We’ve been talking about markers and secondary reinforcers, and there have been some great comments about using clickers in some contexts and not in others. Like many readers, I use clickers for some training, and not for others. Your comments got me thinking about why I use them sometimes, why I don’t use them others, and the physics of why clicks can be such a powerful marker (and/or reinforcement).
First, I don’t use clickers for all training. This is partly because I am a classic “absent minded professor” and there are just too many times in the world in which I forget everything but my head. I also admit that I am always happiest when it is just me and a dog–no clicker, no leash and as soon as practical, no food as reinforcement.
However, I’ve always used clickers for trick training. As I thought about what’s different between training tricks and other behaviors, I realized that tricks are often asking a dog to do something she doesn’t normally do, and so the precision of a clicker when you are shaping a new behavior is invaluable. To me (and this is very much just as matter of individual preference) that kind of precision isn’t necessary when training a dog to perform a behavior on cue that she normally does anyway. Teaching Sit and Lie Down is so darn easy that the precision of a clicker isn’t as important as it is when teaching something that requires shaping.
THE BENEFITS OF CLICKS There is no question that clicks have many advantages over words as markers. For one thing, they are short, usually only 100-200 milliseconds or so, while even a one syllable word is going to be at least twice as long. That’s part of why clicks are more precise. In addition, clicks are what are called “broad band” sounds, meaning that the sound contains energy in a broad range of frequencies, from high to low. That’s an advantage when ‘talking’ to mammals. We have what’s called a “tonotopic’ acoustic receptor system, meaning that each cell in the brain that receives sound is programmed to respond to a narrow range of frequencies. Some cells are stimulated most readily at 500 Hz, others at 1,000 Hz. That means that “broad band” sounds like clicks, which have energy in a large range of frequencies, light up lots of cells at the same time, like a busy switchboard, while “narrow band” sounds like words have energy in a smaller range of frequencies.
In addition, clicks are what are called “instant onset/offset,” so that the energy in the sound begins at full force, rather than gradually increasing in amplitude. That creates what looks like a “wall of sound” that stimulates cells that look for ‘edges.’ Make sense? [I remember there is some research that supports clicks being more effective training markers, but I don’t have time to look it up. I’ll bet it’s on Karen Pryor’s website….]
Here’s a not-so-great image from my dissertation that illustrates a “picture” of short, broad band sounds… look at the vertical bands in the top left.Clicks are very much like those tall vertical bands, whereas speech is far messier and less precise.
That said, I still don’t use the clicker all the time, and for the last few years have used “yes” as a verbal marker. But that’s a sloppy word, very hard to say with precision (“yesssssssss”). You need a nice, clipped stop consonant at the end. I messed around the last few days with just making a tongue click, but for some reason my brain and mouth don’t want to do that. I’ve thought about “Yep!” but I’m concerned about it sound like “Hope.” Hummmm, still pondering. Would love to hear what you all use besides “yes” and tongue clicks! (Which are a great idea, but my brain just wants to use speech, sloppy as it is).
MEANWHILE, back on the farm: We had a lovely, relaxing Sunday morning at a good friend’s, Hope playing with an 8 month old BC, Willie and I getting to work sheep in a big, open field. We’ve worked so little this summer I didn’t know what to expect, but Will did great, listening beautifully and slowing his pace nicely when asked. Boy is four years old different than two or three! Notice that the sheep are moving at just the right speed… not too fast to get panicked, not too slowly to end up turning and challenging the dog.
Here’s Hope and his buddy Hap. Hope looks oh-so-serious here (and doesn’t he look grown up for a 5 month old dog?), but the two of them played beautifully, lots of loose body, open mouth puppy play. Was fun to watch.
Marisa says
I’m not an expert or a trainer, but I’ve used “Good!” and “Thanks!” as markers in the past. The former was easy to say quickly, the latter reminded me to be polite.
quinn says
I LOVE that last picture!! Such relaxed pleasure.
I have never used an actual “clicker” for clicker training, because a) I’d never want to rely on having one in my pocket when needed and b) I can make a tongue-clicker sound which amazes other trainers with its incredible semblance to a “clicker” sound. Yes, it’s a gift. My 4th grade teacher said that everyone has a talent. Apparently, this is it for me.
I’m going to go back and look at that picture again 🙂
Melissa says
I said it on the last post, but it was buried in a whole lot of musings, so for clarity’s sake I use “PING” for one dog’s marker and “TICK” for the other dog. I originally thought “PING” was a little too long, which is why I picked “TICK” for my second dog, but now that I’ve tried them both out I think I like ping better. It might be longer, but it has a ringing quality that tick doesn’t have. I think that ringing quality makes it more attention-grabbing and clear.
Incidentally, on shaping with clickers and secondary reinforcers, if I’m in a good place with my dogs in a training session and I’m marking and rewarding a lot, it gets to a point where if I drop a treat the dogs ignore it and drive for the next marker instead. They don’t need a treat after every click, although I still try to deliver one. I just don’t mess around trying to find a treat we’ve dropped. When the training is over they spend the next half an hour in the training area browsing for all the dropped treats.
Crystal says
I accidentally conditioned “here” as a marker. Apparently, I said “here” a number of times as I handed my dog a treat… It’s quick, it’s fast, and it works well, actually.
Deanna in OR says
Melissa, I liked your “Ping” and “Tick” so much from your earlier post, that I am going to suggest them as possible marker words for my next puppy class, along with “Good” (which I say short and sharp, almost as “Gut” like in German).
One thing I do when introducing marker words to my students (at orientation night, without dogs), is to practice the word of their choice, saying it as many times as they can in 30 seconds (everyone out loud all at once). Then I tell them that is how short and sharp it should be when using it as a marker with their dog. I also tell them that when they are “charging” the marker at home that week, they are teaching themselves to do it consistently as much as they are teaching the dog that the word means a treat is coming. So much of the repetition in training for novice trainers is to help the trainer become more consistent as it is for the dog to learn.
I also use “Good!” to mark the human students’ behaviors in working with their dogs in class. Fortunately with people, praise can work well as reinforcement although sometimes I use chocolate as a random reward to follow the marker….
Joh says
Beautiful pics!
I use the clicker just for “formal training” e.g. in Training-Sessions at my dog-school/with my trainer/if I decide to do some “training” (mostly trick-training)
I tried to use a marker word (the german wird “fein” (roughly the same as the english “fine”) with a slightly over-pronounced “n” at the end.
The doggies know “fein” means something good, but it doesn’t work as a correct marker, because I use it to often/not just in the correct moment. It seems I talk to much and I’m not carefully enough with my words 😉
Anna V says
I use the clicker a lot, but not always.
I guess my general rule is that I use it a lot to capture behaviours or positions (for example when teaching “sit” and “bow”), but I don’t use it a lot when I can praise or encourage while the dog is performing (for example a jump sequence in agility, or teaching “stay”).
Then again, I have Belgian Shepherds, which are much more interested in playing than eating 🙂 And we certainly play a lot….
Yep, that last picture is great!
Suzanne says
I’ll use the clicker when I set out with a specific goal to train, or when I’m taking my reactive dog Dart someplace to practice being calm around other dogs.
During everyday moments when I want a behavior, or I want to capture something they did that I liked, I’ll snap my fingers. Sounds just like a click to me – unless I’m wearing gloves!
I will use the word yes, usually without even thinking about it, but like you, I find it very unspecific.
What a great picture of Hope and Hap. Hap looks a lot like my boy Dart. Those big wide ears give such a sense of gentleness. Hope is totally charming, and I love those brown whiskers inside his ears!
Jeff Line says
I tend to use a clicker when I am shaping a behavior. Otherwise, I just use a marker word. As I reflect, I think I may have just shaped myself to use a clicker for shaping rather than actually believing it has any magic power.
I think the KPA folks believe the clicker is more salient than other cues. As I understand it this is based on it following a shorter neural pathway, analogous to that which causes us to step away from an object that looks like a snake even before we are aware we have seen an object that looks like a snake. I’m a skeptic on that saliency argument.
I do think having a clicker in ones hand is a great way for a crossover trainer to avoid giving reflexive and/or inadvertent leash corrections.
Shannon B. says
How you could have ever though Hope was “plain” is beyond me. Just look at the amazing tufts of blonde hair sticking out of his ears. That boy is as cute as they come. Can hardly wait to see what adulthood brings to your lovely little boy.
As for markers, I have two children who love to “train” our 1 year old Australian Shepherd “Kodi” so verbal markers are more or less meaningless to him because he hears them in all sorts of voices and contexts. If I really want him to learn a new behavior I usually start out with a clicker and quickly move to hand signals. My kids haven’t picked up on my subtle hand singles just yet and think that Kodi and I speak a secret language. Perhaps we do.
Jenn D. says
I’ve advised my clients to use the words “mark” and “click” in place of the clicker. “Click” seems to work quite well, as it lends itself to a lilting, happy tone.
One of my clients used “joy” as her verbal marker because she said she felt like jumping for joy whenever her puppy did something right. Hey, whatever works :-).
Love Hope’s expression in that last pic!
Nancy says
For shaping and tricks, I do use a clicker. But most of the time I use a mouth click–made not with my tongue, but with the side of my mouth. It sounds a lot like a clicker, it’s loud, precise, and doesn’t vary much.
Frances says
I suspect there is always going to some creative tension between our human (especially female human) need to express our feelings (“Yay, Poppy! You CLEVER girl! That was a BRILLIANT jump!!” – me, last night, at Agility Class) and the dog’s probably preference for a short sharp marker click, followed as quickly as possible by a reward! I think my two have compromised – they accept my human wittering in good part, as long as it is still followed by the reward. It is interesting that many of the marker words mentioned are also words we use to express approbation – is there a risk of slipping into thinking of the word as praise, and a reward in itself?
Ellen H says
I have not used a clicker in 7 years. The reason, it scared my springer I got 7 years ago. Not exactly the reinforcement you want. Whenever I would click, her ears would go down and she would duck away! So, I used “yes” with her and am now using it with the current puppy in our lives.
Denise says
I really prefer to use a clicker when training, especially when shaping, but no matter how many multi-packs I buy, there never seems to be a clicker around when I need one! If I can’t find a clicker, I fall back on “yes” but it definitely does not work as well. There’s something about the clicker that seems to get and hold Hugh’s interest much better than a verbal marker. He seems more enthusiastic and gets excited about the training session even if my treats are so-so on the tasty scale. Hearing that click seems to be more exciting than my “yes!” no matter how short, sharp and upbeat I try to make it.
Lily says
Ellen H, I can’t use a clicker to train my Aussie either because she seems to have an adverse reaction to the click (no matter how “soft” of a clicker I use…and I’ve used many kinds!) I use “good” as a marker for her and “yes” as a marker for my other dog, a Daschund mix, so that it doesn’t confuse them. Although now the Aussie perks up whenever she hears “yes” because she knows the Daschund is going to get a treat and she wants one too!
Shelly V says
I often use yes, as I realize verbal markers aren’t going to be as precise anyway. Recently, I have also had clients use the word “click!” This way, when we are talking and I instinctively say “Click! Treat!” it doesn’t confuse them. This seems to be the most successful so far.
Hope looks so beautiful! He’s growing so fast.
Carrie says
“Would love to hear what you all use besides
Ann W in PA says
Ellen H and Lily: I’ve seen a few folks start with a ball-point pen – the kind without a cap that makes a soft “click” sound when you press the button to push the writing tip out – and it worked great. Same concept, same type of noise, but soft enough that it didn’t startle their dogs. Eventually, once the dog got the game, they switched to a regular clicker since it’s easier to hold (and doesn’t get ink on you.) 😉
Susan Mann says
Deanna mentioned charging the marker (she was talking verbals, but also applies to clicker and other mechanical markers) and I was wondering how many people still do this, and what your (Patricia’s and everyone else’s as well!) thoughts are on it.
The clicker/marker has 2 meanings- a promise that a reinforcer is coming, and also, “there, what you did that second,” is why you’re gettting that reinforcer. Charging the clicker teaches the first meaning, but ignores the second. And that promise that a reinforcer is coming has so much salience to the dog, that I think it can overshadow the other meaning, and make it harder for the dog to figure that piece out. I no longer spend any time charging the clicker, but take a simple exercise, such as hand targeting or bathroom downs, and teach the dog that both pieces are relevant. IME it has not taken the dogs long to figure out, in spite of the fact that I am “lumping” these 2 pieces together. This could be because my own dogs are BCs 😉 but I also did this with my neighbor’s 2 JRTs as well as other dogs I’ve worked with directly.
Susan Mann, Brodie, Kyp!, and Arie
Cassie says
I like to shape new tricks when I get a random urge based on a behavior that my dog is offering up. Because he likes to toss me a lot of new behaviors FAST I couldn’t possibly mark anything well using my voice. I need that clicker!
I don’t use the clicker once we have it on cue (verbal or body)- unless we’re just playing clicker time to keep him in love with it. My dog gets soooooooo much more excited about the click than my voice. I just can’t compete with something that is reserved soley for reward, and the chance to gain even mroe rewards.
I think a click is absolutely more powerful than a verbal marker for teaching- but not necessary for maintaining and practicing. I also like that the clicker is not emotional. No extra baggage comes with it as may come with my voice, and it is far more reliable than I am at being consistent. The clicker is always in a good mood, always follows the same rules, and means that I am paying full attention to my dog’s miniscule responses. Why wouldn’t he love it? The sound of the click means one on one, non distracted interaction with me, and the chance to find new ways to get stuff he loves.
My voice is always here, and no matter how much I try to be the most interesting thing in his world, I am sometimes incredibly boring.
Holly says
The clicker never has a bad day:) It’s always in the same mood!
Faith says
I use the letter “X” as a marker. The method I use was developed by Kaycee Cover. There was phonetic research done to pick out this specific sound, as opposed to using other sounds or words. Part of the reason “X” was chosen was because it is one of the, if not the, least used sounds. One of the challenges of using words as markers (e.g. “yes”, “good”, etc) is that they occur often in everyday life and have the potential to create confusion.
There has been discussion of whether or not one can be as effective using voice versus a clicker. The rationale is that we are quicker to mark with our finger, so to speak, than our voice. I haven’t trained enough with a clicker to notice a real difference, but I don’t see a problem with using the voice. Plus, I like having both hands free. And I, too, can be absent minded so not having to remember another piece of equipment is nice. I always have my voice with me!
Karen Schumacher says
I’m simply not always prepared. What “was” a game of fetch – turns into – wow – that’s awesome I wonder if I can “get” it again? “Good” and “Yes” are the fallbacks. Do they work? Absolutely – Do they allow me the flexibility and precision of a clicker? Absolutely not. Bottom line – it’s a mixed bag!
Michy says
I use Yes as a verbal marker at times, but I also use Good Dog or simply Good. I do try to keep the clicker handy, all of the dogs know what it means, and that they did something good when they hear it. The fun part is when I’m working with one dog, and the other three hear the click and come over to see if they can finangle a treat as well. I had started training without a clicker before I took one of our dogs through a basic manners class, so there was no need for me to charge the clicker so much as just start using it with Sit, and it has worked out really well.
I think the clicker offers more precision, and always sounds the same, but I manage to forget to grab one half the time, so Yes or Good do the job.
trisha says
To Jenn D: “Click!” Soooo smart, why didn’t I think of saying “Click” as a verbal marker? I tried it yesterday and it worked perfectly, flowed right out without any hesitation. Easy to say, and a good, short, snappy sound with abrupt beginning an end. Perfect for me. It really is partly about finding the right word for you, each one of us is different . . . I tried clicking with the side of my mouth (I called them “tongue clicks” but I don’t use my tongue either). It is easy for me to produce, but I kept not wanting to use it, I’d decide to and then continually “forget.” I realized yesterday that I grew up giving repeated clicks to horses to speed them up. The sound already means something to me, and I use it in that context with dogs sometimes too. I suspect that’s why I couldn’t get in the habit of using them as a marker. (FYI, as much as I like “Click,” I thought “Tick” was a super smart marker too.)
And to Faith: Thanks so much for the reminder about “X,” suggested by Kaycee Cover. She is wise to come up with a sound little used, and it does have good acoustics to it. I tried it years back and for reasons I can’t explain found myself not wanting to say it. But it might work beautifully for others.
I’m also not going to use “Good” even though one commenter correctly mentioned that the acoustics of “Good!” are very different than good used as a praise word, “G–o-o-o-o-o-o-d.” However, I learned in my research that dogs respond to the first 100-150 msec of a sound, and the initial sound, the “G” in both versions is still the same. Luke emphasized this to me on my Feeling Outnumbered DVD. I said “Lassie” and he started forward when he heard the “L…”, then dropped back when the “a” came out instead of a “u’. I never noticed til I saw the video. After that I decided never to name dogs with the same first letter, and to always be careful about how a sound started… it’s far more important to a response than how it ends. I don’t think it’s relevant to some dogs, but is could be important to ones that are especially responsive.
Thanks for this conversation. I’ve been too sloppy in the past about markers versus praise, and am working on tightening that part of my training up. That’s part of what I love about training, you’re never done, and you can always get better, and better, and better.
And to Shannon B re Handsome Hope: Oh, I so agree he’s become quite the handsome boy now, I can’t help myself! I love his brown ear fuzz too. When he was little his ears were flat to his skull… no pretty brown fur then, but once his ears went up and his color intensified he turned into a truly striking dog. More on Hope in posts to come.
Amy W. says
I use the word great.
Faith says
I agree, Trisha, that “X” is awkward for many reasons. It took me awhile to get used to it. I mostly had to get over the feeling of looking/sounding like an idiot. Now I’m comfortable with it. To be honest, my husband and I even use it jokingly with each other when we are “marking” behavior we appreciate – taking out the trash, doing the dishes, you get the idea. It’s even slipped out when my children do something I appreciate (though they don’t understand, but they appreciate the praise that comes with it!). I guess I’ve been conditioned myself!
The other thing I like about Cover’s method is the “bridge” part. (Her method is officially called Bridge and Target.) When you are trying to teach duration/distance with something, you can continue the sound “xxxxxx”, the bridge, to let the dog know that she is behaving correctly and then when completed she gets the terminal “X”. It is dififcult to explain in text, but if you can imagine repeating “xxxxx” softly and then saying “X” succinctly and louder you get the idea. I’ve found that whenever I can give my dogs information that they are doing something correctly, it takes less time to not only learn the command, but then to build in duration/distance.
The last thing I will say about “X”, or using any voice marker instead of a clicker, is that it is a GODSEND if you have children. Anytime my dogs behave appropriately in relation to my kids, I can immediately mark it. I have 4 children under 4 (my son turns 4 in a few weeks and I have 17-month-old triplet girls) so the likelihood that my hands are tied up is pretty high. I can quickly mark something with my voice and then take my 8-10 seconds to find a yummy morsel, or give a well-deserved scratch as a reward.
Janice says
I think that the greatest utility for using a clicker is not for training our dogs but rather for training *us*. In order to train with a clicker, we have to focus with the non-verbal part of our mind–respond to movement with movement, and that movement has to be precise in order to have meaning. Humans, with our verbal brains, often need this training (especially total klutzes like me–an excellent tennis player might be a lot better at this). Using the clicker also forces us to improve our eye and focus on the small movements that are approximations of a goal behavior–allowing us to see the fractions of movement that make up the final goal movement. I think that the clicker is great to use from time to time for training a specific thing but most of the time, I don’t have one with me, my pockets are already full of things I need like my pocket knife and I would hate to miss a training opportunity because I don’t have the right tool at the moment that the training opportunity occurs. When out working on my farm, I often need both my hands already.
Also, when we use our voices, a lot more than the actual word used is transmitted. The vocal apparatus of a stressed and angry human makes a different set of sounds (including overtones) than a relaxed and happy human, no matter what word you are saying. I also think that the word itself is a lot less important than the intonation and that the dogs probably don’t pay attention to much more than the starting consonant and vowel. So you could say “Excellent!” (with the syllabic stress on the first syllable) and I doubt that the dog is paying attention to the -cellent part of the word. Their brains are not tuned to words as ours are but to rhythm and intonation. One exception, personally I don’t like using the “Yes” because as you pointed out, it can become Yessssss. And in nature, things that hisssss are generally to be avoided.
My 8 month BCs have just discovered this morning the joy of jumping the yard fence and chasing the chickens (my chickens are let loose in the barnyard). I guess I was fortunate that this wasn’t discovered earlier, but I barely managed to save the hen they were shredding when I caught them. They do, I noticed on the way back from the barn, give the geese wide berth…perhaps it is that hissing thing. My adult BC (whom I got at a year old) has never chased chickens, or anything else that I didn’t ask him to chase. Some time I would love to hear some words of wisdom about how to prevent behaviors like going after chickens, that may occur when you are not present.
Gosh Hope is lovely. But with those ears, he looks like a fey magical creature from the faerie kingdom!
Marci Haw says
I use a clicker for most new behaviors. Like so many others, I do not always have one handy when I want or need it. I have been saying the letter “X” very softly as a verbal marker. It is short and not easily confused by the dogs with everyday words or other commands.
Lee Harrington says
Dear Patricia –
First of all, I just wanted to say how brilliant you are, and how valuable your information is to the dog world. Dogs and humans benefit from your kind, wise, compassionate, intuitive methods. I’ve been out of cyber space for a while, because I spent the past two years finishing a book, but now I am back online (obsessively–kind of scary!) and am looking forward to joining your group of regulars.
Anyone who reads my work knows I use clicker training, and that I will even tell complete strangers on the streets (those with new pups in tow) how great the clicker training is.
Anyway, this point may have been made already, but I find that in households with multiple humans, non-vocal cues such as clickers and whistles work brilliantly for our three dogs. Obviously this is because the cues/reinforcements are absolutely consistent. Otherwise, we’d have four different people with four different voices technically saying the same thing….but a ten year old boy’s version of “good dog!” may sound different from that of his 55 year old mother.
When I adopted Chloe, a stress-riddled, abused one-year old Spaniel mix, I used the clicker for everything. Within days I taught her Sit, Stay, Heel, Wait, Up, Off, Come….the usual stuff….and I house-trained her too. I believe that–in her short, confused life prior to her arrival at my house–she had never had any consistency. SO the sound of that click became, to her, like a beacon….the first positive thing she can latch on to.
She still loves that sound. Clicker equals treeeeeaaaat!
I am looking forward to reading your blog consistently, and learning more and more and more about dogs, training, life, love, etc.
Blessings and joy to all!
Lee Harrington
(editor at Bark and author of REX AND THE CITY: A MEMOIR OF A WOMAN, A MAN, AND A DYSFUNCTIONAL DOG)
Pat B says
Many years ago Karen Pryor talked about the idea that something about the sound of the clicker went straight to the “reptilian” brain – the amygdala – triggering endorphins and therefore having certain inherently reinforcing properties. There was also talk of a research project to explore this idea.
A few years later when questioned about it, she said that the research had not yet taken place (and this is not surprising as projects such as this take a lot of time, money and resources to carry out properly). Unless someone here has heard otherwise, I’m not aware of the research having taken place to this day, so the idea of the “click goes straight to the amygdala” remains an interesting – if unproven – hypothesis.
As for a marker word, I favor “Chip!” chirped out in a high, bright voice. Not a word that occurs regularly in day-to-day speech, and certainly not in that high, bright tone.
Ellen Pepin says
I have used a clicker on my 4-8 year old collie to help break her of barking and lunging at passing cars. It is always connected to a treat. We have made some progress, but I find that trying to get a treat, and click is difficult to do soon enough to make a difference. I haven’t used it in a while, mainly because my husband doesn’t like to use it. However, when I used it in the house to get her attention, the response I want for passing cars, she immediately stopped and turned around to look at me. She hadn’t forgotten what that click meant.
Kat says
In an effort to improve the life of our younger cat Meowzart I began clicker training him. I also use the verbal marker “good.” For Meowzart the click is definitely better. When I’m using the verbal marker he runs through all his tricks offering them up as fast as he can. Note that he starts with the behavior I’ve requested but adds all the rest to it. When I’m using the clicker I typically get just the behavior I’ve requested although he sometimes will add others as well. My sense is that Meowzart knows the click marks the behavior and isn’t confident that the word does. That plus the fact that I’m faster with the clicker than I am vocally.
I also tried some clicker training with the older cat, Katzenjammer. As near as I can tell he is only interested in getting the treat and not interested in figuring out what to do to get the treat. I started with something pretty simple, touching my extended finger with his paw to get a treat. Sometimes he’d only wave his paw near the finger, no click, no treat. Click and treat only for contact. He never seemed to grasp what it was that earned the click and treat. He’d get frustrated when the click followed by a treat was not immediately forthcoming and rather than try different approaches until he hit on one that worked, he’d start using his teeth trying to bite the finger. He’s never been a particularly smart cat and I gave up trying to train him. He’s nearly 16 and has some medical issues so why add frustration to his remaining years.
As I mentioned before, Ranger (the dog) loves the clicker and has learned to ignore my verbal markers in favor of reading my body language. Clearly, I’m a lot more effective with the clicker.
Jennifer Hamilton says
Before I knew about clickers, I trained my dog about 30 tricks with conventional luring and rewards. When I learned about clicker theory and put it to use, I taught my dog about another 30 tricks or so using the clicker. I must say I didn’t notice a whole lot of change in speed or success of learning, but it made sense so I continued with the clicker on new tricks.
The biggest AhhHaaa moment I had with the clicker was not training new things, but when I used it once on an old trick that I had trained using conventional luring…namely, the circle 8 through my legs. One day when doing a number of newer tricks, I decided to recall an older trick, the circle 8, and when my dog finished the trick, I clicked and rewarded (even though I had never clicked and rewarded with that trick in the past). Every time there after, my dog would not complete the circle 8 trick as she always had. Rather than finish the trick in the heal position by my side, she would stop the trick standing right underneath and between my two legs. I’m sure everyone reading this has figured out what I did to create this problem, but I had not yet figured it out. So I tried repeatedly to get my dog to finish the trick properly, but no go. That’s when I finally realized, the one time I used a clicker on that trick, I had clicked when her nose was in the heal position, but not her entire body. When she heard that click with her nose at my side but her body still in between my legs, she clearly thought “oh, this is where the trick ends…now I know”.
That was the power of the click. My dog had done that trick 100’s of times without a clicker, but doing it one time with the clicker marking the end the trick in a different way and she understood in an instant…even though her lame owner had no idea of the unintended consequence. When I realized my mistake, I had to completely retrain the trick with the clicker making sure not to click until her entire body was out from underneath my legs and in the heal position. Ever since then I am oh so careful what I click, because for my dog, she gets the click better than anything else.
Hollw W says
I also use the clicker sometimes and have found that not all my clients can use it correctly. I was fortunate to have worked with one elderly client that had already developed marker sounds both negative and positive. The negative sound she used it the same sound I used on both my kids and dogs and that sounds like “at.” The positive sound is hard to describe but the best I can do is that it sounds like a quick sharp “ah!” but you must say it with a smile. It works very well for her and when the dog does extra special she elongates it into an more typical “ahhhhh!” I have since used it with other physically challenged clients and it works rather well.
Elizabeth Deitz says
The distinction you made between training tricks and training behavior that is likely part of their normal repertoire already was interesting to me. I have always told my students that there is no difference between tricks and other training…in their dog’s mind. The reason I say that is that I have found dogs are sometimes much more liklely to comply when you ask them for a trick. I believe that part of the reinforcement they recieve for tricks comes from peoples reactions to them. For instance, I have taught all my dogs to sneeze on cue. Everyone laughs when they do it, and they seem to find that laughter, and attention, rewarding. So I tell my students there is no difference between tricks and other behaviors because I want tthem to respond to them in the same way.Happily and effusively.
trisha says
Wish I could comment on all comments, but here’s a few thoughts:
To Elizabeth D: We actually agree completely! I often say that we should think of “obedience” (ugh, hate that word) exercises as if they were tricks. The distinction I was making between tricks and other behaviors was about the necessity for precision when using a marker. I find precision, the kind you find with a clicker, to be more important when teaching a dog something that is not in their normal repertoire. That’s more common when teaching a trick than standard exercises. Say you want you dog to sit up and wave: that’s not something that dogs normally do, so the clicker helps you shape a progression of behaviors toward that. Compare that with Sit or Lie Down. You don’t need to teach dogs to do that, just to do it on cue. That’s the distinction I was trying to make. Make sense?
Patrice says
Mostly I use “yes”, said with a particular quick emphasis that I don’t use in general speech.
For some reason, I got in the habit of using tongue clicks with the “Look at That” exercise. (Actually, I say “What’s That?” — don’t know why. Same idea, though.)
Ed says
I feel so smart – a super professional genius person has the same view of clickers that I do.
I find clickers useful with useful is with dogs who are nervous about people (fosters who, for whatever reason, aren
Wes Anderson says
For consistency in a program using multiple trainers it is hard to beat the clicker. I’m with the ICAN service dog program. We train service dogs for disabled children. The program is based in prisons and uses a network of volunteers to help the dogs practice in public. The wonderful thing about the clicker is it sounds the same regardless of who is holding it. Each dog is exposed to different trainers (we rotate trainers and dogs) and different volunteers so the clicker gives us consistency in our marker. I also feel that the sound of the click is so unique (think of it when do you hear that sound in the environment?) it will get attention when another marker may not. For those familiar with Leslie McDevitt’s “Look-At-That” for reactive dogs the clicker seems better at grabbing attention when confronted with thing(dog,person) causing the reactivity. Great article! As a former engineer I felt my heart flutter when I read “broad band energy”!
BK Grice says
I was told that “good” did not make a good marker because we tell our dogs that they are good dogs all the time. I stopped using it for awhile and became aware that I seldom tell my dogs they are good dogs. My dogs are more likely to hear lovingly that they are rotten, ruffians, rapscallions, brats, etc. and they eat it up. So “good” remains my verbal marker, actually pronounced g’d with a hard g.
Melanie says
Okay, I typed a search for clicking in infants and it brought me to this website. I just have to comment that I am a mother of four children ages 7, 6, 4, and 1. When my 6 year old was a toddler, instead of saying yes, he would nod his head up and down and click his mouth. Then he resorted to just clicking, and we knew he meant yes. We thought it was the cutest thing ever! Well, of course, he is grown now and his speech is totally normal, and now he says yes instead of clicking. The whole reason I did this search is because my youngest is now doing the same exact thing! Instead of saying yes, she nods her head and clicks her mouth a few times! It’s crazy! And no one taught her to do it. I am looking for answers if anyone has any! Thanks!
binary options signals that work says
Concerning the reward, I think you are right – 50:
50% will not be the actual likelihood as a result of you could have eighty% for a successful trade and
5-10% for a losing one.. which is far from 50:50.
Ann Dupuis says
When I use a verbal marker it’s usually “YIP!” (high-pitched)… learned from the Take A Bow DVDs by VIRGINIA (BROITMAN) DARE and SHERRI LIPPMAN….
For some animals / training I use “Good” as an intermediate bridge (“Keep going” signal) and “Good boy!” as a terminal bridge (marking the task as completed). I was partially inspired by Kacey Cover’s “X X X” and Nina Bondarenko’s “x x X” (rising in pitch and intensity as a sort of “warmer” signal) with “EXcellent” as the terminal bridge / behavior-completed-here’s-a-treat signal.
I learned to use intermediate bridges working with my very cooperative but sensitive Arabian gelding. Basic clicker training wasn’t working for him (probably because I wasn’t skilled enough in shaping to prevent frustration). If I clicked and didn’t immediately give him a treat (kinda hard when you’re 30′ away in the center of a lunging circle), he’d have a temper tantrum. (They were quite spectacular airs-above-the-ground statements of frustration and displeasure.)
Likewise, he’d throw a tantrum if he did something that he thought was worth a click…. and I didn’t click. (That made it difficult to graduating him from click-every-three-strides to click-every-6-strides….)
(To clarify: his tantrums weren’t dangerous, they were always in place with no intent to harm, but they WERE impressively powerful.)
I found that using an intermediate bridge and terminal bridge (“x x x x EXcellent!”) gave him enough information on his progress that it smoothed everything out and avoided the displays of frustration.
I used the “good … good … good… GOOD BOY!” intermediate and terminal bridges mostly for building duration into behaviors. Training one of my dogs to lie still for x-rays is one example. I taught him to lie still, marking “good” every second or so as long as he did, and gradually increased the time I expected him to lie still. “GOOD BOY!” told him that a) he could move now and b) here’s a buncha treats! Taught this to my horses, to, very handy in medical procedures.
🙂
Andrew S. says
I just have taught my puppy yes as a marker and am seriously considering changing the word to something less sloppy and less common in every day speech – but I don’t know whether the progress already made outweighs the benefit of a stronger marker word. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated
Jessica says
I believe the studies indicate marker training using words like yes, bravo, or good, or even visual cues is just as good as a clicker. There is no difference in the end, but perhaps if convenience is taken into consideration marker training with a yes would be a bit more efficient on the handler’s part.
Codga says
Clickers are good for training complex tricks that require a chain of behaviours. You can pinpoint the rewards in time more accurately. But for normal household dog training – there simply is no point. Words work just fine and of course are way more convenient.