World Dog Trainers’ Motivation Transparency Challenge

What should a dog trainer be willing and able to tell you about his or her techniques? And how valuable is it to get that information in clear, concrete language?

Renowned dog trainer Jean Donaldson has put a lot of thought into this. We live in a world where dog training is a completely unlicensed industry, and it’s total chaos out there.

There are a dozen euphemisms for what is commonly known as an electric shock. Some trainers make positive reinforcement approaches out to be extremist.  There is plenty of talk of packs and wolves and being a leader, but sometimes little specificity about what these “leaders” do.

When asked about their methods, trainers who employ punishment and negative reinforcement often throw up verbal smoke screens about it. Some may talk about magical leadership powers that can solve problems all by themselves and will insist that they do nothing to hurt, scare, startle, or coerce the dog, claiming knowledge of the Magical Attention Signal  that works without having any consequences. Others will admit to using “corrections.” But many such trainers who use them claim they do not constitute punishment, while arguing that such things are necessary for the dog’s safety.

This latter is unlikely to be true. There are trainers all over the world who can train behaviors to fluency and solve behavioral problems without those corrections. I think it would be a huge step in the right direction if trainers who used methods such as  throwing things, kicking, poking, and hitting dogs, and of course “special” collars, would simply say so, and not hide between the buzz word of “positive.” Using aversives in this day and age is a choice, not a necessity, and that is what many trainers do not want people to know.

Jean Donaldson has developed three questions for consumers to ask prospective trainers before ever handing over their dog’s leash to them. The purpose of asking the questions–and continuing to ask until one gets a straight answer–is to insist on transparency of methods from anyone who purports to be an expert on helping a four-legged carnivore live in close proximity to, or even as a member of, a human family.

The Questions

Three questions

So these are the questions:

  • What exactly will happen to my dog when she gets it right?
  • What exactly will happen to her when she gets it wrong?
  • Are there any less invasive alternatives to what you propose?

Informed Consent

Ms. Donaldson has also proposed that trainers describe their methods specifically, and inform the consumer of alternatives in written consent statement.

Here is a sample consent statement from Ms. Donaldson, quoted with permission. This is what a statement from a trainer who used a prong or shock collar exclusively might look like if they were truthful and transparent.

I propose using pain and fear to motivate your dog. The potential side effects and adverse outcomes associated with these are X, Y, Z.

There are alternatives to what I propose. You could employ food, play, access to smells and patting as motivators. The potential side effects and adverse outcomes associated with these are A, B, C. You could also seek the opinion of a veterinary behaviorist. Our goal is that you are fully informed before consenting to any dog training or behavior modification.

When I first heard these words in her webinar, I got the shivers at the boldness of the statement. Nobody says, “I propose to use pain and fear to motivate your dog.” But it shouldn’t be bold to suggest that at all, if it’s the truth. It shouldn’t be revolutionary to ask for–or be confronted with–with honesty from all trainers.  Can you imagine if the norm for discussing a medical procedure with a doctor were that she deliberately withheld possible side effects, didn’t tell you of alternatives, and wouldn’t be specific about what exactly she was going to do? And that there was no code of ethics or regulatory body to prevent that?

The Video Transparency Challenge

John McGuigan, the Glasgow Dog Trainer, took Ms. Donaldson’s three questions and started a challenge for all trainers to answer them in a video.

So below I’m featuring a video that I believe does this well, and I’ll switch to a new one every week or two. (You can find others on YouTube by searching using the title of this post.) You will get to hear from many different trainers who actually do use “modern, evidence-based, humane methods,” to use the language from the poster above.

Direct link to the video page for email subscribers.

Commonalities of the Answers

It’s fascinating to me how much these videos can have in common, but also how every trainer’s answer has a different “flavor.” The most important commonality to me is that trainers who choose to use positive reinforcement based training uniformly mention continuing education. In response to the third question, many will say that there are probably not any less invasive methods than what they use, but if they are out there, they want to know about them. They state that they are always educating themselves and learning more. Some mention that if they feel that a case is beyond their skill set, they will consult colleagues or even refer the case on, just as a family doctor might refer a patient to a specialist if she had a certain type of medical problem. This kind of honest self-assessment is a strong indicator of competency in my opinion. The truly skilled know their skills and are honest about both their breadth and limitations.

You will also hear almost all of them state that if a dog makes a “mistake” when working on a training task, it is their mistake, not the dog’s. This is not some romantic woo. It is the literal truth. It is up to the teacher to set the pace and difficulty of the learning for the student.

The video of my own answers to the Transparency Challenge can be found on the following page: My Training Philosophy.

Further Information on Transparency

This blog post from Pawsforpraise, Finding the Right Dog Trainer: Harder than You Think, delineates some more of Ms. Donaldson’s thinking on the questions consumers should ask prospective dog trainers. In her webinar “Out of What Box?” she further detailed her thinking on this, suggesting that trainers put the plans in writing for clients, informing them of the methods they will use, the risks and benefits, and whether there are alternatives. The webinar was a discussion on the development of standard operating procedures in pet dog training. Here is a link that describes the webinar, and here is a link to register for and purchase the recorded version.

And how about we all add to the information out there? This is a call to all trainers, professional and amateur, to think through and answer these questions for themselves. Publish your videos, graphics, or written answers online.  Be transparent, and challenge others to do so.

Coming Up:

 

List of Previously Featured Videos

Copyright Eileen Anderson 2014

Share Button

Easy tweets! (They include a link to this post)

  • Transparency in training is the word of the day!

About eileenanddogs

Passionate amateur dog trainer, writer, and learning theory geek. Eileen Anderson on Google+
This entry was posted in Critical Thinking, Dog training hints, Punishment culture, Training philosophy and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to World Dog Trainers’ Motivation Transparency Challenge

  1. Hi Eileen

    Great post and questions to ask every trainer one may come across. It is disconcerting how much resistance there is even amongst “educated” veterinarians, behaviorists and trainers to rule out coercive and punitive methods even though they are not what is in the best interest of the dog.

    There is too much concern in being all inclusive, to all forms of “training” regardless of the fallout and what is in the best interest of the dog. ($$$) I wrote about that here. http://www.funpawcare.com/2014/10/09/the-foible-of-inclusivity-in-teaching/

    I fall back on, It is never OK to abuse a dog. When dog training, expediency should never trump the humane ethical treatment and welfare of your dog. First rule, do no harm.

    Thanks Russ

    • Eileen Anderson says:

      Thank you Russ, and thanks for including the link to your article. I am grateful for your clear voice in the world of humane, science based training.

  2. Sonya says:

    Really good summary of this issue in dog training. It’s so hard for consumers to know what they are getting. It can be so confusing. I’m stoked that you I included my video.

  3. Ariella says:

    Oh my goodness, I would LOVE some transparency with dog training. As a reporter, I have absolutely no problems asking questions. I have absolutely no problems asking follow up questions. I have absolutely no problems asking my questions bluntly. Finding a true +R trainer has been so incredibly difficult. Trainers are incredibly evasive and throw the word “positive” around to the point that it means absolutely nothing. I had someone tell me, “well, our trainer does use a prong collar, but everything is done very positively.” I was polite with them, but I’ll never take my dog anywhere near that facility. One trainer refused to give me examples of her training techniques and said she wanted to talk more during a consultation. Trainers rarely put their methods on their websites, which made everything that much more difficult. I only had one trainer answer my questions just as bluntly as I asked them and I told him I appreciated his honesty. I ended up not hiring him because he was too expensive, but coincidentally, my neighbor did and my neighbor has mixed reviewed.

    I finally found one trainer that I think will work out, though at the time of this posting, I have yet to actually work with her. I resorted to looking at her Facebook page to find out what sort of information she was disseminating to her fans and what other pages she “liked.” When I chatted with her via email, I told her, “we are staunchly positive reinforcement and force-free only.” She assured me she could help me with my dog’s specific issues without using force. I like what I see so far, so I’m hoping for the best.

    • Eileen Anderson says:

      Well, that’s the best example I could possibly get. If a reporter has a hard time getting to the truth about methods, something is badly wrong.

      “Trainers are incredibly evasive and throw the word “positive” around to the point that it means absolutely nothing.” Isn’t that the truth! I’m starting to flinch when I see the word “positive,” I’m afraid.

      Thanks so much for your comment. It’s something that people need to know.

  4. Pingback: Dog Training 101: | Samantha Linda

  5. Pingback: The language of fear and loathing in dog training - Crosspaws

  6. Pingback: My Dog Isn't Food Motivated...Or Is She? - eileenanddogseileenanddogs

  7. Pingback: Using Annoying or Scary Sounds for Dog Training - eileenanddogseileenanddogs

Comments are closed.