Some dogs have towering dominance agendas. Many workingline dogs are not dominant. Many are very dominant. It depends on the dog. Even without the dominance agenda, drivey dogs have drive.. "gotta do, gotta get, gotta have!".. compulsions that help the dog love working with and for us, make the dance one of mutual cooperation and shared joy. But, compulsions that must be seen as such. Sometimes a "high value" treat can't compete with such a compulsion in some situations where that drive is being brought out, tweaked.

What about relaxing? We want our dogs to relax. I have a dog who can only relax when he is given firm boundaries, and some corrections are a part of that. "Oh, like, kewl! Yer the boss, Ma! I'll just chill out and enjoy the sunshine, then!"

The person who taught me positive methods was the president of a Schutzhund club, a police officer. ALL the dogs in the club were trained with positive motivation since puppyhood, if possible, AND corrections when needed. The dogs were balanced dogs who were so eager to work (cookies and toys are involved!! YEA!) in the sport, and yet stable and calm (corrections when needed.. guess the boss is looking out for me!) under loving, strong leadership. The clicker and treats speeded up responses, amde the dogs eager to work, and the use of food or ball without the clicker LURED the dogs into the positions the trainers wanted. Cool!

There are also situations in which NOTHING that you have for a "high value" reward will EVER compete with what a strong-minded, drivey, CONFIDENT dog wants to do. This may be more common in dogs with strong drive, in a setting that can be highly charged, such as on a training field (or in a neighborhood!).

Nothing beats going to the training field and seeing people using treats, or the ball or tuggy to lure the puppies into positions for sits, downs, heelwork. The dogs grow into dogs eager to enjoy and participate in this sport. But I think dogs with strong minds, high drives, (intense urges/compulsions) may need corrections to be able to learn boundaries that they otherwise would ignore -- because ignoring a cookie in favor of a powerful, nearly irresistable stimulus that tweaks drives, can happen more easily for strong, drivey dogs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,637 Posts
I don't believe you can train ANY dog "successfully" or "reliably" without corrections/compulsion..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,451 Posts
My "working line" dog is soft and will work based on her pack drive and earning food. No major corrections needed and they will in fact shut her down. My "show line" dog is much drivier and because of that, he is definitely obsessed with certain objects like balls and tugs. It's not just that he has drive, but he has drive to work FOR that special object. To me that's really what I want from a dog's drive. I don't care if a dog is "drivey" if he is just going to be bullheaded and never actually want to work for anything. At Nikon's age and his level in training, some corrections are becoming necessary. How appropriate they are depend on what you are trying to achieve and how they effect the dog. For example, if Nikon does not out his ball you can lift him off his front feet by the prong collar and he still won't let go (not how he is being taught), but if I lifted Kenya off the ground by a prong collar she would probably scream, run away, and never look at me again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,004 Posts
The people at my schutzhund club advocate the method of following up a correction (for example, a sharp pop on the prong) with click/treats/big praises if the puppy rights himself from the correction.

Is that positive or negative?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,451 Posts
I call that "ending on a good note". Personally, I would give a sharp pop to a puppy, you want to set the dog up to succeed. However in some situations I do what you describe. For example if I catch my dog counter surfing I sneak up and SLAM my hand on the counter which startles the dog in a corrective sort of way. Then I ask the dog to sit and stay while I put away whatever he was snooping in, and at the end he gets a biscuit. Also if my dog is just not doing well with something, I stop training it and switch to something else I know he can do in order to end the session on a positive note.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,348 Posts
On what side would you place isolation?
Only out of the crate for work.
I don't consider this positive, but it's not a correction or compulsion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,004 Posts
The situation was last week we were working with Obie and another 10 months old pup on basic stuff like coming when called when they are in highly aroused, distracted state. So the trainer had me called out "Obie, hier", wait a sec to see if he responds. If there is no sign of response
(no head turn), do a quick pop of the leash (which always get him come running to me), and start hopping a few steps backwayd, then when he comes, act like I haven't seen him in months, click/treat/reward.

His reasoning is that you only use correction on occasions when you feel your dog "knows better". You never correct mistake. You correct disobedience, and even then you always want to, like you said Lies, end on a good note.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,451 Posts
Originally Posted By: Jason LinThe situation was last week we were working with Obie and another 10 months old pup on basic stuff like coming when called when they are in highly aroused, distracted state. So the trainer had me called out "Obie, hier", wait a sec to see if he responds. If there is no sign of response
(no head turn), do a quick pop of the leash (which always get him come running to me), and start hopping a few steps backwayd, then when he comes, act like I haven't seen him in months, click/treat/reward.

His reasoning is that you only use correction on occasions when you feel your dog "knows better". You never correct mistake. You correct disobedience, and even then you always want to, like you said Lies, end on a good note.
Oh that makes more sense. I was invisioning a 4 month old puppy with a prong or something like that. Quick pop as an attention getter when the dog is already aroused makes sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,004 Posts
Originally Posted By: MaggieRoseLeehttp://www.schutzhund-training.com/training_theory.html has alot of GREAT info....
Great info. Thanks!

So what the trainer was doing with Obie qualifies as NEPOPO

NEPOPO®: This is a method developed by renowned trainer Bart Bellon, using negative reinforcement together with positive reinforcement. It is an extremely effective method of training and uses very low levels of electric collar stimulation applied as a command is given (-ve NE), the stimulation is continued until the dog performs the behavior (+ve PO), once the behavior is performed, the dog is rewarded (+ve PO). So the dog is essentially reinforced twice for the behavior, once by the cessation of the stimulation, and then again by the reward.

I am interested in what people think about isolation. Do you consider that a negative method? Everyone in my club sings the praise of isolation and I have seen first hand that it does make a huge difference. But part of me kind of feel bad for the dogs that they can't just get happy go lucky silly house pets, that they end up spending so much of their days by themselves just so that they will be sharp when it's time for them to work (sometimes for as little as 5-10 minutes).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,451 Posts
Originally Posted By: Deejays_OwnerOn what side would you place isolation?
Only out of the crate for work.
I don't consider this positive, but it's not a correction or compulsion.
Good question.

I don't use it and will admit I am uncomfortable with it (though perfectly comfortable with short periods of crating after working and during training anytime it's not our turn).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,962 Posts
I wonder how to reliably train a strong willed dog that is not food motivated and not toy motivated but can and will work because he is bonded to his owner and wants to make him happy? The harsh corrections may destroy this bond and the dog will see no reason to mind anymore.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,451 Posts
Oksana my Kenya is not toy motivated, food motivated enough to train new commands but not really get the focus, flashy obedience I'm looking for in competition. She has a terribly strong bong (I say "terribly" because it sometimes does interfere, she literally won't function if I leave for a weekend). I have made up these little reward games I play with her that look ridiculous but they mean a lot to her and motivate her far more than food and toys. One is called the "Ok up!" game where I release her ("ok") and open my arms so she is allowed to jump all over me. She used to jump up on me when she was insecure, so I put it on cue and now use it as a reward and motivational game. I get her all revved up this way, and use it at the end of a heeling pattern, long down, rally course....same way I'd throw a ball or whip out a tug toy for Nikon.

If the dog has a strong bond and strong pack drive to work with you, get creative with it. It is harder to motivate a dog that is not at all interested in toys and only somewhat interested in food, but it can be done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,483 Posts
Quote: I am interested in what people think about isolation. Do you consider that a negative method? Everyone in my club sings the praise of isolation and I have seen first hand that it does make a huge difference. But part of me kind of feel bad for the dogs that they can't just get happy go lucky silly house pets, that they end up spending so much of their days by themselves just so that they will be sharp when it's time for them to work (sometimes for as little as 5-10 minutes).
I don't consider it a "negative method" from the point of view of learning theory but I have a HUGE problem with it as a practice. I don't believe that dogs are pieces of sporting equipment to be taken out, played with, and then put back in the closet. I think you can boost performance via better training anyway, but even if you couldn't, I don't think the ends justify the means, especially for something that is not a life or death endeavor. And I'm not talking about a little quiet time in the crate before an activity - I'm talking about the widespread practice of leaving dogs kenneled or crated all the time that they're not working.

Going back to the general topic of the thread, after thinking about it more, I've come to the conclusion that I think a good trainer can almost always train a dog to do something using positive reinforcement. Aversives seem to me to be more useful when trying to train a dog not to do something. Like I taught Grace to search and trained her indication using her ball drive. I taught her basic obedience using the clicker. But to train her not to chase deer, I needed aversives because she had to be reliable off leash and I didn't have any rewards that compared to the joy of pursuing a deer. We actually didn't get very far with it because shortly after it became a problem we stopped SAR and moved here and she's already off lead reliable enough for being a pet, but had we stayed, that's where I think something like an e-collar might have been necessary.

Maybe that's my failure as a trainer but that seems to be how my training breaks down - When I'm training an activity I'm pretty much all positive but when it comes to proofing breaks or eliminating undesirable behavior, that's when I use more negatives (sometimes just an "eh!" or "no!" but it's not longer purely positive training).
 
1 - 20 of 88 Posts
Top