"Don't punish for growling"

[jetsmom]

[QUOTE=wendy;6182504]
see, I don’t believe dogs (or horses) understand this very HUMAN attitude at all. The behaviors humans engage in in order to teach the dog “who is in charge” are ALWAYS aversive and punishment-based, and have the side effect of “carpet bombing” behavior. If you punish your dog a lot, your dog will stop behaving. He learns it’s not safe to do much of anything in your presence, so he doesn’t. Many people think this is a sign of a well-behaved dog- gee, he lies quietly in the corner while I’m watching him. So they think “Being in charge” teaches the dog something about behavior, but it doesn’t really. It just makes the dog afraid of behaving when around you. Which should make you sad. And should also make you notice the behaviorally-repressed dog isn’t actually a well-behaved, well-trained dog. One hint is how he behaves when you aren’t there. And does he actually DO desirable things, like obey cues, or just refrain from doing much of anything at all?

Dogs don’t speak english, and unless taught otherwise they behave like dogs. You can be totally and fully in charge, and your dog will still behave like a dog- jump on people, bark, pee on the floor, steal food, eat the couch- until you teach the dog how people expect dogs to behave. Which has nothing to do with “Being in charge”. It’s about education of the dog.

Now, “Not being in charge” doesn’t mean the dog can do anything he likes- no. You systematically teach the dog how to behave and carefully lay out the rules. We do this but not this, and now we do this, and when this happens we do this. If you want this, you have to do this first. Rules, discipline, and consistency.

Most of the time when dogs don’t behave the way we’d like them to behave it’s because of one of two reasons: the dog doesn’t understand what you want; or the dog is under-motivated to do what you want the dog to do. In the example of walking away and expecting the puppy to not eat your supper, the puppy has no idea you don’t want him to eat your food. So if you don’t want your dog to eat your food when you walk away, you first have to teach the dog what you want and then you have to motivate your dog to do it. The given example of beating your dog when he tries to eat your food may or may not work- he might figure out you don’t want him to eat it, but find the joys of eating it to be so high that he doesn’t care if you beat him when you catch him. Or he may figure out that you can’t beat him if you can’t catch him, and now you’ve entered into the battle so many people have with their dogs: they behave like angels until you turn your back. Thus the strategy laid out is sub-optimal in many ways.
If you instead realize dogs will behave like dogs, you can prevent him from ever eating your food in the first place, and with a few simple steps, produce a well-behaved dog who will never eat your food, period, even when you aren’t home. I won’t outline the method of teaching a dog to not steal food, but it involves a period of management + reinforcement, then removal of the mangement period + reinforcement, then it becomes a habit. No punishments are handed out.

I will move on to “Growling”. Growling is the dog communicating very important information. You WANT your dog to communicate with you. If he’s so upset that he is growling, you want to KNOW THAT FACT. So you certainly don’t want to get angry with the dog for growling, or punish the dog for growling; but you don’t want to ignore it. You need to act. If someone is in danger of getting bit by the growling dog, you need to engage in “emergency management”. This is not training, and is not expected to change the dog’s future behavior; it’s expected to change what is happening right now. Change something- call the dog and run awaytogether from the bad guy; call the dog to you and crate the dog; call the child to the next room and safety and shut the door behind you; stop what you are doing to the dog for a few minutes; depends on the circumstances.
Then you are very likely going to want to come up with a training plan so the dog, when put in that situation in future will not feel the need to growl; or a management plan, so the dog won’t be put in that situation in future.

Most dogs growl during situations when they don’t feel comfortable. YOU may think that yelling at your dog, or yanking on your dog, or hitting your dog will somehow convince him that yes, he does feel comfortable, but come on, do you REALLY think that hitting your dog will make him enjoy having the toddler yank on his ear even more? What have you taught your dog- gee, toddlers= ear pain + owner hits me = best to bite the toddler before any of that happens.[/QUOTE]

Good post!

[NRB]

Wendy , What a wonderful post, I wish I could communicate as effectively as you.

[threedogpack]

@wendy;6182504

see, I don’t believe dogs (or horses) understand this very HUMAN attitude at all. The behaviors humans engage in in order to teach the dog “who is in charge” are ALWAYS aversive and punishment-based, and have the side effect of “carpet bombing” behavior.

• 1 to the whole post (just no need to quote the whole thing).

Good job Wendy! And thanks for making it such a clear explanation.

[Dr_Doolittle]

Good post, Wendy!

My question: doesn’t the fact that you (the human) are making and expecting adherence to the rules, and disciplining (fairly and with consistency) mean that you are, in fact, in charge?

Just because you are leading the way, teaching the rules, and expecting certain behaviors doesn’t mean that you are a dictator, but it does mean that you are “the one in charge”.

I just taught two huge dog classes tonight, and thought about this thread. It has remained remarkable civilized (for COTH :D), and has consisted (mostly) of shared information and ideas, intelligent discourse, and interesting thoughts and anecdotes by articulate, caring dog owners–I have followed it with some interest, and have learned from it!

My major problem with my “Pet Parents” (yes, that’s what we are supposed to call them :rolleyes:) comes from the overcoddling owners–mostly women–who have NO idea how to “treat a dog like a dog”, and are horrified by the idea that dogs needs structure and discipline, and that THEY are expected to teach them this. They just want to hug and kiss and give them treats, and think that “making them do things” is just mean (what if Pookie doesn’t WANT to?); they are horrified when a dog protests the Gentle Leader, or takes awhile to learn something new–and are clearly amazed that this requires patience and persistence. There are a lot of sympathetic “AWWS!” (These are clearly NOT horsewomen! :lol:), and they are (to a WOman) flabbergasted by the extent of my patience when I take all of 5 minutes to work a dog through something, while remaining calm, focused, and persistent. Sometimes it takes time for the dog to process things, obviously you don’t just cave in and give up at the first sign of “Huh?!?” or initial resistance, but they are (mostly) utterly gobsmacked by this.

What they DO seem to understand (when I teach them) is the idea of being the leader, both by example–being “calm and leaderly”–and as a result of expecting compliance from the dog when asking for certain reasonable behaviors–the dog should tune in to the human, listen, and respect him/her. As long as they are fair and consistent about it (and use proper cues and timing), it is all for the good. If I can frame this for them by telling them to “be in charge” of the animal, they tend to better grasp the concept.

I can only do my little tiny part in the whole “saving the world, dog by dog”, but we get a lot of rescue dogs in our classes, many of whom have clueless owners; thank heavens they take the time and effort to go to training class! I have had many people tell me that “it was this class or back to the shelter” for their dog, and housewives whose husbands (and kids) were so overwhelmed that before they learned to train, they were going to have to “give the dog up” because it was that hopeless. Most of these are good dogs, and with caring owners. They DO, however, benefit from believing that they CAN be “in charge of their dogs”, because otherwise it is too often chaos and misery, for everyone concerned.

[libgrrl]

Positive reinforcement for you, Wendy!

[wendy]

What they DO seem to understand (when I teach them) is the idea of being the leader, both by example–being “calm and leaderly”–and as a result of expecting compliance from the dog when asking for certain reasonable behaviors–the dog should tune in to the human, listen, and respect him/her. As long as they are fair and consistent about it (and use proper cues and timing), it is all for the good. If I can frame this for them by telling them to “be in charge” of the animal, they tend to better grasp the concept.

I don’t know, if it works for you, go with it; but- I’ve always found the opposite, that as soon as you start suggesting people think about “Being the leader” or “Being in charge” or “getting the dog’s respect” their plans for how to improve their dog’s behavior start to get sidetracked and suddenly it becomes ok to start treating the dog harshly, and doing things JUST TO PROVE THEY ARE IN CHARGE. And once you start thinking the dog SHOULD comply with your command, because yo’re in charge, if he doesn’t comply instead of thinking (is he confused or undermotivated? what is my most effective plan of action?) the “I’m in charge” thinker usually immediately reaches for “he’s blowing me off, I have to MAKE HIM DO IT NOW or he’ll never respect me again”. Which is nonsense, but that’s what tends to happen.

I understand it is sort of an issue of semantics, but it does affect what you do in response to the dog’s behavior.

Example: you’re walking in the park, it’s getting dark, you call your dog back to you. He ignores you in favor of sniffing around. If you’re thinking in terms of pure behavior, you think to yourself “gee, we haven’t practiced our recall much lately, obviously it’s time for a refresher” and you walk over and get your dog’s attention, and quietly go home and practice your recall the next day and he comes when called quite well forevermore.
If you’re thinking in terms of “I’m in charge” people tend to think “that jerk! he’s BLOWING ME OFF! he’s disrespecting me!” you might do something stupid, like charge up to him and yell at him and drag him home. He probably never even noticed you were calling him, being highly distracted, and all he learned was that gee, that human is unpleasant to be near and when she does get hold of you she leashes you and drags you off away from all the fun; and next day, he really DOES blow you off, because of what you did the prior day teaching him that being near you was so unpleasant.

Mind you, I’m not opposed to properly-applied aversives or punishments- if it’s the best tool for that problem, I would be in favor of using it.
I just don’t think most people are capable of using them correctly in any situation. One thing that about punishment that many people don’t seem to ever consider: dogs don’t speak english. They have to guess, often, as to why you did what you did. If you spank your toddler for drawing on the wall, you can explain to the toddler why you are spanking him; but the dog almost always has no idea why you are hitting him or yelling at him.

If I tell you it will take five to ten tries for your dog to guess why you just clicked and rewarded, people nod oh, sure they say. But if I tell you your dog will have to guess why you just yelled/yanked/smacked him, they act like you’re crazy, but it’s the same case either way.

Let’s say you want your dog to fetch your slippers. So you start out by bringing the dog into the bedroom up to the slippers, and when he puts his mouth on them you click. The dog knows you clicked, but at the time you clicked all sorts of things were going on; a short, simple list would include: the dog was standing; the dog’s foot was on the slipper; the dog was wagging his tail; the dog was touching the slipper with his mouth. So most dogs, eager to get another clicknreward, experiment: stand. No click. Wag tail. No click. Foot on slipper. No click. Mouth on slipper. Click. Finally he figures it out.
Let’s say you Don’t want your dog to eat your slippers. Same scenario, but when you see your dog putting his mouth on your slipper you scream NO, run over, hit him, grab him by the collar, and drag him out of the room yanking repeatedly and saying Bad dog. He knows he did wrong, but what? same short list: the dog was standing; the dog’s foot was on the slipper; the dog was wagging his tail; the dog was touching the slipper with his mouth. However, unlike with rewards, most dogs aren’t eager to experiment, so they just stop doing anything that might trigger a repeat performance from you. You carpet- bombed the dog. He didn’t learn what you tried to teach because he couldn’t possibly have done so. You may THINK it was successful- if he was a soft dog, he may have been very impressed by the whole punishment, and decide to play it safe and a) never go in your bedroom when you are there, or possible b) never go near the slippers ever again. On the other hand, if he’s not a soft dog, he might totally forget about what happened within ten minutes, and go eat your slippers later- since you’re not there to punish him, he learns eating slippers is fun, except when you are present. Which is what most dogs learn from owner-delivered punishment: the owner is not safe and/or is unpleasant and confusing.

Anyway, my point is: it’s extremely difficult to use an owner-applied aversive such that a dog actually learns what you intended to teach the dog.

There are actually several scientific studies on the effectiveness of different methods used to train dogs in the pet setting. I will try to dig them up and post them. In general they find that people who use punishments in training their pets end up with poorly behaved dogs with higher rates of serious problems like aggression than do people who used reward-based training.

Dealing with people who think Pooky shouldn’t have to follow any rules is something else entirely.

[EqTrainer]

I have encountered what Dr. Doolittle is referring to. It is common in middle aged women who were never around horses as children. They bring 40+ years of romantic ideas to the table. Its not easy to deal with and keep them safe.

BTW Wendy, awesome examples. One of my frustrations in teaching people is helping them understand that while they may very well feel one way about their animals behaviour, their acceptable response (the one that will yield the desired end result) usually has nothing to do with that emotion. I was taught very early, in plain terms, that I was not allowed to act out of anger or irritation with my horses, but that didnt mean I was allowed to “be slow” in my actions. So if a horse bit me, I was to instantly growl and move on, while making a mental note of the (perceived) reason for the bite so I could fix the underlying issue. The premise being, if lets say I brushed a sore spot, you could move away from me or swish your tail, expressing your displeasure in a non-aggressive way… That biting is never an ok way to express your displeasure but that the responsibility lay with me to determine why the horse bit in the first place and fix it.

People in general seem to think it is ok to link their feelings to actions and never learn to control the actions that emotions generate. The words “but that is HOW I FEEL” are unfortunately an end statement for most people.

[Dr_Doolittle]

What EqTrainer said.

I don’t have time to respond in detail to Wendy’s post, other than to say that we teach exactly the things she mentioned; it’s ALL about “positive, reward-based behavior shaping.”

Reward the behavior you want more of, interrupt and re-directed the behavior you want less of (re-direct the dog to do something positive that you can then reward him for, get him to look eagerly to YOU, consistently :))

I don’t run across many people who punish or lose their temper at their dogs to prove that “they are in charge” (and they tend to be men ;)), most people are the exact opposite; passive and indecisive, giving the dog mixed signals. They don’t believe that they should run the show when it comes to their animals, and often fail to do right things at the right time (timing is SO important!), and they also don’t think about how and why ALL their interactions with their dog are influencing him. They need to be taught what works, what doesn’t, and why. Once they understand this (my job is to explain this to them–in detail–and teach them how to implement these principles), they can become effective trainers. It’s ALL about being positive, not punishing.

[Laurierace]

Part of this depends upon the individual dog and their temperament. I have a sheltie who is very smart but very simple at the same time. I was walking him the other day and was not expecting him to poop since we had been outside all afternoon. Instinctively I said “nooo” when he hunkered down in a strangers yard and I didn’t have anything with me to pick it up. I didn’t yell, I didn’t punish him physically, just sort of moaned no. He has pooped in the house 7 times since then. Apparently my one mistake undid three years of proper training and now he will only poop in the house since obviously pooping outside gets you in trouble. I could make the same mistake ten million times with my pom and she would never make the connection.

[oliverreed]

[QUOTE=Laurierace;6184313]
Part of this depends upon the individual dog and their temperament. I have a sheltie who is very smart but very simple at the same time. I was walking him the other day and was not expecting him to poop since we had been outside all afternoon. Instinctively I said “nooo” when he hunkered down in a strangers yard and I didn’t have anything with me to pick it up. I didn’t yell, I didn’t punish him physically, just sort of moaned no. He has pooped in the house 7 times since then. Apparently my one mistake undid three years of proper training and now he will only poop in the house since obviously pooping outside gets you in trouble. I could make the same mistake ten million times with my pom and she would never make the connection.[/QUOTE]

Oh I AM sorry but this was pretty funny!

[CosMonster]

@Dr. Doolittle;6183229

My question: doesn’t the fact that you (the human) are making and expecting adherence to the rules, and disciplining (fairly and with consistency) mean that you are, in fact, in charge?

Just because you are leading the way, teaching the rules, and expecting certain behaviors doesn’t mean that you are a dictator, but it does mean that you are “the one in charge”.

I think it depends on the context (which seems like pretty much what you were saying, just didn’t want to quote the whole post). I’ve never been a pro dog trainer, but I see it with horses–with most people, telling them to “be in charge” or “show him who is boss” tends to equate to abuse. They’re not meaning to hurt the animal, but simply assert dominance. It winds up the same way though and tends to put people in an adversarial mindset rather than cultivating an attitude of working together.

I don’t generally use any sort of even vaguely dominance-related language when talking about animals except when it is clear that the problem is caused by constant spoiling and no discipline. I find that problems are more often caused by a lack of leadership and discipline until the animal crosses a line, then the owner “disciplines” the animal in an inappropriate way (in that it doesn’t teach the animal anything and/or is too extreme for the situation). People don’t have a problem taking charge, male or female, IME. They just have a problem doing so appropriately and non-abusively.

Also, are you a Petsmart trainer? I worked there for 3 years and the “pet parent” BS seems like it. Just curious, I worked there for 3 years and loved it, took advantage of the free (well, I think they’re supposed to just be discounted but I was friends with the store trainer) training classes with my first dog and they really were quite good. Better than at least 6 or 7 of the private training classes I’ve been to, anyway.

@Laurierace;6184313

Part of this depends upon the individual dog and their temperament. I have a sheltie who is very smart but very simple at the same time. I was walking him the other day and was not expecting him to poop since we had been outside all afternoon. Instinctively I said “nooo” when he hunkered down in a strangers yard and I didn’t have anything with me to pick it up. I didn’t yell, I didn’t punish him physically, just sort of moaned no. He has pooped in the house 7 times since then. Apparently my one mistake undid three years of proper training and now he will only poop in the house since obviously pooping outside gets you in trouble. I could make the same mistake ten million times with my pom and she would never make the connection.

:yes: I should have added to my stories about Bandit that he is an ACD and exceptionally smart, even for the breed. Also very sensitive. He picks up on the slightest cues and does seem to assume everything is a universal rule unless taught otherwise. I grew up with dogs who were punished for growling in certain situations but not others and they did learn it selectively. He’s hypersensitive to human disapproval. I’m not sure if his reaction would have been so extreme if he had been another breed or simply a less-intense dog, but he wasn’t so it is.

I just don’t think punishing for growling is ever the best action, because the root problem that caused the growl is still there and to me that seems like keeping a ticking time bomb on hand. Happy dogs don’t growl like that, and I for one want a happy dog. Angry or upset dogs are the ones who cause problems.