Jim Ha, PhD, CAAB
It’s been an interesting week. Last Friday, a local trainer and colleague, Grisha Stewart of Ahimsa Dog Training contacted me to ask if I would discuss Cesar Millan’s techniques with a reporter from KOMO-TV here in Seattle. To see video of the piece broadcast by KOMO-TV, click here, or click on the image to the right. Millan was in town for a meet-and-greet and fundraiser for a local pet shelter. I leaped at the chance, as the science that I do as an ethologist very much clashes with his approaches, and I have been working hard to get the word out to the public about the serious side effects of his techniques.
In our practice, we see MANY cases of dogs with severe aggression, and in performing our detailed background interviews and assessments, we find that the dog has gotten worse following treatment with behavior modification techniques similar to those of Millan’s, whether administered by the owner, based on what they think that they know of the methods, or administered by local trainers who use similar techniques. These cases elegantly support what we already know from the science of animal behavior, called ethology.
Exhaustion as a behavior modification technique is now being debated for its role in anti-terrorist torture techniques, and we know from decades of learning research that exhaustion actually decreases learning. Flooding as a useful technique in humans has lost its adherents due to its potentially negative side-effects and its ineffectiveness: a vaguely similar but much more useful technique is called desensitization. Flooding is basically the process of “breaking” an animal (or human), a technique now also rapidly losing favor in the horse training world. Finally, Millan makes heavy use of punishment, but which he, completely incorrectly, describes as being part of dog pack dominance behavior.
We know that the use of any one of these techniques will produce fear, anxiety, and a well-documented phenomenon known as “learned helplessness.” Learned helplessness is a psychological condition in which a human being or an animal has learned to act or behave helpless in a particular situation, even when it has the power to change its unpleasant or even harmful circumstance. Learned helplessness theory is the view that clinical depression and related mental illnesses result from a perceived absence of control over the outcome of a situation (Seligman, 1975). This condition has been heavily researched, originally by Seligman’s group at Cornell University. It is one of the conditions we see in post-traumatic stress disorder (a similar condition from which many of the “badly behaved” dogs that are brought to Millan, and to our practice, are suffering), and it is what we see in many of the animals that have been handled using Millan’s techniques.
It’s also interesting to note that we biologists, ethologists, studying the behavior of animals in the world around us would NEVER be allowed to apply the techniques that Millan uses to the crows, primates, killer whales, and other animals that we find so fascinating… and we wouldn’t want to: these techniques tell us nothing and do not help us learn any more about our fellow wildlife.
Given that we know that any of these techniques can produce horrible side-effects, one of the worst things about Millan’s approach is that he combines the use of all three. For these reasons, because we know so much more about dog behavior than Cesar Millan fans realize, because the use of these techniques, especially when we know better, is unethical, I was happy to speak to the KOMO reporter.
As always in the our world, everything is not black-and-white: will Millan’s techniques produce a change in the behavior of a dog, a decrease in aggression in the specific context in which he does the training and in the trainer’s presence? Yup… and we see that on the National Geographic Channel. But at the cost of what severe long-term and side-effect consequences, which we do not see on the National Geographic Channel?
Do I suggest in my own work that many a dog’s problems arise from boredom and lack of exercise, especially younger dogs and those bred for high energy, and do I therefore recommend a greatly expanded exercise program, even training your dog to (voluntarily) run on a treadmill? Yup… but note the voluntary part!
Do some breeds require a clear social structure and “get into trouble” without it, and do I therefore sometimes recommend affirming and clarifying a social structure, using proper social communication signals that dogs recognize? Yup, but notice the part about “some breeds” and proper social signals, which do not include shock collars, “helicoptering” a dog on a choke collar, alpha-rolling a dog (wolves don’t DO this!!!), or any other aversive techniques.
The approaches that we, and most of our colleagues, use are based on science, on a knowledge of animal behavior and psychology that has grown by leaps and bounds (little pun intended) in the past few decades. We no longer use concepts like fixed action patterns, instinctive drift, and nature vs nurture; we know that punishment doesn’t work in dogs… our view of the animals with which we share this planet, and with which we associate every day, has become far more complicated, and far more fascinating. I love my job!
We always love to hear from our readers, so feel free to let us know your thoughts on the KOMO piece. We know that this is an emotional topic for many people, so just a gentle reminder to be respectful when you post. You can also send email to Joel Moreno, KOMO-TV: jmoreno@komotv.com.
As a pet dog owner that adopted a German Shepherd Dog from a rescue group that had multiple behavioral issues resulting in aggressive behavior towards people, I can attest that it is possible for the average pet dog owner to successfully rehabilitated a dog, including a so-called ‘tough breed dog’, by using techniques based in science, reward based training (food and treats are not a bribe).
Supported by veterinary behaviorists and knowledgeable, experienced behavior consultants I was able to successfully rehabilitate my dog. In the process I developed a strong bond with my dog built on trust and respect. My dog is relaxed and happy, not because he’s submitted to me as the leader but rather because he’s learned that the world is a good place and people are to be trusted.
By educating myself and developing an understanding of the realities of dog behavior and with patience, going at a pace that was comfortable for my dog, and consistency I was able to help my dog. And I know that many other people have successfully been able to help their dogs using methods advocated by veterinary behaviorists, certified applied animal behaviorists and trainer/behavior counselors that all advocate and experienced with the evaluation and modification of problem behaviors using humane techniques that change the dog’s internal motivation and improve the human-animal bond.
It’s amazing that National Geographic a non profit who’s stated mission is to promote scientific research and understanding, hasn’t promoted dog training and behavior modification methods that reflect the best practices as advocated by animal welfare organizations, veterinarians and animal provessionals.
Thank you Dr. Ha for speaking out in favor of up-to-date methods focused on changing our dog’s internal motivation.
For all of the Cesar fans who point out over and over that he is not a “dog trainer” I would like to mention an article about him that appeared in People magazine (this was a couple of years before the show), what stood out to me was HIS statement that his goal was to be the “best dog trainer in the world”. When you modify a dog’s behavior you are “training” it to behave differently-regardless of the methods.
Semantics are not the issue here. The methods that he and other “results-based trainers” (to quote Heather Houlahan mentioned in the article that Ms. Hubbard was generous enough to provide -thank you) are. It seems they believe the end justifies the means.
To borrow a quote from Mortimer J. Adler, Ph.D. “You cannot use bad means for a good end any more than you can build a good house out of bad materials. It is only when we do not look too closely into the matter that we can be fooled by the statement that the end justifies the means. We fail to ask whether the end in view is really good, or we fail to examine carefully how the means will affect the end. This happens……where the only criterion is success and anything which contributes to success is thought to be justified. Success may be the standard by which we measure the expediency of the means, but expediency is one thing and moral justification is another.”
So for me “the end” doesn’t “justify the means”.
I think if you would listen to Millan in the interview, he says that his way is “one” method, and it is not the only technique. Not all dogs are going to respond to the same program of training. Cesar individualizes his techniques according to the dog/owner and situation in each case. As someone else stated above, “one size does not fit all.” You should take that to heart.
I think it’s interesting that, in a number of the cases presented on the Dog Whisperer series, the subjects tell the story of previous trainers who “gave up” or basically told the person there was nothing they could do, and that they should just put the dog down. If not for Cesar, think how many more beloved pets would have been needlessly euthanized. Cesar has saved the lives of many animals that were considered hopeless cases.
Many of you who have commented here seem to have some kind of hatred for Mr. Millan, and that’s not healthy for anyone, animal or human.
Wishing you a healthy, happy, and balanced life. 🙂
You want to talk about a bad trainer? have you ever seen Brad Pattison from the TV show “At the end of my leash”??? Talk about a disgrace to Canada. He’s as arrogant and abusive as they come. I have seen both Cesar Millan and Brad Pattison live in person working with dogs and I wouldnt let Brad near my dog even if you paid me. Much is edited out of his show and his tips are more drama based for tv ratings than actual dog training. I cringe at his poor uneducated ‘followers’.
I try to be an open minded trainer (it seems there are so few out there) and try to research many techniques to ensure I am proving my clients with the best information I can and Cesar has brought my training to a new level. While I have modified his techniques to my own style, The proof in my clients dogs behavior is enough for me.
I think all of the Cesar haters hate his popularity. I know I know… “we have nothing to be jealous of” but lets be honest, he has no professional training, he is a mexican immigrant, and he uses training techniques that are outdated and -in your opinions- just plain WRONG! then why does he have his own tv show?!?! Right? I’m sure it is frustrating for all of you. Just keep in mind that while you’re hating Cesar it’s really the discovery channel that is wielding their dog whisperer in the wrong ways. His ways are not for everyone/every dog, and you should be battling to tell people that Cesar is worth watching- just like a man who can walk with wild lions is worth watching- but only for the novelty, not for the guidance in training. People don’t need to use Cesar’s methods for a dog who pulls too hard, they should for a dog who would not be allowed to live without serious behavioral modification- a last chance scenario.
I am not a fan follower of Milan, but I can understand the techniques and can see the similarity behind peoples arguments here and the old argument of spanking children for negative behavior, vs rewarding for positive. WELL it’s PERFECTLY clear that removing groundings and spankings have had a HUGE detriment on North American society, especially in our school system. Undisciplined people cause trouble, so do dogs. Unfortunately many of these behavior science specialists, are just that scientists. And EVERYONE knows scientists are SELF-VALIDATING. Like the world being flat, religion not existing, etc.
I can PERSONALLY say that I have had a dog trainer that works similar to Milan come and help me with my dogo/pitbull cross. In a day he was able to show me how to stop my dog from pulling on the leash. Jumping my fence, chasing small dogs, and jumping on people. Each issue had it’s own correction technique that was very effective. The issues were not completely fixed that day, but gave me a platform to work with.
And to all those that think it should be positive only. Why don’t you tell me WHEN AND WHERE in the wild, dogs reward each other for positive behavior? Ummm they don’t. But they DO discipline through wrestling, biting, etc.
Sounds like the people researching animal behavior are the same ones studying human behavior, telling us that we can’t spank our children, can’t ground them, and need to reward vs punish them.
And look where that has gotten us. More kids committing mass murders in schools, because their parents have done nothing but spoil them and leave them to believe there are no consequences for negative behavior.
I really cant beleive all the negatives that people choose to see, Something so simple as CM way of relating to a dog and understanding a dog on their level is wrong? Give me a break just because something is shown to us as common sense and not follwed by science.
Dogs have as much personality has humans….we all know you cant treat the bad apple the same as the good one. You have to understand where they are coming from as you do dogs and by doing so their is your postive reward and accomplisments for dog and owner.
You people just want formulas to follow when the real formula you cant read in a book is the one you create with your dog….that bond that openess to understand comes from those willing to try. Just like their is bad parents there is bad owners and who is in the wrong the ones who dont try from the emontionall side of life!
As a owner of a min pin CM simple techniques and reasoning behind them make sense!!! Plain and simple TRIED TESTED AND TRUE!!!
No negative and abuse here, I got a happy calm min pin who has the engery when she needs to use it outside playing not tearing up the house becuase of CM simple techniques!
It seems clear to me there are a number of things going on here. One is a tv show, and two is how peole feel about Cesar Millan. But Shouldn’t the consistant thing be about our pets themselves? If I say I like Cesar Millan do I have to be suddenly suspect if I have positive results using his tips? I don’t think I’m saying all of the other methods are wrong. I encourage some of you to take a second look at the TV show without the added pressure of analyzing any of the techniques and enjoy it for the variety of dog content. If you can view it enough you will recognize dogs from other episodes. Stay calm and Assertive even if you disagree with me.
In a attempt to learn something from all of the information provided in these discussions I find it hard to understand all of the declarations of absolutes that come into play on the issue. It seems to me many if not most accredited and non accredited dog behavior experts on the anti CM bandwagon swear/declare that dogs conditioned with positive punishment or force training do not and therefore cannot benefit from the experience, issues are simply masked, and that the dog will always display negative backlash behaviors in the near future regardless.
Furthermore it appears that any testimonial responses by others who have had different results and refute that perspective to such absolutes in results are simply………………..dismissed.
Such are the politics and propaganda in the journey on a road to a agenda.
These discussions tell me more about all of our problems and issues with the dog condition in terms of needing help and understanding than anything else.
Robert
As a lifetime student of animal behavior, and of learning how to “read” the body language of other animals, I too am immensely grateful for this piece and the discussion about Millan’s methods.
One of the things that has been mentioned here that I will second is that those that defend his methods or see no harm are those that are not savvy to reading dog body language and understanding what’s really going on for the dog. When I started consulting on horse behavior, I realized quickly that things that seemed very evident to me are not necessarily evident to the average horse owner. The same is true of dog owners, who, unfortunately, do not by and large know – or even really WANT to know – how to read their dogs’ signals and body language.
I am now back training dogs for one of the big chains, and am extremely alarmed at how many people I see coming into the store trying to use scruff grabs or alpha rolls!!! on dogs in the store, and spouting Millan-isms as fact to other pet owners. I try quickly to intervene when I can, but so many, like the fans here, do not want to hear any criticisms of their cult leader. There will always be the ones that want to take shortcuts and therefore will ignore any advice aimed at improving the welfare of the animal, because their goal is not to have a healthy, happy pet, but to have a predictable pet that will ALWAYS do what the owner wants – in other words a slave. Those people have no interest in having a cross-species relationship based on mutual trust and respect. They want slaves that serve as some kind of ego-booster for them. On the other hand, there are many viewers of his show that I know would feel awful if they realized how much fear they instill in their pets when they try these methods on their own.
I am immensely grateful to all the behaviorists who posted here. Your comments help me to fine-tune my interactions with those customers who come in riding the “pack leader” bandwagon. I actually questioned the natural horsemanship movement when I first started studying horses because of my sense that the horse surely does NOT think we are other horses, so why would we think that trying to “communicate” with them using “their language” would come even close to working. The same holds true here. I am quite certain now that dogs, horses, guinea pigs, birds…no other animal thinks we are the same species as them, so appeals to using “their language” are baseless.
As for those that come in the store, I have only seconds to say something so it is usually “please don’t do that – it’s a good way to get bitten.”
In my opinion, the argue shouldn’t rely if Cesar Millan’s metohds are based on “Scientific Studies” or not! As a researcher, I must say that many of our “inventions” came from empirism, sometimes from a feeling, not only from an academic approuch.
Yes, I could not agree more when people say that we can train our dogs without harming them! But the question is what is really harmfull for a dog? Is that harmfull for all dogs? Is it ok to raise a dog (or anything) without limits? Are we, human adults, able for doing everything we want to? I’d like to receive answers to these questions… I think they must be in role, instead of dealing this subject personaly!
That’s some things we must consider: with CM’s Dog Whisperer TV Show, the numbers of pet owners who decided to take care of their pets increased a lot (in Brazil we have a similar program called Dr. Pet and the trainner uses positive reinforcment), we have to consider the fact that CM controls a numerous pack and that he gets a confident energy and posture!
In fact, we have a nice arguing here!
his training is like crap.
“oh u wanna be the pack leader.” whats that all about? plus it’s not all about being domonint over your dog. he also uses the alpha roll. it doesnt even help. it just makes the problem worse because it makes an insecue dog feel even more insecue. in fact it makes the dog fear its owner. when he deals with aggresive dogs why does he let the dog strike then tell it off with a leash jerk or the alpa roll. shouldnt u prevent the dog from striking instead of letting the dog strike? cause thats how u fix the problem. if u want training advice follow victoria stilwell, cause she trains positively. “instead of your dog fearing you, your dog’s respecting you,” she said in the dog days of summer episode.
As far as the “BIG CHAIN STORE” training goes I wish someone would compile some data/stats on the number of dogs that fair poorlly from the attempts at using a one size fits all approach. I know for a fact that often the training methods that are used DO NOT WORK…
I bet if you do some research and check out a half dozen of the big dog chat sites you will read testimonies to this effect that will keep you busy for years to come.
So much for absolutes and agendas
cheers
Each dog is different and different techniques are required. I adopted 2 older dogs from a Dachshund rescue and each had different issues. Cesar’s methods worked for both…. one using his more gentle methods and the other his more dominate methods. My oldest dog had NEVER been socialized, bit anyone who came close, and was uncontrollable. He now interacts well with other dogs and greets visitors gently (after looking at me to see how I’m reacting). All this because of the methods I learned from Mr. Milan. I have NEVER hit or punished him, but rewarded correct behavior and redirected inappropriate behavior. He is a loving and fun dog now. The other weiner was almost completely opposite. He was extremely shy, cowered, and was starved for attention (also literally starved!). He had NO confidence and was miserable. He now greets people happily, holds his own with other dogs in an acceptable manner, and is happy and confident. Both dogs look to me and my husband for leadership and direction. My heartfelt thanks go out to Cesar Milan. Like I said at the beginning; each dog is different and different methods are required. His warnings not to use the methods without professional help are self explainatory. Be educated and use common sense when dealing with your pets. No one method is the “right” one. While I’m sure your methods work for you… his methods work for me.
HI Thank you for your help!
Just desire to state your document is striking.The understanding inside your submit is merely impressive and i can get for granted you’re an professional on this topic.Nicely with your permission allow me to grab your rss feed to keep up to date with forthcoming publish.Thanks a million and please maintain the great function. Excuse my mediocre English. English isn’t really my native language.
I honestly liked going through your blog threads, and I’ve added in you to my Yahoo RSS.
I have frequented your site before. The more I visit, the more I keep coming back! 🙂
Thanks for writing the article. It was a really good read.. 🙂
I am an assistant trainer at my kennel club and run into the Millan phenomenon way too often. Instead of learning about dog behavior and learning theories (or at least making sure they are listening to someone credible) many pet owners want a quick fix. Instead of understanding that Dominance is simply the control of resources they feel force is necessary. Its quite sad and very harmful to their dogs. To those who think that Millan can rehabilitate dogs with fear aggression, etc while actual scientifically based methods cannot I would recommend you look at dogs like my Rose who came from the local shelter with fear aggression. Completely unhandeable or approachable by people and dogs Rose is now a confident girl who is training in sports. Four weeks after coming home Rose was approaching people regularly, had stopped nipping/biting behaviors, and had been taught several cues. Two years later she is almost ready to begin competition in rally and agility. She also is learning to herd livestock. Since Rose is one of thousands of dogs rehabilitated using positive reinforcement yearly in the US I would wonder why anyone would want to “get dominant” over their dog.
I’ll make an attempt to explain the differences between the methods and add my own, personal, commentary on the subject. I’m doing do as a professional dog trainer who has used methods similar to Cesar’s since the early 1980s (well before I knew he existed). I was also very much in the dog training realm when the “new and improved” methods were first introduced to dog owners. I actually learned about the methods before they were applied to dogs. My first job out of college put me in contact with the head dolphin trainer at Brookfield Zoo near Chicago. I visited with the dolphins on several occasions and he explained the methods that they used for their aquatic mammal training program (which become “click treat” when applied to dogs).
I don’t want to speak for Cesar, so I won’t refer to “Cesar’s method”. I don’t want to speak for the lady on “It’s me or the dog”, especially since her methods are not “ALL positive” or “only click-treat”, but she certainly has a prevailing strategy that falls into the “new age” methodologies. So, I will refer to the two methods as “correction for compliance” or “incentive + ignore”. I know that neither titles are perfect for describing the methods, but I needed to separate them the best that I could.
The two basic premises of the “Incentive + Ignore” method are “offer incentives” for desired behaviors and “ignore bad behavior” and it will go away. The folks who use these methods use “scientific research” to make you think that they have some new-found data to support their dog training strategies. I will simply say that most of those folks are not scientist themselves, and their ability to interpret data is, at times, a bit off kilter, in my opinion. I say that as a scientist, myself; a person who has a degree in science and worked in the field (designing and statistically interpreting experiments in a highly reviewed field) for over twenty years. But, I also speak as a dog expert who does not rely on science to train dogs because training dogs is more an art as it is a science. The “new age” folks will criticize Cesar because he isn’t a scientist and doesn’t have a degree. I’m here to say, as a scientist, that you don’t need a degree to train dogs. You need skills (both innate and learned through experience). Some people are just good at training dogs in the same way that some people are just very good at playing the piano. There is an innate aptitude that enhances learned skills that are acquired through experience. Cesar obviously has an innate ability, which could also be called a gift.
Incentives work for any animal. However, the method leaves the decision about whether the behavior will be presented wholly to the animal (and how much value the incentive has over the animal at any given time). So, it ignores one of the most profound and intriguing elements of domestic dog – the fact that it is not just *any* species. It is a species designed by man, in man’s image, with a keen genetic-based desire to subordinate to a human authority figure – which is derived from their wolf ancestor’s genetic based need to subordinate to a wolf authority figure.
An incentive method clearly works to create behaviors that are especially challenging to “describe” to the animal. Wild species, like dolphins, bears and parrots that have no genetic code that supports subordination to a leader, are often best or only served with this method. Incentive based training is also very useful to teach dogs to perform complex and non-compliance / non-respect based tasks, such as climbing a ladder, jumping through a hoop, dancing on two legs.
The second aspect of the “Incentive + Ignore” method is the “ignore” part. This is the idea that if there is no incentive for the behavior it will go away. I don’t happen to think that all behaviors that are not rewarded completely extinguish because I believe “to experiment is to be intelligent and adaptive”. Sometimes, it is just worth trying a behavior again to see what happens, even if nothing has happened for a very long time. I see hummingbirds coming to an empty feeder months after I last filled it – “just incase” the status has changed. So, to rely on complete extinction of an unwanted behavior through the “zero reward” theory is to wait a very long time, at least for some behaviors.
The “ignore” method suggests that if the dog jumps up on you, so long as you wholly ignore it, the dog will find no value in the behavior and will stop. That has been shown in scientific experiments where the scientists can actually create a situation of “NO REWARD”. However, it’s very challenging for most dog owners to completely ignore the pain of the nails digging into their flesh repeatedly, or watching as their child is bullied or trampled. For most dog owners, it is impossible to ask guests to “just ignore” the dog when he jumps on you. So, there is very often a response that the dog can perceive – either from the person on whom he is jumping or the owner who is standing by wondering why her dog trainer would instruct her to let the dog damage friends and family members. The woman on “It’s Me Or The Dog” show often wears a calf-length rain coat when she arrives in the home. She turns her back to the jumping dog and instead of having the pooch jump on her front, he jumps on her back, apparently because she can be less damaged that way and the coat offers a bit of protection. She even attempted to employ the “ignore” method when a Siberian Husky began to hump her leg to no avail, so they took the dog to a veterinarian and got it an “injection” that would reduce his *Censored Word* urges, rather than simply address the behavior the way another dog would – by correcting the dog!
Along with the ignore aspect of the method, the “new age” trainers often offer the dog a treat when he STOPS jumping up. Where is the logic in that? The dog is being rewarded for “no behavior” or the “absence” of bad behavior. Huh? The dog jumps on someone. The dog is ignored. The dog looses interest. The dog gets off the person and then he hears, “Good Doggie!” and is given a treat for an absence of behavior. On “It’s Me Or The Dog”, I have seen this approach used several times. That’s just bizarre to me.
All that I can imagine is that the dog is offered a reward for focusing on a person with food, instead of any other behavior (including bad behavior like jumping). In my opinion, there has to be an actual behavior, not the absence of behavior that the dog pairs with the incentive. So, essentially, as long as the incentive maintains value in the dog’s mind, the dog simply becomes highly focused on the person with the food. When the dog looses interest in the food, he is just as likely to go and jump on a person, again, and that is EXACTLY what happens on the TV show.
To combat the failure in the “reward for the absence of bad behavior”, the woman asks the dog’s owner to get out some sauce pan lids and bang them when the dog begins to jump up. It seems to me that this attempt at a solution is a hybrid method – an effort at correcting the dog (using the sound as an aversive). The problem is the sound should be the “warning” signal that precedes the actual correction. But, there’s never an actual correction given. Since the sound alone doesn’t truly correct the dog, but is rather an annoyance, the dog soon learns to ignore that sound, as well. A correction truly CORRECTS the behavior. Since the sauce pan lids only interrupted the dog briefly, I put that in the “nagging” category. The “new age” dog training folks have a serious issue with correcting a dog, which to me, is the root cause of their failure.
In my opinion, the “Incentive + Ignore” method overlooks the fact that ALL animal species are hardwired to receive vital information about survival through pairing warning signals to negative consequences. A frog that chooses to eat a yellow and black striped wasp gets a bad sting. His nervous system is designed to learn through experience that a yellow-black striped patterned insect can result in pain. If he lives through the initial offense, he will avoid future stings based on that memory. Any animal can learn through this method. Social species, like dogs and humans, have created a sophisticated language of warning signals that precede the actual negative consequences to maintain social order while avoiding the need to physically harm one another.
In my opinion, the “Incentive + Ignore” method also fails to understand Domestic Dog as a very unique species. In fact, there is no other species as unique as Dog on the planet. Dog is not a dolphin. Dog was designed to live with humans and accept our societal rules, so long as we compromise and use some dog language to communicate our expectations.
The “correction for compliance” method is common in animal species that are social. Non-social species tend to react in fight or flight when they encounter a stressful situation. Social species look to the leadership of their society for cues on how to behave when encountering a challenging situation. The idea that all animal species have nervous systems that can pair a warning signal with a negative consequence is used in societies to provide rules about boundaries for behaviors that are required to maintain a health society. Social species create warning signals (dogs use grimaces, growls, body posture) as warning signals. The negative consequence is only required if the offending dog doesn’t heed the warning of a higher ranking individual or the leader. If a physical correction is required to back-up a warning, then it must be above the threshold to change the offending dog’s behavior.
In my opinion, compliance behaviors are best explained to a dog using the “warn-first then apply a negative consequence” method. That is because dogs are hard-wired to be social, to understand the importance of societal norms and to respect and have reverence for a leader. Dogs do not restrain each other and they do not use incentives to move individuals towards socially acceptable behavior. The correction for compliance method puts a dog into self-restraint mode, meaning the dog is in control of his own behavior based on his understanding of the consequences for offensive behavior. The most serious shortcoming in execution of this method is to fail to correct effectively – and thereby nag the dog, rather than truly correct it.
Ideally, a good dog trainer uses a combination of the methods – separating the processes based on the task. If the task is a “trick”, then the incentive method works very well. Tricks are behaviors that, if the dog fails to comply, are not serous, dangerous offenses. After the dog has been coached through the use of food or other lures to understand the expectations, one can put higher demands on the performance, if it is desired by the trainer. In that case, the dog would be asked to perform the task and if he didn’t, he might receive a correction for non-compliance. That sift from incentive based to compliance based is very effective when it is done correctly. I think that the “new age” trainers fail to realize this important jump from one method to the other, once the dog understands the expectations.
If the task is compliance / respect based, there is no need for incentives. I do not need to give incentives to get a dog to stop jumping up on people, pulling me, mouthing/nipping/biting or staying when told. The dog needs to know, in no uncertain terms, that the behavior is disrespectful and the trainer, as the pack leader, needs to provide canine-friendly feedback to that effect. Canine-friendly, in my opinion, uses methods that dogs apply to each other to set boundaries and limits. Dogs correct each other with bites and snaps only if a warning signal is not honored. So, the human needs to give a warning signal (usually a sound or a word) and then pair that with the consequence if the dog doesn’t back down and respect the boundary.
To find offensive the “claw hand” used as a correction is simply to find corrections /aversives offensive. They find collars and leashes offensive, too, if they are used to correct the dog. The “new age” dog trainers, for the most part, have no interest in using corrections of any type when educating their dogs. They ignore 50% of modes in which animals learn. They just don’t want to correct their dogs. That’s all it is. You can’t correct a captive, wild dolphin. But, if you want to make some money on dolphin shows, you need to get them to work for you. If you want to maintain wild animals in captivity, you need them to cooperate, at some level, so that you can medicate them, draw blood or otherwise manipulate them for their own health. Since captive, wild animals have no need to subordinate to humans, you have to use a method that is incentive based and will result in the highest chance that the animal will cooperate with the program. There’s NOTHING wrong with that method. But, to apply it exclusively to domestic dog is to ignore the true essence of “dog” and to disregard the incredible efforts of the men and woman who, over the past several thousands of years, have dedicated themselves to the creation of what I think is the most incredible species on the face of the earth.
I applaud Cesar for all that he does for dogs. And I think so many people saying the same thing can’t all be wrong. What he does works- does he ever make mistakes…he says he does… He is the last chance for many dogs that “humans” have all but destroyed. Love the conversations….but really like to see it in action to really believe it. Talk is cheap.
Hello to Tammie
And what ‘consequence’ are you referring to if the dog does not understand your first warning sound or word?
Your arguments are well laid out, but still sadly flawed. We do not have any hope of communicating like dogs to our dogs and communicating using compliance serves only to stress us and to stress our dogs. Who would you rather be with? Someone who treats us kindly or someone who ‘jabs’ at us when we are fearful, worried or feeling threatened? It serves to do nothing, but harm in the first instance and further harm as it continues.
Dogs do not dole out forced compliance by the way. They attempt other methods first of all – and those are the ones the ‘new age’ (as you call them) trainers try to recreate to make our dogs feel happier and safer.
Anyone that has experienced raising a litter or two of Border collies would certainly experience how dogs use force as a means of achieving compliance. They certainly use the operants in conditioning of giving warnings that if go unheeded often times result in a physical consequence.
Why anyone would suggest otherwise is possibly blinded to reality or an agenda.
It is my experience and understanding of life that with dogs or humans stress is a natural part (reflex) of learning in many cases. Harm comes in many forms especially if certain behaviors are allowed to occur or continue under certain circumstances.
The 4 quadrants in operant conditioning have there beneficial places when used correctly,effectively, and properly. For some, it obviously depends on which operants one chooses to use or chooses to draw a line in the sand in not using for any given situation or absolutely not in ANY situation. I tend to shy away from the usage of absolutes.
thanks, Dr Ha, for an excellent article –
and to fellow trainers, particularly TRULY DOG-FRIENDLY members, ciao! (G)
when i began training my first pup over 40-years ago, i used a convertible collar: leather tabs to buckled it to fit, with a running-choke or still-chain option.
well, i don’t use chokes anymore – or prongs or shock, or leash-jerks AKA corrections, or many other aversives that i am told we NEED or the dog NEEDS.
and i have not used them in over 30-years.
shocking as it is to me, my mentor in the 1960s was *never* as forceful, confrontational or aversive AKA punitive as CM/DW or the cross-border similar phenomenon, the Canadian-TV ‘coach’.
amazingly, the dogs that i work with are often what could be dramatically described as RED ZONE – oh, my heavens! how terrifying — and yet their pet-owning, non-pro-trainer families succeed with B-Mod very nicely, thanks.
no rolls, pins, yanks, pokes, ‘taps’/with the foot, ‘bites’/with the hand, etc, are needed; nobody gets flooded; exposure is always monitored and gradual.
any person who an READ their dog, and other dogs, can do this –
safely, humanely, and without the drama or trauma.
JMO + IME; happy training, thoughtful B-Mod,
– terry
terry pride, APDT-Aus, apdt#1827, CVA, TDF
Most of the so called all positive (primarily positive/no physical corrections) pro trainers that I have met often suggest putting dogs to sleep that they cannot rehab with one sided methods. They WILL NOT recommend other trainers to their clients that have a outstanding track records of rehabbing such dogs with alternative approaches. It does not take much research to see that this is a widely shared behavior from the so called ‘all positive” folks.
I know because I almost had 2 of my dogs put to sleep because of this mentality.
This tells me something regardless of all of the claims and opinions on what methods are RIGHT for the dog.
As someone who has actually trained and studied wolves in captivity for over a decade, I can tell you first hand that wolves and dogs do not have the same social order and behavior. Training wolves with aversives and flooding techniques would be a disaster. The wolves would either attack you (defensive aggression) or more than likely avoid you forever. Getting their trust back would take a long time.
I also have 10 house dogs and 8 of them being rescues with severe behavior issues when we adopted them. They are NOT a pack as many things required by biologists to be truly called a “pack” are missing. The are a social group of preferred associates (good friends) Our group includes an Alaskan Malamute, 2 pit bulls and 2 chow mixes. Most of our dogs are females and behaviorally, females are usually more aggressive with each other than males in social groups. I do control behavior and set limits with them by controlling the resources they like.
Leaders in animal groups do the same thing. They use both dominant and submissive behaviors to control the resources. The approaches that work are repeated. Well in our home, I control everything by water, sunshine and air. But I am a benevolent dictator! No animal is afraid of me (often referred to by others as respect). Our dogs are constantly trying to get reinforcement the way we have taught them that works. Getting those resources never involves either dogs or humans showing dominant aggressive behavior. We have made it so that it just does not work!
So thanks Dr, Ha for excellent guidance. I watch CM develop over the years into a more humane trainer, but he still need to study animal behavior from the scientist rather than a relative on a farm from years ago. I call that learning “folklore and witchcraft”. CM need to actually study behavior and not make up terms and conclusions base on zero academic education.
Ken McCort
Marilyn McCort, DVM
Doylestown, OH]
USA
Six years ago at the age of 43 I had NO experience with dogs and was afraid of many. To make a long story short, my sons wanted a dog, we did our research and purchased our first at that time. A friend recommended the book Cesar’s Way. Loved the book and have read everyone of his books since. Used many of his techniques. Six years later, our family consists of 5 dogs, I have been a volunteer foster home for several rescues and still am, I own and operate a successful pet sitting services which includes in-home boarding and doggy daycare. I have re-homed hundreds of dogs and rehabilitated many. The breeds I mostly foster are Rottweilers, Mastiffs and Pit Bulls and I also evaluate dogs for the local shelter and the rescue. I have helped many clients with their own dog’s behaviors. How? Through Cesar’s techniques. I’ve never had to roll a dog and most of the time he hasn’t either. It is human nature to pick and choose the things in which we disagree with, but he has done countless good in the rescue community and with the uneducated dog owner. Personally, I love positive reinforcement training and believe that all our interactions should be done so in the most humane way possible. But for people like myself, who take in dogs whose triggers I don’t know right off the bat or who has over 10 dogs daily to contend with, his teaching on calm assertiveness can not be beat. I have met many dogs that are obedience trained beautifully (pr training) but have behavioral issues.
Great website are you on fb?
Yes, we are on Facebook, just search for Companion Animal Solutions. Thanks for reading Behind the Behavior!