THE OTHER END OF THE LEASH

It makes me so happy to say that Tootsie is doing great. Right now she’s sleeping in her crate beside my desk. The door is open, but she loves it there. The only places she likes as well are 1) being in bed with me, 2) being on the couch or 3) being by herself in the crate in the back of the car. She likes it so well in the car crate that I am actually having to train to leave it. I’m assuming this is baggage from her puppy mill days and that she feels most secure and comfortable in a small, confined space.

She’s progressed so well in so many ways: I’m especially taken with her flipping around mid-air when outside after I call her to come, ears flying like a furry dumbo, her open, happy mouth taking up half of her tiny little Cavalier head. As I mentioned in an earlier post, now that house training is behind us (wheee!), she can be outside off leash as long as I watch her like a hawk and keep her close to the house, she no longer barks to wake us up and produce her dinner, so it’s time to continue work on standard training. We’ve gotten started on sitting on cue, but I thought it would be fun to start her on clicker training at the same time.

I’ve worked on sit off and on, never with much diligence, but she is getting the hang of it. I started with lure training–using the smell of a great treat to ‘lure’ her body into a sitting position. Now that I’m going to start her with a clicker, I find myself thinking about the two different methods of training: luring and clicker training. Both have advantages and disadvantages, but I find that combining the two of them can be especially effective in some contexts.

Luring has the advantage of initial speed: In the case of sit, a la Ian Dunbar, you hold a tiny, tasty treat at the crown of a dog’s head and move it back toward their tail (not up, straight back.) As a dog’s nose follows the treat straight back toward their tail, their body finds it hard to stay standing, and so the hips automatically collapse and voila, your dog is sitting. Bingo, the treat gets popped into the mouth and your dog just got rewarded for sitting. Once you have the behavior established, you turn the motion of luring into a visual signal, and then bring in the verbal cue and start minimizing the hand motion.  (For a more detailed description, see The Puppy Primer.)

Luring also has a disadvantage: If you’re not careful to drop out the lure and the visual signal early on, the movement becomes the cue. You can end up with a dog who only sits when you move your hand, not when you say “Sit.”

Clicker training has the advantage of creating razor sharp precision, which helps you communicate clearly with your dog. It’s a great thing to teach a dog that their behavior can influence your own, and in a good way at that. I especially like that in most cases, the dog initiates the action, rather than you ‘helping’ him or her. However, strict operant conditioning suggests that you don’t do anything to initiate the behavior, you wait until the dog initiates him or herself, then click and treat to reinforce it. But truth be told, I’m not someone who is going to wait for a dog to sit when they feel like it, click opportunistically and then wait again for the next time. Not when I can lure a dog into a sit, get 15 reps into one sessions, and then take over with a clicker once I’ve got the behavior started. I tend to mix methods for actions that are easy to lure and for movements or behaviors that dogs do naturally. I should warn you: some trainers feels strongly that methods should never be combined, but I’m an equal opportunity employer, and so have no problems doing so as long as you know how to use them together without confusing your dog.

[10 minute break while Trisha goes to work with Tootsie]

First I used a lure/hand signal (with treat) to raise her chin and get her to sit down. My hand was just inches from her mouth and head. She responded well, and I repeated it 3 times.  Then I moved my hand 2 feet from her head, moved it with the same motion as while luring her (just farther away). She responded well until I moved my hand farther away. Now my hand was so far away from her head its motion probably  looked like a completely different signal. I stopped there because I wanted to  move on to clicker training.

I “loaded” the clicker with 25 click/treats (small dog kibble, which she adores… she adores bird seed shells for heaven’s sake, so finding a motivating treat is not a problem with Tootsie.).

Then I lured 3 times relatively close to her head (to create a success) and click/treated when she sat. I then proceeded to disappear the visual signal, added the word “Sit” and in 20 trials had her sitting just to the word “Sit.”

Ah, but here’s an important lesson: I noticed that while saying “Sit” I held both of my hands behind my back. Wondering if that might in itself be a visual signal, I moved the position of one of my arms. Sure enough, she looked at me as if completely confused. When I put both hands behind my back, she sat again when I said “Sit.” But the cue that she was responding to wasn’t the word, it was the position of my hands. Easily fixed, I just began moving my arms and hands into different positions, saying “Sit” and waiting up to 3 seconds for a response, and clicking immediately when she responded correctly. By the time we stopped she was sitting to the word sit no matter what I did with my hands.

And then… experienced trainers can predict the next stage…. I moved three feet backward into the kitchen. Now I was in a different room. Tootsie again looked completely befuddled. Easy to fix; just critical to remember that any action, any posture, any context, any location can be a relevant cue to a dog. In just a few trials she was sitting just to the word in the kitchen as well as the living room. We stopped so that Tootsie didn’t become a Tootsie roll sausage and I could finish this blog.  We’ll take it up again tonight and tomorrow, and start on some tricks this weekend. Ain’t training grand!!!

Question for you all: I know that some trainers are true purists, only using one method or the other. I’m a fan of mix and matching, as long as one understands the potential pit falls. You? [And fyi, I haven't forgotten about following up on the clicker study I wrote about earlier (clickers versus just food as reinforcement): I'm playing phone tag with the author, but I'll let you know as soon as I know more.]

MEANWHILE, back on the farm: Willie and I have 3 new sheep to work. I don’t like working him on my small ewe flock now, because they have young lambs and huge bags of milk that have got to be miserably uncomfortable when they flap/slap around whilst the poor ewe is being pushed by a dog. Willie and I try to work them slowly and carefully, but there are times it’s just not possible to keep them from speeding up. There’s another reason: Willie has lost a tremendous amount of confidence since his surgery and confinement, and my most aggressive ewe, Barbie, has gone after him and won several times now. I hate having a dog fight a ewe with a young lamb but I don’t want her winning over and over again and continuing to erode Willie’s confidence. So I have 3 new Katahdin ewes with no udders and no lambs. They are flighty and easy to move and will be great for Willie while he builds up his confidence. Jim, Willie and I just split the 3 newbies off and put them in the orchard pasture high behind the farm house. It took split second timing and quarter-horse short stopping by Willie, but we got it done. Everytime I see him slam his forequarters into the ground I wince: cross your paws for him that he’s not lame tonight, I can’t help but worry. I’ll do some stretching as soon as I’m done here and ice him if his shoulder feels hot.

Here are the new girls, as yet not named (though I’m leaning toward Chili for the red one in the middle). Okay, they aren’t bathing beauties, but they will have a good life here this summer and will be perfect for Willie and me to get our paws back into the game. Those of you who work sheep know that the one in the middle is going to be the challenge: see that lifted chin? Oh my!

Here’s a wider shot, showing you the only reason I could get a close shot of the sheep! Good boy Willie.

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.

(more…)

We’ve been talking about secondary reinforcers and markers, and the good question has come up about the difference between them. On the one hand, we know that a click or a “yes” can be used to communicate to a dog that a specific behavior is what is about to be reinforced. Clicking or saying “yes” at exactly the right moment is incredibly powerful in that it is a precise way of communicating to an animal exactly what it was doing that will elicit the reinforcement (clicks are more precise than words, by the way).

However, you could also call a click or “yes” a 2ndary reinforcer, since to be effective it is paired with a primary reinforcer like food, and the animal learns to associate the click/marker with the treat, right? So which is it? Ah, you gotta love the English language: sometimes it helps us understand things, sometimes it makes things more confusing.

Let me answer that question from a different perspective. Ethology, the study of animal behavior in its natural environment, spends a lot of time studying communication. One of the traditional ways at looking at communication is to distinguish between the Message and the Meaning. The Message can be thought of as what the sender is trying to convey, whether intentionally or not. The Meaning, on the other hand, is the information the receiver gets from the signal. As every human who has ever been in a relationship knows, those aren’t always the same thing. So in this case, the Message  of a click or other marker is clear: “THAT, what you JUST did, is what will get you a treat!” [I first inadvertently wrote "meaning," thanks to an alert reader for noticing the mistake! Jeez]

At the other side of the signal, we  don’t know what the receiver makes of it–do they have any idea that we are intentionally ‘marking’ a behavior?  Are they consciously aware that the click/yes leads to a treat if they do that exact, specific thing again? (They don’t have to be to perform brilliantly, as a matter of fact we’ve all seen animals perform perfectly and then have it all fall apart, often when they start thinking about what they are doing!) Are they simultaneously or uniquely becoming classically conditioned to the sound of a marker (I think they are being CC’d, no matter what else is going on)… It seems reasonable that our dogs, if we could talk to them, would define the Message of a marker as both a marker AND as a 2ndary reinforcer. Perhaps what is most important from our perspective is how we define it, because that is what drives how we use it.Does this make sense? I have to admit sometimes I worry less about labels and more about actual behavior, but still, it’s a fun intellectual inquiry.

Question for you: I’m curious: How many of you use markers, of any kind, at all? Did you consciously decide to use a marker and follow it up with praise (sometimes, as a 2ndary)…? If you use a marker in the strict sense of the word, what do you use? Click from a clicker? A word?

MEANWHILE, back on the farm: Over 6 inches in the last 24 hours. No kidding. Another 1 to 3 today. Eeeeeps. Last night there were many small tornadoes reported in the area, one not far at all from the farm. I take these babies very seriously, the infamous Barneveld tornado (9 people killed, the town 90% destroyed) freight-trained just one valley away from my farm, less than a 1/2 mile away, and I will never forget the impact of the first view I had of a close neighbor’s farm, metal roofing blown over a 1/2 mile into tree trunks, 5 buildings destroyed, the ground littered with siding and bricks and fertilizer and corn and thousands of things in tiny pieces too small to identify.

I was in town with friends during the worst of it, and we were all happy to return home to find the structures still standing, the dogs, cats, sheep, etc. fine. Sorry, no pictures yet, it was raining, again, so hard this morning when I left that I didn’t want to take the camera outside.

But here’s Hopey-boy (don’t you love knicknames?), a  helpless victim of Sherman the Sheep, who somehow developed a wound in his neck and is attempting to blame it all on an innocent little puppy. Tall two-leg female is not upset, however. Sherman has been played with, tugged upon, bitten, and thrown around every day for a long time, and has shown an impressive amount of stamina. Besides, we just got in Polly the Pig (seriously) to sell on the website, and Tall Two-Leg is forced to take her home for the dogs to try out. Poor dogs.

I just finished reading a review copy of Karen Pryor’s new book, Reaching the  Animal Mind (Scribner). I don’t know when it’s coming out, I’ll let you know as soon as I hear (but you can pre-order it on Amazon now). It’s an inspiring book, especially for those that haven’t yet used clicker training on any of their animals. I don’t use clickers for everything I have to admit, I tend to use them most for tricks, or any behavior that is not in a dog’s normal repertoire.

One of the interesting parts of her book is a report of research by Lindsay Wood that found clicker training significantly faster than a verbal marker at training new behaviors. This makes a lot of sense, given what we know about sound and the way it is received. I did my dissertation work on sound, and learned that sounds like clicks (broad band spikes, basically) are perfectly constructed to get a lot of response from acoustic receptor neurons. They are also unique, and so get more attention than any words we could produce.

I also loved reading about her early years at the Sea Life Park, thrown into the “deep end” as it were, as a last minute trainer for the planned marine mammal show that was starting in just a few months. Karen’s ability to combine the science of learning with real live problems, and her intuitive understanding of the importance of figuring out why an animal is, or is not, doing what is asked, is truly inspiring.

Meanwhile, I brought Willie and 4 sheep to campus yesterday for a sheep herding demonstration for my University class. Willie had never worked inside in a enclosed arena before, much less in a setting with 150+ people watching. I thought he’d be a bit nervous, and he was, even more so than I thought. What interested me most was that the sheep had no trouble percieving and responding to it. They wouldn’t move away from Will unless he was just a few feet away from them. Normally their flight distance from Will is about 15-20 feet, (flight distance varies tremendously depending on the dog and the sheep and the context), but in the arena Will had to be right behind them to get them to move.

Poor Will tongue flicked his way around the entire hour, but he didn’t make any huge mistakes, never lost his head and so I am still proud of him. The fact is, Will is simply not the perfect herding dog. The pro’s would call him weak, in that he doesn’t have the confidence and the power to intimidate stock, especially bold individuals who are willing to threaten  him. The ideal herding dog takes complete charge over a herd, but without frightening them.. a tricky balance indeed.  However, Willie tries hard and I can’t help love him for it. He’s biddable and he’s game and he tries so very hard, it’s just impossible not to love him for it. He helped load the sheep up for the demo, and even though the ram challenged him (and ran him backward 10 feet), Will came back and reasserted himself, and the ram turned and trotted up the ramp into the truck.

As I think about it, I realize that I myself have never been particularly brave, but I’ve tried not to let that stop me in whatever I do. I have, after all, spent over 20 years working with aggressive dogs.  Could it be that part of why I love Willie so much is that I identify with him?

Who knows, but here’s part of why I love my two-legged guy, Jim, so  much: The photos below is of just one of two gorgeous flower arrangements he brought me for Valentine’s Day (did I mention he also brought his home made heart-shaped sugar cookies, made from his grand mother’s recipe? Oh yeah, and then there’s the chocolate he brought… am I lucky or what?)

And here’s why colorful flowers are so welcome this time of year, although I do love the fresh snow on last year’s flower stalks: