# reward-based resource



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

+R/-P Dog Resource WebPage


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

this by the way is a project of Leonard Cecil's - 
if U have a link [video, book research pub, etc] to submit, contact 'Buzz' directly. :001_smile:


----------



## LuvMyDog_Worldwide (Apr 1, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> +R/-P Dog Resource WebPage


_"And strictly speaking, it's pretty hard to start a -R protocol without a +P at the edge. But that's not the point. The point is, that in normal training and behavior modification, we try to stick to +R with as little anything else as possible"_

Isn't that what we all try to do? Some of us are trying to address the -R/+P... but that seems to be a taboo subject, even when 'Buzz' accepts it's necessary, the APDT accept it's necessary, even B.F. Skinner accepted it was necessary.... so why when the topic comes up the 'R+ only' evangelists state it's not necessary and it's either cruel, painful, or a quick fix?

I'm growing weary of the idea things work for "most dogs" and no-one ever mentions or discusses openly what should be done with the "few" dogs falling outside the R+ sphere, especially when the only recourse of the R+ camp is to state 'more R+' is the answer when the links they post state it isn't. No wonder this gets so confusing.

regards,

Austin


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

the section on research papers [journal articles, peer reviewed or theses] has an interesting introduction, 
from our courteous host, 'Buzz' - 


> _ These research papers were taken from various sources. As research papers, they hold to a certain
> format including details concerning methods employed, discussions and conclusions.
> Please be aware, that while on the surface more detailed, what one might call factual, scientific findings
> are not the word of goD. What is today state-of-the-art science can be skewed to represent a POV.
> ...


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

more research links - 


> Andrew U. Luescher, Ilana R. Reisner,
> Canine aggression toward Familiar people: A new look at an old problem, 2008,
> Error Page - Veterinary Medicine
> 
> ...


----------



## RobD-BCactive (Jul 1, 2010)

LuvMyDog_Worldwide said:


> _"And strictly speaking, its pretty hard to start a -R protocol without a +P at the edge. But thats not the point. The point is, that in normal training and behavior modification, we try to stick to +R with as little anything else as possible"_
> 
> Isn't that what we all try to do? Some of us are trying to address the -R/+P... but that seems to be a taboo subject


The vital context you missed out was this.


+R/-P Dog Resource WebPage said:


> When this page was started, the title +R/-P Dog Resource WebPage seemed like a good idea. Of COURSE, under very specific circumstances, we will use -R, especially in certain fear reduction protocols. And strictly speaking, its pretty hard to start a -R protocol without a +P at the edge. But thats not the point. The point is, that in normal training and behavior modification, we try to stick to +R with as little anything else as possible. And there is the rub. What does THAT mean? Its all a VERY slippery slope. So does anyone have a better title for the page that communicates to trainers and owners alike, what this page is all about?


The fear reduction protocol is likely considered Behaviourist territory, not something to be undertaken lightly by typical dog owners. So if for example a dog in uncomfortable at a certain distance to a stimulus, then perhaps you reward a wanted behaviour with distance, but do not move for unwanted behaviour in circumstances. That's R- for wanted behaviours and P+ could be used for unwanted by edging closer or turning to face the stimulus. The example I remember on forum, as a dog who did not know how to approach & greet other dogs, it likely under behaviourist supervision required to be taught better coping mechanisms.

Compare with the advised *desensitise* & *counter conditioning*, where the dog is intended to be kept gently under threshold, to become more tolerant of the stiumulus and furthermore actually change the emotion associated with the stimulus to neutral or happy by rewarding well.

"+R/-P Dog Resource WebPage" is not a good names, hence lFL titling the thread "reward-based resource".

Yelling at a dog can be R+ for barking.
Roughly pushing the dog away can be R+ for crazy jumping up & inappropriate boisterous play.
Hitting the dog with a reed stick, can be R+ for unwanted behaviour, as can corrections.

R+/P- and P+/R- couples have no moral meaning, to choose whether the light or dark side of learning theory is being employed, one must look at the behaviours and the stimuli employed after the response (See Operant conditioning - Wikipedia for the theory underpinning this).


----------



## LuvMyDog_Worldwide (Apr 1, 2011)

leashedForLife said:


> more research links -


And you've read exactly how many of these?

regards,

Austin


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> has an interesting introduction,
> from our courteous host, 'Buzz' -


I'd hardly call the damage his articles seem to have done to you a courteous act.

.


----------



## Sled dog hotel (Aug 11, 2010)

LuvMyDog_Worldwide said:


> _
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Andromeda (Nov 21, 2010)

LuvMyDog_Worldwide said:


> Um, Rob said it


Where? To make it easier for you here is his post:



RobD-BCactive said:


> The vital context you missed out was this.
> 
> The fear reduction protocol is likely considered Behaviourist territory, not something to be undertaken lightly by typical dog owners. So if for example a dog in uncomfortable at a certain distance to a stimulus, then perhaps you reward a wanted behaviour with distance, but do not move for unwanted behaviour in circumstances. That's R- for wanted behaviours and P+ could be used for unwanted by edging closer or turning to face the stimulus. The example I remember on forum, as a dog who did not know how to approach & greet other dogs, it likely under behaviourist supervision required to be taught better coping mechanisms.
> 
> ...


----------



## Sled dog hotel (Aug 11, 2010)

SleepyBones said:


> I'd hardly call the damage his articles seem to have done to you a courteous act.
> 
> .


You mean like the damage mentioned on the ECMA website formed by the shock collar and electronic training aids manufacturers in March 2004 out of their own mouths on the FAQs section.

"Mild static stimulation (because shocks not a nice word is it?) that your dog feels are designed to be undesireable (again undesireable is a much better word then discomfort for the dog or worse still painful) so your dog will avoid it.(no mention it avoids it when the trainer decides to shut it off) yet apparently its "totally harmless and humane".

Or even better No. 4 of the ECMAs facts out of their own mouths on their own website. "Any collar receiver worn for extended periods can cause a condition similar to bedsores, know as pressure Necrosis.

and you have the brass neck he who uses shock collars for routine training to condemn the aticles as damaging!!


----------



## canuckjill (Jun 25, 2008)

Re opened after a little moderating, if I missed anything or it doesn't make sense please let me know and I will try to fix it...Jill

ps a couple of posts were removed as after modding the next post didn't make sense


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

this is from a page off a link... i went to 
Links, Blogs, etc. on Leonard's treasure-horde,

& there i clicked on Animal Behavior Society, 
Applied Animal Behavior at ABS - Animal Behavior Society: Applied Animal Behavior

the list of pages is in the left-margin.  i clicked on Articles - & from that page, i chose:

Articles: Applied Behavior - Animal Behavior Society: Applied Animal Behavior 
there are 4 articles about cats, 3 about dogs; all are Applied Animal Behavior, AKA Applied Behavior Analysis - 
what is the animal doing now, what would we rather have her/him do, & how do we get there?


----------

