Dog Whisperer this past Saturday

[lizbud]

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.

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?

[Giselle]

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).

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.

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?

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 :/

[lizbud]

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?


The Premack Principal is a type/method of human conditioning.

[Emma<3Beth]

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.

[Giselle]

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?

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.

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).

The Premack Principal is a type/method of human conditioning.

All conditioning holds true for all animals, including humans.
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.

[lizbud]

I am still completely in the dark over the terminology you use.

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.

[Giselle]

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.

[IRescue452]

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.