OPINION
all the trainee needs do is walk , or run away , ( from hand ’ s-reach and earshot ). Even with shock collars that extend the reach of pain , and even with a well-trained thumb , aversive stimuli always fail the fourth and sixth criteria for aversive stimuli to effective act as punishment . Consistently well-timed shock might inhibit targeted behavior but do nothing to get the dog back on track , i . e ., teach dogs what we would like them to do . This of course is where verbal instruction excels .
I developed the dreaded ‘ quadrant ’ simply as a memory aid for trainers to understand and remember the ridiculously complicated ( and scientifically incorrect ) Skinnerian positive / negative terminology . ( Of course , it should have been reinforcement / inhibition ; one punishes a dog to inhibit their behavior .) ‘ Learning theory ’ has been accepted as gospel , questioned by no one . We must re-evaluate every aspect . Learning theory is exactly that , theory , well , more accurately , learning hypotheses . The big question is how applicable , how relevant , and how effective is ‘ the study of food / shock-trained caged rats ’ to the training / education of dogs , cats , horses , and people who are not held captive . A : Not very .
Researching caged animals also severely constrained the creative powers of researchers from researching easier , quicker , more effective , human-friendly , animal reward-training techniques , such as lure / reward training .
As dire as things are in the dog training world , we can change things very quickly . I think reward-training is at a critical ( do or die ) juncture . I so desperately want to ensure that the APDT , the CCPDT , and the Foundation , ( all my ‘ children ’) remain at the head of the pack to decide the future of the dog training profession worldwide . As such , have listed 10 suggestions and provided a rationale for each .
1 . Create an Advisory Board of past Board members and stellar dog trainers — a considerable knowledge base of : What ’ s been tried already ; What worked ; What didn ’ t ; and What to do now ? For personnel , off the top of my head I would propose starting with : Sue Pearson , Alan Baumann , Mel Bussey , Michelle Douglas , and Megan Stanley . Some of these people lived and psychologically died for the APDT . For amazing practical dog trainers , no one can compete with Julie Case , and then I would suggest Amanda Gagnon and Gina Esoldi .
2 . For the CCPDT to establish a CCPDT-SA — a certified Skills Assessment by reviewing an unedited video of what can be taught in just one hour . A simple TEST-TRAIN-TEST format to quantify the increase in Response-Reliability Percentages and Response : Reward Ratios . The test may comprise of anything , but
I would suggest : 3 repetitions of the basic position-change test sequence ( C-S-D-S-St-D-St ) using verbal cues only ; longest Sit- , Down- , and Stand-Stay ( to ‘ break ’, or to successful criterion and ‘ release ’); and speed of 10 repetitive , off-leash , one-step Come-
Sits and Heel Sits — just very basic stuff . The choice of dog ( s ) is irrelevant , since each dog is used as its own control — puppy / adult , little / large , attentive / inattentive , trained / untrained , or calm / moonlaunched . ( No need for matched-pairs of subjects ). Obviously , the less attentive and trained the subject , the greater room for potential improvement . What is important is objectively quantifying the degree of behavior-change effected by training in a set time-period .
3 . Trainers Researching Dog Training : 1 . To set benchmarks using their own training techniques for the above Test , ( for example ), so we all know who to read , or listen to and then
2 . To compare the effectiveness and speed ( time and trials to criterion ) of different reward-training techniques . Why Trainers ? Because in other studies , for example comparing behavioral pharmacology to training , who knows what the ‘ trainers ’ did . In fact , I have never identified a single trainer in one study that comes to mind . Some 15-20 years ago , I created a one-day Science Track at the APDT Annual Conference to illustrate some simple experimental designs . Half a dozen or so speakers presented original research on dog training . I presented the SIRIUS ® Study — a simple test that we still use today ( very similar to the one described above ) to objectively evaluate progress in puppy classes . Drs . Suzanne Hetts and Dan Estep presented an objective study on a single dog . Strangely , the Science track met with some passive resistance from the paid conference organizers . We got a room that only seated 100 people , ( the room overflowed and they had to put loudspeakers at both ends of the hallway ). The following year , it was discontinued . Dog training cannot become science-based until it is based on the science of dog-training , ( and not caged rats ‘ trained ’ by computers ). I have already formed an informal group of trainers to conduct studies .
4 . The APDT Foundation Awarding Monetary Prizes to Trainers for Completed Research , rather than grants to researchers for proposals to conduct future research . We want to teach trainers how to train like researchers , and objectively quantify everything . In addition to raising money , the whole point of the Foundation was to teach trainers to develop the mindset of quantifying the effectiveness and speed of behavior-change , i . e ., training .
5 . Winning Research Studies Published in an online APDT Journal of Dog Training to teach trainers how to interpret the significance of research studies .
16 Building Better Trainers Through Education