***Update. This page has recently been found by a group of dog folks who are very much in favor of clicker training. As evidenced by the comments below I thought I’d add a little bit to the article to clarify some of my positions.
First off, to those who strongly disagree with me, I thank you for coming here and voicing your opinion. In nearly every public forum where I and my colleagues participate and shared our dislike for your style of training we are nearly always summarily banned for having a differing opinion.
As much as I don’t agree with your opinion I don’t fault you for having it and I’m not about to censor you for disagreeing with me. So as long as you keep your comments respectful with no cursing I’ll continue to keep them on this page with no censoring. I would encourage you to do the same on the other websites where you share opinions with varying colleagues.
Second off, in a selfish way I thank you for commenting. Google looks highly on articles with comments so your comments are helping to bring more people here to be educated on this topic.
On to the clarification. I have never asserted that clickers and treats don’t work. I KNOW they work. Anyone can see they work within minutes to train a dog to sit, lie down, or a whole variety of behaviors. The dispute I have isn’t on WHETHER they work or not.
Conversely, I know that abuse works as well. No, don’t get me wrong. I’m not advocating abuse just as I’m not advocating clickers by saying I know they work. But tell me, if your dog jumps on you and you smack him in the head with a frying pan, how many times will he jump on you?
So the argument isn’t about whether abuse works, clickers work, e-collars work, etc. We all know that they ALL work.
The difference comes in with the degree to which they work, the amount of time/effort to achieve satisfactory results, and the by-products of the method. Let me elaborate:
- Abusing your dog through smacking, hitting, kicking, etc. CAN work very fast to get rid of some behaviors. So it ticks a box as far as being timely and efficient. It doesn’t tick the other boxes. You don’t often see dogs get to high levels of training through abusive, emotion based and angry methods. Also, the by-products of the training are awful. The dog comes to fear the owner, hate life, and is at greater risk for real injury.
- Using motivators or a lack of motivators as the sole training method. To me, this one ticks all three boxes in a negative way. You CAN achieve quick results but they are very basic. For example, you can teach a dog to sit or lie down with a clicker super fast. As you want to take that training, though, and make it more ‘real-world’ by adding distractions, overcoming the dog’s natural drives, etc. that will take an enormous amount of time and effort. Most dog owner aren’t going to be able to develop the skills necessary for that and few dog owners will be willing to invest the time. What you end up with is very basic and rudimentary training that took a long time to achieve. At my company we regularly get clients who have been going to this type of training for months, and in some cases years, to correct issues like aggression, leash pulling, destruction, and other problems that are literally turned around in minutes, hours, or days with better methods. This leads to the by-products that I don’t like from this movement of training. So many dogs end up in shelters and euthanized because they were ‘trained’ using inferior methods that get lower end results or take too much effort to get desired results. Are dogs abused through clicker training? Absolutely not. But the lack of ability to produce quantifiable and qualifiable results ends up with an awful by-product.
I, very often, see proponents of this method talk about their ‘successes’ in ‘training’ an aggressive dog, or a destructive dog, or a hyper dog. Frequently those successes were built on management with drugs, management with avoiding scenarios (we’ve had many clients been told by their ‘positive’ trainers that in order to fix their dog’s aggression they just had to avoid dogs…not so much of a fix), or simply excuses like ‘well, this breed is just that way’ or ‘there is a ceiling with every dog so this is as far as we’re going to get’ or other such excuses. The successes that these trainers enjoy are far inferior to the successes enjoyed by a more stabilized approach. So, again, I don’t doubt certain successes in this style. I just happen to know that there are far greater successes within reach.
- Using what I call a ‘stabilized approach’ or what other trainers refer to as a ‘balanced approach’. When this approach is done wrong it can absolutely have bad by-products. I’m not ignorant of the damage that unskilled, cruel, or idiotic trainers have done with pinch collars and electric collars. But with even a little bit of skill someone who is using a stabilized approach will be able to achieve high end results, in a quicker time, with no negative by-products. That just isn’t a claim that can be made by any other style of training.
I have years and years of anecdotes that I could share but one that I often like to think of was a client I worked with a few summers back. She had an 8 year old dog with severe aggression issues that she adopted when the dog was 1. It was her love for this dog that actually inspired her to enroll in one of the most respected University level dog behavior programs in the country. These were the folks doing the studies, writing the papers, creating the research on why their method is better. In four years she graduated and hung out her shingle as a dog trainer after having worked with professors and professionals in the industry using positive methods, clickers, motivators, etc. None of it had any effect, though. Despite what studies told her she couldn’t see any sort of change and was forced into management mode for 7 years and keeping her dog isolated from other dogs.
She happened to be in my town, Salt Lake City, for three weeks, far removed from her home back East. We met two times. We used a pinch collar and an electric collar along with rewards, primarily praise but also some treats. We used methods that I developed designed to correct the aggression, teach better leash skills, teach her skills for focusing, and teaching her how to self manage. She was only briefly in town, I would have loved to have worked with her more. She confided in me later, though, that with those two sessions her dog had made more progress in three weeks than she had in 7 previous years of working with Doctors, Professors, and bright minds in the dog training profession.
Do I discount what professors and researchers have to say? No…not really. I see some value in what they are doing. But it’s common knowledge that the money for research follows popular opinion. You want grants? Start doing research that supports what people want to hear. That doesn’t make me a flat-earther. It just means I have a healthy skepticism for scientific studies as we all should. As soon as scientists start putting out drugs that don’t maim and kill, make weather predictions that are always right, delve into the human psyche to show predictable and verifiable results when variables are changed, make economic predictions that actually occur…then let’s start pointing to studies as infallible.
Until then, and while scientists continually get things wrong and are continually shown to have bias in how they conduct their studies, let’s look at the data and make our own interpretations instead of blindly tossing out studies instead of results that someone has been able to achieve on their own.
To sum it up, does clicker training work? Absolutely. Just not on a level that I would feel comfortable charging for and putting my name on. I’ve made a nice career with thousands of happy clients and dogs based on a stabilized approach to training and if the means ever come out to accomplish that with purely motivators I will adapt to that. Until then, I’m going to stick with what gets the best results for both dog and owner.****
There are some little known secrets about clicker training for dogs that most professional dog trainers don’t want you to know. The fact is that clicker training is not effective yet it has become one of the biggest movements in dog training despite the fact that it is deeply flawed and based on incorrect understanding of dog behavior and learning. How can I make such a bold assertion? Read on.
Clicker training has it’s first beginnings back in the 1960s when animal trainers were using clickers and whistles to train pigeons, dolphins, and other animals for military application.
For example, dolphins were trained to use their natural sonar to locate mines underwater in harbors and off coast lines.
Sound like a great idea, right?
In theory it was. The following points, though, outline why this can be great for dolphins but bad for your family pet:
- These dolphins being trained were 100% dependent on their trainers for food. If they didn’t work they didn’t eat. All of the dolphin’s meals for the day were divvied out as the dolphin performed his or her tasks. This is fine if you are a full time trainer and your only job is to give the dolphin his mackerel for his work. What about the family dog, though? Do you really think it’s a good idea that your dog’s entire food consumption is dependent on whether or not he wants to lie down and stay when someone knocks on the door? Do you want to make your dog’s meal contingent on whether or not he ignores the cat and comes when called? Can you imagine the hassle of carrying around your dog’s meals all day long so you can gradually parse them out for good behavior? The logistics of this idea are ridiculous.
- You can’t correct a dolphin. I’ve yet to see a training collar big enough for a dolphin. If you try to use a spray bottle on a dolphin like you can with a dog or cat I don’t think it has the same effect. What are you going to do? Get in the tank and start smacking the dolphin around? Of course not. There is no effective and humane way to correct a dolphin. As a result the trainers HAD TO devise other methods to train behaviors.There ARE effective and humane ways to administer corrections to dogs. Why ignore those when they speed up the learning process, improve the relationship between the dog and owner, and make behaviors more sure and certain.
- The effectiveness of the training wore off in the ‘real world’. When these dolphins were done with training and sent out into the ocean to do their job the trainers were surprised to find out that they lost several dolphins. Despite all the clickers and the whistles the dolphins still didn’t respond to their training.
Why?
Simple. Clickers and whistles don’t provide deterrents for bad behaviors. They ONLY provide positive motivation for good behavior. What happens when results of behavior were better than what the trainer was offering? The dolphin is left looking at this wide open world full of fish, vegetation, tides, rocks, caves, other dolphins, etc. and they realize that they’d rather go after the distraction then go to the trainer.
In realizing this the military just came to realize that this was a ‘cost of doing business’. If you are going to train dolphins, well…you may just lose some. Okay, let’s move on to training the next batch.
What does that mean for the family dog, though? If you train the dog in the living room with clickers and treats and no distractions what do you think will happen when you attempt to transition that training to the real world? There are a lot of things in the real world (bikes, cats, dogs, kids, cars, squirrels, etc.) that are far more interesting than your clicker and treats.
Remember, many of the dolphins did come back after their task. Not all of them swam off into the wide open sea.
Are you willing to risk that it’s your dog, though, who cares more about distractions than he does about your rewards?
The bottom line is that clicker training for dogs can be great if you are teaching tricks or other behaviors that don’t need to be performed with any level of distraction. The second you want to add distractions to the mix, though, this style of training will leave much to be desired.
Clicker training is not a new word for me. Actually a friend of mine made his dog trained from Clicker Training . So I know that your training schedule and comfort zone for dogs is quite good.
How can i purchased a book and or dvd with all the topics and tips related on how to train an american bulldog in every aspect ?
I cannot recommend this person as his facts are inaccurate & he uses methods that are scientifically proven to be wrong & dangerous.
Agreed!!!
Same challenge to you as to Beth. Let me know what science says that methods that are proven to work don’t work?
Bentosela, M., Barrera, G., Jackovcevic, A., El
gier, A.M., Mustaca, A.E. (2008) Effect of
reinforcement, reinforcer omission and extinction on a communicative response in domestic
animals (
Canis familiaris)
.
Behavioural Processes
788, 464-469.
Blackwell, E.J., Twells, C.,
Seawright, A., Casey, R.A. (2007) The relationship between
training methods and the occurrence of behaviour problems in a population of domestic dogs.
Proceedings of the 6
th
International Veterinary Behaviour Meeting,
Fondazione Iniziative
Zooprofilattiche e Zootecniche, Brescia, Italy, 51-52.
3
Haverbeke, A., Laporte, B., Depeierieux, E., Gi
ffroy, J.M., Diedrich, C. (2008) Training
methods of military dog handlers and t
heir effects on team’s performances.
Applied Animal
Behaviour Science
113, 110-122.
Herron, M.E., Shofer, F.S., Reisner, I.R. (
2009) Survey of the use and outcome of
confrontational and non-confront
ational training methods in client owned dogs showing
undesired behaviours.
Applied Animal Behaviour Science
117, 47-54.
Hiby, E.F., Rooney, N.J., Bradshaw, J.W.S.
(2004) Dog training methods – their use,
effectiveness and interaction with behaviour and welfare.
Animal Welfare
13, 63-69.
Landsberg, G.M., Hunthausen, W., Ackerman, L. (2003) Canine aggression,
Handbook of
Behaviour Problems of the Dog and Cat (second ed.)
, Saunders, Edinburgh, 385-426.
Smith S.M., Davis, E.S. (2008)
Clicker increases resistance to extinction but does not
decrease training time of a simple operant task in domestic dogs
(Canis familiaris). Applied
Animal Behaviour Science
110, 318-329.
Yin, S., Fernandez, E.J., Pagan, S., Richardson
, S.L., Snyder, G. (2008) Efficacy of a remote-
controlled, positive reinforcement, dog-train
ing system for modifying problem behaviours
exhibited when people arrive at the door.
Applied Animal Behaviour Science
113, 123-128.
Those studies prove that using corrections doesn’t work? Give me a break.
You have some studies showing what people have done with treats and clickers. You don’t have any studies showing how corrections don’t work. The closest you have in that drivel are studies showing how compulsion doesn’t work but I’ve read the studies. The manner in which the compulsion was administered was so ridiculous it could have only been applied by a professor or a ‘cookie pushing’ trainer.
Try again.
I’d be curious to know what science disproves my methods? I have demonstrable proof for years and years showing how my methods work.
Wow! This article is deeply flawed and illogical. If you don’t know anything about clicker training you probably shouldn’t be flouting your ignorance for all to see. Proofing at all levels of distraction to make sure the dog understands in all circumstances is the protocol. Clickers speed up learning, not correction. Corrections actually slow down or block the learning process and that is backed by science. Why would tigers, whales and elephants are trained with clickers if they didn’t work. How ridiculous to say you cannot put a “training” collar on them and then begin to argue that clickers don’t work. You’ve also left out the most important part of training, the relationship and human/dog bond. Corrections quickly tear at the very fabric of that. When your dogs work with you because they want to, not because they fear you, then you have a trained dog.
You may want to check the ‘science’ on why they train tigers, whales, and elephants with clickers. it’s not what you’re touting.
I know that clickers work. What I also know is that clicker training as it is done by the majority of most dog trainers and dog owners today ‘works’ on a very low level to achieve a very inadequate level of obedience.
I have high standards for my dogs and my client’s dogs which is why clickers never enter the equation.
I find it disingenuous of you to suggest that clicker training “works on a very low level to achieve a very inadequate level of obedience.” There are hacks in dog training, just as there are in every profession. You would certainly sound ridiculous going around saying that birth control pills don’t work simply because there are women who get pregnant because they forget to take them. Training, whether it’s your brand or it’s clicker training, works on the principles of operant and classical conditioning, and it is only the mechanics of the trainers using those principles that differ. If you are a skilled clicker training, you’ll have obedient dogs. I have high ethical standards, which is why shock collars never enter the equation for me.
I’ve never claimed anything about woman’s birth control, have no idea how that entered the equation, and see your argument as a complete apples to oranges attempt at getting a point across.
The most skilled of clicker trainers will rarely approximate the level of training that even a novice ‘balanced’ trainer will achieve with methods that are more in line with what the science tells us is effective. Purely positive folks jump on the bandwagon that they have studies that show that pp works. I don’t deny it works. It just doesn’t work very well.
So you would make a better argument comparing highly effective birth control (balanced or stabilized training) to a lesser prescription of birth control that is known for allowing a lot of pregnancies (purely positive or clicker based training) if you were looking for accuracy.
: The most skilled of clicker trainers will rarely approximate the level of training that even a novice ‘balanced’ trainer will achieve with methods that are more in line with what the science tells us is effective. ”
Annnnd, you base this assumption on which study? This is certainly not my experience and I am not aware of any studies that show such a result.
Oh, and there is no such thing as purely positive. Any educated clicker trainer is fully aware that there are four quadrants to learning theory, all of which “teach”. They just choose to emphasize the ones that make the dog and handler enjoy their job and has the least amount of fallout possible.
There has to be a study for everything now? Decades in the business doesn’t count for anything unless someone with some fancy letters after their name agrees? Give me a break.
I’m still open to seeing some results that ‘prove me wrong’. Go ahead, let’s see some video instead of listing some studies. I’m interested in what actually works, not what some professor told you works.
Why is it that when the argument between clicker trainers and balanced trainers come up the clicker trainers resort to studies to prove their claims and the balanced trainers point to what has actually been done over and over and over and can be proven and shown through video, testimonials, etc.?
You guys need to come back with something more convincing than a list of studies.
This completely asinine. No credentials, no factual or statistical proof, as well as no documentation to support this man’s claims what so ever…. seems quite frivolous! It is truly disappointing to read this, I can’t imagine having that kind mentality towards another living thing. You would rather punish and reprimand a dog for not thinking and acting like a human simply because it is a “Hassle” for you…. in addition to this blatantly ignorant rant , he misspelled Praise (Prase).
The last bastion of the losing argument is to go after grammar and spelling of your opponent. Sad.
Your assertion that I would rather punish and reprimand a dog for not thinking and acting like a human is 100% false.
This whole website is documentation supporting my claims. Feel free to go through it or feel free to continue to believe the new ‘dogma’ of today’s ‘behaviorists’. The choice is yours.
I hate to see any discussion on training become the defense of ones unyielding dogma on training. I will first say I have no clicker credentials exceppt working with KP at the National Zoo in 1977/78. She was hired to teach the zoo keeper staff about operant behavior and the use of primary and secondary reinforcers. Becaused the whistles used by the aquatic trainers were a bit slow for the bridge she sugessted we go to the dime store and buyt clickers. Yes the elephants are very smart and pick up on the conditioning quickly. Prior to Karen Pryors arrivals we,the keepers and learning old school trainers had to over come some dangerous issues using force training. In the book don’t shoot tbhe dog KP describes how Jim Jones and her trained Shanti to retrieve a frisbee,in truth the young elephant tried to eat it. Had it not been for some hands on training wed wouldn’t have been able to reach in her mouth to remove it..I no longer work there, fired in 1979, but I called an old efephant co worker to check my memory and yes we aggreed no PP. In defense of punishment and it’s misuse in the discussion,the use of punishment is to reduce an unwanted behavior whether the punishment is neg or pos. For those that are comfortabke with it please use it I’ll bridge orally.
Just wondering what your credentials are. Where were you educated as a trainer? What schools or programs did you attend? Who are your mentors in the training and behavior world?
What schools and programs and credentials? Unfortunately, there are no serious programs in any colleges across the US for dog training. There are a few who have attempted to add some classes and programs but their efforts haven’t produced any real-world results.
Wow, your science is flawed and I’m sorry for all the other people that are being subjected to your ignorance. The ONLY argument you can have against positive reinforcement training is that it didn’t work for you. The ONLY reason it didn’t work is because you don’t understand the science of learning and how to apply it. I love the comment that there’s no good schools – so typical of someone who thinks they know everything and has no clue how little they know.
I’m not saying it doesn’t work. It just doesn’t work on a level that I’d feel comfortable charging money for.
I’m the first to admit that it works. Just don’t expect to get great levels of training out of it.
As a successful clicker trainer who uses it for not only tricks and basic behaviors, but also serious aggression issues, I have two words for this article. One of them is Bull.
‘Successful clicker trainer’ is an oxymoron.
There is a lot of science behind the fact that punishment based training is not optimal and that “balanced” training can create confusion and distress:
http://lifeasahuman.com/2011/pets/dog-trainings-latest-buzzword-balance/
http://ahimsadogtraining.com/handouts/training-basics.html?alt=learning+theory
http://www.patriciamcconnell.com/theotherendoftheleash/tag/positive-vs-negative-dog-training
http://www.4pawsu.com/harsh_agg.htm
http://www.4pawsu.com/trainingmethods.htm
Was this a joke list? You sent a list of links to people who say that ‘science based’ training is better. There was no science on these pages, though, outside of defining basic principles of conditioning.
Try again. And keep trying. I love the commenting. Helps with page rankings and that way more folks can get education on the fallacy of clickers.
“There is no effective and humane way to correct a dolphin”
Utter tosh. Why would you want to correct a dolphin, there’s no need when it’s easy to get it right in the first place and you would only get it right in the first place if you understood the basic principles of animal behaviour and learning.
“What happens when results of behavior were better than what the trainer was offering?”
Again even basic kindergarten animal training – you haven’t found the right motivation for the animal
“If you train the dog in the living room with clickers and treats and no distractions what do you think will happen when you attempt to transition that training to the real world? There are a lot of things in the real world (bikes, cats, dogs, kids, cars, squirrels, etc.) that are far more interesting than your clicker and treats.”
Ooo, that same old phrase – basic animal training kindergarten stuff – it’s called building up the distractions
“What schools and programs and credentials? Unfortunately, there are no serious programs in any colleges across the US for dog training. There are a few who have attempted to add some classes and programs but their efforts haven’t produced any real-world results.”
Seriously – what planet are you living on? My 12yr can find several programmes/classes that produce real world if not world class results. Any trainer who thinks they can blind people with a one sided uneducated stance to training without understanding all the tools in the OC/CC box (look the terms up, applies to any living organism inc humans) just isn’t a trainer worth bothering to listen to.
“Seriously – what planet are you living on? My 12yr can find several programmes/classes that produce real world if not world class results. Any trainer who thinks they can blind people with a one sided uneducated stance to training without understanding all the tools in the OC/CC box (look the terms up, applies to any living organism inc humans) just isn’t a trainer worth bothering to listen to.”
Yet you don’t provide any? Get your 12 year old on here, then.
“Ooo, that same old phrase – basic animal training kindergarten stuff – it’s called building up the distractions”
Sounds fine in theory. Let’s see some video of high end, distraction heavy training done with treats and clickers. I’ll wait while you go find some.
“Utter tosh. Why would you want to correct a dolphin, there’s no need when it’s easy to get it right in the first place and you would only get it right in the first place if you understood the basic principles of animal behaviour and learning.”
Of course there is no reason to correct a dolphin. You have a captive audience that doesn’t live unless he performs. Good luck replicating that in a dog. Ever seen the studies on what happens when clicker ‘trained’ dolphins are let loose in the real world with real distractions? Oops.
“Again even basic kindergarten animal training – you haven’t found the right motivation for the animal”
Again, if this is so basic and kindergarten let’s see some high end, distraction heavy training with clickers. Shouldn’t be a problem digging up some video if it’s so basic, right?
The reality is that both of us have science on our side based on our own interpretations of said science. Only one of our sides, though, has actual results.
Ty says: “What schools and programs and credentials? Unfortunately, there are no serious programs in any colleges across the US for dog training. There are a few who have attempted to add some classes and programs but their efforts haven’t produced any real-world results.”
The Flat-Earth-Society here we come…
The available information and science is there, you need only become a student of it. Your assertions about operant conditioning are flawed which demonstrates to me that you don’t embrace the science. Not believing in decades of demonstrable science means you are not engaging in dog training: you are effectively making it up as you go along. The efficacy of operant conditioning (and its proper execution) is not a matter of “opinion”. Why don’t you send your “points” to Bob Bailey and ask him what he thinks about your claims? If you don’t know who Bob Bailey is then you also need a refresher course in history as well.
I don’t believe the earth is flat.
Not believing in decades of demonstrable dog training show me that you aren’t interested in helping dogs but rather promoting ideology that makes sense on paper but falls apart in the real world.
Who is denying conditioning by the way? You keep running back to that as if I have ever claimed that I don’t believe in any sort of conditioning?
You’ve completely missed the point of clicker training. Not sure your writing deserves a whole paragraph reply, so i wont bother.
Darn.
Hi Ty,
Thank you for totally proving that anyone can make claims about science or their methods. Because anyone can…especially if they do not post any studies. Operant conditioning is operant conditioning no matter which of the quadrants you choose to use. Purely positive makes me want to gag because it does not exist and the only people who ever bring it up are frustrated and insecure “balanced” trainers who would rather slap an ecollar on a dog than, god forbid, use food or a toy as a reinforcement.
All you do is make yourself look like a training neanderthal bringing out weak arguments with no proof. You want to see clicker trained obedience? Check out Mario Verslijpe and his latest dog, Hasco who has been completely trained with clicker/marking training. NO CORRECTIONS…at the World IPO championships. He used to use an ecollar. He no longer has to because he has developed his skill and used his brain.
I can provide dozens, if not hundreds, of studies that prove that positive reinforcement based training is as accurate and successful as correction based/balanced training, without behavioural fallout or risk thereof..what do you have to show us to back up your bluster?
Decades of personal experience and hundreds of years of combined experience of colleagues. Doesn’t look as cool, though, I’ll admit, if there isn’t a fancy study attached to eons of experience showing how balanced training will outperform polarized training every time.
I do think your side needs to find some new examples, though. For every 1000 case studies showing balanced training outperforming the positive folks will pull out one or two trainers who have had success with clickers. Great stories, but you’re going to need a lot more evidence before you start to become relevant.
This is a parody, right? Nobody in this day and age could possibly ignore the roomfuls of applied science on animal learning and dog b-mod n the service of wanting to use collar corrections on dogs. Have we been fired back to 1975? LOL!!!
I’m interested to see your science that says that collar corrections don’t work?
I also find it interesting that there is this assumption that if something is newer, it’s better. It’s easy to say with a scoff that those idiot trainers in 1975 didn’t know what they were doing. But let’s also look at results when we’re talking about behavior.
Sorry, I don’t have any studies to show and I know that is currency for some folks, but most people who have been observant will tell you that over the past 40 years both dog behavior and child behavior have worsened. Boundaries are no longer being set as they were previously, discipline is now a no-no, correction is frowned upon for child and dog alike, etc. The net result, worse behavior and societies with more criminals and deviant behavior on the human side and fuller shelters and more unwanted pets on the dog side. And note, awareness about bad breeding practices is at an all time high yet we’re seeing an epidemic of shelter dogs due to bad behavior.
I find it highly arrogant to think that just because you happened to be born at a later date that you are somehow better or smarter than trainers that came before you and their knowledge can be tossed out because it doesn’t fit within the spectrum that you’ve latched onto.
Regardless, I LOVE the fact that there are more and more of your mind set. The more the market gets full of motivator-only trainers the more that dog owners are clamoring for trainers like myself who can produce results.
I can see both sides to this article, and to the commenters posting. It’s true what the commenters say — clicker training can and does work — but only for some dogs. What do you do with a dog who doesn’t care about food or toys or even praise? Or who perhaps cares a little, but is way more interested in the distractions at hand (other dogs, squirrels, children, leaves blowing by)? Clicker training simply cannot work for some dogs. Just as no single training method can work for every dog. In this case, we need to give the dog more information, helping them to make a better, safer choice. If that involves collar corrections, either through teaching them the language of the training collar or remote/e-collar, then that is what’s best for THAT dog. Something else to consider is the individual living situation of the dog. Often, as trainers, we get desperate calls from owners saying “I need this fixed NOW,” and they simply haven’t the time — and occasionally the willingness to develop the skill set — to get the behaviour they need in the time they have allotted to fix the problem (whether that’s realistic or not). Again, those are the moments when providing more information to the dog, including both rewards and consequences THAT ARE MEANINGFUL TO THE DOG is a necessary step in teaching. It’s the “meaningful to the dog” part that’s most important here — if you think you’re engaging in P- by not giving the dog a treat, it’s only P- if the dog actually cares about not getting a treat. Otherwise it’s completely inconsequential. So, to summarize, clicker training can and does work, but not for every dog, and not always to the level required. There is no single form of training that works for every dog — and that’s why we, as trainers, are OBLIGATED to step beyond our own personal philosophies and actually train the dog in front of us. If we cannot or won’t do that, then our next obligation is to refer the dog and owner to another trainer who is able and willing to do the work required to get the dog trained to the level required, in the time required. Anything less than that is completely unethical.
I use clickers all the time to begin dogs on training. But, once I have taught them the commands it is time for proofing. That is where a great balanced approach comes in. I admit, there is the occasional dog that doesn’t need a correction and does great in the real world of distractions without anything more than the motivation of a treat or toy. But, most dogs need understanding and feedback on all ends of the spectrum. Its unfair to only provide partial feedback to an animal when we can give them the full picture of what we expect from them. I love clicker training. It is fun, easy and my dogs totally love it. But, they also love the fact that I can provide a full picture to them.
One of my favorite things from R+ only trainers is when they send you to someone else’s link (which its always the same few names that comes up every time) to see the work they are talking about. They have none of their own work to show for what they are saying. Just because a very few people can take a highly highly motivated dog, bred strictly for work, and train it only on treats, does NOT mean that it can or will apply to any other average dog out there.
Clicker training works. I have trained dogs to retrieve things, turn off lights, close doors behind them, play music, and 100′s more besides beginning obedience. Clicker training one’s own dog can be a full time job and work. Using real world treats and varying those joys/rewards and also jackpotting sends messages. That is provided you have a certain kind of dog who will work with you. Maybe you have a dog that doesn’t train up perfectly, gives you the paw (finger) when he/she chooses, prefers to chase other animals into the street regardless (oh, you want your dog on leash all the time? – then clicker is fine for you), you need to teach the dog NO and correct for behavior that is dangerous or embarrassing or unacceptable after you have fully taught your dog the meaning of YES and rules of the game. Then, it is completely fair to give your dog corrections to have a 99 to 100% dog as opposed to 60% to 97%. I need my performing dogs to perform offleash in unfenced areas with other critters around and be 100% so I use more than clicker. Just depends on what dog you have, what kind of owner you are (diligent or not) and the behaviors you need. My dogs love me no matter what tools I use because I have given them a strong base of love and goodness.
Ty is correct in that Clickers work and other methods work. Anyone with their mind not deceiving themselves for the sake of believing what they want to believe will understand that he is correct.
Let’s go ahead and compare training to birth control since one of the commenters brought it up. Birth control works, clickers work. Woo boy, let’s have fun. Now let’s say, we want off leash training (freedom) or we want to date and have sex with lots of people cause we aren’t married (terriers running) Well, birth control pills are great to a point….if we don’t also use a condom to protect against HIV and STD and we got that disease, how great was that birth control pill (clicker). A correction collar, ecollar, those are the protection from cars etc that kill just as a condom is higher protection against HIV that kills. I want close to 100% cause I am training all dogs, not just those sweet cute ones who want to listen to me as a trainer. I love my dogs so much that I want them to live a long life, but also have freedoms. So, I keep my mind open to all tools and protections.
Studies – the proof is in the pudding. But everyone has different tastes so you accept a very sweet or runny pudding…good for you clicker trainer who only allows reward base. The only perfect STUDY is to cut that particular dog in half and train each half and find out the truth. No one is willing to do that and until we are, we have opinion. My opinion (clicker training for 13 years) is leaning on the side of Balance and Ty Brown.
I have to say Robin, Brittany, and Jill hit exactly what I would say. However, the Herron survey being quoted as a scientific study proving anything should just be tossed out. It is a survey, not a scientific study. How the techniques were applied, if they corresponded with the actual instruction, the reasons for the action that provoked aggresssion…really? I respect Herron, and have gone to see her speak, while I disagree in some ways, I think well of her. However the survey…not much more than a grain of salt to take with that.
Great read Ty Brown. I find it interesting how as humans we don’t immediately look to finding a balanced approach in all aspects of our lives. For people with common sense this should be a no brainer. Why would anyone want to limit themselves on a one way only style of training. fully understanding all methods and how they work, when they work, as well as their pros and cons is the best thing that you could do. I find it funny that the majority of people who are commenting are commenting simply to ” bash” you for talking “badly” (or just stating the facts that their are limits to clickers) are commenting from a purely emotional pov/state. Emotional choices are the exact reason why people struggle in life and with their pets. Emotions are the very reason why pure positive clicker only for EVERYTHING “trainers” are limited on the type of dogs and owners that they can help.
When i work with my dogs and clients dogs i take a Bruce lee approach…..I understand all methods and incorporate what is appropriate for the issue at hand.
-Blake Rodriguez
Dog Behavior Specialist of Dream Come True K9
http://www.dctk9.com/dctk9-services/
http://www.youtube.com/user/DreamComeTrueK9
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Dream-Come-True-K9Blake-Rodriguez/168524309848413