Jane Killion Seminar: Reinforcement Training

Jane Killion is a reinforcement trainer.

Notice the words I chose there, because she doesn't call herself a positive trainer. Why? Well, in behavior science, all “positive” means is “add.” You add something in order to manipulate future behavior. Sometimes you add something in order to increase a behavior, and sometimes you add something in order to decrease a behavior. Technically speaking, this label can easily refer to some wildly divergent training methods. But Jane also feels the term “positive” can be divisive. Since so many people misunderstand it to mean upbeat, kind, or virtuous, it implies that people use use other methods aren't. What's more, it also implies that anyone who is nice must automatically be positive, which is misleading.

As a result, Jane favors the term “reinforcement training.” Her methods are based on providing reinforcement to the dog, whether that's by adding something desirable to increase a behavior (positive reinforcement), or by removing something unpleasant in order to increase a behavior (negative reinforcement). What she avoids whenever possible is the use of punishment, as all that does is suppress behavior, not teach the dog what you want him to do.

Training under the umbrella of reinforcement gives a trainer a variety of things to use to create behavior. Without a doubt, the most popular- and Jane's favorite- is to use food. Not only is it a primary reinforcer, but it's also easy to dispense, easy to control, and it tends to tap into the “thinking” part of the dog's brain.

Of course, any one who has worked with dogs knows that sometimes training with treats just doesn't work. Jane identified two main reasons this happens: emotional interference (ie, stress), or competing reinforcers that are more relevant or interesting. After all, when it comes down to a choice between eating a bit of hot dog and chasing a squirrel, most dogs will choose the squirrel. And if you're working with a “Pigs Fly” dog, the chances that he will choose the environment over you is large.

That doesn't mean that you can't use positive reinforcement with a dog who isn't interested in food. You can, it just takes a bit of creativity. Enter Premack, a principle which states that a high probability behavior can be used to reinforce a low probability behavior. If your eyes just glazed over, don't worry; Jane has come up with a very clever way of describing the Premack principle. She calls it ICE: Identify “hot” reinforcers (anything your dog wants, which might include sniffing the ground, rolling in something stinky, or peeing on a bush), Control them, and then Exchange a behavior for the hot reinforcer.

Jane showed us an excellent video of her working with a very distracted young dog that really wanted to do was explore and sniff, which was incompatible with his owner's desire that he walk nicely on the leash. In the video, Jane identified the hot reinforcer (sniffing), controlled that reinforcer by shortening the leash so he couldn't sniff, and then waited for an opportunity to exchange a behavior for sniffing. As soon as the dog looked at her, she let out the slack in the leash and told him to go sniff. After a few moments, she shortened the leash again, and the process repeated. Soon, he was willingly paying attention to her while they walked through the field together. Pretty cool.

As the video demonstrated, Premack is a powerful thing, and I wish she would have demonstrated it live during the seminar. I can understand why she didn't- we had limited time, and Premack takes longer than handing out a cookie- but I was still a bit disappointed. There was even a great opportunity to demonstrate Premack/her ICE system since one of the working dogs had a medical problem that made it difficult to use food for training, but instead Jane had that handler switch out for a different dog.

Another way to train with reinforcement is through negative reinforcement. This often ignored method has us remove something aversive in order to provide relief to the dog. This is a powerful thing, and dogs and people alike will perform behaviors that bring them relief. Jane was clear that she will not add the aversive herself, but that she will use unpleasant things that are already present; a shiny floor, perhaps, or the presence of the judge leaning over the dog to do the stand for the exam. And, Jane said, often the equipment in agility is a stressful thing for dogs.

To that end, she showed us another excellent video demonstrating how reward placement can provide negative reinforcement. On screen, we saw a dog who was hesitant to jump on the table, an agility obstacle that requires the dog to stay on a platform for several seconds before moving on to the next obstacle. The dog in question was slow and reluctant to get on it and lie down. Jane shaped the dog in several steps to move towards, get on, and then lie down on the table, each time throwing the treat away from the table, which allowed the dog relief from the piece of equipment he found unpleasant. Soon, she had a dog eagerly offering the desired behavior.

Again, I was disappointed that she didn't demonstrate the use of negative reinforcement during the seminar, even though there was actually a training problem that could have been set up to take advantage of it. One of the working dogs was having trouble performing recalls in the presence of other people. Jane chose to have people stand in two rows, then instructed the handler to call the dog to run between them. I would have loved to see Jane use some negative reinforcement in this situation through the relief of social pressure by having the people move back when the dog responded. This could have been a powerful reward for this dog, but instead, the dog got a treat when she came.

Now, there's nothing wrong with this. The approach worked; the dog was able to improve her ability to come despite the presence of people, but it was stressful for the dog. Jane was okay with this; learning is stressful, she said. She's right, of course, but after my experiences with Maisy- a dog with clinical anxiety- I have far less tolerance for stress during training. As a result, I just wasn't comfortable watching the amount of stress the working dog endured- especially when Jane could have used negative reinforcement to relieve the dog's stress while still accomplishing her goal.

As these two examples demonstrate, most of what Jane showed us over the course of the weekend was straight positive-reinforcement-with-food. More to the point, Jane has a tendency to shape everything. At times, it felt like this the only tool she has, but then, she's so good at it, she doesn't really need anything else.

I doubt that I will ever attain her level of skill in observation, setting criteria, and timing, but I am hopeful that having the chance to watch her will improve my own abilities. I look forward to telling you about some of what I learned... But it will have to be in the next post, as this one has gotten far too long already.

Jane Killion Seminar: Introduction

Jane Killion is a clicker trainer best known for her book When Pigs Fly: Training Success with Impossible Dogs. Her breed is the Bull Terrier, and based on the stories my former boss told me about her own Bull Terriers, Jane named the book well. In fact, they are so notoriously difficult that many believe they can only be trained when… well, you know.

Jane calls any dog that is challenging or difficult a “Pigs Fly” dog. Typically, Pigs Fly dogs are terriers or sighthounds- ones who have been selectively bred to work independently of their handler. That said, a Pigs Fly dog is not determined by breed. Any dog can seem impossible to train, and when I talked to Jane about Maisy, she described my seriously biddable dog as a Pigs Fly dog, too. And I suppose it’s true; Maisy may be eager to please, but she hasn’t been easy.

Jane has a training system that she claims will work with any dog, even the ones who aren’t all that interested in pleasing their humans. This system isn’t necessarily new (it’s all based on operant conditioning, and relies heavily on positive reinforcement), but she’s coined some new terminology and phrases that are easier to understand for those who just don’t want to bother with all the scientific terminology (which is probably most people). This makes the Pigs Fly system easily accessible to a wide audience.

Poor lighting+cheap camera=subpar photos.

Over the course of two days, Jane lectured on things like shaping, using reinforcement effectively, getting attention from our dogs, and solving training challenges… and she demonstrated these concepts with the working dogs, too. It was very interesting to watch her work with the dogs, because she is very, very good at what she does. Her timing is impeccable, and her ability to split behavior into the tiniest pieces is impressive.

She is also very much a behaviorist. I don’t mean that in the sense that she works with troubled dogs (although she has). No, I mean that she operates from the standpoint that we can’t know what our dogs are thinking or feeling, and that while it’s fun to try and guess, we need to train based on the behavior we see in front of us. She’s not wrong, and while I agree with her to a certain extent, she takes it further than I do. Perhaps I tend to be too anthropomorphic, but I’ll admit that I don’t care for this approach.

In fact, that was very much my feeling on the whole weekend: while she’s not wrong, she also doesn’t resonate with me. The fact of the matter is that she’s a far better mechanical trainer that I will ever be. But her style struck me as cold, sterile, and lacking in heart or soul. And frankly, I was outright uncomfortable with the way this played out at times.

That’s not to say that I didn’t learn anything; on the contrary, I picked up some great tips. Still, the stylistic differences challenged my beliefs and philosophies on training. They forced me to think about who I am as a trainer, as a person, and how my personality influences the way I interact with dogs. In fact, I suspect that I will be reflecting on the weekend for a long time to come, even after I’ve finished blogging about the seminar proper.

But for now, we must focus on the task at hand. Over the next several weeks, I will be bringing you posts covering what I learned. So sit back, relax, and get ready to enjoy Jane Killion in all her brilliance.

Is a Flexi Leash Right for You?

There are a lot of horror stories out there about Flexis (and other brands of retractable leashes). Many of them are about irresponsible owners, which isn’t surprising; who hasn’t seen a dog on a Flexi in a different pet store aisle than their inattentive person? But others are about injuries like cuts and burns, or even more serious incidents like fractures and amputations. Despite this, Flexis remain wildly popular, and I even know of some responsible pet owners who really like them. So when I was contacted by a Flexi company rep with an offer to test one out for free, I welcomed the opportunity to decide for myself.

The Good
I can totally understand why people like retractable leashes. As someone with a short dog with even shorter legs, it’s not uncommon for her to step over the leash. In fact, it happens so often, that I taught her to lift her foot up on cue so that I could untangle her without having to bend over. Since Flexis retract into the handle, there is no slack for the dog to get tangled in.

I also really liked the length. The model I tested was 16 feet long (and they come up to 26 feet long). This meant my dog could move around more than a regular leash would allow her. When combined with the retractable feature, the result is something far more manageable to use than a long line, making Flexis an easy way to give significantly more freedom to dogs who aren’t reliable off-leash.

The Bad
Maisy didn’t like the Flexi. Since it’s a retractable leash, the dog does need to pull a bit to extend the length, something Maisy refused to do. While she usually roams and explores on her regular six-foot leash, with the Flexi, she ended up next to me, her movements slow and hesitant. The moment I put her regular leash back on, her normal behavior returned. I think this was because the Flexi puts a fair amount of pressure on the dog’s neck, which I assume she found uncomfortable. Take a look at these pictures to see just how much tension was put on her collar:

 

On the Flexi, her collar pulled away from her neck due to 

the pressure of the leash. Click to enlarge.

On the six-foot leash, you can barely see her collar
because there's no tension in the leash.

The Ugly
This tension in the leash actually increased Maisy’s reactivity on walks- not surprising considering that trainers often discuss how tightening up on the leash can cause a reactive outburst. Maisy was able to walk past a barking, snarling dog with barely a second glance while on her six-foot leash, but when on the Flexi, her body language became tighter and quicker. She fixated on some people she saw in the distance, her tail was high and tight, and she got taller and leaned forward- all signs that she’s about to react imminently.

Worse, I had far less control over her while she was on the Flexi. Although I was able to verbally call Maisy back, the increased freedom meant she could have gotten closer to the trigger than I would have liked. The Flexi does come with a braking mechanism, and I found it easy to use, but frankly my dog is much faster than I am. I would not have been able to use the brake fast enough to keep her within six feet of me. And if she’d hit the end of the leash, she would have had enough increased force that I could have either fallen or dropped the leash (and then retracting towards her, which would probably scare her, making the problem worse).

Is a Flexi Right for You?
Since many of my readers have reactive dogs, the answer is probably no. Although there may be some reactive dogs who do okay on a retractable leash, I would advise extreme caution. If you have a stable dog, the answer is maybe. The Flexi company itself recommends they only be used with obedient, controllable dogs.

If you choose to try one out, you need to be thoughtful about when and where you use it. I do not think they are appropriate for crowded or busy areas. Pet stores, popular walking paths, and crowded city streets all call for a six-foot leash; there are plenty of people and dogs alike that do not want your dog to approach them, and while the Flexi does have a braking mechanism, it’s not foolproof. Instead, use it only low-traffic areas where you expect to see very few (if any!) dogs and people. 

As an aside, before using the brake on the Flexi, I really think you should give your dog a warning. With a regular leash, your dog knows how much room he has before he hits the end of the leash, and can avoid the collar pressure if he wants. With a retractable, your dog has no idea where the end of the leash is because it keeps changing. This seems unfair to me.

I would also recommend attaching the Flexi to a back-attach harness in order to minimize any discomfort on the neck. It should go without saying that you shouldn’t use a prong or slip/choke collar, a head halter, or a front-attach harness with a Flexi. These devices are meant to stop a dog from pulling, and using a leash that by its very design requires the dog to pull seems counter-productive. The dog will also essentially self-correct with every step, running the risk that you will desensitize him to the collar/harness, making it less effective even when the dog is on a regular leash.

Some Notes on the Company
Despite the fact that the Flexi was not right for me or Maisy, I have nothing bad to say about the company itself. While there are some dangers inherent in the use of retractable leashes, the company is very upfront about this. Every leash comes with a safety guide (which is also available online by clicking here), and they have a very nice instructional video (available here).

Flexi also has a new product called the MyFlexi, which is a personalized retractable leash. You can choose the size and color, as well as a picture of your own for the housing. This was very easy to do, although it does require a high speed connection. You can even add words or phrases! I ended up choosing a stock design because I wasn’t sure if I would keep the leash (I won't- I plan to donate it). The result is very pretty, and while I haven’t used it enough to know for sure, it seems very durable. My leash also came very fast- within a week, which was impressive. I very much enjoyed the experience, even if I didn’t enjoy the product.

Finally, I do need to give the following FTC disclosure: I did receive a free product from Flexi in order to facilitate this review, but was not otherwise compensated for this review. My opinions are mine alone, and were not influenced by the company.

Training Tuesday: Trick 2

Here's our second trick of the year, "Splat!"



Maisy learned to offer lying on her side during our several years in reactive dog classes; I just never bothered to name it before. The naming has actually taken a lot of work. She is much better at visual hand signals, and this trick only has a verbal. We have spent literally hundreds of repetitions working on this, and it is still shaky. Still, she's getting it, and I wanted to show you the result before the month was over!

Any suggestions for next month's trick?

Maisy's Brothers

Although I vaguely reference Maisy's “brothers” from time to time, I realized that I've never directly posted about them. This makes sense, of course; the focus of this blog has always been dog-related, and Maisy's brothers are decidedly feline. Still, they are an important part of my life, and Maisy's as well, so I thought today I'd take the time to formally introduce them.

Nicholas J. Cat

Or Nicky for short.

Nicky is an 11 year old orangish-beige tabby cat that I got from the humane society as a kitten. He lived with my parents for awhile when I lived somewhere that didn't allow cats, but he gladly gave up life as a farm cat to return to the city when we bought our house in 2007.

Nicky struggles to get along with Maisy, although I'm not sure whose issue this is. Nicky breaks a lot of Maisy's rules- no staring, no scratching, no jumping on the counter- so their relationship is definitely tense. She snarks at him in situations that she'd completely ignore from her other brother.

Nicky has a recurrent skin issue (eosinophilic granuloma complex), and has had recurrent urinary blockages, requiring major surgery. He spent two years as part of a diet-trial study at the University of Minnesota. That was very interesting, as his food was labeled “Investigational Cat Food- Green.” It was a double-blind study, and neither I nor the researchers know if he was on the placebo or not. I'm looking forward to reading the study when it's completed (the clinical phase will last at least another year).

Nicky is a very friendly kitty. He sleeps on my head most nights, which is terribly uncomfortable for me as he also drools. A lot. I hate waking up with an earful of kitty spit in the middle of the night. I love my Nicky kitty, even if he is kind of a pain.

Malcolm J. Cat

I have no idea why they have the same middle initial.

Photo by Robin Sallie.

Malcolm is somewhere between 5 and 8 years old. We adopted him as an adult from the humane society in 2007, and his age is a guess since he'd been a stray prior to that. He had already been neutered and was in good shape, so he probably escaped (he's an accomplished door-darter) and was never found by his people. I feel kind of bad about that, actually, since he's a really cool cat.

Malcolm is definitely my husband's cat, and I often see him curled up in his lap. Malcolm also gets along with Maisy very well, and although they don't play together as often as they did when they were younger, he can still be seen chasing Maisy through the house. She loves that!

Malcolm, too, has some health problems. During a wellness exam, the vet discovered a heart murmur. Subsequent ultrasound by a kitty cardiologist showed aortic insufficiency- some of the blood slips backwards, and it has to be pumped twice, leaving him at risk of cardiomyopathy.

Malcolm is my clicker cat. Although I haven't spent much time at it, I have done some targeting with him, and successfully shaped him to enter a carrier on his own. It's so different from training with Maisy, but very fun! I would love to teach him some basic obedience stuff and a few tricks, but I never seem to have the time.


Anyway, those are Maisy's brothers. How about all of you? Does your dog have any feline friends?

Do Methods Matter?

As a dog trainer, I think often about how and why I train the way I do. Lately, I’ve been especially interested in what makes for good training. What skills do I need to have to help a dog learn efficiently? What factors contribute to the end result/behavior I’m looking for? In an effort to figure it out, I’ve been doing a lot of reading, and I have been asking others for their insight, too. In the process, I’ve discovered that good trainers:

• Have excellent timing, which allows them to communicate their expectations to their dogs clearly.
• Are consistent and predictable in their actions.
• Have good observation skills, which allow them to see both the dog’s behavior as well as his emotional state.
• Keep their rate of feedback high, which helps the dog understand what is wanted of him.
• Can adjust the lesson plan, asking for more when the dog is ready, and balancing the current level of learning with appropriate distractions.
• Are patient and calm during training.
• Are capable of being creative in their approach, and are always learning new ways of doing things.
• Definitely have a good sense of humor and a healthy dose of humility; things never seem to go the way we expect in training!

What’s missing in this list, though, is how the training is done. In fact, in my research, I found that people very rarely specify that a good trainer avoids corrections and focuses on positive reinforcement. Which leads me to wonder… do methods matter?

 

This is what I want. How do I get it?

Long-time readers know that I feel quite strongly about using positive methods; I do not use pain or fear when I work with a dog. I’ve even gone so far as to say that it’s perfectly possible to train without physical corrections. But for all that, I don’t think that people who train differently than I do are bad trainers. In fact, it would seem that “traditional trainers” are just as capable of demonstrating the skills needed to be good trainers as “positive trainers” are. Good timing, consistency, and observational skills are important whether you’re using a choke chain or a clicker. High feedback rates? Creativity? Adjusting criteria effectively? Ability to remain calm? Yup, all are possible, no matter how you train.

In short, good training is good training, no matter how you do it. So, again, I must ask: do methods matter?

Well, they do for me. I'm a process-oriented person who is interested in more than just the end result. I enjoy teaching my dog how to think and offer behaviors. I think it is fun to watch her figure out the problems I present her. I want a relationship built on feelings of trust and safety, and I think this is easier to do when the dog doesn't need to worry about being hurt or scared.

In addition, I much prefer the end result that comes from a dog who is a willing, cooperative partner that isn’t afraid to try new things. In my experience, dogs who have been trained with positive methods tend to have happier, more enthusiastic performances than those who have been trained with corrections. Of course, I must point out that I have seen very flashy performances come from dogs owned by traditional trainers, and it would be unfair to say that all dogs trained with corrections are miserable. What's more, I've seen some pretty stressed positively trained dogs.

Again, good training is good training. But here's the thing: it’s hard to be good.

If we're honest, most of us probably fall in the mediocre range of training skills. If we keep working at it, we will improve, but in the meantime, we make mistakes. And this is where I see the biggest difference between methods. For example, poor timing plagues many of us, and it leads to confusion because the dog isn’t sure what’s expected of him. The result will be hesitant responses and sloppy behaviors, no matter how you train. But where an uncertain, clicker trained dog will probably continue to keep working, the uncertain, traditionally trained dog is more likely to display signs of avoidance and stop trying entirely.

Certainly, the dog himself influences this a great deal. The “harder” dog- the one who isn’t terribly sensitive either physically or emotionally- will probably be able to sort through inconsistent and confusing messages. The “softer” dog probably doesn’t have that same stamina and persistence, and as a result, tends to shut down much sooner and more often. Unfortunately, it seems that many people vastly underestimate how sensitive their dogs are. The dog is labeled as “stupid” or “untrainable,” and everyone’s quality of life goes down.

I also think it’s easier to become a good trainer when you use positive methods. Take, for example, the skill of adjusting criteria. Ideally, regardless of our training style, we will work to set our dogs up for success. Whether we're clicking or correcting, we want to balance the dog's current level of learning with distractions. With traditional training, the temptation to wait for the dog to make a mistake so we can correct him is strong. Some folks will even purposely set their dogs up to be wrong. Compare this to positive training, where the entire goal is to break the behavior down into small, attainable pieces, which makes it easier to take distractions into account.

I also think positive methods make it easier for the trainer to control her emotions. I know that when I'm focused on seeing mistakes, agitation and frustration tend to creep in. I struggle to remain calm and patient when all I see is wrong behavior. This could just be a quirk of my personality, but I don't think so. I know enough other people who share it to believe this is just the way we are. We humans tend to see what we focus on, and we react to what we see. Reframing the training experience so that we’re focusing on the positive instead of the negative radically changes our emotional reactions.

Again, good trainers have learned to master these skills regardless of their methods, and they can get spectacular performances from their dogs as a result. But for the rest of us? Well, I think the methods do matter. The average person will find it easier to get the results they want using a positive reinforcement-based approach.

But don’t take my word for it. Try it for yourself. And no matter how you choose to train, strive to be good at it. Your dog will thank you.

With Apologies to Elizabeth Barrett Browning

How do I love thee? Let me count the ways.

I love your furry face and mismatched ears,

And the way you bravely face all your fears.

Your enthusiasm and joyful displays

Warm my heart and bring sweetness to my days.

I love the way you fill my life with light,

I love the sheen in your eyes when you’re right,

I love your tail wag when I give you praise;

You make me proud, pup- I’m your biggest fan.

It may sound silly and it may sound trite,

But I love you more since I first began.

Oh, please believe that I’m glad when you’re near,

For I love thee truly, and if I can,

I shall love thee better each passing year.