Post by cenydd on Aug 12, 2013 13:46:21 GMT
WHY METHODS MATTER
I frequently see dogs with behavior problems that are the result of aversive methods, whether at the hand of the unskilled owner or at the hands of a "professional." A recent study found that aversive methods, specifically the use of physical punishment, did not produce better-behaved dogs. Another study, published in 2009, found that aversive methods can increase aggressive behavior in dogs.
The risk of causing or exacerbating unwanted behavior is high with punishment-based methods for the following reasons:
Negative Association - All punishment runs the risk of creating a negative association to something in the environment - or the environment, itself - or the person that is handling the dog when the punishment is delivered. A recent study in Germany measured the Cortisol (stress hormone) levels of dogs trained with shock collars. In the dogs that received random, poorly timed shocks (much as would be delivered by the average dog owner), the Cortisol levels increased over 300% just by entering the room where the dogs had been shocked one month after the training had taken place. As stress is the main cause of most behavior problems, increasing a dog's stress levels runs the risk of causing behavior problems that were not present or exacerbating existing problems.
One example of how these methods increase stress involved a dog that suffered severe diarrhea at each training session with her former trainer, a man who used collar corrections on a prong collar, causing the dog to cry in pain. Shortly after her first training session, the dog severely bit a man who was visiting the owner, although she had shown no fear of or aggression toward men prior to her training.
Sensitization- Because traditional behavior modification methods involve setting the dog up to exhibit the undesired behavior and then punish it, the dog must be repeatedly exposed to the trigger that incites the behavior. The more a dog is exposed to a trigger and has a negative experience, the more likely the chance of sensitizing the dog, making the dog more sensitive to that trigger.
Positive training methods, on the other hand, work towards desensitizing the dog through carefully controlled, limited exposure. Each exposure is paired with something pleasant, often food, which changes the dog's association to the trigger. At the same time, the dog is taught an alternate, more acceptable behavior to perform when the trigger is present, such as looking at the owner instead of lunging or barking at another dog.
Suppression of Warnings - Barking, growling and snapping without making contact with the skin, even an inhibited bite that does not break the skin, are all normal communication from dogs. These warnings are designed to increase distance, keeping the dog safe. A dog that can warn and have the warning respected doesn't intend to, or need to bite.
This is not to say that the only alternative is to ignore or reward the barking or growling. Instead, these warnings should be respected, and then the owner should work with a qualified professional to change the dog's behavior in those situations.
Aversive methods can and do work on some dogs in some instances. Primarily dogs of sound temperament, bred for work, who are learning obedience and when applied by trainers with excellent timing and skill, who know how to use such methods sparingly and when not to use them. Unfortunately, with training being an unregulated industry, trainers who have such advanced skills and knowledge are few and far between.
I frequently see dogs with behavior problems that are the result of aversive methods, whether at the hand of the unskilled owner or at the hands of a "professional." A recent study found that aversive methods, specifically the use of physical punishment, did not produce better-behaved dogs. Another study, published in 2009, found that aversive methods can increase aggressive behavior in dogs.
The risk of causing or exacerbating unwanted behavior is high with punishment-based methods for the following reasons:
Negative Association - All punishment runs the risk of creating a negative association to something in the environment - or the environment, itself - or the person that is handling the dog when the punishment is delivered. A recent study in Germany measured the Cortisol (stress hormone) levels of dogs trained with shock collars. In the dogs that received random, poorly timed shocks (much as would be delivered by the average dog owner), the Cortisol levels increased over 300% just by entering the room where the dogs had been shocked one month after the training had taken place. As stress is the main cause of most behavior problems, increasing a dog's stress levels runs the risk of causing behavior problems that were not present or exacerbating existing problems.
One example of how these methods increase stress involved a dog that suffered severe diarrhea at each training session with her former trainer, a man who used collar corrections on a prong collar, causing the dog to cry in pain. Shortly after her first training session, the dog severely bit a man who was visiting the owner, although she had shown no fear of or aggression toward men prior to her training.
Sensitization- Because traditional behavior modification methods involve setting the dog up to exhibit the undesired behavior and then punish it, the dog must be repeatedly exposed to the trigger that incites the behavior. The more a dog is exposed to a trigger and has a negative experience, the more likely the chance of sensitizing the dog, making the dog more sensitive to that trigger.
Positive training methods, on the other hand, work towards desensitizing the dog through carefully controlled, limited exposure. Each exposure is paired with something pleasant, often food, which changes the dog's association to the trigger. At the same time, the dog is taught an alternate, more acceptable behavior to perform when the trigger is present, such as looking at the owner instead of lunging or barking at another dog.
Suppression of Warnings - Barking, growling and snapping without making contact with the skin, even an inhibited bite that does not break the skin, are all normal communication from dogs. These warnings are designed to increase distance, keeping the dog safe. A dog that can warn and have the warning respected doesn't intend to, or need to bite.
This is not to say that the only alternative is to ignore or reward the barking or growling. Instead, these warnings should be respected, and then the owner should work with a qualified professional to change the dog's behavior in those situations.
Aversive methods can and do work on some dogs in some instances. Primarily dogs of sound temperament, bred for work, who are learning obedience and when applied by trainers with excellent timing and skill, who know how to use such methods sparingly and when not to use them. Unfortunately, with training being an unregulated industry, trainers who have such advanced skills and knowledge are few and far between.
www.4pawsu.com/trainingmethods.htm
So what kind of training methods do you think work best, and which are most appropriate?
