This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Chaz Reinhold on 13 August 2011 - 01:08
by Ruger1 on 13 August 2011 - 01:08
Chaz is right, let him go, and Alphapup, you stay...: )
Sorry Chaz, I could not resist ...: )
I was just reading old PM's from when I first joined...So many nice folks and a lot do not post anymore...: (
by StephanieJ on 13 August 2011 - 15:08
| your question has two ways of being looked at |
sj That would be where the "yes" or "no" would be applicable.
ap
| ... if you are asking can one use both operant conditioning as well as e-collar , that is can one use more than one technique training |
sj Neither operant conditioning nor an e-collar are "techniques". OC is a form of teaching/learning. The e-collar is a tool (literally). Technique goes to the application of a methodology or a tool and would be demonstrated in such things as timing or ratio of punishment/reward. The water of training terminology is muddy enough-please do not pollute it further with comparisons of apples to oranges.
ap
| If one is interested , there are studies in literature that enable you to find out why i state what i do & why that is not a yes /no question . |
sj I am intrigued. Would you be so kind as to direct me to a source where I might read one of these studies in literature?
ap
| a current could be used as a reinforcer as opposed to an aversive stimulus |
sj Fascinating. Please give an example of the former, ie. how can a current be used as a
by Slamdunc on 14 August 2011 - 15:08
"you would discover how a current could be used as a reinforcer as opposed to an aversive stimulus. may appear confusing and not possible , but it is possible."
I agree. An ecollar can be used for various things. Such as increasing drive, getting a dog to focus during tracking for example or as a correction. It really depends on the dog, the conditioning with the collar, the handler and the level of stimulation applied and the experience of the person using it. E collars are not just for hammering dogs, or a last resort for lack of control or poor training by a lazy inexperienced trainer. I would suggest that anyone who thinks that an E collar is a tool of last resort or only used on aggressive dogs or dogs that won't "out" avoids using it altogether. I have found more ways to use low level stim positively than I ever have for the higher levels. I find the E collar to be more of a finesse tool. I hate seeing people who just push buttons hoping to get the right reaction or stop an unwanted behavior caused by their poor training or lack of control.
by ALPHAPUP on 14 August 2011 - 19:08
.[ again quite often i post not being comfrotable and i rushed my thought]. yes Steph , i failed to enunciate properly . i take your reply constructively . i should have written ' utilization of operant conditioning ' , as it is a form of learning / teaching opposed to Classical Pavlonian teaching / conditioning , in learning theories. Also : yes , ditto , the e-collar is a tool, as is a leash & collar. and as i wrote , one's mouth ! [ seriously , i have taught that to people] : the use of one's mouth is a great tool in working with the dogs.
Regarding operant conditioning and the e-collar ? [ i would have loved to know what you thought about that ]. So seeing i can't- for the readers, i want you to think this through . let me give input for newcomers . Operant conditioning is a form of motivational training , whereby you [ an operator] induce a behavior [shape it or a part of it ] ] and offer a reward for correct behavior [ or part of the behavior] . OR the animal [ now the operator] offers the behavior and you reward the animal l for the behavior . Operant/Instrumental Conditioning has two forms .
So ask . why would an animal desire an electric current ? why would it choose that as a reward ? [e currents can be at various intensities now , can't they .. from the mildesat of mild , like putting your finger on the TV , to an outright hell of a shock !!]. remember we are talkiong about motivational training. [ . chaz BTW this is why i don't usethe term for myself 'drive' Instead i state the exact motivation and thought within the dog to answer your question from before . but Many people use 'drive' therefore i at times i forgo my terminology dor their sakes.] So - why would an electric current be a motivator. ?
Ok - i often wrote : animals do things [ simple talk ] with purposeness . yes ? then ask yourself : to what purpose would an animal desire an e current or a shock ? again , sound absurd ? NO it ISN"T : so did anybody think of any answers yet ?? [ this is why i ask - to train well you must think dog ! ]
studies in the past have shown that a rat can be trained to give itself a SHOCK [ that's a behavior being offered ] in order to get a reward ! so ask .. why would it enage in that behavior ? COMMON SENSE [ although it was not event before the test] . the REWARD has to be more potent / satisfying to fulfill the need ,the motivation of the animal than the act of getting the shock !!
What can be more motivating and satisfying that a rat would shock itrself ? ........... the ANSWER : Coaciane , heroin , . And BTW cigarettes are more addicting than heroin !! rats would press a botton elliciting a large electric shock in order to ingratiate themselves with coaciane !! Not only that ... they would continue and continueand continue !! . The behavior of shocking itself was rewarded by getting the drug. Obviously , the reward , so much potent was worth it for the animal now . wasn't it?
everybody looks at an electric shock as an Aversive , but what if the current is so LOW [ ? impercievable even ] and Paired with another intensely strong positive reward , it could perhaps become a postive now , couldn't it . ?
by StephanieJ on 15 August 2011 - 01:08
| So ask . why would an animal desire an electric current ? |
While to some degree behavior is behavior, rats are not dogs, and the discussion of such just brings us further off topic. A canine example of your theory for you: the dog who has learned to blast through the invisible fence to gain its freedom (most often I have found that the original blast was from some sort of social or prey inducement but that the freedom then becomes reward in itself). Note the dog is not so likely to brave the shock to return to the confines of the invisible fence. So again it is not the shock the dog desires, but the reward that the shock brings.
To bring this back on topic-I am guessing that negative reinforcement comes into play in Mr. Balabanov's return of the dog to the track with current.
Which brings us to:
| Operant conditioning is a form of motivational training , whereby you [ an operator] induce a behavior [shape it or a part of it ] ] and offer a reward for correct behavior [ or part of the behavior] . |
| Regarding operant conditioning and the e-collar ? [ i would have loved to know what you thought about that ] |
by ALPHAPUP on 15 August 2011 - 02:08
steph . you are talking semantics now . the fact remains , the rat still offered a behavior . animals offer behaviors to obtain the reward . if you do not reward then it is easy for the behavior to extinguish . If the rat did not desire the current / to shock itself , conditioned or not .. it would not have undertaken that behavior of shocking itself . it doesn't matter if it was classically conditioned , . the fact remains , the rat shocks itself , no one else shocked the rat , it choose to do that to itself because it learned that it brought the desired reward - no matter what you call it . we can say is the glss half empty or half full . nonethe less it still remains and water & glass . the rat still offers a behavior to obtain something even if you nwish to say the reward promoted the act. that is like saying the dog didn't offer it's paw , it is the cookie that promoted the dog to do that. i think dogs are smart enogh to know that a behavior brings the reward . cocaine can be a very powerful reward when addicted. that is what the readers need to know . . besides , this is not a dissotation on animal learning theory or a dissotation on any learning theory . . the point is that even a current that most think is aversive can be desired under certain conditions . . i don't think the average person cares about all the terminology or that is more complicated. this is complicated enough especially for anybody that never heard about operant conditioning .[ don't forget there may be youngsters reading the posts too ] . that is my point . there are all levels of people reading the posts. many didn't even realize that a rat would shock itself to get cocaine.
RE Ivan . i have no idea how he tracks , what he teaches or does or does not. therefore i can't comment.
? So dogs . but this is what i can relate in verse: i have friends who have malinois so tough , so hard , so aggressive , the bite suit is 6 inches think and then some . they drool for a bite .biting machines . i can tell you that bite problems they tried to work on > Ha .. put an electric collar on that dog and it viewed that stimulation as a stimulus to keep biting ! these are some *** of a canine . some of these dogs , i bite my tongue to say this, they had two e collars on . one around the neck and another on the testicles . now truhtfully , i haven't made up my mind for sure yet , and it has been years since i saw that . But i think in my gut that first e collar actually stimulated the dog to bite even more intenslytherfore creating the need to utilizing a second. . i would had a feeling that dog just wanted a reason to bite . that 1st e collar, that current just gave him the reason to obtain his reard . a bite and a fight to the death . it had the klii instinct in it . . and at times i think it gave him the reason to not get off the bite . seemed the more stim ulation the stronger the fight , the morfe it enjoyed the opportunity tio KILL. you didn't want to mess with that dog- if you PO'd him watch out . .can't say for sure , so who knows !!
Re: rein forcements .. i know stephanie .. personally i am very well versed . i understnad bidges etc etc. and reinfortcers . check out my other posts. and i relate differently than you - that's ok . //BTW , punishment is Always Negative . punismeant kindly . punishment is a negative-negative reinforcer , also as i have written . there exists , positive-negative reinforcers , positive - positive reinforcers , negative-positive reinforcers. . in any event .. i try to keep things simple steph .. ther are many levels of experience and levels of know
by ALPHAPUP on 15 August 2011 - 02:08
the point is that with certain tools . techniques , learning modalities, there is an up side and a down side . if you are going to train you best go out and do [ with people that know] to learn . don't rely on a DVD . it may help novices or others , but as this thread goes , no one can learn all they need by a DVD .
by wrestleman on 15 August 2011 - 17:08
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top
