clicker training

welsh
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 129
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Southern Ontario

Re: clicker training

Post by welsh » Thu Sep 22, 2016 10:01 am

I've said that clicker training is probably most useful for training complex tasks, which is not how most dog trainers use it. Let me add an example.

Suppose I want my dog to open my fridge by pulling a rope attached to the handle, get a beer out of the case, and bring it to me. This is a complex task, because the dog has to perform a series of steps: opening the door, getting the beer, retrieving the beer.

It is easy to see how to approach this with clicker training. First, the dog gets a click for showing interest in the fridge, then the rope, then for mouthing the rope, then for pulling the rope, then for getting the door open, and so on. You would use the clicker to progressively shape the behaviour until you got the result you wanted.

This is how clicker training has been used with dolphins, horses, cats, and other species: it is used in shaping behaviour where we can't communicate what we want.

But here is an example of clicker training being used to train a simple task, where it really doesn't apply (and where it takes longer, in fact):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUKGHf_d66w

The key difference between the beer-fetching task and the placeboard vid is that in the beer-fetching task, the timing of rewards is critical. Because we are shaping the behaviour, a mistimed reward will confuse the dog. For example, if the dog nuzzles the rope and then turns his head away, and he gets the reward as he turns his head away, he may get it into his head that he'll be rewarded for ignoring the rope. Thus the importance of the clicker or other conditioned stimulus (e.g. voice marker) to precisely mark what we want.

This is not so with the placeboard. There is no need for shaping here, because the task isn't complex. We are not looking for a specific body movement; we only care that the dog is on the board. There are lots of ways to get him there, because we can communicate what we want by e.g. calling him onto the board, hand-signalling him onto the board, or luring him onto the board. (And in fact, our clicker trainer lures him onto the board; this is not shaping.)

One other problem with the clicker method for simple tasks is that teaching through positive reinforcement only is probably slower. I say "probably" only because there is no study on dogs that proves this. There is, however, a study with a creature almost as primitive: the college student. Subjects in that study were divided into three groups: one group was only given feedback when they did the right thing (positive reinforcement), the second group was only given feedback when they did the wrong thing (positive punishment), and the third group was given feedback in both cases. You guessed it: the third group learned the experimental task fastest. Dogs will learn tasks faster if given guidance: luring, hand signals, verbal markers when they do the wrong thing, etc. Because our dogs are socially attuned to us, we can communicate what we want very easily when training simple tasks like this.

User avatar
Chukar12
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2051
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 5:20 pm
Location: Northern California

Re: clicker training

Post by Chukar12 » Thu Sep 22, 2016 10:06 am

Welsh there is ample point and counter point studies to the science of this which makes quoting them ... Again from academia, absolutely useless. Unless you establish context for practical application. Do you actually believe people need you to cut and paste links?
Classic consultant mentality. A plan is useless unless it is executed. Do you know that studies clearly show that if you consume fewer calories than you burn you won't gain weight? Yet folks still do.

welsh
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 129
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Southern Ontario

Re: clicker training

Post by welsh » Thu Sep 22, 2016 10:17 am

gonehuntin' wrote:Welsh, I believe you also are correct BUT it depends on the voice inflection and this is what many people have a hard time with. A voice is like the electric collar. Without variable intensity it is devastating, with variable intensity it is a gently but persuasive tool.
This is true, and the study Shags posted earlier confirms it. A word of praise delivered with a flat inflection was less rewarding than a word of praise delivered in a happy tone.

(So, you ask, how can the flatly inflected "Bravo" in the study I cited be effective? Because the dog was first conditioned to that word as a reward marker, using that flat inflection.)

I would suggest, though, that people who have trouble with timing and with maintaining a happy tone when delivering verbal praise are going to have troubles with timing when using a clicker, too. And the clicker is useful only in formal training situations, because we don't typically carry clickers with us everywhere, with our fingers on the button ready to deliver perfectly timed clicks. So do clickers really make us more consistent?

welsh
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 129
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Southern Ontario

Re: clicker training

Post by welsh » Thu Sep 22, 2016 10:24 am

Chukar12 wrote:Do you actually believe people need you to cut and paste links?
Well, that's an interesting question. Why did I link to a study? Let me try to answer that, in your own words:
Chukar12 wrote:Welsh, what studies?
I am puzzled as to what response you expected.

I note you have checked my profile, discovered I am a consultant, and used that as a personal attack. Would you care to discuss clicker training, instead, or merely earn yourself another LOL?

shags
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2717
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:57 pm

Re: clicker training

Post by shags » Thu Sep 22, 2016 10:37 am

So, when we observe dogs on the various television training shows, it seems universal that the animals absolutely pick up on the handlers' emotional states. Nervous, fearful handlers have nervous, fearful, or aggressive dogs; overbearing handlers have cowed dogs; Timid handlers have timid or aggressive dogs. When the handler is able to project calmness and quiet assertiveness, the dogs become calm and receptive to training.

Most of us have probably watched a confused bird dog trainer fail to get something across to his or her charge, but when a confident trainer takes over, the dog is able to get the lesson.

I think it follows that it doesn't matter if a handler is clicking or using verbals, the dog will still respond to the handler's enotional state. An angry or timid handler clicking isn't different from an angry/timid handler saying "good" or whatever the verbal marker is. The dog knows.

Sometimes, for some people, verbalizing can escalate negative emotions. Think about yelling from the kitchen to rouse a teenage kid from bed... Time to get, Junior...Junior! Get up!... $&@## JUNIOR GEDDOWN HERE!!! Perhaps using a clicker can help such folks to maintain the proper mental state, whereas others can get by with using verbals?

To me it's not which method is better...it's which system is better for a given trainer.

User avatar
Chukar12
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2051
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 5:20 pm
Location: Northern California

Re: clicker training

Post by Chukar12 » Thu Sep 22, 2016 10:42 am

Welsh, fair enough I asked you what studies. I should have included that I was interested in your application of these theories. As I said, there are points and counter points. My thoughts come from a combined study and experience, and from numerous successes and failures in the field of both my own and the observations of other practitioners. Let's be clear, I speak specifically of performance field dogs. In the weeds, in those details, execution is the key, not theory.
I have nothing to gain here by arguing this and certainly nothing to prove. My entire participation is not to provide or receive information that is academic, there are far more reliable sources for that than an on line forum. I want to hear and provide information about actual successes. You can "bleep" sure bet that IF I argue a point I have experienced both sides of it and tried to duplicate results and measure the effectiveness from both sides with live experience and numerous times. I have little regard for those who haven't and would attempt to apply the work and experience of others without the benefit of experience in the environmental context.

User avatar
Sharon
GDF Junkie
Posts: 9114
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 4:46 pm
Location: Ontario,Canada

Re: clicker training

Post by Sharon » Thu Sep 22, 2016 2:59 pm

gonehuntin' wrote:Excellent Welsh. This thread is now getting most interesting and I can see both view points. What it may all come down to in the final analysis is which method better fits OUR style and not which is more beneficial to the dog. Keep in mind that I STRONGLY believe and practice "treating" young dogs but stop at the clicker.

I'm old and set in my ways but I have always believed and will always believe that the more HUMAN interaction we can have with our dogs, the better they will UNDERSTAND us. Throughout their short lives much of how they choose to interact with us will be more a product of voice inflection rather than a specific word. We can make a encouraging word debilitating and a corrective command pleasant. All with the inflection of our much mis-used voice. The more human interaction I can have with a dog and the less mechanical, the better I like it. I love the ecollar and the Astro and feel they are remarkably progressive steps but feel the clicker is a regressive step. Maybe I'm just too "bleep" old.

The other thing I've never understood about clicker training is it's short range. We work our bird dog's at 100-500 yards and I'm not sure the clicker is even audible at 100 on a calm day and I know it's not in a wind. So I deem it a puppy, short range training aid and don't feel that for sporting dog's, it can EVER be effective for advanced work. Please keep in mind this may be senility speaking.

Right - as I said earlier on. :) Good tool for in the house /walking around the block obedience ,but after that ..................Like an e collar , timing is everything with a clicker.
" We are more than our gender, skin color, class, sexuality or age; we are unlimited potential, and can not be defined by one label." quote A. Bartlett

polmaise
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2689
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2012 2:08 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: clicker training

Post by polmaise » Thu Sep 22, 2016 3:11 pm

So now the old guard have voiced .
'Pippa' done it ! ..yea ..ftch with a clicker at early training and with positive only training !..it says so in her blog !! ..so it must be true ?
It's not 'clicker training' or any other 'old man huntin' training that gets results .
It's what works that get's results .
You guy's and the ole guard are great ..but.
Cracker'd ..you invited me here a few years ago for the right reasons , .Please no more .

User avatar
crackerd
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1085
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 6:57 am

Re: clicker training

Post by crackerd » Fri Sep 23, 2016 2:14 pm

polmaise wrote:You guy's and the ole guard are great ..but.
Cracker'd ..you invited me here a few years ago for the right reasons , .Please no more .
Mea culpa, mate. My penance is that I "clicked" on the Enter button to enter my dogs in a field trial this weekend, only to have one of them come into season, and the other come down with a urinary infection that will keep her out of the trial, too. So you see my misdeed in signing you up is coming home to roost. :wink:

MG

User avatar
ezzy333
GDF Junkie
Posts: 16625
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 3:14 pm
Location: Dixon IL

Re: clicker training

Post by ezzy333 » Fri Sep 23, 2016 2:49 pm

polmaise wrote:So now the old guard have voiced .
'Pippa' done it ! ..yea ..ftch with a clicker at early training and with positive only training !..it says so in her blog !! ..so it must be true ?
It's not 'clicker training' or any other 'old man huntin' training that gets results .
It's what works that get's results .
You guy's and the ole guard are great ..but.
Cracker'd ..you invited me here a few years ago for the right reasons , .Please no more .
Robert, if you are having trouble, just think about the rest of us, as you have given a lot more than you received. Kind of nice to get differing opinion though if everyone keeps it civil.
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=144
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=207

It's not how many breaths you have taken but how many times it has been taken away!

Has anyone noticed common sense isn't very common anymore.

Post Reply