Training Theory | Bespoke Behaviours

How do dogs learn?

There are different types of canine learning. Learning abilities and tendencies can be influenced by genetics, by specific roles that we have selected those breeds to do over hundreds or thousands of years, by maternal care, by health issues, by learning through observation of others, by early days care...by all sorts of things.

For dog training purposes, whilst we need to be mindful of all of the above and to know the history of each dog, the types of learning that we are mainly concerned with are how dogs learn through making associations between a stimulus (trigger) and a consequence.

Classical conditioning is a physiological, unconscious response to an associated stimulus. The dog learns to associate an initial stimulus with a positive or negative related outcome delivered very quickly afterwards and will then begin to react instinctively to the presentation of the stimulus (eg a dog starting to salivate at the sounds of a bell ringing indicating their meal time).

Operant conditioning is a conscious behavioural response to an associated stimulus. This response is cultivated through exposure to the stimulus and the associated consequence for the dog of displaying that behaviour. If the behaviour gains a positive response for the dog, they are likely to repeat it (eg a dog learning what 'sit' means and then sitting down when presented with the cue, will gain a treat or fuss). If the behaviour of the dog to the stimulus gains a negative or neutral consequence for the dog, they are less likely to repeat it.

Both forms of learning can take much repetition to sink in or, in the case of something unbelievably exciting or scary, can take place in 'one time learning' (eg when your dog sees a fox and takes off after it, then gets incredibly excited at that location in the walk every time you pass it as a result of that one encounter, or, when your dog chews a wasp and is stung and learns through that one encounter that buzzing flying things are very bad news).

When considering training your dog, it is vital that you decide which kind of consequential approach you are looking for in a trainer. An aversive (dominance) trainer uses fear and discomfort punishment methods to suppress unwanted behaviours, a 'balanced' trainer uses a combination of reward and punishment in their approach and a positive trainer uses only kind and positive reward based training. Take a look below at the negative vs positive approaches and decide what is best for you and your pooch.

The problems with Dominance Theory

I am a force and fear free trainer. What this means is that I will not use ANY methods of training that cause the dog to feel fear, anxiety or physical discomfort. I will not tolerate the use of aversive equipment such as choke collars, prong collars, slip leads, anything used to startle the dog etc. My training does not include verbal admonishment and it does not include any physical reprimands including lead checks or physically manhandling the dog.

Why not?

Because these are the training methods which sprung up as a result of the 'pack theory' research by Mech in 1968. Research that became known as 'dominance theory' and which was subsequently debunked by Mech himself!

Briefly, this research studied an artificially created, captive wolf pack and observed their unnatural, stressed behaviours. The notions of 'alphas', hierarchies and dominance emerged from this research and took the dog training world by storm. The problems are that Mech himself later denounced his research as unrepresentative of behaviours of members of a natural wolf pack and also that wolves and dogs are now so far removed, that the behaviour of a wild wolf cannot possibly be comparable to that of a domesticated dog who we have deliberately bred to hone specific companionable and working qualities over thousands of years. They may have once descended from the same species but they have diversified immeasurably since. Its like comparing a gorilla to a brain surgeon - we came from the same place originally but do the two species still share the same behaviours? Should we be treated the same?

Put it this way - would you look at a wolf and a pug and think they were related? No, probably not. So why do we persist in attempting to bully our domesticated, loyal and sensitive companions into submission just because that's what a flawed research piece in the 1960s (which was then denounced by the researcher) said?

If you are a fan of Caesar Milan style dominance and cruelty methods then I am not the trainer for you. I am not interested in bullying a dog into fearful submission or in methods resulting in the dog shutting down (rather than positively changing) their behaviours.

Most aggression in dogs is a visual and verbal display of fear which is aiming to get the focus of their attention to retreat, to remove the perceived threat. By applying aversive methods creating pain and anxiety to an already fearful situation, we are just stacking fear on top of fear and making the whole incident a million times worse for the dog. They will learn that the thing that was already frightening is now doubly so. We are actually making the situation much worse and teaching the dog that we will also cause them fear and pain which destroys the trust between dog and owner.

A few myths

There are lots of dominance myths that persist in the dog training world which I find nonsensical, here are several:

The dog is trying to rule the house because they sit on the sofa. I believe that they sit on the sofa as it is more warm, cosy and comfortable than the floor, and / or because they want to be near us (as we have encouraged them to be for thousands of years).
A dog who leads the way through the door is trying to assert an alpha status in the family. I believe that, rather than attempting to assert world domination, the dog who rushes to go through a door before you is probably extremely excited as fabulous, exciting and interesting things happen on the other side of the door.
You should be able to remove a bowl full of food from your dog 'to show him who's boss'. I believe that if you do this, you should be prepared to be bitten. All that behaviour shows the dog is that it is unsafe for its food to be near you and it needs to protect it. I would probably try and bite someone too if they repeatedly gave me my dinner then took it away again!
The dog wants to be the alpha of our family. Whilst dogs who live together do establish a social hierarchy, that is between themselves, they do not think we look, smell or act like dogs. They don't try and establish themselves as rulers of the household. If you watch an animal hierarchy, the alpha will usually be a peacemaker rather than an antagoniser. Dogs share fluid hierarchies based on resource competition, their hierarchical order can change constantly - eg they may compete for a bed one day and a treat the next.
The dog is being deliberately controlling and naughty as it refuses to walk to heel. A) have you taught it to walk to heel? No? Then how should it know this is what you want; b) there are a million smells out there that need investigating - dogs can smell cancers in people before machines can detect it so they are just using that nose for what they were meant for, and many breeds are originally hunting breeds who we have designed to sniff stuff out for us - they are doing what we designed them to do!; c) are we on a dog walk or a root march? If its a dog walk - let it be about the dog! They are micromanaged by us in every other respect, every minute of the day - let them enjoy their walk and let them sniff their way around it! Imagine getting halfway through an email pinned to a lamppost and getting yanked away by someone before you have finished reading it....annoying much?!

So what does all this mean for training?

When you use an aversive or 'balanced' trainer, they will use methods that gain compliance from the dog by exerting an unpleasant force or consequence. All this does is shut down the dog's options of response in that moment. It does not remove the motivation for the dog to continue to do the behaviour. For example by placing an anti-bark collar on a dog, it will likely stop the dog from barking when it is wearing it (due to the unpleasant consequence of making a noise) but the dog still wants to bark and will still bark when the collar is removed. Would you not prefer a kind and gentle method that teaches the dog an alternative go-to behaviour which brings great rewards and gives them a better choice to make - hence creating a preferred and long lasting solution?

When you use a method which creates fear in a dog, you are creating a ticking timebomb. They aren't feeling better about the situation eg that scares them into shouting and lunging at other dogs, you are simply creating a further layer of fear that is worse than the original one (eg yanking on a lead causing pain when a dog reacts to another out of fear). This means that the dog still fears the presence of other dogs but it now learns that their presence also means it will be pulled in the neck and that it causes pain. So the other dog now represents both fear and pain. The reactive dog will now be doubly scared and that will bubble away inside the dog increasing the anxiety at every interaction until it explodes in an aggressive outburst. Personally, I struggle to understand how anyone would deliberately want to do this to their dog when they could instil instead a gentle, trusting and communicative bond to make the dog feel better about the situation.

Punishing training methods slow your dog's progress as they create fear, doubt and mistrust in their relationship with their handler, all they learn is that bad things happen consistently when in those tricky situations.

We all know how stress, anxiety, fear etc makes us feel. Now add a level of intentionally inflicted pain and extra fear on top of the original fear every time you are forced into encountering that stimulus by another person, with all options to express yourself or leave the situation removed or shut down. Try to imagine the level of chronic anxiety, stress, pain and terror that would cause and see how long it takes for you to turn into a nervous wreck when you encounter that stimulus every day. This is why I prefer kind, gentle, motivating, humane and long lasting fear-free methods of teaching. Oh and because its all based on denounced and completely irrelevant 'research' from nearly 60 years ago!

If you are interested in reading more, here are a couple of great resources:

Does Training Method Matter? You Bet Your Dog’s Life - Steve Dale

https://www.fearfreehappyhomes.com/training-method-matters/?fbclid=IwAR1-jKm9FciBD8nuxKb4Mka-tmBRebEuX7Uzo1W-gNTBcPD6Y4rRCCtZbps

Dominance in Dogs - Barry Eaton

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dominance-Dogs-Fiction-Barry-Eaton/dp/1929242808/ref=sr_1_1?qid=1688327004&refinements=p_27%3ABarry+Eaton&s=books&sr=1-1https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dominance-Dogs-Fiction-Barry-Eaton/dp/1929242808/ref=sr_1_1?qid=1688327004&refinements=p_27%3ABarry+Eaton&s=books&sr=1-1

The benefits of fear- and force-free training

What is fear and force free training?

This training style is a form of positive reinforcement. What that means is that the dog learns through being rewarded for the behaviours that it displays which we like. What gets rewarded will likely be repeated. Over and over. This means that your dog chooses to do that behaviour more often because it brings a pleasant reward or outcome.

Positive reinforcement training is delivered using gentle, humane and positive engaging methods. It has been scientifically proven over and over that dogs trained through positive reinforcement are more optimistic, less aggressive and anxious in the long term and have much stronger bonds with their caretakers than those trained using aversive methods.

Positive vs negative training

Through positive reinforcement, the dog is making positive behavioural choices which replace the previously unwanted behaviours. The dog is choosing to engage because we are creating a great experience, not one that is simply shutting down the dog's natural behaviours and responses through applying fear, anxiety or pain. All that the latter will achieve is forcing the dog into submission to avoid a fearful consequence and creates a state of internalised terror that will one day explode as they feel forced into fighting back.

Think of it in these terms; why do you go to work? For most people, it is because they are rewarded for those turn-up-and-do-your-required-duty behaviours with a payday. This is positive reinforcement, you work for the promise of a positive reward / outcome. Now withdraw that payday and replace it with being assaulted or mentally traumatised regularly by your boss. Now you are turning up and doing your duty purely out of attempting to avoid being beaten or put in mental anguish. There is nothing positive in it for you, you are just behaving in the way you are being told to, to avoid anything worse happening. In the longer term, you will likely become chronically stressed and anxious, physically unwell and will ultimately end up quitting and /or breaking down.

Which of those is the more engaging motivator? Which would you prefer to work for? Both ways achieves the behaviour getting done but I know which I would prefer to be subjected to....and it is no different for our dogs.

With positive reinforcement training, in time the dog learns to override the old behavioural responses as the new choices it makes bring a more positive value to its life. It also brings a lovely strong bond to working together with their owner / handler as great stuff happens when they engage with you. It makes learning and training FUN for the dog (and owner)!

The benefits of positive training methods

Positive reinforcement training promotes and benefits both the physiological and the mental health of the dog as we are looking to change that negative behaviour by building a positive alternative option that the dog is desiring to go to. Aversive and balanced training creates negative associations that the dog simply seeks to avoid by modifying behaviours in those situations that will attract punishment.

Positive reinforcement builds trust and motivates the dog to work with their owner to try new things through building an optimistic outlook. Punishment based training teaches the dog to avoid new situations / new learning / new training for fear of getting their reaction wrong and attracting a painful or unpleasant consequence. Many dogs who struggle with training or aggression already have a pessimistic outlook as they expect novelty (new experiences) to bring negative consequences, we don't want to use aversive methods that reinforce this pessimism. We want to make them feel better about their worries by associating those triggers with positive outcomes. Over time, this reworks the brain response to novelty from being something to be worried about to being something that is interesting and likely to have a good outcome for the dog.

Now, positive reinforcement training / fear- and force-free training often gets attacked by those who prefer aversive or 'balanced' training methods. They prefer the 'quick fix' that is apparently delivered by their methods - teaching the dogs to avoid certain behaviours through an associated application of fear and / or pain. We have already established that this is not a long term solution as it also creates anxiety, terror and distrust which will likely explode out at some point. This is also scientifically proven. What is interesting is that when you see an aversive trainer commenting on the methods of a positive reinforcement trainer, note their language and communication style. They are almost always very confrontational, personally abusive and aggressively judgemental. If that is how they communicate with fellow humans, imagine how they choose to communicate with animals - with your beloved pet.

I really don't care how you have attempted to train the dog in the past. By that, I mean that it is very important that we discuss previous training methods that you have tried as it may give indicators to the dog's current behaviours, however, I mean I am not going to judge you. We have all, with the best of intentions, made decisions in life which may have turned out not to be the best option. My motto is that 'we don't know what we don't know!' therefore, there is a minefield of information out there and it is very easy to be led down pathways that aren't ideal or turn out to be stuck in outdated training methods. What is important is that you now have a potentially different option of training, using a different method that absolutely cannot create any harm in your pooch and can only serve to make things better.

As a positive trainer, I do not look to judge, I only look to support and offer empathy to those on both ends of the lead. We will work together to reframe the situation for your dog or to open up new optimistic and exciting worlds to them in a way that teaches them that training and engaging is super rewarding and fun