There were some interesting techniques, but do you think we, as 'regular' people can duplicate his techniques?
And train our dogs so quickly!
Symphony
www.beginningdogtraining.com
Printable View
There were some interesting techniques, but do you think we, as 'regular' people can duplicate his techniques?
And train our dogs so quickly!
Symphony
www.beginningdogtraining.com
Quote:
Originally Posted by symphony
He always says that he trains people, not the dogs, and I believe he does.:)
Absolutely not.Quote:
Originally Posted by symphony
And I do not feel that he, himself, executes the vast majority of his "techniques" in a safe or effective manner, either.
The bottom line is... HUMANS are not WOLVES, or DOGS. Cesar's attempts to emulate wolf behavior, through his own skewed perception, often fails miserably. There are many accounts of dogs that Cesar "treated" attacking their owners when they tried to apply the same techniques, and still many of Cesar being attacked while in the "training" process. The fact that his show encourages people at home to physically challenge their dogs (often dogs with real, serious behavior problems) is simply moronic and dangerous.
Cesar does not train dogs quickly. That is what they call the magic of television. Furthermore, the dogs that he claims are being "calm/submissive" are actually shutting down; their behavior has not been turned around, they have simply stopped functioning and ceased doing anything, out of fear. There is no instant gratification microwave for dog training. It takes a lot of understanding, time, reinforcement, consistency, and conditioning. And it is a lifelong process, not a 30-minute process.
Here are some really great links, from CERTIFIED behaviorists (of which Cesar is not):
http://4pawsu.com/dogpsychology.htm
http://www.urbandawgs.com/luescher_millan.html
http://www.marinij.com/homeandgarden/ci_4720342
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MGPHL9D1N1.DTL
http://www.animalbehaviorassociates....ader_myths.pdf
Erika/Bckrazy, thank you thank you thank you thank you!!!!!!!!
If the above barrage of links doesn't convince you, here's a book review of "Cesar's Way" written by a veterinarian for the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior:
http://www.avsabonline.org/avsabonli...r%20review.pdf
The American Veterinary Medical Associations take on Cesar's endorsement of compulsion training methods:
http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/feb08/080215l.asp
AVSAB's take on the pitfalls of punishment:
http://www.avsabonline.org/avsabonli...sk=view&id=118
Bottom line: Domesticated dogs are NOT wolves. DOGS act more like extremely immature/juvenile wolves more than the coherent, stable pack of mature adults that Cesar would like you to believe. Dogs bark a LOT, whine a LOT, furiously wag their tails, etc. etc. - all behaviors that mature wolves do not regularly display.
The dominance myth has really been distorted to an absurd point. There are common arguments that claim something as mundane as a jumping puppy will turn into a dominant adult. So, then, how does one explain a jumping puppy's lip licking, whining, held back ears, etc.? If one has ever seen a band of puppies approach an older dog, the puppies will perform these behaviors while simultaneously *licking the other dog's lips*. As chance would have it, HUMAN lips are taller than the average puppy. Ergo, the puppy must jump to reach. It's not dominance. It's perfectly normal dog behavior. But somehow, we repudiate normal DOG behavior and instead substitute it with our skewed view of "acceptable" WOLF behavior.
So why is Cesar seemingly "effective"? The answer is that, whether we'd like to admit it or not, punishment often works to suppress behavior. If you hit (or, as Cesar likes to put it, "assertively touch") a dog every time he approaches a bone, that dog will learn to avoid the bone to avoid the punishment. He doesn't learn self-control. He learns FEAR. Punishment works to suppress behavior. But in and of itself, punishment is no substitution for behavioral modification, and punishment must be used only by those who know how and when to use it. And nobody should use the level of punishment that Cesar uses.
I agree with BCKRAZY on this one. Ceasar is not my kind of trainer, and the off the scene stuff people don't see would surprise most of the people who think he's so wonderful. I personally do not like him or his methods. I find him unsympathetic and even borders on cruel to animals. I see no respect coming from the dogs, only fear.
I knew you would show up with a fantastic post, Sophie. :D
I definitely agree with you, and shepgirl, that fear-based "training" is NOT going to produce a stable or reliable dog... ever. Any animal acting on fear is going to be unpredictable, erratic, and depending on how far that animal is pushed and where their breaking point is, will often lash out to protect themselves.
What's sad is the untold number of well-meaning owners and their dogs who have suffered because of the gospel that Cesar preaches. On another forum just last week, a woman's hand was bitten and her dog was PUT TO SLEEP, because she physically challenged him while he was guarding food... "like Cesar does"!
Instead of a .1-second, bottom-of-the-screen, miniscule "do not try this at home" warning before The Dog Whisperer... there should be a "DO NOT WATCH THIS CRAP" warning. D:
I really think people confuse assertivness with dominance. It's not the
same thing at all. The "pack leader" has no need to remind the "pack" who
is in charge.
Cesar have a natural born good thing and this is an important factor in dog training: a calm and fearless approach. Apart from this I donīt appreciate or approve his training methods. Problematic dogs need to be corrected with love and reward based technics and not by fear. If a dog is corrected using the fear factor, he will almost all the times come back to his problematic behaviour.
sorry if i cause an up roar but ummm.... I love the dog whisperer :rolleyes:.
The things he does with dogs are amazing and i use what he says with my own dogs. I NEVER hit my dogs but i will touch the dog to snap it out of the bad behaviour.
A lot of dogs he works with are agressive and he has to be firm. If a Pit or Rottie want to get something you have to be firm.
I watched a episode a few night back and he did nothing but praise the dog. I dont always see the dominace thing but alot of it makes sense to me.
But every person to there own i guess.
it is correct that tv does distort(sp*) alot of things and it probably does take a lot longer to train a dog than it is shown.
He's not my type of trainer. I just don't like the cold look in his eyes and I find he has no empathy for any dog he works with.
He seems to be on some kind of ego trip , he doesn't really assert himself, he dominates and does not do it kindly.
Some like him , some don't.
I absolutely 110% disagree when people justify utilizing the extreme forms of the "dominance theory" (i.e. alpha rolls and "assertive touches", i.e. forcefully hitting the dog) because the dog is reactive or aggressive.
Cesar is "amazing" because he uses positive punishment. Punishment has instant results because it suppresses behavior. Dog growls. Hit. Dog growls again. Alpha roll. Dog stops growling. Is that amazing? Or is that disturbing? What is amazing to me is that people still believe in this stuff, when modern psychology and decades of research and behavioral modification have taught us that there are far more effective methods of long term rehabilitation of reactive and aggressive dogs.
As you can see from my siggie, I have a Doberman girl. She is strong, she is willful, she is energetic, and high drive/high pain tolerance. Surprise, surprise, she is also extremely reactive. I do not and never will "dominate" her in the way that Cesar advocates. The basis of Cesar's attitude towards aggressive dogs is that they're trying to assume the alpha role. In other words, they're trying to assert their dominance over the human by taking control of the environment and resources. Uh huh. Right. So, why does my 100%-positive-reinforcement-trained dog do this by herself?Quote:
Originally Posted by Emma<3Beth
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4..._dominance.jpg
That, folks, is a completely UNtrained behavior. I have NEVER taught Ivy this behavior; it's completely natural. So, tell me again, why does my dog react? Because she's dominant? Really??? Am I really supposed to believe that?
Bottom line: Not all "bad" behaviors stem from inadequate leadership, as Cesar would like us to believe. THAT is my major gripe with him.
Well, to each his own I guess, but I admire Cesar's remarkable talent
with all dogs he meets. I certainly do not see cruel or uneven treatment
with any dog he's working with & no fear in any of the dogs.IMO.:)
Hi lizbud you seem to share my opinion:).
I guess it all depends on the dog and the person.
Giselle i like you dog seems like a sweety I was referrring to the agressive dogs that want to kill things our Dane cross(RIP) wanted to kill and i had to be firm good snap of the chain and she settled.
Like I said, Ivy is extremely reactive. She has attacked and, if put in a 'bad' situation, she would attack again. Would she kill? Probably. If I hadn't been there to pull her off our classmate's dog, I'm sure she would have inflicted serious damage. Ivy's aggression is not normal, and I treat her aggression as a psychological and medical problem. It is most certainly NOT a dominance problem, as CM so adamantly asserts with his aggressive and reactive clients.Quote:
Originally Posted by Emma<3Beth
she submitted to you right. :)
Yes not everything is realted to a dog being dominate:eek:. But You did use the same sort of principal with your dog.
when she reacted badly you stayed "Calm and assetive" and placed her in a submissive position on the floor till she settled.
it is the same thing CM(like the abbreviation) :p does with the dogs he works with. You did seem less forcefull i will admit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giselle
I think you are doing your dog no favors by not training her out of
the negative behaviour. No offense, but do you feel it's safe to have Ivy around other dogs?
Lizbud, you misunderstood me big time ;)
I DO train Ivy out of her negative behaviors. But here's the thing: I train her using positive reinforcement, coping mechanisms, and teaching self-control. I train her using desensitization and counter conditioning. I train her with the clicker. I use Premack's principle. I use come-and-go training. I train *holistically*. I train Ivy, ultimately, to teach her to cope with her emotions and to view the trigger as a neutral object. To ALL aggressive dogs, they attach a fierce emotion to the trigger, whether it be excitement or fear. If you really want to get rid of that explosion of aggression, you have to remove the emotion that is attached to the trigger. You have to counter condition it. THAT is how I work with Ivy, and I refuse to use extreme force on her (i.e. the CM-endorsed alpha rolls and assertive touches).
Au contraire, again. Yes, she submitted to me. That is my point. She submitted to me WITHOUT the use of force or subversion. She submits to me because it's natural, because I've earned her respect as a leader. HOWEVER, she also has a natural tendency to react/aggress. According to CM's methodology, virtually all bad behavior is linked directly to inadequate leadership. So, my question to him and all who subscribe to this methodology, is: How is it possible that a very submissive dog is simultaneously extremely reactive towards other dogs? Does this case not completely refute CM's methodology?Quote:
she submitted to you right.
Yes not everything is realted to a dog being dominate. But You did use the same sort of principal with your dog.
when she reacted badly you stayed "Calm and assetive" and placed her in a submissive position on the floor till she settled.
it is the same thing CM(like the abbreviation) does with the dogs he works with. You did seem less forcefull i will admit.
It is not the same principle as CM. As you can see, she was not reacting at the moment. I was merely showing you extent of our relationship - clearly, she is submissive to me. BUT she STILL has natural tendencies to react. I was using that video to counter CM's fundamental training beliefs.
ETA: By the way, if I'm coming off a little "harsh", I really don't mean to. Aggression and reactivity are truly my passion of passions. I adore this topic and it is incredibly personal, so, in the midst of that passion, I can get a little virulent. I really don't mean to :/
I am so glad you didn't get all bent out of shape over my questions.
I truly want to understand the training method you use.:) It does seem
to me you are only reacting to Ivy's bad choices, so she really is not the
submissive one, you are. Right?:confused:
The Premack Principal is a type/method of human conditioning.
Ahh the relms of dog psychology certainly a hot topic. I get where you are coming from Giselle. Hey whatever works for you and doesn't hurt the dog i am all for it. :p
No, I disagree. What you're describing is a human's ideal of "dog dominance". Think of it like this: Dominance is used to DIFFUSE tension and KEEP order. Dominance, in its most natural form, is meant to keep inventory of resources - to prevent scuffles, to ensure that the members of the pack get their share. That is how one should view dominance. But when you try to extrapolate and say a dog is "dominant" because she's trying to manipulate the situation by making me react to her bad choices? That's taking the dominance concept a little too far.Quote:
It does seem
to me you are only reacting to Ivy's bad choices, so she really is not the
submissive one, you are. Right?
She is not voluntarily choosing to react "badly" to make me submit to her, to make me react to her. Here's where I think CM followers and +R followers dissociate: Aggression/Reacting is NOT a completely voluntary choice. When dogs aggress and react, they are acting so due to knee-jerk, primal reflexes, usually fear, excitement, etc. They have attached a strong emotion to that trigger and, when they see the trigger, they are working with their instinct. They have literally entered another state of mind. If you've worked with a lot of aggressive dogs, you'll see their eyes harden, their muscles tense and quiver, their jaw muscles tighten, their focus on you severely decreases, etc. These are not voluntary actions. They are the result of a strong emotions tied to the trigger. So to rid the dog of the aggression, you have to change the base of those emotions. Essentially, you have to neutralize the trigger, which is most attainable through DS and CC (desensitize and counter condition).
:confused: All conditioning holds true for all animals, including humans.Quote:
The Premack Principal is a type/method of human conditioning.
Premack's Principle is a psychological principle. It was derived from a study of monkeys, not humans. In fact, a large majority of psychology's most major, fundamental principles have been derived from animal research, including Pavlov, Skinner, Harlow, etc. How can one claim that those principles are only "human conditioning" methods? If you've done "come-and-go" training with a dog, that's Premack's Principle right there.
I am still completely in the dark over the terminology you use.:confused:
Could you give me the name of some Dog Trainers that use the Premack
principals or how "come and go" training works? Any reference tools would
be a big help. Thanks.
Come and go training: Dog is interested in something else. Say "Come". As soon as dog flicks even an ear towards you, reward. Release the dog to sniff or be interested in whatever it's interested in. Say "Come". Dog turns towards you, reward. Release dog to do whatever it wants again. Say "Come". Dog turns to you, reward. Release dog. Over time, the value of staying by you and coming is exponentially greater than the value of distractions. Ergo, the "come" is strengthened. The dog *chooses* to stay by you, regardless of the distractions. Premack's principle at its best.
Virtually all handlers in competitive dog sports use this type of come and go training to strengthen the "come". Virtually all recall classes involve this game. This "come and go" training is also rapidly becoming a pivotal aspect of puppy/foundation classes, too. One trainer, in particular, who uses this game with exceptional creativity is Leslie McDevitt of "Control Unleashed". I believe Susan Garrett uses this concept fairly regularly, too, but somebody has to check me on that.
I still think the idiot (CM) needs to learn more about immediate dog health before training any more dogs. He recommends strenuous exercise for any dog he sees not knowing whether this would be a good health move for that particular dog. Does he know that a young large breed dog should not be run to exhaustion (if he does he doesn't show it on tv). I still can't get over the episode where he ran that picky-eater newfoundland until the dog was about to collapse and then let it cool off in a pool of water and drink to its heart's content and then brought in a huge bowl of food. The first time I watched that episode I almsot fell over in my seat I was so tense and waiting for the dog to start vomitting or just fall over dead. Hell, my dogs don't get to run off-leash at their own pace even a half-hour after a meal. I've seen them throw up their food an hour after a meal once when I took them to the dog park and they ran too much. I certainly don't feed them directly after running around, and this dog CM was "training" was forced to run non-stop until it was near collapse.
I reckon CM is excellent, watch it every week. I use most of his techniques on my dogs. Works for me and mine.
The one episode I watched I was in complete shock and I never will watch it again. The episode I watched was with a pit bull, yes I will admit he was very out of control. He was dog aggresive (what I could remember and I am pretty sure he has shown aggresion with people.) But the way he acted with this dog sickend me in my stomach. In my mind negativly touching the dog and cornering the dog is one of the worst things you could do to a (fear aggreisve dog). Then he had his young son do the same thing, and I could not belive he would actually put his son in that situation. I don't care if the dog was the nicest dog in the world, you do not put your child in that situation.
Yes I will admit some dogs his methods will work, but with a lot of dogs, mine included, my dogs would lose all there confidence and would just crumble. My flat-coat when she was young, was VERY aggresive with men, but with the clicker and A LOT of praise, she now loves men and I am proud to call her a excellent therapy dog. I have a strong feeling what he would have done with Zoey and the thought scares me.
Everyone seems to have a strong opinion about the Dog Whisperer. I happen to be one who likes him and I actually read his book myself. He states repeatedly in his book that very few dogs are naturally dominant and those are the ones he ends up working with. Most dogs are perfectly happy being submissive and most of us are lucky to own that type of dog.
I recently used some of Caesar's techniques on an agressive dog in my neighborhood. The dog, a Shar Pei mix, was aggressing on an 8-year-old girl. I stood it down with dominant body language (I'm not a particularly large woman) and it backed down. I know I was lucky this worked, but I couldn't let the dog go after a child. Anyhow, I give Caesar and his techniques the credit for the good outcome of this incident. This dog was later put down by animal control because she attacked other people in the neighborhood.
I absolutely DO NOT believe in using shock collars or any other painful methods to train dogs, but I know for a fact that some stronger-willed dogs so need for their owners to show dominance and strength in dealing with them. For me, it's my little 14-pound terrier mix. She's a sweetie and very smart, but likes things her way. Sometimes she has to be corrected, especially when she growls or bears her teeth at a person.
I guess I just thing some people should have a more open mind.
When Cesar's methods "work", they do so because they are punishments and punishments suppress behaviors. Cesar seeks to mask the offending behavior; true animal behaviorists seek to eliminate the cause of the offending behavior. That pretty much sums up the argument.
There was an excellent summation of the difference between CM and +R people regarding teaching a dog to ignore an object.
Option 1: Give the dog's leash a snap or other aversive everytime it sniffs the inappropriate object.
Option 2: Teach the dog "leave it" using +R methods.
So what it really boils down to is...would you rather teach your dog by setting him up to fail or setting him up to succeed?
CM's techniques work for my dog. I stand behind him 100%. To each their own I suppose.
The ONLY method I use is to make sure you are always calm around your dog or when handling a behavior. When I had a food agressive Lhasa Apso that used to jump up on my bed, I would grab him by the collar and simply guide him off. When he was able to sit there for about a minute or two, I would positively reinforce his behavior.
One day, he jumped up on my bed again and I grabbed him by the collar and pulled him off. He bit me right in the hand and the leg. I was scared when I pulled him off because he was already growling and baring teeth. I realized that energy is key, but positive reinforcement is the best.
Same thing when I taught my Butterscotch to sit. Everytime she sat down I gave her a treat and said sit along with it. I also make her sit when shes going to get food or get a new toy. Now I don't even have to tell her to sit, and I owe it to positive reinforcement.
I agree with Giselle 100 %. No dog should be punished for something they know absolutely nothing about. Does a dog know chewing is bad ? Does a dog know that it shouldn't bite if scared? No. But if you slowly remove the fear or other powerful emotion slowly by introducing the item and rewarding any positive behavior, then the dog will learn to associate the item with a treat, or praise etc.
One episode that really pisses me off is when there was this pitty named Emily that was dog agressive and Cesar forced the dog to be submissive . He literally grabbed the dog by her neck, shoved her into the grass and had the dog panting and basically asphyxiated (SP?) the dog. I was horrified that the owners could just stand there and let Cesar choke their dog.
Please watch the last few minutes of this video and tell me that this dog is not fearful. And please tell me that it isn't cruel to hang a dog by a choker until they cannot breathe. Honestly.Quote:
Originally Posted by lizbud
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjLDQmgYd-s
Oh, it makes perfect sense now... FORCE the dog to ENJOY being in the house by strangling him into exhaustion. :rolleyes:
Oops... didn't mean to post on this one!!
It is not my intention to be rude or confrontational, just curious. Given the fact that the owner was an experience one who couldn't solve it, plus had tried two other trainers who also couldn't, may I ask please how you would have solved the problem?Quote:
Originally Posted by bckrazy
Quote:
Originally Posted by bckrazy
I actually remember seeing that particular episode on TV. This Jindo dog
was an exceptional case. I honestly would not have kept this dog myself.
The video did not show the entire session & if it did, it would explain how
and why this session fit into his over all method of dealing with THIS
particular dog.Do you know much about this breed? They are certainly
not the breed for everyone.
I remember this episode ALL the time. That dog amazes me. Jindo's are soooo stubborn and strong willed. Desperate times call for desperate measures. I definitely would not have kept the dog either. The owner was an experienced dog trainer himself!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by lizbud
No offense taken. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisH
I am definitely not a behaviorist, by ANY means... but for starters, "experience" does not always equate to well-informed. The owner described other methods that trainers had used on Jonbee, all of which were based around dominance theory, just like Cesar. He described how Jonbee had been alpha rolled before. I definitely feel that the owners' hearts are in the right place, but sadly, they fed into the out-dated, disproven methods that have been given the shiney, hip new name of "canine psychology". Emphasis on "psycho".
First of all, I would stop forcing the dog inside. They described the dog as one who loved affection when he was outside, and who was perfectly well adjusted outside, and who had been found living on the streets - the dog is clearly completely fearful and unsure about being inside of a house. Common sense suggests that hanging a dog on a choker and pinning him down until he pees all over himself and collapses is doing nothing to make being inside of a house a positive experience for that dog. Personally, I would start incredibly slow, leaving a door open for him to CHOOSE to explore inside, giving him tons of praise and rewards for going anywhere near the house and progressing very slowly. The key is conditioning the dog to make positive associations with the desired behavior/object - in this case, being in the house. House = food. House = praise. House = safe, calm, positive, happy. Maybe he would never feel completely comfortable in a house, being that I'm sure he had never seen the inside of one before he was rescued... but at least he wouldn't be forced, or hung, or pushed to the point of attacking. I would MUCH rather have a happy outside dog who spent short training periods in the house than one who was so afraid and traumatized by being in the house that they lashed out and/or shut down completely.
This is a really good link, that touches on Jonbee... actually, it's written by my Obedience trainer: http://4pawsu.com/cesarfans.htm
A very reasoned reply, thank you, thanks for the link too, very interesting.
I am not anti Cesar by any means but I have to say that I do prefer our own Victoria Stilwell and Jan Fennell's training methods to his, which appear to work just as well.