Saw you post on TikTok- I love your take on this. I'm a "amateur" trainer (meaning I only train my own dogs as hobby). What are your thoughts on ecollar use in conjunction with positive reinforcement? For example: I use an ecollar but not as a punishment. Sometimes, it is negative reinforcement, in case of emergency, but it is mostly as positive reinforcement similar to a clicker (I'd say 99% of the time positive). I use a dogtra, so the stim is at a very low level, and I've associated the feeling of the stim to a positive reward. I like to think of it as a dog hearing the clicker vs feeling the stim. Neither are positive or negative feelings or sounds at the beginning and we attached a positive association to it over time. I've had great success with this and my GSP. She isn't fearful or stressed with the collar or stim feeling, but knows I'm giving a command that follows with a reward when she feels it. I've never had her shut down, tuck tail, show signs of stress, etc in association with the ecollar. This will allow me to recall her when she's out of hearing range, or when/if she goes deaf I can still recall her reliabily. I think the way most people use ecollars is appalling, but was curious on your thoughts of this application? Thanks!
Hi! I’m also a trainer for a local rescue and I’ve heard this line of thinking with e collars a lot. My concern with it is that comparing it to a clicker ignores the fact that most dogs will consider the vibration or shock to be much more intrusive than a simple click - making it more aversive than a clicker. So even if we pair the vibration/shock/sound with a positive reinforcer (eg a cookie), it is acting as a positive punisher. If we think about why it interrupts a “bad” behavior, often times this is because the sensation from the collar is aversive/painful/intrusive enough to “stop” them from engaging in the behavior and recall to you. These are just my thoughts, and I’m sure the poster knows much much more!
Great question! I am a crossover trainer, meaning when I first started training I used methods and tools that relied on positive punishment but I no longer do. As such, I no longer use tools like e-collars, prongs, slip leads, etc. And there are a lot of reasons why. Firstly, there has been some research done on the combined use of positive punishment and positive reinforcement and the data shows that dogs in this group also showed higher rates of stress related behaviors and also had higher cortisol levels in conjunction with training. You can read one such study here: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7743949/ My view is that we, as humans, are the ones that choose to share our lives with a dog. We are the ones who go seek out a breeder and purchase a puppy, send in an application to adopt a dog from a rescue, or apply to be foster homes. We decide what the dog eats, when they go to the bathroom, how much exercise they get, what forms of enrichment they have access to, what environments they go to, etc etc. When it has been documented that training with positive punishment, even combined with positive reinforcement, can produce negative outcomes that are not seen to the same degree in groups of dogs trained without the use of positive punishment, then I feel it is in the dog's best interest to train them in a way that is the kindest to them... because they did not choose to come into our lives. We chose them. The other reasons I don't use positive punishment in training, specifically tools designed to work through the aversion of punishment (the dog doesn't pull on the leash in order to avoid the unpleasant sensation of a prong collar or a slip lead tightening around their neck or a correction from an e-collar; the dog recalls to its handler in order to avoid continuing to experience a stim from an e-collar, etc etc) is because, quite simply, it's not necessary! There are entire countries where prongs and/or e-collars are illegal. Those countries still have dogs with behavioral concerns, they have off leash dogs, they still have working dogs, they still have dogs that participate in a variety of sports at a high level... and they get on just fine without those tools. That only further illustrates that they are not necessary. So if I can train a dog without them, why would I choose to use them? The issue that I take with the proposal that a stim from an e-collar or correction from a slip lead is just a cue that the dog responds to the same as they would an audible cue or a hand signal is that that statement is a false equivalency. We don't know that the dog feels pain or discomfort from the e-collar, for example, unless they are obviously showing signs of pain. But that doesn't mean that it isn't painful or uncomfortable for them. Certain dog breeds have been genetically selected to be able to do their jobs even if they're experiencing pain or discomfort, but that doesn't mean the feeling isn't there. So again, if the premise is that the stim from the e-collar is just another cue, why choose to use a cue that could also potentially be physically uncomfortable for the dog? Why choose a tool that has been proven to have negative consequences for that animal? In this video I talk about how training doesn't happen in a vacuum, and that's true! We don't know for sure that the dog might not start associating the stim from the e-collar with the presence of other dogs and therefore develop some unpleasant feelings about other dogs that they then might try to communicate in a way we don't like... so why risk that? Why not just teach a cue that doesn't have those risks? For recalling at a distance, I've had great success with whistles. But there are also management strategies that can be put in place too to make using such tools unnecessary that do not negatively impact the quality of life for the dog or their human family. I know that in the last 6-7 years I have not touched a prong collar, or an e-collar, or used a slip lead as a corrective tool (I have used them on my own dogs but solely for sports where they have to run naked to get them in and out of the ring quickly, and I reinforce them for walking nicely so they don't choke themselves), or instructed any of my clients to make use of positive punishment... and we have still been able to achieve results. And quickly! The myth that positive reinforcement takes longer is just simply not true. If you're doing it right, behavior change happens fast! So again, if we can achieve the same behavioral outcomes without using tools or methods that can cause the dog to feel pain, discomfort, or fear... then why are we using them?
Also! Just chiming in that it sounds like we're confusing markers and cues a little bit. The clicker should not be used as a cue for the dog to do anything, it is a marker to let the dog know that reinforcement is coming. It doesn't ask for a specific behavior. Just pointing that out as I feel it further illustrates my point that equating the stim from an e-collar with a clicker is not accurate, even if the stim from the e-collar is paired with a treat. The stim from the e-collar, in your example, is being used as a cue for the dog to do something. Which is not what a clicker is used for (or at least, it SHOULDN'T be used for that... I guess theoretically you could train the sound of the clicker as a cue for the dog to do a behavior, but then you couldn't also use it as a marker system in training anything else because that would just be confusing to the dog).
@PuptoPerfection Is it still considered punishment if it's not used as a consequence? Totally agree, I use it as a cue, not as a marker. However, I've never used it as a consequence. It's used during the command, not before or after, as a way to associate a "feeling" to a command. This allows me to communicate a recall when she's off leash and out of range of sound either due to wind, etc. (We only go off leash in remote areas, responsibly. I'm a helicopter mom 😅) I see it like a tap on the shoulder, letting her know mom's talking. I should mention - I use it at a very low stim and have never used a shock collar. I set it to the lowest point she would feel it, but notbing further. It has 127 levels, so I'm able to fine-tune the feeling to exactly my needs. The ecollars with only 10 setting are fucked up in my opinion. A 1 setting on a garmin is equivalent to a 11 on mine - i usually train at a 5. If she fails a command, we'd take a step back and go back to fundamentals using positive reinforcement. I don't punish her with the stim because if she doesn't listen, it's because i set her up for failure. We'd take a step back a stage if necessary. All commands are taught with purely positive reinforcement first. The ecollar was only introduced as a safe guard to her already reliable recall. In case of emergency type of thing. I've never had to use it in such a way, but i know it's there if i need it (helicopter mom). My philosophy for dog training is, "I want my dog to be excited to do something right, not scared to do something wrong." So far, that mentality still applies to this application of the ecollar, no? This is why I see this application specifically as negative reinforcement. Does that make sense, or am I still off base? I do agree with you on how most people use ecollars. In-fact, I think they should be regulated at a minimum. Compulsion training is outdated and better methods have certainly arisen.
@Bellesweetie I use an ecollar, not a shock collar. It does have a vibrate setting, but it's definitely more uncomfortable than the stim, so i dont use it. I've never used the collar as a consequence. It's used during the command, not before or after, as a way to associate a "feeling" to a command. The poster correctly pointed out i use it as a cue, not a marker, like a clicker. However, this cue allows me to communicate a recall when she's off leash and out of range of sound either due to wind, etc. (We only go off leash in remote areas, responsibly. I'm a helicopter mom 😅) I see it like a tap on the shoulder, letting her know mom's talking. I should mention - I use it at a very low stim and have never used a shock collar. I set it to the lowest point she would feel it, but nothing further. It has 127 levels, so I'm able to fine-tune the feeling to exactly my needs. The ecollars with only 10 setting are fucked up in my opinion. A 1 setting on a garmin is equivalent to a 11 on mine - i usually train at a 5. Humans wouldn't feel it at all until an 18. If she fails a command, we'd take a step back and go back to fundamentals using positive reinforcement. I don't punish her with the stim because if she doesn't listen, it's because i set her up for failure. We'd take a step back a stage if necessary. All commands are taught with purely positive reinforcement first. The ecollar was only introduced as a safe guard to her already reliable recall. In case of emergency type of thing. I've never had to use it in such a way, but i know it's there if i need it (helicopter mom). My philosophy for dog training is, "I want my dog to be excited to do something right, not scared to do something wrong." So far, that mentality still applies to this application of the ecollar, no? This is why I see this application specifically as negative reinforcement. Does that make sense, or am I still off base? I do agree with you on how most people use ecollars. In-fact, I think they should be regulated at a minimum. Compulsion training is outdated and better methods have certainly arisen. Most people use it as a "you didn't do what I said so I'm going to zap you" and that's super fucked. I've built a trusting, loving relationship of mutual respect with my dog. The "be the alpha" type shit is outdated and wrong. Thanks for your insight! I love the discussion and appreciate others input :)
![Megan Thee Stallion - Mamushi (Remix) [feat. TWICE] [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5c0_u9PsrsQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![Megan Thee Stallion - Mamushi (Remix) [feat. TWICE] [Official Audio]](/img/tr.png)
Saw you post on TikTok- I love your take on this. I'm a "amateur" trainer (meaning I only train my own dogs as hobby). What are your thoughts on ecollar use in conjunction with positive reinforcement? For example: I use an ecollar but not as a punishment. Sometimes, it is negative reinforcement, in case of emergency, but it is mostly as positive reinforcement similar to a clicker (I'd say 99% of the time positive). I use a dogtra, so the stim is at a very low level, and I've associated the feeling of the stim to a positive reward. I like to think of it as a dog hearing the clicker vs feeling the stim. Neither are positive or negative feelings or sounds at the beginning and we attached a positive association to it over time. I've had great success with this and my GSP. She isn't fearful or stressed with the collar or stim feeling, but knows I'm giving a command that follows with a reward when she feels it. I've never had her shut down, tuck tail, show signs of stress, etc in association with the ecollar. This will allow me to recall her when she's out of hearing range, or when/if she goes deaf I can still recall her reliabily. I think the way most people use ecollars is appalling, but was curious on your thoughts of this application? Thanks!
Hi! I’m also a trainer for a local rescue and I’ve heard this line of thinking with e collars a lot. My concern with it is that comparing it to a clicker ignores the fact that most dogs will consider the vibration or shock to be much more intrusive than a simple click - making it more aversive than a clicker. So even if we pair the vibration/shock/sound with a positive reinforcer (eg a cookie), it is acting as a positive punisher. If we think about why it interrupts a “bad” behavior, often times this is because the sensation from the collar is aversive/painful/intrusive enough to “stop” them from engaging in the behavior and recall to you. These are just my thoughts, and I’m sure the poster knows much much more!
Great question! I am a crossover trainer, meaning when I first started training I used methods and tools that relied on positive punishment but I no longer do. As such, I no longer use tools like e-collars, prongs, slip leads, etc. And there are a lot of reasons why.
Firstly, there has been some research done on the combined use of positive punishment and positive reinforcement and the data shows that dogs in this group also showed higher rates of stress related behaviors and also had higher cortisol levels in conjunction with training. You can read one such study here: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7743949/
My view is that we, as humans, are the ones that choose to share our lives with a dog. We are the ones who go seek out a breeder and purchase a puppy, send in an application to adopt a dog from a rescue, or apply to be foster homes. We decide what the dog eats, when they go to the bathroom, how much exercise they get, what forms of enrichment they have access to, what environments they go to, etc etc. When it has been documented that training with positive punishment, even combined with positive reinforcement, can produce negative outcomes that are not seen to the same degree in groups of dogs trained without the use of positive punishment, then I feel it is in the dog's best interest to train them in a way that is the kindest to them... because they did not choose to come into our lives. We chose them.
The other reasons I don't use positive punishment in training, specifically tools designed to work through the aversion of punishment (the dog doesn't pull on the leash in order to avoid the unpleasant sensation of a prong collar or a slip lead tightening around their neck or a correction from an e-collar; the dog recalls to its handler in order to avoid continuing to experience a stim from an e-collar, etc etc) is because, quite simply, it's not necessary! There are entire countries where prongs and/or e-collars are illegal. Those countries still have dogs with behavioral concerns, they have off leash dogs, they still have working dogs, they still have dogs that participate in a variety of sports at a high level... and they get on just fine without those tools. That only further illustrates that they are not necessary. So if I can train a dog without them, why would I choose to use them?
The issue that I take with the proposal that a stim from an e-collar or correction from a slip lead is just a cue that the dog responds to the same as they would an audible cue or a hand signal is that that statement is a false equivalency. We don't know that the dog feels pain or discomfort from the e-collar, for example, unless they are obviously showing signs of pain. But that doesn't mean that it isn't painful or uncomfortable for them. Certain dog breeds have been genetically selected to be able to do their jobs even if they're experiencing pain or discomfort, but that doesn't mean the feeling isn't there. So again, if the premise is that the stim from the e-collar is just another cue, why choose to use a cue that could also potentially be physically uncomfortable for the dog? Why choose a tool that has been proven to have negative consequences for that animal? In this video I talk about how training doesn't happen in a vacuum, and that's true! We don't know for sure that the dog might not start associating the stim from the e-collar with the presence of other dogs and therefore develop some unpleasant feelings about other dogs that they then might try to communicate in a way we don't like... so why risk that? Why not just teach a cue that doesn't have those risks? For recalling at a distance, I've had great success with whistles. But there are also management strategies that can be put in place too to make using such tools unnecessary that do not negatively impact the quality of life for the dog or their human family.
I know that in the last 6-7 years I have not touched a prong collar, or an e-collar, or used a slip lead as a corrective tool (I have used them on my own dogs but solely for sports where they have to run naked to get them in and out of the ring quickly, and I reinforce them for walking nicely so they don't choke themselves), or instructed any of my clients to make use of positive punishment... and we have still been able to achieve results. And quickly! The myth that positive reinforcement takes longer is just simply not true. If you're doing it right, behavior change happens fast!
So again, if we can achieve the same behavioral outcomes without using tools or methods that can cause the dog to feel pain, discomfort, or fear... then why are we using them?
Also! Just chiming in that it sounds like we're confusing markers and cues a little bit. The clicker should not be used as a cue for the dog to do anything, it is a marker to let the dog know that reinforcement is coming. It doesn't ask for a specific behavior. Just pointing that out as I feel it further illustrates my point that equating the stim from an e-collar with a clicker is not accurate, even if the stim from the e-collar is paired with a treat. The stim from the e-collar, in your example, is being used as a cue for the dog to do something. Which is not what a clicker is used for (or at least, it SHOULDN'T be used for that... I guess theoretically you could train the sound of the clicker as a cue for the dog to do a behavior, but then you couldn't also use it as a marker system in training anything else because that would just be confusing to the dog).
@PuptoPerfection Is it still considered punishment if it's not used as a consequence? Totally agree, I use it as a cue, not as a marker. However, I've never used it as a consequence. It's used during the command, not before or after, as a way to associate a "feeling" to a command. This allows me to communicate a recall when she's off leash and out of range of sound either due to wind, etc. (We only go off leash in remote areas, responsibly. I'm a helicopter mom 😅) I see it like a tap on the shoulder, letting her know mom's talking. I should mention - I use it at a very low stim and have never used a shock collar. I set it to the lowest point she would feel it, but notbing further. It has 127 levels, so I'm able to fine-tune the feeling to exactly my needs. The ecollars with only 10 setting are fucked up in my opinion. A 1 setting on a garmin is equivalent to a 11 on mine - i usually train at a 5. If she fails a command, we'd take a step back and go back to fundamentals using positive reinforcement. I don't punish her with the stim because if she doesn't listen, it's because i set her up for failure. We'd take a step back a stage if necessary. All commands are taught with purely positive reinforcement first. The ecollar was only introduced as a safe guard to her already reliable recall. In case of emergency type of thing. I've never had to use it in such a way, but i know it's there if i need it (helicopter mom). My philosophy for dog training is, "I want my dog to be excited to do something right, not scared to do something wrong." So far, that mentality still applies to this application of the ecollar, no? This is why I see this application specifically as negative reinforcement. Does that make sense, or am I still off base?
I do agree with you on how most people use ecollars. In-fact, I think they should be regulated at a minimum. Compulsion training is outdated and better methods have certainly arisen.
@Bellesweetie I use an ecollar, not a shock collar. It does have a vibrate setting, but it's definitely more uncomfortable than the stim, so i dont use it. I've never used the collar as a consequence. It's used during the command, not before or after, as a way to associate a "feeling" to a command. The poster correctly pointed out i use it as a cue, not a marker, like a clicker. However, this cue allows me to communicate a recall when she's off leash and out of range of sound either due to wind, etc. (We only go off leash in remote areas, responsibly. I'm a helicopter mom 😅) I see it like a tap on the shoulder, letting her know mom's talking. I should mention - I use it at a very low stim and have never used a shock collar. I set it to the lowest point she would feel it, but nothing further. It has 127 levels, so I'm able to fine-tune the feeling to exactly my needs. The ecollars with only 10 setting are fucked up in my opinion. A 1 setting on a garmin is equivalent to a 11 on mine - i usually train at a 5. Humans wouldn't feel it at all until an 18. If she fails a command, we'd take a step back and go back to fundamentals using positive reinforcement. I don't punish her with the stim because if she doesn't listen, it's because i set her up for failure. We'd take a step back a stage if necessary. All commands are taught with purely positive reinforcement first. The ecollar was only introduced as a safe guard to her already reliable recall. In case of emergency type of thing. I've never had to use it in such a way, but i know it's there if i need it (helicopter mom). My philosophy for dog training is, "I want my dog to be excited to do something right, not scared to do something wrong." So far, that mentality still applies to this application of the ecollar, no? This is why I see this application specifically as negative reinforcement. Does that make sense, or am I still off base?
I do agree with you on how most people use ecollars. In-fact, I think they should be regulated at a minimum. Compulsion training is outdated and better methods have certainly arisen. Most people use it as a "you didn't do what I said so I'm going to zap you" and that's super fucked. I've built a trusting, loving relationship of mutual respect with my dog. The "be the alpha" type shit is outdated and wrong.
Thanks for your insight! I love the discussion and appreciate others input :)