Here’s an interesting question: Should you teach a dog the concept of “no, don’t do that?” If so, how would you teach it? This came up during a discussion generated by an earlier post, “Asking versus Telling.” It was mentioned that very few classes teach the concept of “Don’t do that,” but lots of owners want to convey that information.
I get why it’s not taught much, for a variety of reasons. First off, teaching a negative is tricky. (“Don’t think about red!”) In addition, the word “no” has been so inappropriately and, often ineffectually, used. I grew up often hearing “NO!” spoken (or yelled) to my family dog, Fudge, a multi-mix of a sweetheart, who none-the-less, thought the garbage was her god-given right.
The primary problem with “No” it is often used without any training of its meaning. My parents, dog lovers to the core, just said “no” louder and louder, eventually with more and more anger, until the dog finally stopped, or they didn’t know what else to do except slap her butt with a rolled-up newspaper. (Standard advice in the 1950’s.)
I may be getting into the weeds of acoustic theory here, but it seems to me that there’s also something about the sound of the word “No” that makes it especially problematic. Saying the word “No!” somehow easily leads to “Nooooooo” that leads to “NOOOOOOOO!,” which then leads to it being said louder and lower, and then louder and louder, until it becomes plain old yelling.
So, should we even try to train something that means “Don’t do that?” We all, at least in this village, strive to use positive reinforcement as much as possible. At the same time, life experience, and many of the comments I’ve read over the years, make it clear that it is hard to live with a dog without some way of communicating, “I don’t want you to do that,” or “Uh, you are out of line, bud.” After all, dogs do it to each other all the time, with a glare, a stiff posture, or a growl. In addition, we are human. We are social primates who sometimes need to communicate something akin to “No shirts, no shoes, no service.” So, how can we do this in the most positive way possible?
I thought it would be interesting to have a discussion about this issue. Here are some of my thoughts, but know that I see myself as just getting our conversation started:
Circling back to “it’s easier to teach a positive than a negative,” as well as the ever-important question, “what DO you want your dog to do?,” one of my go-to’s is LEAVE IT. If taught the way most positive-forward trainers do, Leave It means “turn away from that and look at me.” It doesn’t literally mean “don’t do that,” but it accomplishes the same thing. It’s easy to teach (one fist holding okay food, one holding great food; hold out the bland stuff, say Leave It and the micro second the dogs turns their head, reinforce with the better food from the other hand, etc, etc.) Kikopup has a great video on how to teach Leave it on Youtube.
There are, of course, other cues you can give that distract your dog from doing something you don’t want them to. For example, “Wrong,” is sometimes used when dogs are being taught labels for an action. Say you are teaching words for objects, and present a stuffed bunny and a ball. You say “bunny!” and the dog goes to the ball. Some trainers stay silent if this happens, and just withdraw the object. Others, on the other hand, would say “Wrong” here, and use it to mean “I’m conveying information to you that you’ve made the wrong choice, as a way of helping you out.” Theoretically at least, one could use this in other contexts. I don’t use Wrong myself, but would love to hear from those of you who do. Do you use it in other situations?
The common cues I can think of that most directly mean “don’t do that” are words like “Uh-uh” and “Hey,” ideally, said in a quiet, low voice. With some super-responsive dogs, all that is required is the word being said in an atypically low voice. Using pitch to convey information is a well-understood aspect of animal communication, first spelled out by ethologist Eugene Morton who wrote about the Motivational-Structural Rules that correlate low and “noisy” sounds (think growling) with aggression or authority, and high, “thin” sounds with appeasement or fear.
The effect of pitch on dogs can be astounding. If Skip is looking at the sheep and I say “that’ll do” in a normal voice he’ll sometimes not even flick an ear in my direction. If I say the exact same thing in a lower pitch (sometimes even quieter, not louder), he’ll wheel around and leave the sheep. So when I use “Hey,” which means “What you are doing is wrong”–say that Skip is flanking when I asked him to Walk Up–I always say Hey in a lower voice than I normally use. If he continues I will say it louder and lower, but then either call him back to me (taking away the sheep, the reinforcement), or tell him to Lie Down (another way of “taking away the sheep”).
Using pitch to convey meaning is all well and good, but is there also a way to specifically teach, in a way that is the least aversive possible, that Hey or Uh-uh means “don’t do that?” And should we? For decades I’ve stressed, “teach your dog what you DO want her to do, don’t focus so much on what you DON’T.” And yet… as mentioned earlier, read the comments from the “Ask versus Tell” post a few weeks ago. Yet soooooo many of us do indeed find ourselves communicating something that means “uh, what you are doing doesn’t fly here,” from saying their name in a low, drawn-out voice (raise your hand for hearing this yesterday, Maggie), to saying “Uh uh,” or “Nope,” or “Wrong.”
Here’s a case study: When Skip came, as a dog who had peed and pooped in his “house” for three years, I had to respond to the occasional times he lifted his leg in the house. Besides a doggy diaper and relentless positive reinforcement for going outside, I had to communicate to him that he must never do that inside the house, and eventually, inside any building. Obviously, “Leave it” wasn’t going to work here. I also had to communicate it to him at the speed of light (boy does that urine comes out fast!), and in a way that didn’t frighten him or compromise our relationship. On reflection, I actually did say just plain old “no,” the first time or two, instead of any of the cues I’ve been using for years. Eighteen years of conditioning with my parents apparently kept that stuck in my brain for use in times of crisis. However, what I also did, this time based on my years of experience as a trainer and behaviorist, was to say it fast, low-pitched, and clipped. There was no anger in it, just a quick, abrupt sound that got his attention, said in an especially low voice. I would follow it up with looking at him in horror and saying “Oooooh, we don’t do that here.” Again, in a low, quiet voice. Because Skip is super sensitive to emotions, he got the message incredibly fast.
What about you? I’m fascinated to hear what you have to say. Do you teach or use a cue that means “We don’t do that here?” Have you changed what you say over the years? use Leave It or Wrong? I can’t wait to read what you have to say.
MEANWHILE, back on the farm: Beautiful weather lately! Haven’t said that in a while. The clouds were gorgeous Sunday morning when we took a walk at Walking Iron Park. It’s perfect for us now, regrettably, because dogs are only allowed on leash there, and Maggie is now restricted to leash walks after straining her Achilles.
This is what Maggie thinks of being restricted to a leash for the last four days (and being helped up and off the couch):
Sadly, she doesn’t seem to be enjoying our new couch covers, which we think are ADORABLE.
Do NOT, on pain of nothing but kitty litter to eat for the rest of your life, show the next two photos to Maggie. While Maggie chilled out in her crate, Skip fell in love with Bliss, the new(ish) Border Collie of UW’s kick ass Physical Therapist, Courtney Arnoldy and husband Zach. Looks like Bliss felt the same way. (Friend Hixie calls Skip’s posture the “man dance.” Best title ever.) Look at Skip’s ruff! His ears and tail. This guy was all in, you could practically hear the red sports car gunning its engine outside the bar.
After series of rom-com greetings, they played “race horse” around and around the pen. I switched my phone to video to capture it, and got this:
This is what I call The McConnell Method, in which you can stop any behavior by getting out a recording device. I’ll bet you’ve experienced it yourself?
That’s it for this week, I look forward to our conversation about teaching something akin to “We don’t do that here,” in the most positive way possible. Join in!
Frances says
Very timely question – I have just spent the weekend with family for a birthday party – Saturday was a party with a dozen adults and two toddlers, Sunday just family but still with a toddler. I was prepared with pen and car crate but they weren’t needed – the babies were well supervised, careful and respectful and the dogs simply removed themselves when they began to feel a bit overwhelmed – but there were a couple of moments when an instant veto was needed, notably when Freddy watched the littlies playing for ages with a fascinating Fisher Price cash register, decided he needed to make his own claim and lifted his leg on it. “Fur-EDDY!” in a voice of absolute shocked horror stopped him and a watchful “Don’t even think it!” prevented any further episodes. Mostly I try to distract and redirect, and to notice and praise good decisions like choosing not to tease the cat but I do find myself going into full on Joyce Grenfell mode – “Freddy, what is it that we don’t do?” – when it comes to the very occasional annoying humping game!
Bruce says
Usual go-to is “Leave it”, but in more pressing circumstances a guttural “Aaaaah” does the trick.
When Red Dog fixates on some potentially critter-containing part of the natural environment I usually say, “What are you looking at?”, and she breaks off her fixation.
One that Red Dog trained herself on was “Alright, that’s enough”, which apparently I say when she spends too much time smelling some seemingly random patch of grass.
Minnesota Mary says
Great topic! I try to use polite words when speaking to my dogs. I say please and thank you. When I have to say “no”, it’s “no sir” (or no ma’am). It’s difficult to say those words in anything but a sweet tone.
The leave it command is especially important when visiting a facility as a therapy dog team. Any interesting smelling pill is potentially deadly, so “leave it” must be rock solid. A training facility here has a great way to teach leave-it. We sprinkle treats on the floor, saying leave it. The dog is focused on the treats, but until the dog breaks that focus on their own and glances at the handler, they are stuck on “leave-it”. Once the focus it broken, we say “OK!” or whatever your release word is, and the dog can eat all the treats. Not sure if that qualifies as teaching a negative, but it’s a good one.
Trisha says
MM: I absolutely completely and utterly LOVE “No Sir!” Brilliant.
Jackie D says
Because it is almost impossible for this human *not* to say something like ‘no’, I came up with ‘Uh Oh’. Because of the way the pitch goes it is extremely difficult to sound cross when you say it.
My first dog did understand what it meant, I’m not sure my current two do, but at least I’m not shouting at them…
Martin N. D. says
Our current two dogs do know a leave-it-type command, but we use “avast” as the cue. That’s the nautical term for stop/cease/desist. Because it feels silly to me and because of the actual sounds involved, it sounds like the happy cue it should be.
We also have a sound we make when the dogs are doing something they shouldn’t be (pulling, barking, standing on the street rather than the sidewalk, etc.) That was less carefully chosen. It’s a disgruntled sound that felt natural for us – and so does nothing to redirect our own, human emotions to a more pro-social state. Maybe we should change it to something sillier. Then again, I’m not entirely convinced it works at all. We were/are encouraged by our trainer to use it, and I’m reluctant to go against expert advice (at least when the expert is both ethical/kind and qualified), but I really don’t see my dogs change their behavior just because we make that sound.
Mostly, I try to stick to cues that signal a specific, desired behavior. A hand target or a request to focus on me almost always have the side effect of stopping the unwanted behavior. The only problem is that these are really fun behaviors for them, which means these tricks reinforce whatever the dogs were doing right before I say it. That’s great when I’m fast enough and can prevent the mischief, but counterproductive when I’m caught off-guard.
Judy says
My go to is no sir or no mam. Said as strongly as needed and in a low pitched voice but sometimes loudly 😋. I will also resort to what I call the family look. You know the one your parent gave that meant one more step young lady and there will be hell to pay. The loudest silent reprimand ever. Not sure if it works but I feel more in control.
Tammy says
Like you and others who’ve commented, my go-to is “leave it,” first taught for leaving something alone on the ground, then gradually generalized into broader use. It’s worked well for us.
I don’t use “no” because it sounds too much like the “go” used in agility to ask the dog to run fast in full extension through a series of obstacles.
The only time I used something dramatically different was when we installed goat fencing for use as agility ring fencing in our backyard. I needed my dog to understand that under no circumstances could she touch the fencing, even though we did not electrify it, because I didn’t want her to learn that she could essentially just kind of push it over and take off. So the first time she ran at the fencing and touched it, I fell to the ground crying out like **I** had been hurt. She immediately rushed over to me and has never touched the fencing again in the 5 years we’ve had it. I repeated the exercise with the newer puppy, and worked just as well, though I had to fall to the ground in mock pain a couple more times with her, lol. So, I’ll keep this in reserve for crucially important don’t-do-that instances, but “leave it” will remain the everyday option.
Marie says
Before I knew what I was doing with training, I did teach one of my beagles the word “stop”. She would lick one of her feet as stress relief, being a traumatized rescue. But obviously constant licking leads to sores, etc. So I would quietly say “stop” – and place my hand over the spot she was licking. Incredibly, she never went to another spot (such as the other foot) to lick – she just turned her head away. After a while, the word stop without me putting my hand there was enough to do the trick!
Laura says
I’ve ended up using “No thanks!” said pretty cheerfully but firmly, but I can’t say I trained it on purpose. I think Maya, who is fairly sensitive to my emotions, eventually picked up on the fact that it always predicted a stronger, more physical interruption (moving toward her, substituting a different chew object, insisting she get off the counter…). I end up using it mostly in circumstances where a well-trained “Leave it” might work even better, but as a fairly inexperienced dog trainer/owner I get turned around about how to get there without creating behavior chains of doing something undesirable to get the reinforcement of “leave it”+treat, and “no thanks!” doesn’t predict food here. (I praise Maya for redirecting herself, but the jury’s out on how highly praise ranks for her as reinforcement.) I count myself very lucky that Maya’s usual response to realizing that I know she has something I don’t want her to have is to spit it out rather than scarf it down or run away.
I also use a lower-pitched “ma’am” directed her way when I think she’s considering temptation—chasing the cat, counter surfing—but as one of those untrainable humans I tend to say “excuse me,” “don’t event think about it,” “I see you thinking about [behavior],” and who knows what else. The tone is somewhat meaningful to her, or just the reminder that I’m watching, but it’s no wonder that results are mixed.
Carole says
I used to teach my students that there are two ‘No’ commands: a casual ‘no’ for please stop doing that, and a more forceful ‘NO!!’ (like the kitchen is on fire) for never do that again! All my dogs know ‘Leave it’, and I also use ‘Hey!’ to get their attention and stop the behavior. (This also worked when I had a houseful if kids and couldn’t get the individual name out fast enough.) In addition, I also find myself asking, ‘What are you doing?’ They stop and look at me, usually with an expession of: “Um… nothing. Why do you ask?
Trisha says
Carole, I too ask Skip, especially, when he does something foolish while herding, “What are you doing?” I swear sometimes he’d answer, “Uh, I don’t know….’
Trisha says
Laura, you don’t sound inexperienced to me! So many good choices.
Trisha says
Tammy, I love, love, love your histrionics. Please send video.
Trisha says
Judy.. love your polite no!
Trisha says
Martin, yay for teaching me what “avast” means! Heard it a million times but had no idea what it meant. Thought it meant “look!” Or something like that. I also love what it sounds like and just might have to teach it as some kind of cue. Standing on a trial field and saying avast just makes my heart laugh. And, to your other point, if the sound doesn’t work, drop it and carefully train a new one. We all have cues that we should probably dirch. Or, say AVAST to ourselves when we keep usung them.
Margaret Tucker says
For 10 years my male lab was bossed around by my female rescue mix, and since she died a couple of months ago I find he is trying some things he didn’t do before. I do use “Leave it ” at signs of interest at something forbidden, but NO comes out automatically if he is already doing it. I try to tell him to do something else but sometimes removal is necessary (he eats everything,) However, I am not consistent enough and his skills are getting rusty. I think some retraining is needed for both of us,
Nana~Mary says
We have two “girls,” a Westie and a Cavalier. We have to use totally different strategies with each of them, due to the fact that the Cavalier had a vestibular event 4 or 5 years ago and is now deaf. When trying to get her attention, I have to clap (I have never been able to master the loud whistle that my husband can do!) But when we do get her attention, she has a vacant look on her face. (She also had a bit of a personality change when she had the vestibular event, so she keeps an “out to lunch” look on her face most of the time.) Any kind of successful communication with her is spotty at best.
The Westie is a different story altogether. (And here is the part where I want to say, “Who on earth decided that having dogs or other animals on television commercials was a good thing??”) My frustration is because she HAS to bark at any animal or bird that she sees on TV! (And if she barks, it usually gets the Cavi barking, too.) My first attempt at stopping the Westie from barking was to turn off the TV until the commercial was over. But I’ve been trying to “convince” her that she really doesn’t need to bark. I have tried loud “NO’s,” (I’m also a product of my “eighteen years of conditioning with my parents”) and I’ve tried saying “No” softly. She is definitely a work in progress! So far, the most successful way I have experienced is to say, “Oh, No!” in a quiet voice while shaking my head back and forth. The look I give her is one that says, “I am SO disappointed!” She is beginning to respond to this one. Sort of.
But again, WHO decided that animals on commercials were a good thing???)
Nana-Mary says
@Tammy, LOVE the “fall to the ground, crying” reaction! I hope you never have to use it in a public setting! How embarrassing that would be!
Trisha says
LOL, Nana-Mary, to who decided to put animals on TV. My wild ass guess: The people who are trying to make pots of money and know how much we love rhem.
Deborah Mason says
Our dogs, especially the older one, tend to bark at other dogs in/cars when they are in the car. It started with yappy little dogs (“foo-foos”) – “that’s just a foo-foo” to indicate it wasn’t with barking back. We now use it to prevent bathing back regardless the size of the barking dog (s). It won’t prevent bathing at dogs in nearby cars, but it fits keep them from answering barkers in parking lots.
Grace says
Great topic! I use the LEAVE IT cue when I don’t want my dog or a shelter dog that I’m working with dog to engage with / interact with whatever – another dog, food on the ground, squirrels, anything I accidentally drop that would be dangerous (wine glass, raw meat, etc.). If I use that cue, it means that whatever it is is off-limits, and I train it the same way. If I drop food on the floor & am too lazy to pick it up & it’s something I’d probably give my dog Lewis anyway, I say “ruh roh” (remember Astro on the Jetson’s?), which is his cue that’s he can have it; he looks at the food then at me, but won’t go for it unless I give the cue. I don’t use “no” for a couple of reasons: 1. like others who do agility it sounds a lot like “go, and 2. I do lots of brain games with him and want him to try things for himself or with me without fearing that he’ll make a mistake (do it wrong);” I use “no-sir” or “no-ma’am” depending on dog’s sex. “Oops” is what I use to let Lewis know he forgot something he was supposed to do – like stop just inside gate so I can close it before unclipping his longline – then “let’s try again” so he gets another chance to get it right. Lewis is a very observant dog, and has picked up on my exasperated “really?” for the moments when he acts like he’s temporarily lost his mind.
Anne says
We mostly use “leave it,” especially if he finds something gross outside; and also when our Sheltie very occasionally throws up his meal if he then approaches what he threw up as if planning to taste it. “Yucky: leave it!” also works.
For some reason, he sometimes approaches the t.v. & growls very lowly and if we are channel surfing. If the normal corrective phrase doesn’t work, we step between him and the tv, back up, & start moving him away from the tv. Sometimes we also ask: “Do you want to go to time out?” [in our mud room] After being placed there once – very briefly – he always stops when he hears that. [Obviously parenting & grand-parenting technique!]
Wendy Katz says
I used to teach Leave It (and it once saved my dogs when I dropped a Pyrex bowl of meat that shattered when it hit the ground) but now I prefer Kikopup’s positive interrupter, which is a cue to turn away from something and report to the trainer. She uses a kissy sound in her tutorial video; saying “Here” comes more naturally to me. In the “Leave It” days the dogs seemed to learn that it meant back off and lie down, which might be more useful for dropped food or pills. Turning away is more useful on walks.
Honestly, what comes out of my mouth in a crisis is “Aack!” so I should train that as a cue too. Whatever cue is used, I’ve found that some kind of longer term alternative activity often is necessary to keep them from immediately returning to the crime if used for household misdemeanors.
Raising an Aussie puppy has taught me that moments of pain can overcome one’s best +R trainer resolutions during that time of the evening when puppies seem to become possessed by demons. At that time, I sometimes find myself making a guttural OW! followed by a freeze and hard stare. That provides momentary relief but long term it works better to get her teeth onto a toy or else chasing tossed treats as we move to a place to practice relaxing.
A client of mine had the brilliant idea of using Leslie McDevitt’s 123 walking game to keep her 5 month old Samoyed puppy from biting her pants and legs as they walked across the yard or room.
That upholstery IS adorable. And lol yes, I’ve experienced the McConnell effect on many occasions. I hope Maggie recovers soon.
Trisha says
Grace, I love Ooops! And “Try again.” Funny, I’ve said “Wanna try again” to Skip when working sheep, but didn’t think of it til you reminded me. Good on you.
Shana says
We are also in the ‘Leave It’ category starting back whenHobbes was a puppy and wanted to eat everything he found, especially outside or on a trail. I have also trained him with ‘Stop’ as a distance queue in particular for at the beach when he was too far away or running toward something (usually smelly to roll in). He knows now to stop immediately and sit and wait for me or my husband to reach him with a tasty treat. I use a higher pitch ‘UhOh’ command at agility as a redirection when either of us do something incorrectly. If I use any command that sounds too negative (like NO) Hobbes will show anxiety and become much more interested in eating grass than actually running the course.
Ted Ridley says
I use Leave It to redirect pups from squirrels, cats, blowing leaves, pebbles, cigarette butts and roadkill from the time of their earliest walks. I praise compliance, and jackpot with treats if the pup makes voluntary eye contact. I also work leave it as a training exercise at home, approaching treats on the floor with a quick movement to cover with my foot if my dog decides to ignore my command. Later, with well established success, I rely on the default of no command to mean leave it, unless I say “Take it”. Usually works.
Training blind retrieves with bumpers, I say leave it when I drop them, then walk a workable distance away with the dog. Given the increased enthusiasm and drive when released to fetch, I tend to believe that leave it, in this situation, builds anticipation.
Jann Becker says
Several years, and dogs ago, we took classes with a very old school, choke chain trainer. She pronounced “Leave it” as “Leee-VIT!” and needless to say, it stuck for non-emergent occasions. Usually “Lee” is a lower pitch the “VIT.”
I’m pleasantly surprised when Leave It (however pronounced) works for “Whatever you’re doing, don’t.”
Our other go-to survival cue is DROP, for when they didn’t leave ‘it’ or we didn’t see them pick ‘it’ up. That one is low pitch, loud, in a firm “this is not up for debate” tone and I try to save it for those situations.
It’s also interesting to see the newer dog pick up cues from the older one; I don’t think I ever systematically taught him DROP but he does so anyways. He’s a skittish rescue and any sign of disapproval makes him back off and look like “What? You mean I’m not supposed to do that?”
Beverley Cardinell says
Yes, I do use “leave it” and also “uh-uh” regular tone and get her to leave it or dont pee there and a treat follows when she does leave it or doesnt mark = pee. But my favourite is “Private Property” for any place she is not allowed to go – ie an open store door, someone’s walk way or garage that is open…such a smart LBD i have. Great article, as always. Thank you for all you do for us and our dogs. Xoox
Ellen Jean Hale says
My grandmother used to say tut-tut in a sweet way to all her grandchildren when we were about to do something we shouldn’t. Tut-tut was never spoken harshly or paired with an aversive, we were never in fear, but we all knew to stop.
So, throughout my life I have said tut-tut to animals during training when they are about to do something wrong. For example, my grandfather (that grandmother’s husband) was watching me train horses. Whenever a horse was about to come undone (or something), I would calmly say tut-tut and the horse would stop. My grandfather was in the cavalry during World War one, which was an especially bloody war for horses and others. So, he got a big kick out of tut-tut working so well, which made me wonder why.
I think tut-tut functions as a signal avoidance cue. In signaled avoidance experiments, a CS is first paired with an aversive US. Once subjects learn that the CS predicts the occurrence of the US, subjects quite readily learn to use the CS as a signal to avoid the aversive outcome. Electric fences are an example. After a young novice horse touches an electric fence for the first time, the fence readily becomes a signal for shock and consequently the horse avoids it.
Because avoidance signals are learned so readily, it’s possible that while people think they haven’t paired an avoidance signal with an aversive, they unknowingly did. However, not necessarily. In the standard simple discrimination procedure, there is a positive (S+) and negative (S-) discriminative stimulus that are presented in random order over trials. The reinforcement contingency is basically, presentation of S+ is followed with reinforcement while presentation of S- is followed with the omission of the reinforcer. During discrimination training, subjects can learn both that S+ predicts reinforcement and S- predicts the omission of reinforcement. Once they learn the S- predicts the omission of a motivationally significant appetitive reinforcer, they avoid the negative stimulus. In other words, they use it as an avoidance signal. It’s possible that by patting horses on the neck after a correct response, they learned that tut-tut signals the omission of a pat.
To add a little more food for thought, discrimination training procedures involve differential reinforcement, both reinforcement in the presence of S+ and the omission of reinforcement in the presence of S-. Discrimination training procedures involve differential reinforcement because comparatively the stamping in idea through temporal contiguity (timing) between events and repetition doesn’t work very well.
Stamping in is part of behaviorists conditioning-extinction theory. Importantly, the primary determinant of successful conditioning in traditional conditioning-extinction theory is temporal contiguity between the to-be-conditioned events and reinforcement. Conditioning-extinction theory is likely why Patricia McConnell has stressed for decades to “teach your dog what you DO want her to do, don’t focus so much on what you DON’T”. Patricia McConnell is in good company. Pavlov (1927, pg. 117) originally thought that if he paired a single stimulus with food often enough, his dogs would ultimately respond only to that stimulus and no other when given a choice between the conditional stimulus and similar test stimuli.
However, in some cases even after over a thousand pairings of a single conditional stimulus with food, his dogs never mastered complete discrimination between the conditional stimulus and other similar test stimuli. In other words, accuracy reverted to chance when similar discriminative stimuli were added during testing; his dogs not only responded to the conditional stimulus, but they also responded to the test stimuli.
It’s not that Pavlov’s dogs were incapable of discriminating between the conditional and similar test stimuli. Rather, single stimulus conditioning does not produce reliable discrimination because it is not explicit. There was nothing in the arrangement to inform dogs of the task requirement to discriminate between the conditional stimulus and test stimuli.
Eventually Pavlov discovered that if he exposed his dogs to two or more similar stimuli and correlated them with different schedules of reinforcement (reinforcement and the omission of reinforcement), his dogs readily learned the discrimination task. After just a few random presentations of the positive and negative discriminative stimuli, Pavlov’s dogs responded only to the positive stimulus during testing. Due to its rapid learning effect, the procedure of randomly presenting one stimulus that is always followed with reinforcement and another that is never followed with the reinforcer has come to be known as the discrimination learning procedure.
So, the thing to consider is that the idea of temporal contiguity being the primary determinant of successful conditioning was disproven over a half century ago. By now it’s well established that the primary determinant of successful conditioning is a reinforcement contingency involving differential reinforcement, both reinforcement and the omission of reinforcement. And to train with a reinforcement contingency, that specifies both when reinforcement will and will not occur, is to train discrimination, which is more readily learned than with a stamping in arrangement regardless of whether the discrimination task is between stimuli or stimulus-responses. In other words, a little tut-tut may be a good thing.
Gayla says
‘Leave it’ for pre-undesirable behaviors.
Clap to startle and then suck in my breath (as if in shock!) for in-progress events.
And ‘that is incorrect’ for when she makes the wrong choice.
Although I try to focus primarily on letting her know what I want her to do, I think (kindly) teaching a negative is part of the information. Sometimes the communication is incomplete without it.
Evelyn says
Well, I tend to use voice tones rather than actual words.
There is a LOT of different ways one can ‘say’ Millie!
MAUREEN DWYER says
When my two-year-old intact male, Tibetan terrier was young he slept in a crate in my room. He was way past the stage of having to get up in the middle of the night to go pee. But sometimes he would be bored or restless, and start to whine or scratch at the door of the crate. I used kind of a low guttural voice from my very sleepy bed, saying Doolin Quiet. I usually only had to say it once and he would stop and go back to sleep, and so would I!
The low tone really helped to make me sound serious in what I’m asking/telling him.
Trisha says
Ellen Jean—fantastic food for thought, thanks bunches for this.
Regina R. Allen DVM says
I use what I guess would be an interruptor when one (or more) of the dogs is doing or thinking about doing an inappropriate behavior. The word or words depends on the urgency of the situation. For instance, if I dropped an onion piece on the floor & the dogs raced towards it, something along the lines of “ahhh!” stops them in their tracks so I have time to scoop up the offending food. Then they all get cookies for responding. If it’s a less urgent issue, like someone grabbing a shoe, I ask, “What are you doing?” & then redirect to an appropriate behavior. Seems to work in my current household of 5 dogs & with past dogs, & doesn’t appear to be damaging to relationships.
LisaH says
With my BCs, I usually find myself using “uh uh” with a head shake, and its generally sufficient. Then a lot of thank you and praise for the correct action. I may also use “stop” (in your tracks), “leave it”, or distract and redirect. All depends on the situation but my goal is to be consistent & not yell, using a very matter of fact tone. Lately I’ve added “thats a no fly zone” when my guy wants to run into the tree/brush/bramble/burr rabbit line … work in progress.
Kat says
My goal is always to equip my dogs with the skills they need to make good choices. They figure out pretty early on that when I direct sounds at them it has relevant information for them. When I think about it the way I convey “don’t do that” information to them has been tailored to each dog. For all her determination and drive Finna was actually a sensitive soul and a very neutral nope or saying her name in a sing-song voice told her when she needed to stop. Ranger almost never needed to be stopped from doing something. Usually just a click of the tongue was enough to redirect him in a better direction. D’Artagnan is similar in that he seldom does the wrong thing. If I see him about to do something I don’t want all I have to do is say his name with some degree of surprise. Falkor Bash, well, there are a lot of ways to say Falkor Bash including as a really exasperated growl. Sadly, when he was going through his “I’m bored so I’ll pull this book off the shelf and tear it up” phase he heard his name growled a lot. But we got through that phase without needing to replace my entire library and now a low warning “Baaash” reminds him that there are better choices.
Karen says
I teach leave it, which is very specific to a think, it could be something at home that is not for dogs, or a delicious (only to dogs) disgusting dead thing or deposit on a walk, or even just leave a toy that’s not theirs. I do use a uh uh type noise as a negative marker, and I think they learn its meaning just through simple repetition. How strongly I can use something like NO or a cross tone depends on the dog, all my previously border collies have been marshmallows, and even a slightly cross voice could make them into a slinky mess. My youngster is a completely different character, comes from world champion trial lines, and was bred by the owner of the world champion, and can handle pressure in a way that none my other border collies could, its interesting working with him. He is destined to be an agility dog, not a sheep dog, but I wanted that drive.
Patricia Anderson says
HAHaHa! ” McConnell method!” I sure do know what you are talking about. I wonder if anyone has used getting out a camera to stop a behavior, since it so often works that way.
Alex says
This is such an interesting conversation! Both my dogs (4 and 7 year old border collies) have a super solid leave it. They also loosely know what ‘no’ means since I tend to say it in an information giving context (like if I say let’s go outside but forgot to specify front or back and they head to the front door, if I say no wrong way they’ll turn around and head for the back). While either of those might be said with intensity, neither is generally said with any strong negative emotion.
However, I’ve inadvertently taught them that “STOP” means whatever you’re doing desist immediately. I pretty much only ever use it if 1. Playtime with me is getting too rough wrt wrestling or teeth 2. They are getting too wild and in danger of body-checking my toddler 3. The older one throws a tantrum about being told to move off the couch 4. The younger one is shriek-barking in someone’s face. It’s like the human equivalent of a very loud offended protest bark/warning/correction. I definitely shout and sound pissed off. I guess thinking about it the consequences of ignoring me, beyond me disengaging from interacting with them, are crate time but I can’t think of a time when either of them didn’t immediately modify their behavior.
Lisa McEvoy says
For my dogs, “leave it” means move away from it but I only use it where they are about to interact with something they will never be allowed to have. When I need them to stop doing something, I tend to say, “enough” and while I haven’t trained it to mean anything specific, it usually stops them long enough for me to manage the situation. It doesn’t teach them not to do it again however so I consider it an interrupter more than a cue. Sometimes you need that.
Elizabeth says
What if instead of teaching a cue such as leave it we were to proof a behavior of asking permission vs snatching while also utilizing already taught cues to give them an alternate behavior that is incompatible with the behavior they desire. I’m thinking of a method similar to Susan Garrett’s It’s Yer Choice game where instead of cuing the dog to not do something they wait/ask for permission to interact with something and it is not granted they just ignore the desired object and “move along” to something more appropriate. Combining this with a well conditioned positive interuppter like your vocal cue of “Hey” (when at a distance or where a collar grab is not feesable), or a collar grab (when in close proximity) as a consequence may serve as better information to the dog than a “don’t do that” cue such as “no”or “leave it”.