|
| |
- These articles are provided free to all readers as an educational service.
- They may NOT be reproduced on any website, discussion board or group
for any reason.
- You may post links to the Flying Dog Press homepage
http://www.flyingdogpress.com or
this Flying Dog Press Articles page.
The author, Suzanne Clothier, hereby grants limited permission for
individuals & non-profit organizations to reproduce and distribute these
articles IN PRINT ON PAPER ONLY (no emailed newsletters or publications,
no PDF, no HTML)
under the following conditions:
If you enjoy this articles, we'd appreciate knowing which articles you found
useful and how & why you use them. If you find any illegal use of these
articles, please let us know. Thanks!
|
LESSONS FROM THE MASTERS:
Learning About Punishment
from Dogs Themselves
By Suzanne Clothier
NOTE: This orginally appeared in the April/May 2002 APDT
newsletter, written at the request of the newsletter editor after I had
written a Letter to the Editor noting that there was a lot we could learn about
an appropriate & fair use of punishment from dogs themselves. This is NOT a
defense of punitive training methodology - and "punishment" is defined
as all students of operant conditioning understand it to be defined: one
of the four possible consequences of a behavior.
There's an old lady I know who has been training puppies for
years. And she does a very good job of it. Funny thing, though, she routinely
uses positive punishment as part of her approach. Always has, always will. She's
completely unaware of learning theories, has never attended a conference or
seminar, and never once read a book about dogs. Yet the puppies she's trained
are happy, respectful, and well mannered, and calmly attentive to her subtlest
gesture.
How is it that she uses positive punishment to such good effect, without
creating desensitization or panic or resentment in her pupils? And how does she
do it without collar, leash, head halter, treats or clickers? Because this old
lady is a dog. This experienced trainer of puppies is my retired brood bitch
Carson.
There's a growing tendency among many dog trainers to denounce the use of
positive punishment (P+), though properly defined it means only this: "the
presentation of an undesirable consequence." For many trainers, P+ is a bit
of jargon heavily laden with ugly images of pain, fear and outright cruelty. And
there's no denying that historically, dog training has leaned heavily on
punitive methodology, much of which is thinly disguised abuse in the name of
training. But when we mistakenly equate P+ with abuse, we are ignoring what dogs
themselves can tell us about the value of P+.
Whether we like it or not, P+ is quite natural in animal-to-animal
interactions. For example, Carson is resting on a sofa. The puppy Ruby
approaches, thinking about jumping up to share the space. Hardening her eyes and
holding her head very still, Carson growls softly, her message clear:
"Leave me alone." Ruby ignores this. Carson escalates the warning to a
loud, scary air snap, and the puppy dances back a step but returns almost
immediately, clearly thinking this may be a new game. Carson's next move is a
threatening lunge that ends in grabbing the offending puppy by the muzzle for a
few beats. Now Ruby gets the message and wisely retreats.
As classically defined, Carson's intent in meting out this punishment is to
"decrease the likelihood of the behavior in the future." P+ adds
something unpleasant as a consequence for a behavior. Being no fool, Ruby learns
that jumping on top of her grandmother has unpleasant consequences; an
unoccupied sofa is a better choice. P+ is employed by dogs among themselves all
the time.
Dire warnings about the effects of using P+ have their basis in fact.
Improperly applied, P+ can undermine the relationship, can lead to
desensitization, abuse, cruelty, panic. Though these unhappy results are often
presented as an inevitable outcome of employing P+, the truth is that these
result from the use of poorly applied or extreme P+. If P+ was destructive to
relationships, there would be no cohesive pack structure possible among canids.
But dogs and wolves do use P+ and still have strong, affectionate, trusting
relationships. Clearly then, the problem lies not with P+ itself, but in our
application of it. Learning how to effectively use P+ requires that we look to
our dogs for clues.
Properly applied with good timing, clarity and appropriateness of scale
(something any socially skilled dog does with an ease that leaves human trainers
in awe), P+ makes increasing subtlety of gesture possible. Having used P+ to
convince Ruby to nap elsewhere, Carson will not have to escalate the punishment
the next time. In fact, she will be able to use less to make the same point. As
Ruby learns to read Carson more accurately, the stillness coupled with a
hardening eye will be sufficient warning. Dog language is built around nuance
and subtlety.
But it is in nuance and subtlety where we often fail in our application of
P+. We do not start with stillness and shifts in our eyes and breathing. Often,
we begin where Carson ended – grabbing for Ruby and "correcting"
her. The puppy has no chance to learn that there are subtleties that should be
heeded. From the dog's perspective, we rocket from completely unconcerned to
furious action without warning – a scary situation for a dog that can and does
erode the relationship. There's no appropriate beginning to our scale of
warnings, and no way to back up from there; we are crude, unsophisticated
communicators who do not observe proper canine protocol of escalating warnings.
We can become better trainers through careful study of the nuances of how
dogs do what they do, and employing the same subtlety in our own communications.
Here's an example – Ruby approaches while I'm eating lunch. My first response
is to stop chewing, hold my head very still and harden my eyes a bit. If
ignored, I then very slowly turn my head toward Ruby, hardening my eyes further.
Ignored, I lift a lip – just a bit – while still pointedly staring at the
offender. Ignored, I growl and escalate the lip lift. Still ignored, I growl
louder, longer, and finally, lunge toward her with a threat bark and an air
snap. This effective and very "canine" approach does not ruin our
relationship in any way. Ruby understands this because it matches what other
dogs are also teaching her. Like the other dogs, eventually, I can just offer
the stillness and hardened eyes as warning. No equipment or treats or clickers
needed – just the power of natural interaction shaped in a way the dog can
easily understand, without the emotional overtones often present in human/dog
interactions.
When Ruby retreats and sits, I quickly switch to offer positive reinforcement
for this desirable behavior. Like all social creatures, dogs need two kinds of
information from others. They need to know when they are right, and when they
are wrong. Though some trainers refuse to give anything but positive responses,
nothing in the dog's culture that supports that lopsided approach. A socially
sophisticated dog becomes just that because other dogs told him both when he was
right ("I'll keep playing with you since you're behaving nicely") and
when he was wrong ("don't bump into me again!"). With a clear
understanding of what is right and what is wrong, Ruby can make a choice.
Though we may pride ourselves on being positive trainers, we may be surprised
to recognize that we do use punishment, however mildly, from time to time.
"Timeouts," disengaging from too rough play, or simply withdrawing our
attention from a dog – all are punishment, and all may used as part of a
humane approach. The use of punishment (+ or -) doesn't mean we are bad
trainers. P+ is merely an "undesirable consequence"; we have the
full responsibility for deciding how unpleasant that consequence will be. As
with any consequence for a behavior, we will be most successful as trainers when
we employ P+ appropriately with awareness, and when we can move past our
emotional response to the mere mention of punishment.
As dogs and other social animals show us, P+ may be used effectively without
destroying the relationship. They also show us that timing, subtlety,
appropriateness of scale, and clarity are the critical ingredients in
influencing another's behavior. When we learn from dogs, we learn from the best.
|
FROM BARN FIRE
to BARN OF JOY: St. Patrick's Day 2004, our barn burned to the ground,
taking with it our beloved
pig Charlotte, turkey Mabel, cats Dudley & Jessie and many chickens and turkeys
did not escape. ( Please
click here for details.) The incredible outpouring of support from
all directions has humbled and staggered us - we are truly blessed. The
new barn that stands now is the barn that love built, and includes a room for
seminars & training so that the love that made this possible can be passed along
for years to come. Thank you for
your support & patience during this difficult time. - Suzanne & John