# Barking Mad Training & Behavioural Centres



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Has anyone been to one of these? The head office is in Stevenage which is just up the road from me & runs a number of courses from training & behavioural to fly ball & agility. 
Was thinking of going to one of their open days for possible enrolement but just thought I'd see if anyone had been to any of the courses.


----------



## London Dogwalker (Oct 27, 2009)

Franchise - avoid, avoid, avoid, anyone who has to pay their way into something like this. Reminds me of Barkbusters. :frown: 

What qualifications do any of the instructors hold? They say they give behavioural consults but don't seem to have any behavioural qualifications. 

Look on APDT for good dog trainers.


----------



## montys-mama (Dec 8, 2009)

the one in stevenage is very expensive!


----------



## CarolineH (Aug 4, 2009)

Barking Mad Dog Training School Hertfordshire Website for the company.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Thanks, I know it's quite expensive but as it's up the road it would mean it would be really easy to get to so we could do things in the evening. 
They have an open day on Sundays which is free so I might just go along to have a look .... & not tell my OH about prices!


----------



## montys-mama (Dec 8, 2009)

Sorry I sort of posted and ran earlier,
I take my springer to another one of their franchises which is a lot smaller, a lot more personal and also cheaper.
Although I absolutely adore the one we attend, I have not heard very positive reviews of the Stevenage franchise, in particular the training methods. (I also live very locally)
My puppy however has come on in leaps and bounds and is doing very well at his classes, I am also very happy with the training methods used there.

I think it really does depend on the trainer and is definitely worth looking at, as although ours is 'connected' to the franchise I didnt realise until the other day.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

I go to obedience training classes locally which are really good, Toby loves mixing with the other dogs & I really like the trainer there. They are held inside so I just thought that he would benefit from outdoor training as well.
Do you live near Stevenage? Where do you go?


----------



## k8t (Oct 13, 2009)

Hi

I know of Richard Clarke and to be honest, I think he may not be as positive as would be good!!

Back in 1986 I did a weeks course with the BIPDT and got an honours, however, even back then, although it was an interesting course and even more interesting that it was in Cambridge at the Royal Vet. College, I didn't really rate it that much. It was though one of the few places that a trainer could gain a formal qualification at that time. 

Personally, I find them a bit dated and although they may have moved on slightly, they were inovled with the Dog Borstal series, which was appalling!.

I also believe that membership can be obtained by anyone working with dogs, not necessarily trained or assessed in anyway and when I worked full time, I could have applied for membership, whether or not I had done the weeks course.

Look at the APDT site for something first.

Kate


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Thanks for that. I did read something else about another local behaviourist that had been involved in that programme. I know you can't always believe what people post but someone was saying that he'd shouted at a dog in a session & pulled it's lead really hard - if anyone did that to my dog I would punch them!!! 
The class I go to at the moment is really good for Toby& I had contacted other recommended behaviourist but he hasn't got back to me as yet. I will look at the APDT site though


----------



## Laurenaw (Dec 30, 2012)

I have read through this forum and have a few things I'd like to make clear:
1- They were never involved with Dog Borstal as a club, Richard just judged the dogs. 
2- The majority of instructors ARE qualified in at least one area of dog behaviourism or sport. 
3- They DO NOT use compultion based methods and mainly use positive reinforcement and positive punishment.
4- You pay for what you get.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Laurenaw said:


> I have read through this forum and have a few things I'd like to make clear:
> 1- They were never involved with Dog Borstal as a club, Richard just judged the dogs.
> 2- The majority of instructors ARE qualified in at least one area of dog behaviourism or sport.
> 3- They DO NOT use compultion based methods and *mainly use positive reinforcement and positive punishment.*4- You pay for what you get.


Hmmmm, where I come from positive punishment = compulsion...........


----------



## Laurenaw (Dec 30, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> Hmmmm, where I come from positive punishment = compulsion...........


Negative punishment is violence, positive punnishment is withholding somthing (e.g toy or treat). Negative reinforcement is compultion.


----------



## Guest (Dec 31, 2012)

Laurenaw said:


> Negative punishment is violence, positive punnishment is withholding somthing (e.g toy or treat). Negative reinforcement is compultion.


I'm sorry but that is incorrect.

Negative = removing something.
Positive = adding something.
Reinforcement = behavior more likely to repeat.
Punishment = behavior less likely to repeat.

Therefore:
Negative punishment = removing something that will make a behavior less likely to happen again.
Positive punishment = adding something that will make a behavior less likely to happen again.
Neither of the above need be violent.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Laurenaw said:


> Negative punishment is violence, positive punnishment is withholding somthing (e.g toy or treat). Negative reinforcement is compultion.


It is always useful to learn about things and how they work before posting about them.

This is a very simple glossary of terms which I think may be helpful to you?

Clicker Training Terms | Karen Pryor Clicker Training

If you would like to be pointed towards some books etc that might help I and I am sure others, would be happy to help.


----------



## Laurenaw (Dec 30, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> It is always useful to learn about things and how they work before posting about them.
> 
> This is a very simple glossary of terms which I think may be helpful to you?
> 
> ...


Books are useful but you need experience. Oh and clicker doesn't work for everything
"The only thing two behaviourists will agree on, is that the third is doing it wrong."


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Laurenaw said:


> Books are useful but you need experience. Oh and clicker doesn't work for everything
> "The only thing two behaviourists will agree on, is that the third is doing it wrong."


You are quite correct that experience as well as knowledge is required, but of course it has to be the RIGHT experience. 

Perhaps we could recommend some trainers with whom you could gain some experience of operant conditioning? Where do you live, I am sure there will e some proficient individuals in your area?


----------



## Laurenaw (Dec 30, 2012)

ouesi said:


> I'm sorry but that is incorrect.
> 
> Negative = removing something.
> Positive = adding something.
> ...


These phrases are Idioms. You can't just look up each word individually.
So you have just addmitted that BMDTS useing positive punishment isn't compultion. Contrary to what you said before.
Also, Reinforcement is a way of marking a behaviour with a clicker or a 'good girl'. Punishment is compution if it is negative punishment. Next time, before you take every phrase literally, find out what they mean.


----------



## Laurenaw (Dec 30, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> You are quite correct that experience as well as knowledge is required, but of course it has to be the RIGHT experience.
> 
> Perhaps we could recommend some trainers with whom you could gain some experience of operant conditioning? Where do you live, I am sure there will e some proficient individuals in your area?


I know the individuals thanks. I don't believe you know more then me.


----------



## Guest (Dec 31, 2012)

Laurenaw said:


> These phrases are Idioms. You can't just look up each word individually.
> So you have just addmitted that BMDTS useing positive punishment isn't compultion. Contrary to what you said before.


Idioms?? What are you talking about?! These are well defined terms used in behavioral science. An idiom is an expression that can't be taken literally, like "raining cats and dogs". A scientific term with an established definition is not an idiom.

What have I said before? The previous post was my FIRST post in this thread. I'm not even in the UK, have zero experience with BMDTS.

YOU were the one who said positive punishment is withholding something, which is incorrect.

ETA, just saw your edit:


> Also, Reinforcement is a way of marking a behaviour with a clicker or a 'good girl'. Punishment is compution if it is negative punishment. Next time, before you take every phrase literally, find out what they mean.


Wrong again. Wow... I'm thinking I may not be the one in need of finding out what things mean


----------



## Laurenaw (Dec 30, 2012)

ouesi said:


> Idioms?? What are you talking about?! These are well defined terms used in behavioral science. An idiom is an expression that can't be taken literally, like "raining cats and dogs". A scientific term with an established definition is not an idiom.
> 
> What have I said before? The previous post was my FIRST post in this thread. I'm not even in the UK, have zero experience with BMDTS.
> 
> ...


I am not wrong but if you want, give me examples of what you mean.
I know what an idion is. You were explaining each word individualy, which you can't.


----------



## Guest (Dec 31, 2012)

Positive reinforcement. Adding something to make a behavior more likely to repeat. I say sit, dog sits, I give him a treat. 

Negative reinforcement. Removing something to make a behavior more likely to repeat. I say sit while tightening on the collar. Dog sits, I remove the pressure.

Positive punishment. Adding something to make a behavior less likely to repeat. Dog jumps I lift my knee and thump the dog in the chest. Adding the unpleasantness of my knee to the dog's chest makes the jumping less likely to repeat (IF the dog finds being kneed in the chest unpleasant, many don't).

Negative punishment. Removing something to make a behavior less likely to repeat. Dog grabs at a treat, I close my hand and remove access to the treat. The behavior of grabbing is less likely to repeat as the dog works out a different way to get me to give him the treat. 

And yes, you can explain each word individually which I did in my previous post. 
Positive and negative have to do with adding or removing as in math. Reinforcement and punishment have to do with the frequency of the behavior.

The dog is always the one who determines what is punishing and what is reinforcing, actually it's the dog's subsequent behavior that determines if something is punishing or reinforcing. If you are beating your dog over the head with your fist but the behavior continues, then what you are doing is not punishment in behavioral science terms. Likewise you can bellow good boy all you want but if the dog is not repeating the behavior, the "good boy" is not reinforcing. In fact bellowing "good boy" at a sensitive dog may actually be punishing to that dog. Look at the subsequent behavior to determine if it is or not.


----------



## Colette (Jan 2, 2010)

Many people get mixed up with the terminology used in behaviour science so its nothing to be embarrassed about, particularly as terms like positive and negative have different meanings in day to day speech.

Still the actual terms used in animal behaviour are as follows :

Positive reinforcement is adding something to increase the behaviour, eg giving a treat for sitting on cue.
Negative reinforcement is removing something (generally an aversive) to increase a behaviour, eg pulling up on the dog's collar until it sits. You remove the collar pressure to reinforce the sit.
Positive punishment is adding something to reduce a behaviour, eg smacking the dog for jumping up.
Negative punishment is removing something (generally something the dog wants) to reduce a behaviour, eg removing all attention when the dog jumps up.

These are the correct uses of the terminology, I'm afraid Lauren's are incorrect.

I should add that a clicker is simply a marker, it must be paired with something the dog finds rewarding. You can train using positive reinforcement with or without a clicker.


----------



## Kara742 (Sep 22, 2013)

I have been going to barking mad for nearly a year now and have been very pleased. Although Richard Clarke once judged dog borstal barking mad as a whole does not seem to promote or be involved with dog borstal, nor have any of my instructors used methods as harsh as some of those in dog borstal. I would also like to point out that I have never seen an instructor pull a dogs lead or shout at a dog, in fact I was often reminded by my instructors that by shouting at your dog you are just making noise so how can you expect the dog to listen. 
I noticed that nearly all the instructors are qualified in at least one dog sport and they all have a very high standard with their own dogs. Although I understand that some people will disagree i think that it is impossible to train a dog without ever being negative such as saying 'no' and I believe that barking mad follow this 'rule' and have successfully helped many dogs with it and no matter what your own opinion is you have to admit that they are doing something right as I, along with many others happily pay there quite premium fees to train there and I think that it is definitely worth it.
(Sorry for rambling a bit I just felt that this thread was a bit too anti barking mad)


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

How do you become "qualified" in a dog sport?


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> *Laurenlaw*
> Negative punishment is violence, positive punnishment is withholding somthing (e.g toy or treat). Negative reinforcement is compultion.
> http://www.petforums.co.uk/dog-trai...ing-behavioural-centres-2.html#post1062568066


You seem to be completely confused between operant conditioning & some kind of human behaviour towards another human or other species.

As for the later, all dog trainers, regardless of what they call their 'method', attempt to use 'negative punishment' as a base of teaching, negative punishment is an aversive. As has been pointed out before, it's only the animal who perceives what is and what is not 'punishing' & that can only be judged by empirical observation of the animal in question.

Of you (anyone) use toilet paper then thats a conditioned 'negative reinforced' behaviour.

Can you clarify if you are talking about some method or other or if you are intending to mean OC (operant conditioning process). If it's the later then the edu vids below maybe be useful to you, not least because they save pages upon pages of unnecessary, time consuming, writing.

The translation of OC behaviours is at the beggining so you don't have to watch what can be boring footage of the behaviours.

B F Skinners -Co-Active Positive & Negative Reinforced Behaviours - YouTube

B F Skinner Translated, Negative Reinforded Behaviours: Avoidance Responses To Aversive Stimuli. - YouTube
.


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> *Ouesi*
> Positive punishment. Adding something to make a behavior less likely to repeat. Dog jumps I lift my knee and thump the dog in the chest. Adding the unpleasantness of my knee to the dog's chest makes the jumping less likely to repeat (IF the dog finds being kneed in the chest unpleasant, many don't).


There is no such thing as 'positive' punishment in OC, thats just made up from nowhere & anywhere.

No one can change OC, it's Skinners theory one else's, 'punishment' is only translated one way ie 'negative' = removed.
.


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

The only way to find out if you approve of a trainer`s methods is to go and watch a class. 
Without your dog.


----------



## Kara742 (Sep 22, 2013)

smokeybear said:


> How do you become "qualified" in a dog sport?


Qualified may of been the wrong word to use but the majority of instructors have been trained in a dog sport to a high standard where they can compete. My point is they all seem to be experienced, no matter what qualifications they have and I can't deny that they do their job well


----------



## Guest (Sep 22, 2013)

SleepyBones said:


> There is no such thing as 'positive' punishment in OC, thats just made up from nowhere & anywhere.
> 
> No one can change OC, it's Skinners theory one else's, 'punishment' is only translated one way ie 'negative' = removed.
> .


No, that is incorrect. There is absolutely a positive punishment quadrant to OC. Actually there are 5 consequences of behavior if you include extinction.

You seem really stuck on Skinner. You do know that others after Skinner have also studied and theorized on behavior and we have their knowledge to pull from too right?
First off, the idea of consequential learning was not original nor unique to Skinner. Thorndike before him was putting cats in mazes, and there were others too.

Secondly, Skinner does not own OC theory. See, that's the beauty of science (as opposed to dogma), as new information presents itself, scientists monitor and adjust as needed and incorporate the new knowledge in to the theories. You know, like when Newton thought the smallest particle was an atom? Scientists didn't stop there, they kept experimenting and learning.

Skinner conducted his experiments in the 1920's and 30's. We have come a long way since the Skinner box when it comes to what we understand about behavioral science. I suggest you catch up.


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> You seem really stuck on Skinner.


I have never seen such disrespect shown to the person whose OC terminology changed psychology into what is now known as 'behaviourism''.

Please show respect to the man whose terminology you either misuse/misunderstand or have been mislead into misquoting & misleading others. On not ONE occasion have I seen you cite the very founder of behaviourism.

Skinner is the recognised founder of the terminology which constitutes the principles OC, show him some respect, alternatively cite one of your published papers which cite where Skinner ever (*ever*) translated punishment both ways, punishment simply means a behaviour is removed (= negative)

In (1) 1976 Skinner yet again defined an operant punishment, he wrote _punishment is designed to remove behavior from a repertoire_.

Now Ouesi, *unless* you can cite where Prof Skinner wrote there was something called a 'positive punishment' stop misquoting him, making things up about him & show the worlds most eminant, recognised, respected, primary authority on OC terminology show some respect.
.

Refs
1. Skinner B F (1976) _About Behaviorism_ P68, Random House, NY.
.


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> Skinner does not own OC theory


Grow up.
.


----------



## Kara742 (Sep 22, 2013)

Yes, skinner is important. He is, after all, the basis for dog training today but that doesn't mean his ideas can't be developed so don't go dismissing positive punishment just because you need to keep up with the changes in dog behaviour.


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> dismissing positive punishment just because you need to keep up with the changes in dog behaviour.


Skinners theory is not species specific related.

I am not and never have "dismissed" positive punishment, I am saying (to repeat) it is not a part of operant conditioning.

I may be wrong but seems Ouesi & others seem to be describing a teachers behaviour more than a concept from some kind of, or someones, theory of learning.

If you dont accept operant conditioning theory thats up to you.
.


----------



## Guest (Sep 22, 2013)

How can I be misquoting someone I never quoted nor claimed to quote?

Operant conditioning as defined by modern science (yes, many thanks to the work of Thorndike, Watson, Skinner and others), is ONE of many theories of learning where behavior is modified by consequences. Consequential learning if you will. Different than instinctual learning, or conditioned responses, or observational learning...

OC is based on the four possible consequences of behavior (five if you count extinction). 
1) Behavior is strengthened because something pleasant was added.
2) Behavior is strengthened because something unpleasant was removed.
3) Behavior is weakened because something pleasant was removed.
4) Behavior is weakened because something unpleasant was added.

I don't know of a single person familiar with OC who disagrees with the four consequences of behavior. Any textbook, online search, behaviorist handout, college professor, will tell you the same thing. I'm not quoting anyone because this is considered common knowledge. Kind of like I don't have to quote Copernicus to state that the earth revolves around the sun not the other way around.


----------

