I would never out-right hit a dog, but when I want mine to pay attention or stop doing something, I'll flick his snout.
He gets all flustered and stops immediately.
He gets all flustered and stops immediately.
Poll: Is hitting your pet the right way to punish it?
- Thread starter _tinned_magpie_
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Taken from a CRACKED article: http://www.cracked.com/article_18551_6-well-intentioned-ways-youre-ruining-your-dog.html_tinned_magpie_ said:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Punishing it After You Discover Something it Destroyed/Pooped On:
Most dog owners have walked into a room to find our favorite slippers chewed up. Or maybe it's a book, or a computer, depending on the dog. It's natural to take one look at the destroyed slippers/novel/Alienware workstation and start yelling over and over again that the guilty party is, in fact, a Bad Dog. Hopefully this makes you feel better, because that's all it does.
There are two problems here: First, dogs don't speak English (their biggest obstacle to U.S. citizenship) so the only way we can really communicate what we want is through associating behaviors with tangible rewards.
The other problem is dogs have pretty much no memory at all. This is why they're smart enough to know to wait until you're gone to dig that half-eaten burger out of the trash, but not smart enough to clean up the evidence after the fact.
So if the rewards/punishments aren't immediate, don't bother. If they do a good thing (like sit on command) and you immediately give them a treat, they associate the sitting with the treat and are more inclined to do it next time around. If they do a bad thing (like try to fit a cat's head in their mouth) and you immediately give them a punishment (like playing an Insane Clown Posse song), they associate cat bullying with excruciating pain and are more likely to stop.
So how long is too long to wait to punish your dog? How about one second?
That's right; studies have shown that even half a second delay in punishing (or rewarding) a dog has a noticeable effect on how fast they learn. So when you get home two hours after he's butchered your finest gaming computer, that is as far gone from his mind as ancient Roman history. He thinks that you're yelling at him for running up to greet you when you get home.
"He knows what he did," you might say. "Just look at him, he looks guilty as hell!"
Dogs may or may not feel guilt, but when he's looking sad and bowed-over amongst the shreds of your favorite possessions, that's not what's going on. Dogs will do that when you yell at them whether they did anything wrong or not. All he knows is that you're angry for some mysterious reason, probably thinking you just fly into a rage for no reason like Joe Pesci in Goodfellas. All he's saying is, "I like you better when you're not flying into an insane fury that makes no sense to me. Please try to restrain your crazy irrational emotions."
Beating your dog is the easy way out. Really training it with positive reinforcement is hard, but your relationship with your dog will be much stronger.
Positive reinforcement works best, but there are occasions with big, aggressive dogs where you have to show dominance (for instance, if you adopt from a shelter where dogs usually come from broken homes or were strays). Sometimes they'll bite for whatever reason, and that can only be quelled with force, basically showing the dog you are the alpha.
Typically, if you can establish dominance early, using force needn't be an option. As much as we'd like to think they do, dogs don't understand the spoken word, though they do understand tone of voice. Raising your voice is a much better way to show your displeasure.
I'm no dog whisperer, but I do understand a thing or two about animal hierarchy thanks to knowing several breeders and trainers. Likalaruku also posted a very handy guide a few spots above me for all of you dog owners out there.
Typically, if you can establish dominance early, using force needn't be an option. As much as we'd like to think they do, dogs don't understand the spoken word, though they do understand tone of voice. Raising your voice is a much better way to show your displeasure.
I'm no dog whisperer, but I do understand a thing or two about animal hierarchy thanks to knowing several breeders and trainers. Likalaruku also posted a very handy guide a few spots above me for all of you dog owners out there.
Hmm again that doesn't really make you sound mature yourself and actually further support my point that you are one arrogant person. I also like the fact you didn't really answer my question about sources supporting the notion that negative reinforcement and physical punishment for animal training is completely useless. Or maybe you don't have anything to back you up. Is accusing others for trolling and being immature your usual tactic in a debate?Jimmyjames said:
Maybe I can just spot a waste of time a mile away, and I don't really care about arguing with you.twasdfzxcv said:
Trying to coerce me back into the argument isn't *really* disproving my theory about you being a troll, is it?
I find that while hitting with any sort of frequency is bad, and can actually make matters worse, sometimes it is necessary when they are doing something than risks their own safety.
For example, my dad was mowing the garden, and my dog didn't seem to like that, since she kept growling and pouncing at it. Obviously this could very well mangle her paws, so the next time she did it he gave her a wallop and she hasn't been near it since.
For example, my dad was mowing the garden, and my dog didn't seem to like that, since she kept growling and pouncing at it. Obviously this could very well mangle her paws, so the next time she did it he gave her a wallop and she hasn't been near it since.
Just once, then from there on you just need to raise your hand in the same way, they will remember what they got last time.
Again this is really just ad hominem and not addressing the argument. Doesn't that actually make you the troll in the case? To avoid this little thing being drag on longer and being disrespectful to the OP and the readers here, let me end this by summarizing it here. You stated that physical punishment and negative reinforcement have no effect in animal training, that animals' brain won't be able to understand punishment and you seems to have the evidence supporting so. I response by saying you are arrogant for thinking so and ask for the proof of your statement. And you accuse me for being a troll and ignore my request for the source of your claims.Jimmyjames said:
It is my belief that physical punishment and negative reinforcement execute correctly are necessary in animal training, and it's a belief shared by most experts in the field and supported by the history of these training methods. I suppose I'll ask you one last time for any evidence you have that proves otherwise and we can share it among us and add to the discussion here.
OK, fine. Here are a couple of articles about it. Please read them and then feel free to shut up about it.twasdfzxcv said:
First, why negative reinforcement isn't effective:
http://www.behaviorlogic.com/id105.html
And, why physical punishment isn't effective:
http://www.behaviorlogic.com/id97.html
(This article details the differences in the animal psyche from the human)
In conclusion, stop berating me then telling me I'M the arrogant one.
(BTW, We ARE talking cats and dogs here, not elephants and tigers)
Ironic thing to say considering that I tried to take this off-forum and you had the nerve to post my message here. Who exactly is being the disrespectful one?twasdfzxcv said:
I find that a quick slap away from the head on a largeish dog works well when they do something bad but you have to make sure that they know they did something bad and I would never hit my dog repeadetly or strong enough to actually harm him, I think it hurts his pride more than anything else. I wouldn't hit a small dog or a cat though, a quick spray of water or a flick would work better.
A strong tone of voice, a kind of deep growl, works better for all dogs and so I rarely ever have to raise my hand,
A strong tone of voice, a kind of deep growl, works better for all dogs and so I rarely ever have to raise my hand,
Funny how you claim that animals brain work differently and the articles uses extensive analogies with human behaviors. Second the author never claimed that punishment and negative reinforcement are useless. Her clever use of anecdotal evidences (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence) at best only support the notion that in those certain situation they're not effective. You should avoid claims that are only backed by personal stories and tales. If you want to learn more about behavior you should probably start with wikipedia page on it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning) and follow up on its sources. All 4 forms of operant conditioning works in certain situation and they're all valid methods.Jimmyjames said:
I don't suppose that calling people being trolls openly in threads and attempt the discussion that are obviously relate to the topic in private is the classy thing to do? Clearly the more respectful action is the exact opposite of what you did.Jimmyjames said:
And again for the record:
"ou know what? Now that you've angered me, I'm gonna lay it all out for you.
I'm sick of argumentative people on forums. You quote, troll, pick fights, and when someone tries to respond maturely off-forum and figure out exactly WHAT THE HELL YOUR PROBLEM IS, you bring it right back to the forum.
Go argue with someone else. I am profoundly tired of people like you.
Repost that."
