I don’t know why, but I always enjoy
discussions on punishment. In ways, it feels like a “forbidden
fruit.” I very rarely use punishment with my dog or my clients’
dogs, and if you try to discuss it- even theoretically- online, it
can cause a lot of controversy. So my opportunities to talk about it
are rare.
During the Shedd seminar, Ken talked
about the advanced concepts of punishment, negative reinforcement,
and aversive stimuli. These are three distinctly different concepts
that are often confused, misused, and misunderstood. Still, the
definitions are quite simple, and if you plan to use any of these
techniques, you really do need to understand them.
An aversive stimulus is
something that the animal wants to avoid. There is no definitive list
of what makes something aversive; each animal will have different
feelings about this. For example, some dogs hate being squirted in
the face with water, but Maisy thinks it’s AWESOME.
A reinforcer is anything that
increases the behavior it follows. Positive means something
was added to make that behavior increase, while negative means
something was removed. A negative reinforcer happens when
something is removed, and as a result, a behavior increases in the
future. This can happen for two reasons. First, the behavior may
increase due to avoidance; an aversive isn’t actually applied, it’s
simply threatened. The animal acts in order to prevent it from
happening. Or, the behavior may be the result of escape. This happens
when the aversive is actually applied and the removed with the
desired behavior occurs. But either way, negative reinforcement is at
play. It’s important to note that negative reinforcement can work
and be both humane and effective if it’s done correctly.
A punisher is something that
decreases the behavior it follows. This, too, can come in the
positive or the negative variety. One way punishment can be used
humanely is through deprivation; a reinforcer is withheld (negative)
so that the animal will not perform the incorrect behavior again
(punishment). Ken pointed out that this is why it’s so important to
have multiple reinforcers available because this allows you to
withhold certain reinforcers without depriving the animal of his full
diet.
With that said, you really do need to
know your audience when you use these terms. A trainer will punish a
behavior; she wants a particular action to stop. But the public tends
to punish the animal. That is, the punishment happens well after the
fact, such as grounding a child for a bad report card or putting
someone in jail for a crime they committed. In both cases, the actual
behavior is so far removed from the consequence that it’s probably
not being affected much.
So, while Ken does use punishment, he
does not use it as the public understands it.
Ken talked about the use of conditioned
punishers, as well. These are things that become aversive by
association. Just as a clicker is a conditioned reinforcer because it
predicts good things, there are also things that will predict bad
things.
A delta signal, which is a
warning to the animal that an aversive is about to be applied, can
sometimes be used as a last chance to get things right. “Stop doing
that or else,” it tells the animal. Your mom using your full name
can be a delta signal; it tells you that you need to stop pulling
your sister’s hair or face her wrath. The problem with deltas is
that it can be very easy for the emotional trainer to escalate the
use of punishment.
Ken also told us that a no reward
marker acts as a punisher. This is the opposite of a bridge; it
marks the moment when a behavior is wrong so the animal won’t do it
again. These are typically quite mild, but can still cause
frustration in the animal. So, while a skilled trainer can use no
reward markers effectively and humanely, Ken thinks the potential for
misuse is high.
I think my favorite part of this
section was Ken’s discussion on how trainers use punishment versus
how the public does. I appreciated the focus on behavior, not whether
the animal is being “good” or “bad,” “cooperative” or
“stubborn” (a word that always makes me crazy).
But what do you think? Anything
intriguing here?
4 comments:
I would love to see a more in-depth discussion of punishment (and negative reinforcement, etc.), in terms of what we can use as humane trainers. One of the criticisms lobbied frequently, at least in my world, of "positive trainers" is that there are no consequences for their dogs. While I hope that isn't true of me, I *do* find it difficult to find ways to tell my dogs that they are wrong without crossing the line. Make sense? So I wish we could talk about this as positive trainers.
Nicky
I think a "no rewards marker" as punishment is subjective (I have heard of it described as such before). For a very soft dog, it can be the end of the world. For my girl, though, she (seems to) like knowing where she went wrong. So the "no rewards marker" for her ("too bad" or "excuse me") is the indicator to reset whatever behavior she's attempting or performing and try again.
I have a "punishment in training" style post in the works (doing some reading), so I was happy to read your thoughts! I agree, it is a polarizing topic.
I taught a NRM when teaching 2x2 weaves. I think it is useful in certain contexts. However, its easy to use as a crutch, and I haven't gotten great results from using it.
What is a delta signal and how is it used?
Post a Comment