Correction before command?

[SoupDragon]

I was recently watching some YouTube vids and came across a Bill Hillman (USA) video, How to Create a Fast Whistle. Basically the dog was yanked (no pun intended) then given the sit command. Having watched other American based training with use of the shock collar they seem to give the "nick" before command, so can only assume that its based around the same principle. This comment was one I replied to for clarification of the principle.

This works more generally too -- correction first, then command. Gets 'em listening for the command and working to beat the correction. Becomes a game for the dog to see if they can beat you to it with instant obedience.

This was my reply

How can you beat the tug when it's the first command and a correction in one, I fail to see how the dog can beat the correction, what motivation is there for him to race the whistle, I can understand him racing the tug because its uncomfortable, but he can never beat it?


I then had the reply that they had trained hundreds of dogs and basically it gets them to listen to the next command.

I am not seeking to use this technique, I'm just seeking to understand the processes in place that make this logical. Any thoughts much appreciated.

[munstyman]

There are two elements working here. First is the `anticipation' of the dog to move the training ( to command ) forward which is the same as the multipurpose commands when we teach word to whistle to hand signal. We use the nature of the dog to anticipate and use it to train them. The second element is the focus. Many of the retrievers in the USA are `high drive' by nature and trained accordingly. Ironically this is where the `anticipation' works against them and the dog is already focused on doing the retrieving and not on the obedience element before hand. The tug/nic is is used to keep that anticipation in check. ( To the level that is beneficial to the dogs training )
NB. This is my interpretation of how the technique works for the dogs. Our cousins may see it differently, and often we over here are often too quick to dismiss it because of the association we have with ` correction' in modern training circles.

[ips]

I don't get it at all.....getting a bollocking before you have even done anything wrong......similar to me to force fetch which I also didnt and still dont understand the concept of

[munstyman]

I don't get it at all.....getting a bollocking before you have even done anything wrong......similar to me to force fetch which I also didnt and still dont understand the concept of

That's because it's not "a bollocking" ips. It is a physical " pay attention" ( to what you've been taught, all of it, not just on what you know is coming ). The force fetch is another physical method of training/showing the dog what you want it to do.

[Nickheref]

I don't get it at all.....getting a bollocking before you have even done anything wrong......similar to me to force fetch which I also didnt and still dont understand the concept of

That's because it's not "a bollocking" ips. It is a physical " pay attention" ( to what you've been taught, all of it, not just on what you know is coming ). The force fetch is another physical method of training/showing the dog what you want it to do.

I often give a quiet whistle (not using the stop or turn whistle) just by mouth to let them know I am about to ask them to do something, particularly when they are all out together having a run so not concentrating on me, a sort of "hey pay attention something is about to happen". Often it is something like spotting an aggressive looking dog well ahead that they haven't or someone on a horse.

[munstyman]

I do to Nick, except I actually say the words " Pay attention"

[Naj]

This is the hoary old chestnut, direct v indirect pressure, which comes out of American e collar training culture. The routine use of a tug or electric shock before the command is considered to be indirect pressure, as opposed to the more traditional use of a correction to punish an unwanted behaviour or response, which is direct pressure. Even the experts struggle to explain how it works in behavioural terms, falling back on … it works so we use it! This is because it doesn’t work within the Quadrants of Operant Conditioning, which you can usually rely on to explain what is going on in training. Those that do have a stab at explaining what is going on usually follow the lines of what Munstyman said, that each behaviour in a chain is trained under threat and that sharpens the response to the next behaviour in the chain, which in turn is trained under threat etc. This isn’t an ethical approach to training that sits well with everyone.

My thinking on this is that it’s straightforward Pavlov and his Classical Conditioning, in this case where an unpleasant experience becomes linked with the Command and corresponding behaviour through association. It works through tapping in to one of Jaak Panksepp’s emotional states, fear, which produces an escape/avoidance response in the dog which responds quickly to escape (and eventually avoid) the unpleasant experience. Which, unfortunately, it can’t.

As regards force fetch training, that’s relatively easy to understand because it’s straightforward Operant Conditioning whereby a behaviour and its consequences are interlinked.

[ips]

I don't get it at all.....getting a bollocking before you have even done anything wrong......similar to me to force fetch which I also didnt and still dont understand the concept of

That's because it's not "a bollocking" ips. It is a physical " pay attention" ( to what you've been taught, all of it, not just on what you know is coming ). The force fetch is another physical method of training/showing the dog what you want it to do.

Correction, bollocking, pay attention, showing the dog.......semantics really imo.....I just can't get my head around doing the above before the dog has done wrong the mantra for many of us seems to be praise what you want ignore what you don't want so for me correcting (or whatever you want to call it, see above) before you know if you want it or you don't want it doesn't sit well with me

[Kibble]

I have not come across this before and I don't plan to use it. It doesn't sit well with me either, and I don't think my timing is good anyway However, I can relate to the the 'high drive' and problematic 'anticipation' that MM highlights.

When I started teaching Mia to sit while I threw dummies, I threw a few, picked them myself and then sent her for one. I rewarded her for sitting after each pick. She sat nicely for all the ones I picked. However, for reasons I can't explain, she kept breaking early to the one I meant to send her for. I can only assume I did something a bit different. Maybe it was as subtle as a glance. Unless she is telepathic!

I have other instances, where her awareness and anticipation is surprising.

In the pre-emptive correction scenario, my guess is that a 'yank' would take more than a millisecond and the slightest movement of hand or lead could get a sit reaction from a fast dog. Hence a speedy 'sit'. It still does not feel right, from my human perspective.

[CockerCanuck]

I am not a evangelist for the e-collar and certainly don't want to talk anyone into using one if you are at all uncomfortable or untrained in its use. However as a North American who has been around gundogs for over 60 years, I have had lots of exposure to them. Twenty years ago I was quite opposed to them and still am not happy about their impact on the breeding of some strains within breeds who have become so high drive they really can't be trained without them. I have over the last two decades seen their use, in the hands of good trainers (Bill Hillman is one of them) become much more subtle and sophisticated. Used correctly you should never see the dog react physically or emotionally to the stimulus. I urge each of you to pay attention to yourself the next time you are walking your dog on a lead how often you give a little tug or a jingle on it to get the dogs attention? I am sure most of you would say "but that is not punishment". Well I would say neither is the very light nick I use on an e-collar. I just have the advantage of a 500 yard long lead to give him a tug with. We all know if we choose to use correction how important it is to get the timing right. Often very hard to do in the field, but not with an e-collar. Both my current dogs were trained with their use. It has been years since the Cocker has had one on but the Chesapeake still wears his particularly when I go out with my training group much less so while actually hunting.

I am familiar with the technique of a nick just prior to a command but don't use it. I do often use a very light nick at the same second as the command which in my opinion develops very quick and consistent response. If you wait until the dog ignores or disobeys a command you are now using the collar to "punish" which is generally at a higher level of intensity. The idea is to train in ways that it rarely if ever gets to this.