These Aren't The Droids You're Looking For

QUESTION: How many Zen Masters does it take to screw in a light bulb?
ANSWER: There is no light bulb.

This is the joke that comes up so frequently in my lessons. It's probably a mistake to include it in this post, it will never have that chin rubbing "hmmmm..." quality again (assuming you've read this of course) This joke helps set the stage for what I'm ultimately, really asking my dog owners to do and that's to think differently about the problems they're having with their dogs. I'm also trying to establish a dynamic where you the dog owner are expecting your dog to think and problem solve, to understand why their behavior results in one consequence versus another. One is compelling, rewarding, the other is not. 

I'm working with a couple with two beautiful little dogs. Levi, a miniature dachshund and Stanley, a beagle/dachshund mix. They are also expecting a baby and have concerns about how their dogs will adjust to the addition of the new family member. Levi doesn't like when John touches Felicia's belly to feel the baby kicking. Perhaps he views it as an aggressive overture, a preamble to conflict of some sort. He jumps, barks and nips at John's hand. Our goal was for Levi to reevaluate what this gesture meant to him. We wanted Levi to tell us that he wanted John to feel the baby kicking because ultimately, Levi's objections to this gesture could be symptomatic of broader misinterpretations which in turn can have a negative, even devastating impact on the human/animal bond. Conversely, it can lead to outright denial, which can lead to escalating aggression. There are ways to work through these problems with our dogs that often deepen the bond we have with them. Here's how we approached Levi's "What are you doing to Mom?" problem.

Stanley & Levi practice stay after hearing the doorbell.

The first step was to teach Levi and Stanley how great being on the floor is. This is not a semantic argument, this is Real Estate 101. Your dogs want the couch, they want the bed. but these coveted locals are off limits when there's a baby in the house, so our job is to convince them that these spots are not prime real estate as they believe, the floor is, their beds on the floor are. Resentment can fester into dangerous behaviors so removing conflict from the proceedings is a high priority, as it happens, it's also considerably more fun. I have another favorite way to frame this arguement, "These aren't the droids you're looking for." instantly relevant to fans of Star Wars Episode IV, Obi Wan doesn't massacre the inquisitive storm troopers, he changes the nature of the encounter in a way that is devoid of conflict. "I want to be up there on the couch!" , "Nah, you don't want the couch, what you want is the floor. The floor is awesome." "You're right, the floor is awesome, I love this floor. This is the best floor in the history of floors. Thanks for showing me." This may seem overly simplistic but that's it in a nutshell. The details of getting there with your dog may differ depending on their attachment to elevated perches and what they're compelled by but it's still about rewarding the floor while managing the couch and your bed. The elevated places are never bad which means they're not punished for being there, merely redirected to the floor where they're once again met with praise. Using things like Kong Wobblers or my personal favorite the IQ Ball is another way to use the food they'd otherwise be eating from their bowls (boring) into a game that unfolds on the floor (fun) adding further value to the lower elevations of your dog's living space. "But aren't some dogs fine on furniture? My dog's never acted aggressively on furniture" There's no question that some dogs are sweet as pumpkin pie in these situations, still, safety first. There's no down side to this exercise, quite the contrary. The dog owners I've worked with report that their dogs thrive in this modified dynamic because it's fun and they're getting more attention then they ever did before.  

Now that the two pups are very keen on being on the floor, we take to the couch where John, equipped with treats, presents Levi with an opportunity. Levi can have the treat, but only after John rubs Felicia's belly. Is this getting weird? No? Good, let's move on then. A quick rub, feed, another rub, feed, repeat. Now, ask Levi to sit. When he sits, John rubs Felicia's belly and feeds Levi a treat. "Levi Sit", Levi sits, John rubs Felicia's belly, feeds Levi, repeat. Here's where something interesting happens. We stop everything. If Levi understands his role in the proceedings, that one thing (sitting) triggers another thing (belly rub) to happen and that it ends with him getting a treat then,...wait for it,....Yes! Exactly! Levi will get things going again by sitting. He knows John's going to rub Felicia's belly when he sits, but now that's less important than the reciprocal effect of getting a compelling treat and now Levi is sitting on the floor to prompt a belly rub and a treat. 

This sets the stage for the sorts of things that happen once the baby is born. Feeding, changing diapers, playing etc. They can be predictive of a compelling consequence. No conflict, no yelling, no whaling and gnashing of teeth. Understood in these proceedings is that while troublesome, neither dog has a serious history of aggressive behavior. This approach is reasonable only when there is no such history. 

 Consequence changes behavior (Thank you Dr. Dunbar) 

Closer to the Heart

 

Dr. Dunbar wins the attention of a very cute, very distracted puppy.

This weekend, K9 Connection in Warwick, RI hosted a two day workshop with Dr. Ian Dunbar. Over the years Dr. Dunbar has been an important influence on me. What got my attention first was the example he set. Trainers and behaviorists  can debate who they relate to most but there’s little debate over his relevance. If you do what I do for a living you know who Ian Dunbar is and yet despite having few peers, he is approachable, intellectually curious and disarmingly funny. He’s quick to turn the spotlight on the trainers and dogs in attendance. He’s slightly compulsive, not allowing the one brown chair amongst the other identical black chairs in a game of dog training/musical chairs. Dog slobber was a problem, yup, one of the very best vet/behaviorists in the world doesn’t do dog drool. Go figure. Above all though, Ian Dunbar is an extraordinary and energetic teacher who wears his love for what he does like a superhero's cape. This weekend I watched a master at work. Two days of one incredibly clever idea after another went by in a relative flash. So much information had been communicated, it felt like a great movie I’d watch over and over again, collecting new bits of nuanced goodness with each viewing. A day after it was over it started to register with me that there was a wonderful subtext that had unfolded right in front of me. Everyone there had gotten more than we'd expected. At 5:30PM on Sunday, as the workshop drew to an inspired close, there was one final message that summed the experience we’d all had in a very sweet way. I won’t spoil it by elaborating on it because it’s something you deserve to experience for yourself. If you have an opportunity to see Dr. Dunbar lecture or workshop do it, don’t think twice about it. Do it if you’re an accountant, systems analyst, roofer or mechanic and you’ve never had a dog before. I say this because the subtext of the workshop transcends the otherwise obvious attraction for people who work with dogs. It was about being kind to one another as well as to our dogs. It was about the importance of doing the right thing. It was science vs. nonsense. Amidst all the wonderfully clever games and insightful techniques, I found myself rooting as an observer for the dog owners in the ring. Clapping and cheering for people and dogs I’d never met until this past weekend. It wasn’t just me, everyone was in on it and it happened with the seemingly effortless guidance of the brilliant and self described shameless teacher. If playing the fool drove home the point that everything he was sharing with us were things we could do ourselves, he was not above it. “Yes, by all means photograph, video tape, post it on YouTube, I’d like to think I’ll still be around after I’m gone.” Think about that for a minute. 

It's satisfying to learn that someone you admire a great deal would approve of how you do things. I appreciate the value of clicker training but am not a clicker trainer. I prefer to use by voice for audible cues, a personal decision I've doubted from time to time. However I was also compelled to reevaluate a number of ideas I've both relied on and thrust upon my clients with a great deal of earnest over the years. They include:

Don't Repeat Yourself: Unless you want your dog to think the instruction for "sit" is "sit, sit, sit"

only say it once. "Absolutely ridiculous!" was Dr. Dunbar's response to that question asked by a fellow attendee.  I could have looked at this as simply a difference of opinion but as a hypothesis, Keir and I tested it with Miles Saturday night. It works. To this I say to every dog owner I've beat that drum relentlessly with, I apologize.

The Verbal Cue Follows the Instruction: Lure for sit then respond with "Good Sit". Wrong again! The connection is not clear as I had thought. As a form of praise it's fine but the connection between the word and the lure (hand signal) is cloudy or non-existent. Again, Keir and I worked on this with Miles giving only hand signals first followed by only verbal commands, measuring response ratios. They were all over the place and changed as the venue changed. Lots of practice and proofing to be done there.

Always Use Food Rewards: This applies to other forms of reward (toys) that may not be on your person when a response is required. My argument stemmed from the use of choke, pinch and electronic collars. Response ratios can be maintained (reliable) so long as they're around, therefore treat rewards should always be around. Much to my shame and humiliation, wrong again. While for dog owners who are hyper-vigilant about having treat bags within arm's reach, get reliable responses from their dogs, there are situations that will trump the most compelling treats you can imagine. Higher value treats for more challenging environments, done that lots of times and while I'm not ready to toss out everything I've read, seen and done related to counter conditioning for proximity with primary and secondary reinforcers,  I did witness a game of follow the leader with roughly 30 dog/handler pairs. No treats used and lots juicy, behavioral goodness on display. The prolific use of treats are under review.

In this exercise, participants are asked to lie down next to their dogs the way their dogs are lying down.

I've written before that training is a science and as such is evolving. Remember Bertrand Russell, "Science does not aim at establishing immutable truths and eternal dogmas..."  That’s an extremely important idea and segues nicely into my favorite hypothetical question, "Are you interested in the truth?" assuming the answer is "Yes." it follows, "Then you won't be upset if you're wrong." Still, I am a little upset. There are lessons that would have yielded more specific, more desirable long term results. I suppose that will always be the case. Engineers design bridges knowing all too well that more sophisticated, safer and longer lasting bridges will be possible in the future. So too will the science of training continue to advance thanks to people like Dr. Dunbar. 

Leaving K9 Connection this past Sunday evening, I wanted to thank Dr. Dunbar, tell him how much he'd inspired me but he's British and I'm shy when it comes to things like this so I'll say it here. I started the weekend feeling drained and down, I left reinvigorated and grateful for the experience. Thank you Ian Dunbar and thank you Jamie Dunbar for the invitation. Thanks also to Teri and Cassandra at K9 Connection for hosting the workshop. Great, great, great.

Quite Logical

It's been my experience that dogs are logical creatures. But as another Vulcan proverb concedes, “Logic is only the beginning of wisdom” and that means that dogs make mistakes based on otherwise logical assumptions. Without question, the most common one is jumping on people. While not a mistake necessarily it is a misunderstanding between we humans and our dogs. Here's why. When dogs are puppies they're amongst the cutest things in all creation. Small, furry, helpless and given the opportunity, jumping all over us. Most puppies are encouraged to do this by us. It's harmless enthusiasm at this stage in their lives and very few dog owners discourage it, quite the contrary in fact. When I was a kid, Pepsi ran it's famously effective ad featuring grandparents unleashing a litter of Labrador Retriever puppies on their grandkids. It's the perfect illustration of the information that's changing hands quietly beneath the adorable bedlam. I'm not implying anything sinister is being sewn into this exchange, not even that it should not be allowed to happen. It's beautiful if you ask me, if only all of us were this unabashedly enthusiastic about one another. There is a very big “BUT” however. Little 2lb puppies are fuzzy and delightful but some of them grow exponentially in their first year becoming adult dogs 50-150lbs and more. Now jumping is a problem and we don't want them doing it anymore. Imagine those Lab pups jumping on those little kids one year later,...YIKES! The kids aren't laughing hysterically, they're traumatized. Things have changed for us but for our dogs, well, they haven't got the memo and if they're unaware of your sudden distaste for them leaping into your grill for sloppy, wet smooches, then it's not fair to assume they'll understand why you're sticking your knee in their chest when they do.

 

To assume dogs know they're doing something wrong is to both ignore the messages we've unconsciously etched in their brains when they were puppies and assume they'll grasp an abstract concept like right and wrong. What's this? No right and wrong? It's anarchy, ahhhhh!!!! Relax, it's not the apocalypse. Consider this. If I were to shake hands using my left hand you might think it's odd but you wouldn't think it's offensive. Yet in some parts of the world it's a cultural norm to wipe with the left hand only, so offering it is not advised unless you intend to offend, in other words it's “wrong”. It's right to tip your waiter but wrong to tip the person at the drive thru window (Thanks to Mr. Pink for that revelation.) Dogs are not confronted by a jury of their peers, they don't editorialize, they don't pontificate, postulate or castigate. In other words, the concept of right and wrong is a societal construct, to assume our dogs are privy to them is not,...logical. 

So now we agree it's not wrong so to speak but we still don't like it. It's potentially dangerous and we want to bring an end to it. What can we do? If our dogs learned that we liked them jumping on us they can learn that we like it even better when they greet in a sit. I had this discussion with a local family I'm working less than a week ago. They're expecting a baby in the fall and with their 18mos old Golden Murphy jumping impulsively on his mom Kelley, this problem took on a real sense of urgency. It was with great satisfaction that as I got off my soap box, Murphy's dad Ryan produced a photo of his daughter Tori welcoming Murphy, then about 12 weeks old, as he jumped on her. I knew at that moment they got what I'd been droning on about. As Murphy began showing a marked preference for greeting in a sit (praise and treats) Kelley was able to sit down with a baby doll standing in for the real thing as Murphy greeted politely in a sit. Just as he'd been encouraged to jump as a puppy, he'd been encouraged to sit as an adult dog, it was a Vulcan mind meld! Fascinating...

New Year's Resolution

We're an inpatient culture. At the very least we've developed into one. If you're old enough to remember Dana Carvey's grumpy old man eschewing the virtues of the old days, "Why, if we wanted to go to the bathroom we had to walk a mile in the rain and mud to a wooden shack in the middle of the night,...and we liked it that way." then you're old enough to know how much things have changed. Each generation views their respective realities through they're own period lens. The lens Du jour expects instant gratification, consider on demand movies (on your cell phone no less) books, music, etc. Home delivery is available, overnight if you like, for just about anything.

Inevitably this sensibility has spilled over into my world as well with the occasional dog owner assuming little more effort than that needed to call or e-mail should be required for a miraculous transformation in their dog. It comes across in different ways but I've gotten pretty good at ferreting these dog owners out and that's important because there's no better opportunity to set things straight than at that moment. Serious behavioral problems take time to address, in some cases so much time that it tests the will of even the most steadfast of the dog owners I work with. It's critical dog owners struggling with behavioral problems in their dogs understand this before they dig into the business at hand. For my part this idea cannot be understated.

As behaviorist Katenna Jones suggests in her book "Fetching the Perfect Dog Trainer" dog owners should expect to see a tangible response to training and conditioning very quickly. Some indication that the trainer's  hypothesis has merit and that the predicted outcome will come to fruition. The hard work comes in the day to day business of working and living with these dogs; fast food and  instant downloads this isn't, not by any stretch. It's also not for every dog owner and communicating that from the outset is critical. Julie K. Shaw, RVT, KPA-CTP, VTS (Behavior) at a recent seminar emphasized how important it is to assess the strength of the human animal bond. In other words, "How do you feel about your dog?" That's an enormously important question that plays very neatly into questions of expediency. If the bond you have with your dog is fractured, then the notion of pouring time, energy and financial resources (training, veterinary care etc. all have costs associated with them) into that relationship is pointless, it's also a disservice however expedient the draw of a new client may be. 

For dog owners who are informed and ready to put in the time, work begins. There are so many smart, creative thinkers working on ways to make training, counter conditioning, desensitizing and management more effective and often times more fun. It's an embarrassment of riches and yet it remains an imperfect science. A favorite Facebook page (Swipe to read) I Fucking Love Science posted a quote by 20th century philosopher Bertrand Russell, "Science does not aim to establish immutable truths and eternal dogmas; it's aim is to approach the truth by successive approximations, without claiming that at any stage final and complete accuracy has been achieved." For me that means I can sleep at night so long as I've been honest about my role in helping dog owners make their own successive approximations. It's also my responsibility to know when I've done as much as I can and whenever possible appreciate that the problems a dog owner is dealing with are outside my skill set. On that front I intend to do a better job. That's my New Year's Resolution. To listen more closely to what dog owners are telling me, to ask better questions and be a better part of that process of successive approximations. Oh, and eat more vegetables, can't forget that.

Deep Thoughts About Big Stuff

The last ten years have marked a period of dramatic change in the dog training world. Training models based on the work of author/trainer William Koehler and Nobel Prize winning animal psychologist Konrad Lorenz, began to appear flawed in some important ways. Emerging figures like Ian Dunbar, Jean Donaldson and Karen London were shedding new light on the subject and what's emerged is a far more nuanced, thoughtful approach that appeals to our better natures. In an ironic stroke, the last ten years has also given rise to the celebrity dog trainer. Sure, the 70's and 80's had Barbara Woodhouse and Matt Margolis but they've given way to Cesar Millan who's “Dog Whisperer” program on National Geographic is easily the most referenced source for dog training amongst my clients. The ubiquitous “psht!...psht!” while pointing is a dead giveaway. The irony lies with the approach. The pack leader or ethology based model espoused not just by Cesar Millan but by scores of dog trainers across the country, appeals to a lot of dog owners but relies on sensibilities more than it does on hard science. I want to be careful here; as my old friend James was fond of saying, “Don't let your mouth write a check your butt can't cash”. (always liked that one) I am not a scientist, let's get that out of the way, this is only my take on it; the science appears to support a shift in the language of dog training; specifically, treating dogs like members of our family, canine members but family members nevertheless. Now families have hierarchies; mom, dad the kids. So what's the difference, why the shift from expressions like “pack leader”, aren't they basically the same thing? I agree the difference appears to be subtle but in practice it's very important. Ultimately it defines the battle for the hearts and minds of dog owners across the country who are “psht'ing!” their dogs in earnest and trying to act like canine pack leaders as opposed to having a better grasp of how their dogs think and behave.

Regular watchers of Dog Whisperer have seen Cesar work through some remarkable transformations. Now thems' is fightin' words in some corners but I'm reminded of another favorite adage, “Get a room full of dog trainers together and the only thing two of them will agree on is that the third one doesn't know what they're talking about.” Whether you're a fan of Cesar or not, the guy's worked with dogs that were facing euthanasia and turned some of them around. His high profile renders him a target for sometimes harsh criticism by default. It also means you can't have a discussion about the current state of dog training without taking the massive impact of his show into consideration. It would be like talking about global economics without considering China's role in it, it's too big to ignore. Dr. Dunbar himself conceded as much by contributing to Millan's new book “Cesar's Rules” click HERE for more details on that. The AKC censured Milan in a high profile show of angst but as an organization the AKC is not devoid of controversy and no moral authority by my estimation. The last time I checked you can still walk into a pet store and purchase a dog with AKC papers, no questions asked. Some of these outlets try to blur the details of their puppies' origins with semantics, the sad fact is that they're likely coming from puppy mills, for me, a badge of shame for any pet store and at the very least a noteworthy chink in the AKC's armor.

So the current state of dog training is complicated. I'd go so far as to say it's a mess but that's to be expected when the basic culture of training is changing as dramatically as it has been. Discussions on the APDT LinkedIn member boards (say that ten times fast) have been lively and interesting, while others like Positive Dog Training Professionals, seem stifled by comparison; a shame since these forums have the potential to broaden the dialogue to such a great degree. The technology that makes possible an (in theory at least) open dialogue amongst trainers around the world has changed on a very basic level the way trainers debate the important issues that define how we go about doing what we do. Of course there's the untethered aspect of internet boards that allows for new words (for me anyway) e.g. "flaming" defined by urbandictionary.com as "An online argument that becomes nasty or derisive, where insulting a party to the discussion takes precedence over the objective merits of one side or another". Ultimately I think the ledger sheet reflects far more positive than negative comes from these forums and as younger generations turn more and more frequently to the internet for information it makes sense that this is where a lot of the cultural changes in this business will play out.

While not a practitioner of ethology based training, I am a byproduct of it and there's no question that practitioners of it have had success with it for decades. Let's face it, when something doesn't work it simply doesn't have a decades old shelf life, however it has been brought into the light of day, exposed to high definition and like the news anchor's complexion on your plasma TV, not as flawless as we once thought. Early on in my career I was impressed to read that the many of the brightest minds in our field, individuals who could be forgiven for having a healthy ego, were instead open minded to emerging techniques. It was an epiphany for me and I'm glad in hindsight it happened early on. I took from it a healthy disregard for zealotry. None of us should be so self absorbed as to think we've got this completely figured out; a lot of good headway's been made but like any other science this field is evolving.

This latest chapter in this evolution is “Positive Reinforcement Training”. Even casual observers of positive reinforcement based training will note there is no monolithic doctrine. There is a discourse amongst the very best in our field about what defines the “do no harm” approach and how it's realized in a practical setting. Frankly I'd be disappointed if there wasn't one. It was the stagnant state of affairs that could be blamed for a polarized mindset that exists on both sides of the training spectrum; the “Pinch Collar for Every Dog” and the “Throw Treats at Every Problem” schools respectively. In engineering, flexibility is fundamentally important for large structures to prevent catastrophic failure under extreme circumstances. I believe that same dynamic applies with respect to the training of dogs and I predict the science will bare this notion out in time. As a practical matter training is best governed by common sense and science. I think it's imperative that the training community embrace their responsibility to educate the dog owners they're working with. To make it about the dogs and their human counterparts. The most profound training moments in my career have happened quietly in people's homes where the likelihood of it sticking, of being meaningful is at it's highest. Our ability to access various training scenarios honestly evaluate our individual ability to address them and stay abreast of training theory are fundamental to that cause. Dog owners are not without some responsibility in this process. I'm vetted every time I conduct an evaluation. Dog owners should feel confident about their veterinarian, they're groomers and their trainers. Some red flags dog owners can keep an eye out for? At the risk of appearing self serving, reject training “guarantees” or boasts of “can train any dog”, that's the stuff of circus carnies not responsible, self aware dog trainers. I've got nothing against circus carnies but there's a lot more at stake when you're training a dog than a giant, stuffed ,blue panda. Dog's are not autonomous creatures; assuming you can predict their every whim is just foolish. Assuming you cannot makes for a more realistic approach, it might even give would-be dog owners a reason to reconsider whether they're cut out for dog ownership in the first place. Dr. Dunbar's Dog Star Daily website has a link to a compelling podcast on the subject HERE. Give it a listen, it's very sobering.

When I sat down to flesh this post out, I knew I was going to take a stab at a subject that was the proverbial hornet nest. I hoped my thoughts at this point would coalesce into something that would bring some clarity to the debate but I find myself conflicted about it myself at times. For example: A training scenario that has a dog rescued from a gas chamber in the deep south. It's found it's way with the help of a rescue group to a nice home here in Rhode Island. The dog owner is struggling with aggression issues that were not seen or perhaps revealed by the rescue group. After several weeks of counter conditioning, the dog is not responding to non-aversive techniques to curb it's aggression issues. I could be criticized as lacking the skill required to execute a non-aversive approach with that particular dog, fair enough. There are however scenarios where, without a change in a particular dog's behavior the long term prospects for that dog are in jeopardy. Those situations unfold from time to time, that's just the way it is. What if positive punishment/negative reinforcement, as a means to graduate to positive reinforcement/negative punishment yielded the desired effect? Are they mutually exclusive as some schools of thought allow for? For now, those scenarios are few and far between but when they do come about I've been inclined to do precisely that, so far with positive results. I'm not trying to break new ground, not even pontificate. These are tough situations that sometimes call for pragmatic solutions and while I don't count these amongst my most profound training moments I take some comfort in knowing that dog's on steadier ground than it was before the lesson. Are the hornets buzzing around my head yet?