I don't have a problem with Cesar amd what he does. If I tried the "Spare the rod to spoil the dog" approach with my dogs, I'd be a doggie doormat. Ella wouldn't be much of a problem, but Taz would certainly take over and he would not be nice about it. As it is, the only time he acts up now is when he gets a bath. He doesn't growl or bite, but he does give me that look that says "If I thought I could get away with, I would bite you!"

In his youth, he did snap at me once and he's never done it again. Now the old boy is 11 and has cancer, so he'd rather spend his time and energy napping on my bed away from the little noise maker named Ella, but if I had just dealt with his issues the way it's suggested, I can almost guarantee he would have made a career of snapping at me just because I wanted him to do something that he had issues with. Having a bath, in the house, with warm water and shampoo is not the biggest crime a human could inflict on a dog.

I love my dogs, but they are not allowed to rule my house...

"For instance, dogs jump to greet people in order to get their attention. Owners usually provide attention by talking or yelling, pushing them down, or otherwise touching them. A better solution would be to remove attention by standing silently and completely still and then to immediately reward with attention or treats once the dogs sits. This learning-based approach leads to a better understanding of our pets and consequently to a better human-pet relationship"

LOL- I gather the person that wrote this has never shared a home with a Jack! Ella would jump and run around in circles for hours if I let her. I agree that there is no need to yell, push or hit, however, teaching a dog to sit then be given attention once the dogs butt and all four paws are on the floor is just as effective and it elimates wasting time standing around waiting for the dog to chill out.

I agree Dr P-I linked to you today.
http://mainepets.mainetoday.com/blogs/adogslife/
Stacy, of course you can teach a dog by catching them being good, I do it all the time. It was a huge eye opener for me when I learned how to teach a dog to be operant. Dogs need to learn that they need to do something to get something. That something is not always a cookie. It could be our affection, or a toy or whatever the dog wants at that time. Even super bouncy dogs can figure this out. Behavior that is rewarded is likley to be repeated.
When we teach our dogs to be operant then we don't have to spend so much time telling them what to do, -or what not to do! they too busy figure out what we want.-Nancy

HI Emily,
Yes, taking a step back so the dog can't connect at all, is what i teach-nancy

I agree with Katie. It's a common misnomer to equate the use of positive reinforcement with permissiveness in regards to both dogs and children. The two are not the same. You can be "leader of the pack" without using punishment (actually, only positive punishment, such as hitting, is avoided; negative punishment, which means removing something the dog wants, is used with this style of training/behavior modification).

I watch "The Dog Whisperer" because I'm fascinated by Cesar's ability to communicate with dogs (in both directions), but I think his methods are dangerous to the general public, who do not understand them and lack Cesar's ability to read the body language of dogs or use their own body language to communicate. This becomes more and more evident in later episodes, where almost all the people he helps have watched his show and have tried unsuccessfully to apply his methods to their own dogs, usually making the problem behavior worse rather than better.

I would highly recommend Patricia McConnell's books to anyone who thinks that dogs feel guilt and want revenge on owners. McConnell has a PhD in zoology and her latest book, "For the Love of a Dog: Understanding Emotion in You and Your Dog," studies the mind and emotions of dogs from a scientific viewpoint. I also recommend her earlier book, "The Other End of the Leash," for a fascinating look at dog behavior and how it compares to our own. Her books are entertaining and fun to read as well as educational. She also offers a number of booklets for solving behavior problems of various kinds. I've been studying dog behavior and training for 25 years now and have attended three of her seminars. I think I've learned more from her than from any other source. You can see her books here:
http://www.dogwise.com/itemdetails.cfm?ID=DTB968
http://www.dogwise.com/itemdetails.cfm?ID=DTB745
http://www.dogsbestfriendtraining.com

Katie- I have no problem with giving my dogs praise, just as I don't allow them to do what whatever they want as that would be a nightmare.

What I walked away with in the article that Dr.Patty posted was that dogs are sensitive wallflowers that will break if you don't correct improper or bad behavior. That's what got me. I never said that I never give my dogs affection or allow them to mess up occasionally as I think they do retain things better sometimes when they learn something the hard way as long as they are not in any type of danger.

The "touchy-feely don't hurt the dogs feelings"thing is just...Blech! I don't know where it came from, but I see this stuff all the time with parents and their children and it drives me nuts. If this mentality is a extension of the human version, somebody needs to step back and realise that dogs are not children although children do not break when they are busted for naughty behavior either, just ask my son. The phone rang when he got home from school and he got the look of dread on his face because he knew who was on the phone and what I was about to be told. It wasn't a horrific thing he did, but it was something that he has been spoken to about repeatedly by his teacher and us and he did it anyway.

If people don't like Cesar, that's fine, but his show shows plenty of people that use the " Don't hurt the dogs feelings" approach and their dogs become monsters in one way shape or form. These owners forget that what they are dealing with is a dog and dogs need manners, not to be treated like a spolied 2 year old. The word "punishment" in and of itself suggests human behavior and I don't buy that either. I don't send my dogs to their room when they are being obnoxious, I correct the obnoxious behavior as it's happening and then the issue is dropped.

If it bothers people that I said Taz would take over my house if I didn't set ground rules and enforce them, there is nothiong I can do about. It is what it is, however he gets plenty of back massages, ear massages, cookies and just quality time with all humans in this house. I can't remmeber the last time I had to get on him for bad behavior, so in the world of Taz, it's all good.

I didn't see the message as touchy feely.

"We’ve all seen dogs punished inconsistently without a clear causal relationship between the behavior and the punishment and correction applied too harshly or only when the punisher is angry."

Seems remarkably explicit that punishment is not always innately evil but boy-howdy is it more prone to go wrong when people act when angry or plain don't have much of a plan for how to train the dog.

And, necessary or not, it is my impression that dogs trained with frequent (daily or more) physical punishment tend to be more nervous--that includes my own prior experiences and a few papers out there on specific technique used with service dogs.

I see physical punishment as a bit like stockman's stick or dog tethers, they have a place but are awfully prone to overuse and abuse when seen as a 'freely permitted' technique. The guidelines are more an indicator to the unaware/unknowing owner than a prohibition for the informed trainer.

I think the place of physical punishment can certain be 'optional'--quite possibly in all cases. And I say that as a person who has slapped a dog on the head a few times.

I have to say 'ditto' to EmilyS's response. And I agree with Mary that McConnell's books are must reads. I also recomment Suzanne Clothier's 'Bones. . . From The Sky' book. Kind of like many other things in life, an extreme in either direction is the problem. Dogs aren't happy (or safe!) without strong leadership, but they're not happy living with a despot either. The main problem I have with a show like Milan's is that it really should be considered entertainment, not instruction on how to train your dog, and his one size fits all philosophy. Taken as a complete picture, I agree with Cesar's ideals, if not with all of his methods. But I don't know how many times I have seen people give their dogs a sharp poke with their fingers, or a slap, and say 'shish', and yet they never give their dogs any exercise. They take the piece, or pieces, that they think will be a quick fix (15 minutes, just like Milan!) and leave out all the stuff they're too lazy to do. For all of us that visit Dolittler, maybe a lot of this is really all just semantics, but a surprising number of the general public are still back in the dark ages of rubbing a puppies nose in their own feces; I know, because I work with people that have no more knowledge of dog training than that. And they've left that puppy home alone, loose in the house, for 9-12 hours, and think this 3 month old puppy is 'taking revenge' by soiling the carpet! Umm, hello? Can an adult human 'hold it' for that long? I think, in gereral, there is too much exposure to 'you have to be alpha', 'if you don't lead the dogs will take over', 'never let the dog walk out the door before you', 'don't let them sleep in your bed' and all that bs, and not enough exposure to REAL CANINE psychology and an understanding of the responsibilities of a REAL pack leader. Long winded, but. . .if the only solution you have is a hammer, then every problem looks like a nail.

You can only do better when you know better. You can only know better IF you actually study the learning theory behind positive reinforcement. That is, if you have a sincere interest in teaching your dog in a non-violent manner. It isn't new science either. How long have they been training dolphins using hands off methods? (Can't imagine one of them in a choke collar.)

"Excelerated learning" by Pamela Reid PhD
"Don't shoot the dog" by Karen Pryor
"The other end of the leash" and "For love of a dog" by Patricia McConnell PhD
"Kicked, Bitten and Scratched" by Amy Sutherland
and "The Culture Clash" by Jean Donaldson are a few places to start.
Oh and "Click to Calm" by Emma Parsons (for APBT adopter for those reactive dogs)

Use whatever methods you like, it's your dog after all, but realize just because it works for you (in your perception) that doesn't make it best for your dog.

I have owned akitas going on 16 years now. They are not a breed for a push over owner. So I will repeat: Positive does NOT equal permissive.

Methods when I began and now are so drasticly different they don't compare. While I do know how to use those older methods appropriately, which is the key in order to be fair to the dog, they are NEVER my first choice. I have to admit I was not an easy convert to it either. Old habits die hard. But once I saw the undeniable results, in both my dogs AND my relationship with them, the game was over. I know better so I do better.

Dogs don't hit each other so that act doesn't translate very well to them. Yes they learn to avoid the swat, and possibly the person giving it, but do they stop that behavior entirely? (If so why the need to hit them ever again?) Communicating in their own language, using body and facial expressions, is much more effective in my opinion. It just may take some time for them to understand that suddenly YOU understand them and can communicate with them after all. It becomes more of a two way street.

Our society is a lazy one. Heaven forbid we have to put consistent effort onto anything. Lets use the quick fix instead. Nevermind that it may have some pretty damaging fallout later.

A true pack leader is benevolent through their actions, not violent.

Just my two cents on the subject.

P.S. You don't need to use a clicker to use positive reinforcement either. It can be adapted to verbal only which is how I use it. (or hand signals for deaf dogs)

My dog was abused so much in the past that when examined by a vet, he just stands there, terrified, not moving, and not reacting. It makes it difficult to make a diagnosis sometimes since he doesnt always react to pain, or if he does, its subtle. The vets call him well behaved and laid back, but with the position of his ears and tail, its not that way at all. It happens to horses, too. They shut down when presented with a situation where they were punished in the past, and dont understand why. Easier to sit there and ignore the procedure.

I only have to step towards him and he cringes and ducks down, although he has improved over time. And he wouldnt take food from me. Still has trouble eating in front of me. The worst punishment I give him now is verbal - Uh Uh. And its enough, most of the time. Or I take away - or take him away from - the temptation (eg cat's food bowl). Being a terrier, he likes to go back and try again, but I would never hit him for it.

Not everyone is a dog trainer. But it would be good if all pet owners went to a couple of good obedience classes with their dog, and learnt the basics, but also kept it up for the life of the dog - refreshers every so often. Then dogs could be under better control, especially on walks, and less of a danger to others. Also better behaved members of the household. I mean, we train our kids dont we?

I use positive reinforcement with all my animals – birds, dogs, fish – I’ve trained our fish to put on a colorful display to get fed. I’m just too darn lazy to bother with any other method, really.

I look at this way by using aversives and worrying about dominance you can be the “Boss or “The Alpha” or whatever as long as you can keep winning, but using positive reinforcement you get to be “The Deity”- the giver (or withholder/taker) of all things.

Makes me sound like a power-mad, control freak, I know!

Positive reinforcement is not a free-lunch and is not always a simple solution. But complex problems (like dog aggression) don’t have simple solutions, otherwise they wouldn’t be “complex problems”.

You could say of positive reinforcement training/operant conditioning what Winston Churchill said of democracy: “ It is the worst system, except for all the others.”

Cesar is a hot topic on on the breed forum I organize. I am personally not a fan, at all. But many are. I have never really had to put true 'behavior modification' to the test, as my dog is only 7.5# (easily controlled and encouraged with a gentle demeanor) and she's very well behaved. But, I truly believe we lucked out, honestly. I read a ton of books, but so far things have gone exceptionally smooth.
That being said - does anyone else find Cesar has serious issues with women? I find on his show that any problems are almost always the female's fault (if it's a couple). And when he does his little one-on-one summaries with the camera, diagnosing the dog's problem(s) he speaks very patronizingly of emotional females. At this point I am usually scrambling for the remote control to turn the channel, or else I'd toss my TV out the window.

I dunno if I see the same thing at all in regards to CM and women. I remember quite a few episodes where it was the man of the couple causing the problems and a couple of episodes where the woman has quite a bit of experience with dogs, particularly rescues, and finally runs into the one who is a puzzle to her -- I thought that CM was respectful of the women's abilities in those instances.

I find that he deals with many of the women (particularly the giggly, breathy-voiced, flirty, helpless types) with much more patience than I would! Many women (and men) would benefit from developing some assertiveness and confidence and that's consistently part of his message.

I am confused. Who said there are no corrections in the use of positive training methods? Of course you need to give feedback to the dog when it is doing something we determine is inappropriate behavior. Perhaps I misused a word in one of my responses. Or is it an assumption/perception that positive methods use no corrections at all? Simply not true.

You are absolutely right that clicking will not stop a dog mid-lunge if it hasn't been trained/modified for that. I would argue there is a difference between handling a situation quickly as it crops up and counterconditioning a dog you know has this issue in the first place. Knowing you have a dog that reacts this way around other dogs, would then mean you would find out how to change this behavior to avoid future out of control reactions. (I hope.)

Of course yanking on a collar in the wrong instance can serve to amp up the dog in question and either make a more negative association to seeing another dog, or add adrenelin to the prey drive dog in question. The goal in either of those situations is to get them out of their reactive mode, where they aren't thinking, only responding to the stimulus.

There is also a difference between prey drive behavior vs dog to dog aggression. Sorry I missed the intent of "butthead mode". :-) Consider of course the dog doesn't think he is being a butthead, just a dog. Our goal is to find out his currency, use that to let him know what makes us happy, and get him on board with that. (simplified example: Hey look there is a squirrel over there. Mom doesn't like us chasing them but it's ok because now we will play ball. ) Not always easy to do, and will take some time, but completly doable with that time and patience.

Try to take the word treat out of the equasion. Replace that with toys, play, petting, smiling. There are MANY ways you can use positive reinforcement. It's not just about food treats as rewards. Treats are just the gateway drug so to speak. I've used tennis balls and frisbees on some non-food motivated dogs. Favorite squeeky toys, kongs, and tug games also work well. (A rolled up towel makes a great tug toy in a pinch)

Have I ever swatted a dog? Yes. But I didn't realize how it translated to the dog. Now I don't. Plus I realized that emotion almost always was a factor in using swatting. Think about it. When you are calm, (not singling out any specific person here) do you still want to swat the dog?

Tail Wags

I used to also not understand positive training. I used to think, like many still do, as can be seen from the comments, that it's all about shoving a cookie in the dog's face and letting them walk all over you. Once one actually reads the literature and takes in the science, it's quite an amazing thing. I work with many different kinds of dogs and it's such a joy to see a dog I don't own, that I may have never met before, modify its behavior to what I want based on what I present or take away from it. It's a wonder to see that modification get molded into a habit which is then consistently presented by the dog when needed. I'm glad a big organization like the AVMA is helping spread the information, because it's very hard to educate people one on one when they are convinced that rubbing their dog's nose in poop really DID help housebreak it, or the ubiquitous, "he KNOWS it's wrong!" (Side-tracking a little, I wish anyone reading this would re-thing the concept of right and wrong in the dog's mind. Dogs don't see right or wrong, they only see what they want to do and what people want them to do, which is frequently arbitrary and unnatural to them. Imagine someone punishing you, however lightly, for say, picking up a red mug, or putting on the wrong socks, or pooping in the wrong toilet. What a dog does or doesn't do needs to be guided by incentive; otherwise he sees no reason to do it. We can agree that hurtful punishments are unnecessary and may have bad side effects. But if an owner claims a dog is unaffected by her corrections, then why are they being used at all? Train your dog into habits through rewards or removal thereof and he will fall into desirable patterns of behavior.)

I have certainly see Cesar hit, albeit not "thump" a dog for bad behavior and I only watched half of one show. The dog was jumping up while being leashed and he touched it in some way that made it yelp and jerk away.

p.s. typing in that inage code for the second time as usual. Is there a way to make the letters just a little easier to see?

I admit I wasn;t paying enough attention to be 100% sure but it didn;t leave a great impression and wasn;t clarified. So I amy have leaped to yee old conclusion. Sorry I am not sure of the epidsode. Maybe someone else here will know it?

(now trying my fifth image)

So is verbal praise considering gushing? "Yes! Good dog." in a happy tone is my normal verbal praise. To me gushing is a great way to overstimulate a dog. Not what we are going for with praise.

How did gushing get into this discussion? I think there are way to many wrong impressions of what positive training really is. It is to bad. Consider that drug dogs and search dogs are trained using positive method training. You can't force a dog to do scent work! Knowing how dogs learn is a must in those fields. Food for thought.

While CM isn't my favorite by way of his methods, I do agree of some of what he says. Dogs aren't people in fur coats, they need exercise, discipline and love. But some of his techniques leave alot to be desired in my opinion.

If you are going to use those methods, the Monks of New Skete are at least more fair in their use. I disagree with some of their assessments of they why of the dogs behavior, but they do know how to implement that type of training more fairly than CM does.

Personally I love the shows "Barking Mad" and "It's me or the dog" far far better. To bad they aren't on as often.

I think I know why my comment wasn't posting - what I wrote was "Does anyone find Ceasar to be a bit of a s * xist....and I think the s * x was freaking out the spambots. So, I deleted it and said "issues with women"......which, I think he has. ;)

LOL

According to somebody that posted a reply here, I'm not supposed to desensitize or actually work through the problem, I'm supposed to do something else instead. What was the example used..oh yeah, the squirrel thing. I'm not supposed to teach my dogs that little grey furry creatures are not to be barked at or chased, we're supposed to play ball instead. How does that fix anything? IMO, that's just as silly as standing around waiting for a dog to stop jumping on me because he / she is excited.

In the end, I see that I'm not such a demon for making dogs sit and actually practice good manners which was my whole point to begin with. Cutting nails, playing with toes, giving baths do not hurt a dog, but some people allow biting, screaming and other behaviors because heaven forbid they should actually do something about it.

I'm not going to get lured into a arguement about what Cesar thinks about women. There are plenty of examples of men that loved to treat women badly that were proven to do so, versus just what a person thinks he does. JFK is a perfect example, but according to some, he is was the greatest man to ever step foot on this planet. Sure he was....

Stacy, I think you misunderstood my post. (re-squirrels) Or maybe I am missing something. I was trying to make a point to someone else (I think) and I did a poor job with my example. (I'm going to blame my pain meds. Note to self don't post when taking them ever again.) Though using a ball can be used as redirecting attention after a counterconditioning program has been implemented. (or as a reward for ignoring the small fluffy distraction)

My point was that you do need to work on the issue, not just jerk the dog around. That isn't what I would call working on the problem appropriately. (jerking is a great way to cause more aggression however used improperly)

I hope that makes it more clear.

I think I am done with this topic. It seems that there are two camps here where there should be one, the welfare of the dogs. I think we all agree that we love our dogs and don't want to hurt them. (I hope)

It would seem that many people think positive training is nothing but cookie pushing and no discipline. That couldn't be further from the truth. I live with 3 very different dogs that have all responded well with the positve reinforcement training and the no nonsense rules all of my dogs are required to live by. (past included) No darting through doors, come when you are called, no jumping on people and stay means stay are just a few of those. Food rewards aren't used every day either. To label me as a cookie pushing, gushing, softie because I use positive methods is pretty funny if it weren't so sad. Sad because it makes people think the extreme opposite is preferable to "that" type of trainer. Forget about the fact that positive training yields great results and can be used on dogs AND puppies without causing fear. (I've even trained a cat to jump through a hoop on command. Not a useful trick per say but it was alot of fun for all involved.)

I guess I don't understand why people resist learning about positive methods of training whenever it is brought up. "Well I smack my dogs and they do just fine" seems pretty counter intuitive to training to me. If that works for you fine. Just don't expect people to agree with you that have the learning behind their experience that says different. I'm sure I've used this analogy before but here it is again: I own a car but that doesn't make me a mechanic, so if my car is broke and I want it fixed the right way I'll find one, not ask my neighbor for help. (Duct tape will only take you so far.)

I say this out of some fustration and as a person (who makes a living as a dog trainer) simply trying to share some actual knowledge on the subject. It may be that I suck at making my points. (I try hard to make myself clear and can see I have failed miserably in some instances) If I can reach one person to reconsider the antiquated methods out there, it will have been worth at least some of the fustration. I know I don't know everything when it comes to training and behavior, none of us do, tho I can say with some confidence that I DO know more than the average dog owner. Even ones that watch CM. By way of seminars and keeping current with LOTS of great reading on the subject. (aside from my experience in the field) I wish it didn't feel like a battle every time the subject comes up. I'm not sure why that happens. For some reason both sides feel the need to defend their way perhaps.

I know this post may make me look like a total jerk. Obviously not my intention. It is just difficult to read about people smacking their dogs in the name of training and not say anything about it. That which does not vent explodes after all. (perhaps this is my explosion) I will try to ignore future training discussions. It will be hard and I guarantee nothing. :-) I am very passionate about the subject after all, as are most trainers. It is how we are "wired" I think. Tail wags.

Marie, I think you made you point very well and I agree with you.

I am not a trainer, but I have a dog. And though she's quite easy to keep on track, she has her moments. Your posts reminded me to stay focused on behavior modification and what she and I can do as a team versus complicating her issues further with negative reactions. So, thanks for that! ;)

Sorry if I sound stupid for asking, but what *is* the difference between a correction and a punishment? My working understanding of punishment is something that decreases the likelihood of a behavior recurring. So how is this different than "correction" other than "correction" sounds nicer?

I'm not anti-punishment. I have used negative punishment extremely effectively. I have used positive punishment at times. I've also learned that there are other options. I've learned to think outside the box. And I think that it's made me a better dog-owner and a better dog-trainer.

I agree that punishment can be used effectively, but I don't think that most dog owners do so. I think they nag. A lot. And then the dog learns to tune out the punishment. Most people, me included, don't have the stomach to apply positive punishment to the extent that it needs to be used in order to be truly effective. Most people, me included, don't have the excellent timing that is required. And many people don't take into account all of the negative fall-out that can occur, whether the punishment is effective or not.

Punishment - Not emotionally neutral, can occur long after the fact, doled out arbitrarily

Correction - Emotionally neutral (part of ordinary obedience training), consistent, firm and fair

The Monks of New Skete dedicate 2 chapters in "How to Be Your Dog's Best Friend" to discipline and praise.

Those definitions of "punishment" and "correction" are totally arbitrary and don't match up with the actual scientific definition of "punishment".

In the science of animal behavior modification and learning, a punishment is anything that makes a behavior less likely to be performed again in the future. The emotional state of the trainer has nothing at all to do with it.

Cressida, in Real Life, though, the emotional state of the human has a huge impact on the dog. No, it doesn't trump everything--if you cause serious pain or injury, for instance, the dog is not going to be much affected by the fact that you did it calmly and with the best intentions.

But, as a Supreme Court justice said in one decision, "Even a dog knows the difference between being kicked and being tripped over." More immediately relevant, saying "Ah-ah!" to my dog when she heads for the cat food doesn't have the same impact on her that screaming with rage at her would, or giving her a hard whack on the nose. Using the same word to describe those very different things is, at best, not helpful.

Insisting on using words in a way that contradicts normal human experience, and further insisting that that's the _only_ correct use of the words, does not illuminate, it does not inform, and it does not advance the cause of people communicating with their dogs effectively.

p.s. Cressida refers to "it" the defintion, not "it" the dog or the training. Emotional state of the person is not typically included in the definition. When I teach about punishment I refer to emotion as a danger sign only. If you attempt to 'punish' while angry you are at risk of 'abusing' instead.