Ian Dunbar is not a heretic- he wants you to know that. Operant conditioning is real. It’s been proven. The experiments behind the theory were repeated thousands of times, and they were validated. It’s great science.
It’s just not useful for dog trainers. Or at least, not most of it. Ian believes that only about 10% of learning theory applies to us because learning theory was laboratory-generated. That is, the experiments were implemented, monitored and controlled by computers, carried out using Skinner boxes, and the animals used were “simple” and had “few interests.” In contrast, we are humans, and we train real dogs in the real world.
If we choose to use learning theory in training, then we must learn to train like a computer. That’s not necessarily bad- computers have some pretty good traits. They are tireless. They are completely consistent in both monitoring the trainee’s behavior and in providing feedback. This allows them to have very clear criteria. By contrast, we humans often have unrealistic or unclear criteria, and are inconsistent in our observations and feedback. So, why wouldn’t we want to train like a computer?
Well, computers as trainers have some drawbacks. They can not qualitatively assess an animal’s performance- they can’t see cute or flashy behaviors and train that into the final product. While they can give feedback, they cannot give instructive feedback. All a computer can do is say yes or no- provide a click and treat or a buzz and shock. They cannot explain why the animal was wrong or what he should do instead, and they cannot explain how important or urgent compliance is. Humans can.
Then there is the matter of reinforcement schedules. Ian identified seven reinforcement schedules: continuous, fixed interval, fixed ratio, variable interval, variable ratio, random, and differential. Ian explained that six of these seven schedules will maintain a behavior, but only one will improve behavior. The one that will improve behavior- differential reinforcement- is the one that computers cannot use. (Personally, I disagree. Computers may not be as good at it as we are, but there is no reason a computer couldn’t reward faster responses. In fact, they might be better at that than I am- I do not have a stopwatch in my head.)
Because we humans cannot be as consistent as computers, and because computers cannot provide instructive feedback the way we can, Ian sees no need for us to try to emulate computers. He finds this to be especially true because most dog owners don’t need nor want the precision that comes about from training like a computer. As a result, he really doesn’t have any use for the vast majority of learning theory.
So what does Ian like? Thorndike’s Law of Effect, which more or less says you should reward the good stuff and punish the bad stuff. Ian says this is simple, elegant, and pure. It doesn’t get into complicated and confusing types of rewards or punishment which cause endless arguments on the internet. Thorndike tells it like it is.
Again, Ian’s orientation as a trainer of pet dogs is obvious. The average dog owner doesn’t care about precision, and doesn’t have the consistency or patience needed to sort through the various quadrants and schedules, so I understand why Ian thinks we should avoid discussing learning theory with clients. We need to quit worrying about the science and terminology and just train. We should help them, not confuse them. It’s hard to argue with that.
Still, as a dog geek, I struggle with this idea. Personally, I enjoy understanding the science behind what I’m doing. Ian said it himself: learning theory is valid. I like thinking about what I’m going to do. I love planning my sessions. I also think it’s fun to take data and evaluate what I’ve done with the goal of doing better next time.
As a competitor, I want precision. I enjoy the challenge of being consistent enough to get amazing results. I strive to be as clear as possible in my criteria. In many ways, I do try to train like a computer, and I don’t think that limits me. I enjoy pairing clicks with not only treats but also heart-felt praise when my dog does something exceptional. I see no reason to have to choose between computer or human. That’s sort of the beauty of being human, after all: I can think outside of the box and combine the best of both approaches.
I know I’m not the normal dog owner. I spent Halloween weekend at Ian’s seminar, and I’m spending hours writing up my notes for this blog, after all. I would ask all of you if you’re normal dog owners, but I suspect I know the answer to that. You are reading this, after all.
Instead, go ahead and analyze what Ian said. Tell me how it makes sense, and then how it confuses you. Tell me how you use, or don’t use, learning theory with your dog. I know you’ll have lots to say!
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Good with Puppies
Because she's reactive, I always assumed that Maisy didn’t really have very good social skills. I mean, why else would she act like such a jerk to other dogs? (For the record, I don’t actually think Maisy is a jerk, but at the risk of anthropomorphizing- again- I imagine other dogs think she is sometimes. Lunging, barking, and growling when the other dog is acting appropriately isn’t very nice, after all.)
It turns out I’m wrong. She’s actually got decent social skills, barring the barking and lunging, of course, and she’s quite good with puppies! I found this out when my friend Robin got a German Shepherd puppy named Via. Robin’s philosophy on socialization is to introduce a puppy to as many stable adult dogs as possible. Personally, I don’t know that I’d call Maisy “stable,” but Robin apparently trusts her enough to expose Via to her, and I trust Robin (she also teaches our reactive dog class).
So the girls have been playing together. Well, maybe not together, but definitely in tandem. I’ve got two videos of them playing to share. They were taken a couple weeks ago, when Via was about 10 weeks old. The first was taken during the first five minutes or so of the play session:
Now, what I love about this video is how calm and relaxed Maisy is, despite the fact that Via is a bit exuberant at times- Via loves to play with her paws and Maisy… doesn’t like that so much. You can see that Maisy tends to look or move away when this happens- subtle communications which say, “Puppy, that’s too much.”
When Via inevitably ignores that (she’s not much for subtlety yet), Maisy does a very nice job of escalating the warnings, first with a small snap, and then with a larger snap and lunge. She's actually quite patient, and puts up with a lot more from Via than she does from adult dogs. In addition to that, Maisy doesn't go over the top. She makes her point quickly, then moves on, making these corrections not only appropriate, but quite fair, as well.
This second video was taken about 15 minutes later:
As you can see, Via is getting tired. She’s begun barking, and in response, Maisy becomes stiffer and a bit quicker to snap at Via. Even so, Maisy remains fairly patient with Via, and prefers to de-escalate the situation by disengaging from her. We ended the play session shortly after this happened because Via was getting overly aroused, and Maisy was getting stressed, which isn't good for either of them.
Interestingly, Maisy’s corrections never quite work. Via usually momentarily stops what she was doing, but generally comes right back to swatting at Maisy with her paws, or biting her tail (oh, that tail is just too much temptation for a Schutzhund-bred puppy), or whatever naughtiness earned her a correction. I suspect this happens both because Via is very confident and because Maisy just isn't- she'd rather avoid a confrontation if she can.
I’m very curious to see how their relationship develops as Via grows older (and bigger!), especially since Maisy tends to be the most reactive towards large, dark-colored, prick-eared dogs. I’ve always suspected that Maisy’s reactivity is due to fear and anxiety, although I wasn’t quite sure what she was scared of.
Based on her interactions with Via, I’m beginning to think it’s because Maisy just doesn’t have the self-confidence needed to defend herself at close range. She could be a lot firmer with Via and still be appropriate and fair, but she just doesn’t seem to have it in her. Maybe she’s decided that the best defense is a good offense: if she can keep the scary dog away from her, she’ll never have to worry about defending herself.
At any rate, Maisy is good with puppies, and that makes me very happy.
It turns out I’m wrong. She’s actually got decent social skills, barring the barking and lunging, of course, and she’s quite good with puppies! I found this out when my friend Robin got a German Shepherd puppy named Via. Robin’s philosophy on socialization is to introduce a puppy to as many stable adult dogs as possible. Personally, I don’t know that I’d call Maisy “stable,” but Robin apparently trusts her enough to expose Via to her, and I trust Robin (she also teaches our reactive dog class).
So the girls have been playing together. Well, maybe not together, but definitely in tandem. I’ve got two videos of them playing to share. They were taken a couple weeks ago, when Via was about 10 weeks old. The first was taken during the first five minutes or so of the play session:
Now, what I love about this video is how calm and relaxed Maisy is, despite the fact that Via is a bit exuberant at times- Via loves to play with her paws and Maisy… doesn’t like that so much. You can see that Maisy tends to look or move away when this happens- subtle communications which say, “Puppy, that’s too much.”
When Via inevitably ignores that (she’s not much for subtlety yet), Maisy does a very nice job of escalating the warnings, first with a small snap, and then with a larger snap and lunge. She's actually quite patient, and puts up with a lot more from Via than she does from adult dogs. In addition to that, Maisy doesn't go over the top. She makes her point quickly, then moves on, making these corrections not only appropriate, but quite fair, as well.
This second video was taken about 15 minutes later:
As you can see, Via is getting tired. She’s begun barking, and in response, Maisy becomes stiffer and a bit quicker to snap at Via. Even so, Maisy remains fairly patient with Via, and prefers to de-escalate the situation by disengaging from her. We ended the play session shortly after this happened because Via was getting overly aroused, and Maisy was getting stressed, which isn't good for either of them.
Interestingly, Maisy’s corrections never quite work. Via usually momentarily stops what she was doing, but generally comes right back to swatting at Maisy with her paws, or biting her tail (oh, that tail is just too much temptation for a Schutzhund-bred puppy), or whatever naughtiness earned her a correction. I suspect this happens both because Via is very confident and because Maisy just isn't- she'd rather avoid a confrontation if she can.
I’m very curious to see how their relationship develops as Via grows older (and bigger!), especially since Maisy tends to be the most reactive towards large, dark-colored, prick-eared dogs. I’ve always suspected that Maisy’s reactivity is due to fear and anxiety, although I wasn’t quite sure what she was scared of.
Based on her interactions with Via, I’m beginning to think it’s because Maisy just doesn’t have the self-confidence needed to defend herself at close range. She could be a lot firmer with Via and still be appropriate and fair, but she just doesn’t seem to have it in her. Maybe she’s decided that the best defense is a good offense: if she can keep the scary dog away from her, she’ll never have to worry about defending herself.
At any rate, Maisy is good with puppies, and that makes me very happy.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Ian Dunbar Seminar: Aggression
Ian Dunbar does not like to call a dog aggressive. As a label, he doesn’t find it very useful, and moreover, he finds it unfair. I think he has a good point: people tend to say that any dog that bites is aggressive, even if the dog bites only once during its life, and even if it was the result of extreme circumstances. Part of the reason people are so quick to label dogs aggressive is because bites are so rare- comparatively speaking, more children are killed every year by their own parents than by dogs.
Instead of asking, “is this dog aggressive?” Ian thinks we should ask, “is this dog dangerous?” He points out that simply having a bite history does not mean that a dog is dangerous. Dogs bite for many reasons, and the damage they do varies widely. In fact, Ian uses the damage done as the ultimate indicator of whether a dog is safe or dangerous. After all, every dog has the potential to bite, and until he does, you’ll have no way of telling how dangerous the dog might someday be.
In order to help determine if a dog is dangerous, Ian created a bite scale. This objectively analyzes a dog-to-human biting incident based on injuries sustained.
Level 1: The dog growls, snaps or lunges at a person. The teeth never touch skin.
Level 2: While the dog’s teeth make contact with skin, there are no punctures. There may be some indents or bruising.
Level 3: There is a single bite that punctures the skin no more than half the length of the dog’s canine tooth. Typically the entry wounds are circular or teardrop shaped. If there are slashes, they only occur in one direction because the person pulled away, not because the dog shook his head. Bruising is expected.
Level 4: There is a single bite that punctures the skin more than half the length of the dog’s canine tooth. The dog bit down and held, or shook his head. Slashes occur in both directions and bruising is significant.
Level 5: Multiple bites.
Level 6: The dog consumed flesh or killed the victim.
Ian says that the vast majority of bites happen at level 1 or 2. These dogs have excellent bite inhibition, and are not dangerous. However, these dogs do have a problem, and the problem must be solved as soon as possible to prevent someone from becoming injured.
Dogs that inflict a level 3 bite are probably dangerous, and people working with these dogs should be very careful to ensure they have the expertise needed to treat them.
Level 4 biters should be treated like a loaded gun. There needs to be fail safes in place to prevent accidental exposure to people. They should not leave the house expect to go to the vet, and then they should be muzzled. They need to be locked up when people are over. Ian will not work with level 4 cases. Although it may be possible to help these dogs, he has found that it is too difficult to get owner compliance. People simply do not do the level of management needed to keep the dogs from biting again.
Ian recommends that level 5 and 6 dogs be instantly euthanized.
Astute readers will connect this information with my previous seminar post on socialization and bite inhibition. Without a doubt, Ian used the information on aggression to underscore the importance of both socialization and bite inhibition. Obviously, a well-socialized dog is less likely to bite in the first place, but it is impossible to socialize a puppy to every possible scenario. Teaching our puppies good bite inhibition is the back-up plan. It’s what keeps people safe when socialization fails.
Treating an aggressive dog is not easy work. Ian says that it’s on par with sticking your finger in a dike that’s leaking. It works, but it’s not pretty, and it will never be as good as if the dog had been socialized properly in the first place. Ian discussed three methods for treatment.
First, there’s the obvious stand-by of classical counter-conditioning. I’ve written about this before, so I won’t spend time on it now. However, Ian did say that counter-conditioning should never stop. If you have a dog with a bite history, you should always have a handful of treats in your pocket when you’re out, just in case.
Next, for dogs who bite when touched in certain areas, Ian recommends doing progressive desensitization. To do this, you start touching the dog far away from the problem area, and gradually move closer, pairing each subsequent touch with a tastier treat. If the dog shows and signs of discomfort, start over, both with where you touch, and with lower-value treats. Soon, your dog should want you to move closer to the problem area because it means he gets yummier rewards.
Finally, for dogs who won’t let you near them, he recommended a method called Retreat and Treat. That article has the full details, but basically, this is where you throw kibble over the dog’s head, behind him, so that he retreats away from you. Then, as you move away, drop some liver or other high value reward. The dog will likely come close to you to get the liver, and then you start the cycle over again by tossing kibble over his head. Again, the ultimate goal is for the dog to want you nearby.
Thankfully, Ian acknowledged that this was just scratching the surface of how to treat aggressive dogs. He said he’d need another three days to do the subject justice. Still, I was glad that he spent the time to give us a bit of detail.
Instead of asking, “is this dog aggressive?” Ian thinks we should ask, “is this dog dangerous?” He points out that simply having a bite history does not mean that a dog is dangerous. Dogs bite for many reasons, and the damage they do varies widely. In fact, Ian uses the damage done as the ultimate indicator of whether a dog is safe or dangerous. After all, every dog has the potential to bite, and until he does, you’ll have no way of telling how dangerous the dog might someday be.
In order to help determine if a dog is dangerous, Ian created a bite scale. This objectively analyzes a dog-to-human biting incident based on injuries sustained.
Level 1: The dog growls, snaps or lunges at a person. The teeth never touch skin.
Level 2: While the dog’s teeth make contact with skin, there are no punctures. There may be some indents or bruising.
Level 3: There is a single bite that punctures the skin no more than half the length of the dog’s canine tooth. Typically the entry wounds are circular or teardrop shaped. If there are slashes, they only occur in one direction because the person pulled away, not because the dog shook his head. Bruising is expected.
Level 4: There is a single bite that punctures the skin more than half the length of the dog’s canine tooth. The dog bit down and held, or shook his head. Slashes occur in both directions and bruising is significant.
Level 5: Multiple bites.
Level 6: The dog consumed flesh or killed the victim.
Ian says that the vast majority of bites happen at level 1 or 2. These dogs have excellent bite inhibition, and are not dangerous. However, these dogs do have a problem, and the problem must be solved as soon as possible to prevent someone from becoming injured.
Dogs that inflict a level 3 bite are probably dangerous, and people working with these dogs should be very careful to ensure they have the expertise needed to treat them.
Level 4 biters should be treated like a loaded gun. There needs to be fail safes in place to prevent accidental exposure to people. They should not leave the house expect to go to the vet, and then they should be muzzled. They need to be locked up when people are over. Ian will not work with level 4 cases. Although it may be possible to help these dogs, he has found that it is too difficult to get owner compliance. People simply do not do the level of management needed to keep the dogs from biting again.
Ian recommends that level 5 and 6 dogs be instantly euthanized.
Astute readers will connect this information with my previous seminar post on socialization and bite inhibition. Without a doubt, Ian used the information on aggression to underscore the importance of both socialization and bite inhibition. Obviously, a well-socialized dog is less likely to bite in the first place, but it is impossible to socialize a puppy to every possible scenario. Teaching our puppies good bite inhibition is the back-up plan. It’s what keeps people safe when socialization fails.
Treating an aggressive dog is not easy work. Ian says that it’s on par with sticking your finger in a dike that’s leaking. It works, but it’s not pretty, and it will never be as good as if the dog had been socialized properly in the first place. Ian discussed three methods for treatment.
First, there’s the obvious stand-by of classical counter-conditioning. I’ve written about this before, so I won’t spend time on it now. However, Ian did say that counter-conditioning should never stop. If you have a dog with a bite history, you should always have a handful of treats in your pocket when you’re out, just in case.
Next, for dogs who bite when touched in certain areas, Ian recommends doing progressive desensitization. To do this, you start touching the dog far away from the problem area, and gradually move closer, pairing each subsequent touch with a tastier treat. If the dog shows and signs of discomfort, start over, both with where you touch, and with lower-value treats. Soon, your dog should want you to move closer to the problem area because it means he gets yummier rewards.
Finally, for dogs who won’t let you near them, he recommended a method called Retreat and Treat. That article has the full details, but basically, this is where you throw kibble over the dog’s head, behind him, so that he retreats away from you. Then, as you move away, drop some liver or other high value reward. The dog will likely come close to you to get the liver, and then you start the cycle over again by tossing kibble over his head. Again, the ultimate goal is for the dog to want you nearby.
Thankfully, Ian acknowledged that this was just scratching the surface of how to treat aggressive dogs. He said he’d need another three days to do the subject justice. Still, I was glad that he spent the time to give us a bit of detail.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Training Tuesday: Relaxation Update
The main thing Maisy and I are working on right now is relaxing on her mat, and after reviewing my recent posts on the topic, I have to say I’m amazed by how this endeavor has evolved. We started out by doing the relaxation protocol, which went fairly well; we got all the way up to day 5 of the protocol. Still, Maisy was working, not relaxing, so I decided to try something I called day zero, which was basically just duration work on the mat with no tasks or distractions. Unfortunately, Maisy was still working, and I ended my last post wondering how I could change the picture so that Maisy would understand that she should just relax.
I ended up changing two things: the location of the mat, and the reward for being calm. Together, this has made a pretty huge difference in how our relaxation sessions are going, so I’m pretty excited to tell you about our progress.
The first change I made was to move the mat from the floor to the couch next to me. This was an easy decision, mostly because I had no idea what else to use as a mat. We’d already used different types of objects as a mat before, which meant that she’d already been introduced to the idea that lying on any mat-type object is a cue to work. But Maisy was already choosing to relax next to me on the couch in the evenings, and since we’ve never done any training on the couch, it seemed like a natural choice. After all, the entire association with lying on the couch is one of relaxation.
The second change was the way I’m rewarding her calm behavior. Before, I was using food treats to reinforce lying on the mat. Since Maisy is a clicker trained dog, she associates treats with working. If she was receiving treats for lying on the mat, that must mean that she should be working, and frankly, this is not a dog who will relax when there’s an opportunity to earn treats!
Now, I’m rewarding calm behavior with petting and massage. I don’t know that this would work for all dogs- and in fact, a year or two ago, it may not have worked for Maisy. She used to be fairly sensitive to touch, and would wiggle and squirm when I tried to stroke her. Since then, though, she’s learned to enjoy being touched, and more importantly, I’ve learned how she likes to be touched. Even better, it’s something we only do when chilling at home, not as a reward for trained behaviors.
With all that said, our typical relaxation session goes something like this: I wait until later in the evening, when Maisy is already showing signs of being tired. For a dog that doesn’t sleep a lot, this means waiting until she’s no longer begging me to throw her ball. Then I place her mat next to me on the couch, pat it with my hand, and ask her to come over. Sometimes I need to ask her to lie down, sometimes I don’t. If she tries to leave, I just call her back. Then, I time how long it takes her to relax, which I define as lying her head down. Depending on how restless she is, I ask her to remain like that for anywhere between one and five minutes. I will occasionally coo at her and rub her ears the way she likes before releasing her. If she chooses to stay on the mat after being released, that’s fine- I just wait until she goes, and then put the mat away.
We had two especially good sessions recently. On Sunday, it took Maisy several minutes to settle down, but once she did, it was true relaxation. She sprawled onto her back with her eyes closed. She looked truly peaceful, and she remained like that for almost ten minutes! Then, yesterday, as soon as I set the mat on the couch, she immediately jumped on it and lay down. She only remained in a relaxed position for about a minute, but even so, I was excited that she understood that the mat is a cue for relaxing.
I don’t plan to change anything for the next two weeks. Before I do, I want her to settle down on the mat within a minute, and to remain relaxed for a total of five minutes. I really think that it’s important to take things slowly right now. I want her to have a solid understanding of the mat as a place of relaxation before I add duration or change the location of the mat.
I’m really happy with the way it’s going, though, and although it’s taken awhile to figure out what will work for her, I think she’ll continue to be more and more relaxed. I already mentioned this, but in class last week, Maisy was calm and quiet in her crate for the entire time- something that had never happened before. Between our hard work and the chemical edge we’re getting from her medication, I’m finally feeling hopeful about her future again.
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Ian Dunbar Seminar: Problems in the Adult Dog
Ian’s message on Friday was simple: you can predict puppy problems, and if you start young enough, you can prevent them, too. Ian believes that after 12 weeks of age, it becomes much, much more difficult, and once a dog reaches adolescence at roughly 18 weeks, it’s almost impossible. Despite this focus on preventing problems, he did talk a bit about problems adult dogs have, and gave a very brief overview on working with those issues.
One of the most interesting things was that he categorized dog problems in two categories: behavior problems, and temperament problems. Behavior problems are things that the dogs do, and include house soiling, chewing on inappropriate items, digging, and barking excessively. Temperament problems are things the dogs have, and include fear, aggression, hyperactivity and shyness. Ian says that even though behavior problems are far easier to fix through training, people are far more likely to surrender these dogs. Conversely, despite the fact that temperament problems are incredibly difficult to change, people are far more willing to live with dogs that have them.
Although I was intrigued by this distinction, I’m not sure how I feel about it. On one hand, I agree that many behavior problems are due to a simple lack of training. On the other, it seems difficult to parse out which category a dog fits in, especially since temperament problems must be expressed through behavior. While Ian acknowledged that temperament may affect a dog’s behavior, a focus on behavior alone seems to oversimplify what could be a complex issue.
For example, Ian believes that separation anxiety is more likely to be an owner-absent problem instead of true anxiety. He explained that owner-absent problems happen because of excessive punishment for naughty-but-fun behaviors like barking a lot or chewing on things without instructing the dog what he ought to do instead. Since dogs are smart and want to avoid punishment, they wait to have fun until after their owner leaves, which leads the owner to believe that the problem is separation anxiety.
It does seem like people throw the term “separation anxiety” around pretty casually, and I’ve certainly run across people attributing anxiety to a dog that simply doesn’t know what is expected of him. Even so, that doesn’t negate the fact that there are dogs who are truly anxious, and I felt like Ian minimized this.
I had a similar reaction when he discussed compulsivity and hyperactivity in dogs. Ian said that he thinks that true OCDs or ADHDs are extremely rare in dogs, and that people use these terms to label their dogs as an excuse not to train them. He made treatment sound very simple by recommending that people reward the cessation of the unwanted behavior. The dog will then choose to disengage from the obsessive or hyper behavior in order to receive the reward, and the duration will reduce as a result.
I cannot agree with this. Maisy has some obsessive tendencies, and I do not believe it is possible for her to disengage from light-chasing behavior unless the stimulus is removed. For example, even though Maisy hates swimming, I once saw her jump off a dock to chase the light glinting on the lake’s waves. I very much had the impression that she wasn’t thinking: her entire demeanor changed before she jumped. She became frantic and seemed out of control. I don’t think she chose to jump. I think her brain forced her to.
Ian also recommended redirecting obsessive behaviors to more acceptable behaviors, such as repetitively licking or chewing on a Kong. He said this not only reinforces lying down quietly, but that it also allows the dog to engage in a more appropriate behavior while still getting the endorphin release that comes with compulsive behaviors. But I don’t see how this solves the problem. An obsessive behavior is a problem because it interferes with the dog’s ability to engage in normal life activities. Redirecting the focus of the obsessive behavior does not change this.
And then, there’s the topic of aggression. Ian actually said quite a bit about aggression, so I’ll cover it in more depth another day, but basically, he said there’s absolutely no excuse for fear-based aggression or dog-to-human aggression, with the implication that it is due to a lack of socialization in puppyhood. He acknowledged that there may be an excuse for dog-dog aggression, and I assume he meant that it may be genetic.
I’m mostly okay with this, but I became concerned when he talked about treatment. He said that he can jump start the process by doing “a bit of flooding” in a growl class. I’m not sure what he meant by flooding, but that statement set off alarm bells for me. He went on to say that most of the time he can have dogs off-leash and interacting in a growl class within 45 minutes! While I understand that leashes can contribute to the problem, he made it sound like it’s much easier to fix than it really is. I also have to wonder if the “bit of flooding” resulted in shut down dogs, which is why he was able to get them off leash so easily.
All of this is really captures the problems I had with the seminar as a whole. Ian’s clearly a very smart man, has had a great deal of experience, and has lots to offer dog owners. I respect him a great deal, and think he’s done a lot for the field of dog training. Despite that, his way of lecturing utilized stories and examples that, while engaging, resulted in gross oversimplifications and even seeming contradictions. For example, later on, in order to prove his point that it’s better to spend the time socializing puppies, he said that rehabbing an aggressive dog takes a very long time. This seems to be at odds with the idea that he can have dogs off-leash so quickly in his growl classes.
I know that his focus is the average pet owner, and as a result, he speaks simply in order to reach them. Even so, I would have greatly preferred more a more in-depth and critical analysis of the issues he brought up, especially since I think he had a lot of very good, valid points to make. Unfortunately, he made them so simply that I’m afraid he undermined his own message.
One of the most interesting things was that he categorized dog problems in two categories: behavior problems, and temperament problems. Behavior problems are things that the dogs do, and include house soiling, chewing on inappropriate items, digging, and barking excessively. Temperament problems are things the dogs have, and include fear, aggression, hyperactivity and shyness. Ian says that even though behavior problems are far easier to fix through training, people are far more likely to surrender these dogs. Conversely, despite the fact that temperament problems are incredibly difficult to change, people are far more willing to live with dogs that have them.
Although I was intrigued by this distinction, I’m not sure how I feel about it. On one hand, I agree that many behavior problems are due to a simple lack of training. On the other, it seems difficult to parse out which category a dog fits in, especially since temperament problems must be expressed through behavior. While Ian acknowledged that temperament may affect a dog’s behavior, a focus on behavior alone seems to oversimplify what could be a complex issue.
For example, Ian believes that separation anxiety is more likely to be an owner-absent problem instead of true anxiety. He explained that owner-absent problems happen because of excessive punishment for naughty-but-fun behaviors like barking a lot or chewing on things without instructing the dog what he ought to do instead. Since dogs are smart and want to avoid punishment, they wait to have fun until after their owner leaves, which leads the owner to believe that the problem is separation anxiety.
It does seem like people throw the term “separation anxiety” around pretty casually, and I’ve certainly run across people attributing anxiety to a dog that simply doesn’t know what is expected of him. Even so, that doesn’t negate the fact that there are dogs who are truly anxious, and I felt like Ian minimized this.
I had a similar reaction when he discussed compulsivity and hyperactivity in dogs. Ian said that he thinks that true OCDs or ADHDs are extremely rare in dogs, and that people use these terms to label their dogs as an excuse not to train them. He made treatment sound very simple by recommending that people reward the cessation of the unwanted behavior. The dog will then choose to disengage from the obsessive or hyper behavior in order to receive the reward, and the duration will reduce as a result.
I cannot agree with this. Maisy has some obsessive tendencies, and I do not believe it is possible for her to disengage from light-chasing behavior unless the stimulus is removed. For example, even though Maisy hates swimming, I once saw her jump off a dock to chase the light glinting on the lake’s waves. I very much had the impression that she wasn’t thinking: her entire demeanor changed before she jumped. She became frantic and seemed out of control. I don’t think she chose to jump. I think her brain forced her to.
Ian also recommended redirecting obsessive behaviors to more acceptable behaviors, such as repetitively licking or chewing on a Kong. He said this not only reinforces lying down quietly, but that it also allows the dog to engage in a more appropriate behavior while still getting the endorphin release that comes with compulsive behaviors. But I don’t see how this solves the problem. An obsessive behavior is a problem because it interferes with the dog’s ability to engage in normal life activities. Redirecting the focus of the obsessive behavior does not change this.
And then, there’s the topic of aggression. Ian actually said quite a bit about aggression, so I’ll cover it in more depth another day, but basically, he said there’s absolutely no excuse for fear-based aggression or dog-to-human aggression, with the implication that it is due to a lack of socialization in puppyhood. He acknowledged that there may be an excuse for dog-dog aggression, and I assume he meant that it may be genetic.
I’m mostly okay with this, but I became concerned when he talked about treatment. He said that he can jump start the process by doing “a bit of flooding” in a growl class. I’m not sure what he meant by flooding, but that statement set off alarm bells for me. He went on to say that most of the time he can have dogs off-leash and interacting in a growl class within 45 minutes! While I understand that leashes can contribute to the problem, he made it sound like it’s much easier to fix than it really is. I also have to wonder if the “bit of flooding” resulted in shut down dogs, which is why he was able to get them off leash so easily.
All of this is really captures the problems I had with the seminar as a whole. Ian’s clearly a very smart man, has had a great deal of experience, and has lots to offer dog owners. I respect him a great deal, and think he’s done a lot for the field of dog training. Despite that, his way of lecturing utilized stories and examples that, while engaging, resulted in gross oversimplifications and even seeming contradictions. For example, later on, in order to prove his point that it’s better to spend the time socializing puppies, he said that rehabbing an aggressive dog takes a very long time. This seems to be at odds with the idea that he can have dogs off-leash so quickly in his growl classes.
I know that his focus is the average pet owner, and as a result, he speaks simply in order to reach them. Even so, I would have greatly preferred more a more in-depth and critical analysis of the issues he brought up, especially since I think he had a lot of very good, valid points to make. Unfortunately, he made them so simply that I’m afraid he undermined his own message.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Medication Update: 4 weeks
Maisy has now been on paroxetine for four weeks, three of which have been at the full dose of 8mg. When Maisy’s veterinary behaviorist prescribed it, she said it would take 4-6 weeks before we saw any results. Since I saw some improvement at two weeks, I was very excited to see what she’d be like at four weeks. So, for the last three days, I’ve been keeping behavior logs in order to get some objective data.
The data has been… interesting. I was expecting to see a decrease in the number of outbursts Maisy is having, but this has not happened. Prior to her appointment, Maisy would bark or growl at subtle or undetectable stimuli an average of 3.375 times a day. At two weeks, this had decreased to an average of 2 times a day. During this week’s behavior logs, Maisy’s average was 2.667 times a day.
Although this is a reduction from the baseline, I was still disappointed when I saw this. Of course, the numbers are the numbers, but I really felt like Maisy is doing better than she was, especially since it seems like Maisy isn’t as vigilant as she used to be. She might be vocalizing when something startles her, but she seems to settle down faster.
So, I went back to the original behavior logs. Although I hadn’t been scoring the intensity of her reactions, I had kept a fair amount of detail. During the basline period, Maisy’s outbursts included extended vigilance (defined as either trotting around the house scanning the room intently for at least ten seconds) 45% of the time. Two weeks ago, she demonstrated such vigilance 25% of the time. This time, she scored the same: 25%. Good.
Next, I did the restlessness test. This is where I settle down with Maisy and watch a TV program while she lies next to me. During the baseline, she lifted her head or got up 11 times in 45 minutes. Two weeks ago, the number was the same, but the amount of time she looked around had reduced greatly. This time was actually worse- 19 times. It really seemed like she was having a hard time settling down. I think this was because of when I did the observation. The first two times, I came home and immediately watched the show. Yesterday, we went for a three mile walk with friends first. I think the amount of activity immediately preceding the test affected the results. I’ll do it again in a couple of weeks and see what happens.
As for her reactivity, she’s doing well. Like I said, yesterday we went on a walk with friends. I was a bit concerned in the beginning when she rushed towards two dogs. However, she was quiet during those incidents, and frankly, I couldn’t tell if she was trying to scare them off, or if she wanted to go say hi. After that, she settled down nicely and passed other dogs, including large, dark, prick-eared dogs, without a problem.
We also had a milestone in her reactive dog class on Tuesday: It was the first time she went through an entire class without any incident. She’s come close before, with only one or two soft vocalizations during the hour, but this week, there were none. Now, granted, she was in a covered crate the entire time, but that’s never stopped her before. Even better, she was actually relaxed- she appeared to be resting instead of working for treats.
Finally, I should note that Maisy is not experiencing any side effects due to the medication. During the first three weeks, she had some harder stools than normal, but that has subsided over the past week.
Overall, I do think the medication is helping her. She’s tolerating well, and she seems more relaxed. The decrease in vigilance is pretty amazing. The medication will continue to build up in Maisy’s system, and full effectiveness should be seen between 6 and 8 weeks. Hopefully, Maisy continues to improve.
The data has been… interesting. I was expecting to see a decrease in the number of outbursts Maisy is having, but this has not happened. Prior to her appointment, Maisy would bark or growl at subtle or undetectable stimuli an average of 3.375 times a day. At two weeks, this had decreased to an average of 2 times a day. During this week’s behavior logs, Maisy’s average was 2.667 times a day.
Although this is a reduction from the baseline, I was still disappointed when I saw this. Of course, the numbers are the numbers, but I really felt like Maisy is doing better than she was, especially since it seems like Maisy isn’t as vigilant as she used to be. She might be vocalizing when something startles her, but she seems to settle down faster.
So, I went back to the original behavior logs. Although I hadn’t been scoring the intensity of her reactions, I had kept a fair amount of detail. During the basline period, Maisy’s outbursts included extended vigilance (defined as either trotting around the house scanning the room intently for at least ten seconds) 45% of the time. Two weeks ago, she demonstrated such vigilance 25% of the time. This time, she scored the same: 25%. Good.
Next, I did the restlessness test. This is where I settle down with Maisy and watch a TV program while she lies next to me. During the baseline, she lifted her head or got up 11 times in 45 minutes. Two weeks ago, the number was the same, but the amount of time she looked around had reduced greatly. This time was actually worse- 19 times. It really seemed like she was having a hard time settling down. I think this was because of when I did the observation. The first two times, I came home and immediately watched the show. Yesterday, we went for a three mile walk with friends first. I think the amount of activity immediately preceding the test affected the results. I’ll do it again in a couple of weeks and see what happens.
As for her reactivity, she’s doing well. Like I said, yesterday we went on a walk with friends. I was a bit concerned in the beginning when she rushed towards two dogs. However, she was quiet during those incidents, and frankly, I couldn’t tell if she was trying to scare them off, or if she wanted to go say hi. After that, she settled down nicely and passed other dogs, including large, dark, prick-eared dogs, without a problem.
We also had a milestone in her reactive dog class on Tuesday: It was the first time she went through an entire class without any incident. She’s come close before, with only one or two soft vocalizations during the hour, but this week, there were none. Now, granted, she was in a covered crate the entire time, but that’s never stopped her before. Even better, she was actually relaxed- she appeared to be resting instead of working for treats.
Finally, I should note that Maisy is not experiencing any side effects due to the medication. During the first three weeks, she had some harder stools than normal, but that has subsided over the past week.
Overall, I do think the medication is helping her. She’s tolerating well, and she seems more relaxed. The decrease in vigilance is pretty amazing. The medication will continue to build up in Maisy’s system, and full effectiveness should be seen between 6 and 8 weeks. Hopefully, Maisy continues to improve.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Ian Dunbar Seminar: Socialization and Bite Inhibition
If Ian Dunbar has a soapbox, it’s socialization. He believes that all behavior and temperament problems in dogs can be prevented if we adequately socialize our puppies. This starts from the day they’re born and continues until the day they die.
The socialization period in dogs is fairly long, starting when the puppy is around four weeks old, and extending roughly through the twelfth week. (Some experts place it further out, closer to 14 to 16 weeks.) During this time, puppies are learning what’s normal and safe in the world. Anything they don’t experience is likely to be classified as dangerous. As a result, we need to expose our puppies to everything we possibly can to ensure that they will grow up to be non-reactive adults.
Ian emphasizes socialization to people- after all, a dog fearful of other dogs can avoid them if necessary, but will be forced to live with people for the rest of his life. To this end, Ian recommends that puppies meet five new people a day during the socialization period. (Of course, he should also meet as many other dogs as possible.) After that, he should meet three new people or dogs a day for the rest of his life in order to remain socialized.
Socialization is not about having lots of experiences, though. It’s about having lots of good experiences. All food should be hand fed so that it can be used to classically condition the puppy to love people and other dogs. While we should phase out treats as rewards for good behavior, we should continue to use food to classically condition our dogs for life.
That said, it is impossible to socialize a dog so that he never has an undesirable response to something. There are an infinite number of variables: different types of people, objects, and situations can come together in unpredictable combinations. We need to socialize our dogs so that they love people, but when we find the socialization opportunity that we missed, it is how our dogs respond that will matter. If (when) he bites, he must not cause harm.
This is accomplished by teaching our dogs good bite inhibition, and Ian’s soapbox about bite inhibition is interwoven with his soapbox on socialization. In fact, he’s created a handy chart to demonstrate this (click to embiggen):
As you can see, while the lack of socialization affects the quality of a dog’s life, the lack of bite inhibition can cost the dog his life. After all, those are the dogs that do serious damage if and when a bite occurs. I almost think the most dangerous dogs are the well-socialized ones with poor bite inhibition. Although they are far less likely to bite than a poorly-socialized dog, when they do, it will not only do significant damage, but it will also come as a surprise.
Ian outlined four stages to bite inhibition. He believes each step is necessary, and that you should follow the order closely. You’ll notice that in the early stages, puppy biting is allowed. It’s important to note, however, that this biting should happen on hands only, not on clothing. It is impossible to gauge how hard a puppy is biting when it’s on an inanimate object. Allowing the puppy to nip at your clothes teaches him to bite hard and to bite close to your body, which undermines the entire process.
Stage 1: No pain. The initial step to bite inhibition teaches the dog that his jaws can inflict pain on humans. Worse, he should learn that nothing good happens when he does. Ian recommends marking the behavior by saying “ow!” and then leaving or ending the play.
Stage 2: No pressure. When the puppy is no longer causing you pain, you must teach him that your skin is very delicate. Although teeth may touch your skin, there should be no pressure involved. Again, end the play session if there is.
Stage 3: Stop when I say. During this step, the puppy is still allowed to use his mouth- without pressure- but he must quit when you ask. Ian accomplishes this by teaching “leave it” (he calls it “off”) first. (You can read about how he teaches “off” here.) Once the puppy understands the meaning of “off,” you can start using it while playing with your puppy. If he doesn’t respond, get up and leave the play session.
Stage 4: Start only when I say. Finally, the dog is not allowed to initiate mouthing. Instead, he must wait for you to give him the cue. Ian recommends using something that others are unlikely to say, such as “kill me!” This step should be practiced daily for two to three years to maintain good bite inhibition.
Bite inhibition is also learned by playing with other puppies, which is why Ian believes going to an off-leash puppy class is so important. It is also why you should not get a puppy younger than eight weeks of age- they learn so much from their litter-mates. I was lucky with Maisy- when I met her at 14 weeks old, she still lived with a brother.
I was glad to hear that Ian doesn’t think that poorly socialized dogs like Maisy are automatically dangerous. Indeed, they can be quite safe if they have good bite inhibition. Although I totally believe that Maisy would bite if she felt threatened or overly harassed, I don’t think the resulting damage would be too bad. I don’t know that for sure- she was only pushed too far once. In that instance, she merely snapped at the child that was harassing her, and didn’t even come close to putting teeth on skin. Although one trial is not enough to accurately determine her relative safety, I’m still glad that she appears to have good bite inhibition.
How about your dogs? Maisy’s a yellow-box kind of girl on the chart above, but I bet I have readers with a wide range of dogs… or even dogs they’re unsure about. After all, less than a year ago, I wasn’t sure what Maisy would do if she was provoked into biting. I’m still nervous about it, of course, and you’d better believe that I’m much more cautious with her around children. Still, I’m curious to hear about your experiences.
The socialization period in dogs is fairly long, starting when the puppy is around four weeks old, and extending roughly through the twelfth week. (Some experts place it further out, closer to 14 to 16 weeks.) During this time, puppies are learning what’s normal and safe in the world. Anything they don’t experience is likely to be classified as dangerous. As a result, we need to expose our puppies to everything we possibly can to ensure that they will grow up to be non-reactive adults.
Ian emphasizes socialization to people- after all, a dog fearful of other dogs can avoid them if necessary, but will be forced to live with people for the rest of his life. To this end, Ian recommends that puppies meet five new people a day during the socialization period. (Of course, he should also meet as many other dogs as possible.) After that, he should meet three new people or dogs a day for the rest of his life in order to remain socialized.
Socialization is not about having lots of experiences, though. It’s about having lots of good experiences. All food should be hand fed so that it can be used to classically condition the puppy to love people and other dogs. While we should phase out treats as rewards for good behavior, we should continue to use food to classically condition our dogs for life.
That said, it is impossible to socialize a dog so that he never has an undesirable response to something. There are an infinite number of variables: different types of people, objects, and situations can come together in unpredictable combinations. We need to socialize our dogs so that they love people, but when we find the socialization opportunity that we missed, it is how our dogs respond that will matter. If (when) he bites, he must not cause harm.
This is accomplished by teaching our dogs good bite inhibition, and Ian’s soapbox about bite inhibition is interwoven with his soapbox on socialization. In fact, he’s created a handy chart to demonstrate this (click to embiggen):
Ian outlined four stages to bite inhibition. He believes each step is necessary, and that you should follow the order closely. You’ll notice that in the early stages, puppy biting is allowed. It’s important to note, however, that this biting should happen on hands only, not on clothing. It is impossible to gauge how hard a puppy is biting when it’s on an inanimate object. Allowing the puppy to nip at your clothes teaches him to bite hard and to bite close to your body, which undermines the entire process.
Stage 1: No pain. The initial step to bite inhibition teaches the dog that his jaws can inflict pain on humans. Worse, he should learn that nothing good happens when he does. Ian recommends marking the behavior by saying “ow!” and then leaving or ending the play.
Stage 2: No pressure. When the puppy is no longer causing you pain, you must teach him that your skin is very delicate. Although teeth may touch your skin, there should be no pressure involved. Again, end the play session if there is.
Stage 3: Stop when I say. During this step, the puppy is still allowed to use his mouth- without pressure- but he must quit when you ask. Ian accomplishes this by teaching “leave it” (he calls it “off”) first. (You can read about how he teaches “off” here.) Once the puppy understands the meaning of “off,” you can start using it while playing with your puppy. If he doesn’t respond, get up and leave the play session.
Stage 4: Start only when I say. Finally, the dog is not allowed to initiate mouthing. Instead, he must wait for you to give him the cue. Ian recommends using something that others are unlikely to say, such as “kill me!” This step should be practiced daily for two to three years to maintain good bite inhibition.
Bite inhibition is also learned by playing with other puppies, which is why Ian believes going to an off-leash puppy class is so important. It is also why you should not get a puppy younger than eight weeks of age- they learn so much from their litter-mates. I was lucky with Maisy- when I met her at 14 weeks old, she still lived with a brother.
I was glad to hear that Ian doesn’t think that poorly socialized dogs like Maisy are automatically dangerous. Indeed, they can be quite safe if they have good bite inhibition. Although I totally believe that Maisy would bite if she felt threatened or overly harassed, I don’t think the resulting damage would be too bad. I don’t know that for sure- she was only pushed too far once. In that instance, she merely snapped at the child that was harassing her, and didn’t even come close to putting teeth on skin. Although one trial is not enough to accurately determine her relative safety, I’m still glad that she appears to have good bite inhibition.
How about your dogs? Maisy’s a yellow-box kind of girl on the chart above, but I bet I have readers with a wide range of dogs… or even dogs they’re unsure about. After all, less than a year ago, I wasn’t sure what Maisy would do if she was provoked into biting. I’m still nervous about it, of course, and you’d better believe that I’m much more cautious with her around children. Still, I’m curious to hear about your experiences.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)