I just listened to a very fascinating radio podcast with David Kessler talking about his book, "The End of Overeating: Taking Control of the Insatiable American Appetite." There were a couple of things he talked about which made me think of behavior modification work. Here's a quote from his interview regarding dieting, but imagine that he's talking about a dog behavior modification program that relies on repressing the behavior that is unwanted by the owner:

"Diets don't work... diets can't work. Sure they can work - you have the old neural circuitry, and for 30 days, 60 days, 90 days you can deprive yourself; you'll lose the weight. But if you haven't laid down that new circuitry, that new learning on top of that old learning, you go back to your environment... what do you think is going to happen? You get cued again, you get bombarded with those cues - of course you're going to gain the weight back. You need to lay down new learning, new neural circuitry.... It's not simple, there's no miracle fixes, the old learning is always there. There are times when we're stressed, we're fatigued, and we're going to eat more."

Kessler studied "conditioned hyper eaters", people who cannot stop eating until all the food in front of them is gone. "Understand that the behavior is conditioned and driven. When we give the cue, we see an excess activation of the brain reward circuits. When they start to eat... the activation stays elevated and doesn't shut off until all the food is gone.... That arousal, it occupies all of working memory, it's what you're focused on. In order to relieve the anxiety, to get it out of working memory, what do you do? You eat it. And when you eat it, the next time you're cued, what's going to happen? Every time you're cued, and you engage in that cycle - cue, arousal, release - you strengthen the neural circuitry to ensure that you'll do it again and again and again. The behavior has become conditioned, and it also is driven."

Michael Krasny, the host of the interview, goes on to summarize what he read in Kessler's book: "You need to shut out the reward possibility, you need to change the whole reward value of the system."

I can't help thinking about dogs who engage in compulsive behaviors, or who seem to "can't help themselves" in their reactions to passersby, other dogs, the mailman, etc.

Listen to the whole interview on KQED's excellent Forum program.

I just read Whale Done! The Power of Positive Relationships. This is a book that uses animal training methods with humans. It is written by two authors of business management books – Ken Blanchard and Jim Ballard – and two Sea World orca trainers, Thad Lacinak and Chuck Tompkins. My impression is that it’s kind of a “gateway” book to the concepts of using positive reinforcement in human relationships. It’s a quick read – I read most of it in one afternoon – as it’s mostly a fictional story of one manager who learns how to apply positive reinforcement techniques to his business and family after a visit to SeaWorld.

Anyone who is already familiar with modern animal training techniques will find very familiar content here. I liked that they changed the “A” in the ABCs of behavior from “Antecedent, Behavior, Consequence” to “Activator” – “whatever gets performance going”. For business managers, they suggest that one of most common Activators are goals – the goals that managers set for their employees, and the goals that employees might have for themselves. They point out that often these are not the same goals, and that managers might then criticize their employers for not meeting their boss’s goals even when they don’t know what they are – so it’s important to make those goals clear. In other words, managers might be giving unclear cues, or cues that they believe are supposed to indicate one behavior but are interpreted as cuing another one.

I also liked the strong emphasis on redirection rather than simply ignoring bad behavior. Their version of the four kinds of Consequences is (1) No response, (2) Negative response, (3) Redirection, (4) Positive response. (Note that “negative” and “positive” are used in the common sense here of “bad” and “good”, not the behaviorists’ sense of “removed from the environment” and “added to the environment”.) “No response” is the same as “ignoring bad behavior” which we trainers recommend all the time, much to our clients’ consternation. Here they say that it “means just not giving what people do wrong all the scrutiny and energy we usually give it” (makes me think of how much energy goes into the anger I sometimes get into at my daughter when we’re late – again – and I feel compelled to go on and on with “What part of 'we have to leave in 5 minutes' don’t you understand?! When I say it’s time to go, you need to put on you shoes and stop playing and get ready to walk out the door….. etc., etc. etc.”. What a lot of energy I put into those blow-ups!)

When dealing with humans, for redirection they suggest (p. 34):
• Describe the error or problem… without blame
• Show its negative impact
• If appropriate, take the blame for not making the task clear
• Go over the task in detail and make sure it is clearly understood
• Express your continuing trust and confidence in the person

With animal training, “Go over the task... and make sure it is clearly understood” would be making sure that the correct response is well trained (highly reinforced) first, so that you can then cue it when it is wanted. When training a dog to sit instead of jumping up, you need to make sure that the dog understands that sitting will be rewarded – even in moments of excitement like the arrival of guests. When training a dog to look at an “intruding” dog without barking or lunging, you need to make sure that the dog knows that she can look without barking, first. Young children need clarification that "clearing the dishes" means putting them in the dishwasher, not just taking them off the table and leaving them on the counter; employees should understand the actual procedures they need to do.

Clicker trainers talk a lot about when it’s appropriate to change the criteria of what will get rewarded, and I liked that in Whale Done they avoid this jargon by saying that you don’t have to “wait for exactly right behavior before you respond positively”. They summarize this as “Praise progress. It’s a moving target”. Reward people’s progress: “catch them doing things better, if not exactly right, and praise progress. That way you set them up for success and build from there” (p. 37).

I think someone new to the concepts would probably like more concrete examples to follow things like “Praise people immediately. Be specific about what they did right or almost right. Share your positive feelings about what they did. Encourage them to keep up the good work” (p. 40). This reminded me a lot of one of my other favorite parenting books, How to Talk So Kids Will Listen and Listen So Kids Will Talk by Faber and Mazlich, and they have a lot of examples of this kind of reinforcement response in their book. Whale Done does include a few nice examples (p 64-66).

One of the nice points in the book is transferring your external positive reinforcement to an internal one that your “trainee” can give herself (this is the biggest criticism against using positive reinforcement techniques with humans, as in “Punished By Rewards” by Alfie Kohn, a book that is pretty much guaranteed to infuriate anyone who actually knows how to use positive reinforcement correctly, in particular how to raise criteria). I like some of the examples they gave here, like “I’ll bet it felt good when you finished that project before the deadline” (p. 56).

They also talk about finding appropriate reinforcers for your subject – which fortunately with humans we can inquire directly about. I’d want to hear more about how to distinguish between “short run and long run” ways of recognizing behavior – I’m guessing that praise (verbal recognition) might be short run, and offering a raise, more responsibilities, or other privileges are long-run ways for humans.

Whale Done does recognize that it’s hard to learn to notice good behavior. “…Through practice we’ve trained our attention to notice only what they do wrong. We have our eye out for the negative behavior” (p.87). This reminds me of George Shaller’s concept of “thousand-hour eyes” that a behaviorist develops after spending enough time observing her species of choice – being able to see the more unusual, the more subtle, features. Once you practice a lot of looking for “good” behavior, the easier it is to see it.

So I’d recommend this book to the business manager or parent who really needs to be introduced to the ideas of positive reinforcement. There is a “Whale Done Parenting” book which I’d love to read next; for now, for parents looking for more specific advice, I’d recommend the Faber/Mazlish book and Glenn Latham’s book, The Power of Positive Parenting.

This is the 4th and final set of notes on the book "When Pigs Fly" by Jane Killion.

Killion notes that it's not enough to simply reward behavior; you must teach the dog to enjoy training. She writes, “We must build an ongoing sate of excited anticipation that will keep your dog on the hook and vibrating with eagerness to see what you will do next” (p. 79). Patricia McConnell recently wrote in The APDT Chronicle of the Dog that dogs (and people) have a sense of "eager anticipation" when expecting some good result. "This subjective state is characterized by the energized excitement we feel when anticipating something we want... really... is there anyone who expresses 'eager anticipation' better than a dog?" McConnell asks. McConnell attributes the emotional state to the neurotransmitter dopamine, and notes that the dog may get a dopamine rush when hearing the clicker and anticipating the treat that is coming. This is a powerful argument for clicker training in general, and especially for a dog who is easily distracted or more interested in things outside the trainer.

One of the things I like about When Pigs Fly is Killion’s sense of humor: “One of the top reasons people bring their dog to professional trainers is that they want to be able to take a walk and return home with their arms the same length as when they set out.” She is full of hope and optimism as well, saying “However long it takes, that is the right amount of time for you and your dog. Don’t get discouraged and keep trying!” (p. 114). “Let go of the emotional baggage of ‘should’, ‘ought to,’ and ‘because I say so,’ and get back to training behaviors.” She is confident of success, and she is confident that owners will feel better about their outlook on life when they look for ways to reinforce their dogs rather than “constantly angry and nagging”.

“Biddable dogs,” Killion writes, “seem to be born with an abnormally high opinion of You. It is just not natural to want to give up liberty and all of the fun that goes with it at the drop of a hat, simply for the chance to be near a human” (p. 123). Many people who would benefit from this book would consider their dogs to be hyperactive, easily distracted, “Attention Deficit”. The easy-to-train dogs can focus on your training program, “and the distractions are just interference with the task at hand. Pigs Fly dogs think that the distractions are the task at hand” (emphasis mine). Killion suggests that you can “take the forces that seem to be working against you and use them to your advantage". I hope to help my clients see their dogs less as "hyper", and more, as Killion called them, "Dogs of Action".

This is Part 3 of my notes on the book, "When Pigs Fly!” by Jane Killion. See Part 1 here and Part 2 here.

Chapter 8 introduces the acronym SAFETY. Okay, I’m a sucker for a good acronym, one that’s easy to remember and clever. This one is:
Shape it
Add a cue
Frequent but short sessions
Energize your dog’s behaviors with hot reinforcers
Take it on the road very gradually
Yield on your requirements when you change something

Regarding “Add a Cue”. I’ve been telling my students that they should resist adding a cue – giving the command or telling their dogs what to do – until they were willing to bet $5 that the dog was going to do it. Killion suggests a bet of $100. Her concern is that if you give the cue, and the dog does something other than what the cue is supposed to indicate, “it will take many, many correct repetitions to counteract the ‘incorrect’ responses” (p.94). She goes on to suggest that it is your tone of voice that is more important than the word. “When you are coming up with your cues for behaviors, think of them as… musical notes that you will want to consistently sing the same way each time.”

“Energize your dog’s behaviors with hot reinforcers”. While this is the main gist of Killion’s book, at this point she provides a lovely set of examples of “hot” games for the dogs, including dragging a lure-course-like toy on a string for a sight hound, a furry toy for a terrier, or a feathery toy for a bird dog. A scent dog could be gifted with the chance to investigate animal burrows, etc. She suggests keeping the reward a surprise if possible for greater impact.

Many of us know “take it on the road very gradually” as “change the picture” (first introduced to me by Shirley Chong). She cautions that if you push this too hard and your dog can’t respond to simple, well-trained commands, “your dog is probably in over his head and need to go back to a less stimulating environment” (p. 123).

And “yield on your requirements when you change something” is the familiar “raise only one criteria at a time”.

Using the SAFETY acronym, Killion goes on to describe training basic behaviors, very familiar to professional trainers. She includes the “hand touch” or “target”, and explains that you can use it to reposition the dog, turn him away from distractions – moving his head to have his body follow.

For recalls, Killion gives an equation: [history of reinforcement for coming when called] – [level of distraction] = [likelihood that dog will come when called]. “Slant things in your favor by either adding ot the history of reinforcement, or diminishing the excitement/stimulation/novelty of the environment” (p. 129).

She concludes the book with the admonishment that training these basics will help solve the dogs’ behavior problems if you use invest in the training and then use the basics that you’ve trained: “Think of those behaviors as tools that you will use in your life with your dog. If you want to build a house, you will need tools and you will have to go to some effort and expense to get them. However, just having the tools is not going to build your house for you. It is what you do with the tools after you have them that counts” (p. 170).

Killion points out that luring, or showing your reward to your dog in order to get his attention, can backfire. “If you just dole out rewards as a bribe when your dog is misbehaving or not paying attention in order to lure him back to you, that puts the dog squarely in the driver’s seat – he can just cruise along and do his own thing until you notify that this next goody is ready.” This reminds me of Kathy Sdao’s story about a pilot whale who refused to “gate” (swim through a gate from one tank to the next). Trainers would get out a bucket of fish and show it to him to get him to go through the gate, whereupon he got his reward. But Kathy points out that he essentially got his reward as soon as the fish bucket appeared – so he was reinforced for waiting. His trainers called him “stubborn” but he had actually been trained to do a rather good “stay”. Similarly, if you wave a treat under your dog’s nose every time he focuses elsewhere, you will be reinforcing your dog for “blowing you off”. Yes, you’ll probably have a chain of “let attention wander until treat appears, then do a natty sit-attention”, but you’ll reward “let attention wander” first.

One exercise I recommend to my students is try training in silence. In Bob Bailey’s video, “The Fundamentals of Animal Training,” he tells of his pride watching trainers he has educated being still and quiet while training. Killion also warns against doing too much “cheerleading” to encourage your dog to respond (especially for a shy or fearful dog), noting that many dogs will be repelled by trainers who “continually speak to their dog in a high, squeaky voice, and dance around in a ‘fun’ manner… motivational means that which motivates a particular dog” (p. 75). She cautions that while you may look “motivational” to other humans, “it is, at best, white noise to your dog”, and save the animation and squeakiness for use as an occasional reinforcer. “In fact, if you are continually streaming meaningless praise and cheerleading your dog in the hope that he will be encouraged to do what you want, you will have ruined one of the best and handiest reinforcers you have available.”

The whole of When Pigs Fly’s Chapter 7 is a great resource for finding games that will act as motivators and reinforcers. She talks about exploring different kinds/sizes/textures of balls, playing tug, playing games with a bully stick, and using "feathery" toys or "mousy" toys on a string for bird-dogs or vermin-dogs. She also lists a bunch of games that can be played without props, which she calls "naked games" (she credits the term to Brenda Buja). (It reminds me of a story John Rogerson told, where he said he had used his jacket, his belt, and even his shoelace as a tug toy, to keep his dogs guessing whether a game of tug was available to them or not. He said you'd have to strip him naked before he ran out of tug toys. He then paused for a moment and said, "Even then.... No.....!")

She suggests that most dogs are more interested in chasing a ball than fetching it (picking it up and bringing it back) – and I can’t tell you how many clients have complained of that to me. My own dog, Flip, a herding dog mix, used to do that a lot. I think he said, “Well, I stopped that small round sheep from running off from the flock. My job is done. Oh, you want something brought back to you by mouth? Get a retriever!” Killion says, “The entire point of the game is that your dog thinks it is great to chase after the ball… So what if you have to walk over and pick up the ball to throw it again? Most of us need the exercise, anyway”!

I am about half-way through reading Jane Killion’s book on training hard-to-motivate dogs, “When Pigs Fly!”. I love the title of the book and its cover picture – a lovely bull terrier sailing over a jump in front of a rising sun, looking for all the world like a flying pig. And though the first part of the book has so far been covering basic training stuff that I’m very familiar with, I am really enjoying the way she describes things, and how she modifies standard positive training advice for “non-biddable” dogs who aren’t instinctively motivated to please their owners.

To start with, Killion notes that “only about 10% of dog training is about training any particular behavior, like sit, down, or come. The other 90% of dog training is about getting your dog in a frame of mind where he is wiling and able to pay attention and learn” (p. 16). She makes a point that you need to train a positive attitude towards learning, and a good work ethic, in order to keep your dog motivated to learn – especially with a “pigs fly” sort of dog.

Killion has some lovely ways of phrasing things in a way that should motivate the frustrated owner to pursue training. Here’s an example: “Training your dog is like a card game where you hold all the ‘consequence’ cards and your dog holds all the ‘behavior’ cards. Learning the rules of how to get your dog to trade his ‘behavior’ cards for your ‘consequence’ cards is the first step” (p. 17).

Another example: “When you call your dog’s name, you will see him running his risk/benefit equation and deciding whether it is in his interest to look at you or not… On one side of the balance sheet is a great big world, with all the interesting smells, sights, and sensations that God put there. On the other side all you have is the meaning you have invested in your dog’s name though history of reinforcement or punishment” (p. 34). Killion goes on to say that you can’t find a food or toy “that is more exciting than anything else in the world that your dog could possibly encounter,” but that you can get the dog excited about the learning process itself so that figuring out what you want in training can itself keep the dog in the game (p. 48).

The core of this game is found in the acronym ICE: Identify what your dog finds naturally motivating; Control those motivators; and Exchange the motivators for something you want your dog to perform

She calls activities that a dog naturally likes his “hot” activities, and those he is not as interested as “cold” ones. So you are exchanging the chance to do some “hot” activity in trade for doing a “cold” one first. This is classic Premack principle at work.

Killion reminds trainers to avoid any kind of attention to unwanted behaviors, even “nagging corrections” like eh-eh. She says this tells your dog that he is “free to ignore you… he does not have to solicit your attention, because he knows you will be working get his attention.”

I like knowing proper words for things, and I was thrilled to learn the word "crepuscular". It describes being active at dawn and dusk. This is pretty common for predators and scavengers - which is what dogs are descendent from.

Not only is it a good "cocktail party" word, but it will help you be more aware of times when your dog's issues may be more challenging. Unfortunately in our culture it usually corresponds to when we are moving through our homes in a rush - either getting ready to leave for the day, or coming home, preparing dinner, and catching up on our household needs of the day. This is also when dogs tend to get the “zoomies”.

It's important to just be aware these slightly more stressful times of the day may also be the times when you need to work with your young, hyper, or out-of-control dog more - or at least be ready to use "management" techniques to make sure s/he does not get an item to guard and defend, or have an "accident", or get too rowdy in play.

One client of mine calls it “arsenic hour”!

We all have prejudices, biases, and preconceived notions about particular breeds of dogs. It’s a very normal human trait, to categorize things and make assumptions about them, very useful for survival. Our ancestors were able to figure out that round things tend to roll, brightly-colored fruit are more likely to be sweeter than green ones, and that any animal that stared at us intensely was probably dangerous. Even though it is useful, this has led to some terrible assumptions in various cultures about people of certain looks, ages, or genders.

People who have interactions with dogs are likely to make assumptions about certain breeds. My husband used to be afraid of German Shepherds because he was chased by some as a kid. Many other people think, for example, that Chihuahuas are barky, terriers are stubborn, and border collies are “smart”. There are devastating laws being made or considered based on breed biases.

I’m writing about this for two reasons. One, I want to acknowledge the biases that I have. Early on in my career I learned from Jan Cohen about “filters” that dog trainers may use to see the world. Some of them may be useful: If we hear that the dog who is biting hands incessantly is three months old, we can probably guess that it is puppy play-biting (though of course we should ask a few questions to confirm this!). Some of it may get in the way of making a valid assessment. If you believe that Golden Retrievers can not be aggressive, you might make a huge error in your evaluation of a particular dog.

I have learned to overcome some biases, both from my personal experience as well as actual research (such as results from the Canine Behavioral Assessment and Research Questionnaire [C-BARQ] study). I know that Golden Retrievers CAN be aggressive; I know that for most pit bulls, you are in far more danger from the back end than the front end (they are more likely to whack you with your tail or fart, than to bite).

But I still have some assumptions. I’m likely to believe that a Jack Russell terrier will be high-energy. A Lab is likely to be obsessed with food and/or toys. A border collie will learn focused attention easily. A pointer might get distracted by birds.

When I was growing up, one of my best friends had a Rottweiler named Dory, who was a big love-bug and thought she was a lap-dog. I thought all Rotties were like that – and I’ve met many who are. I was very surprised to hear that they had a reputation as a scary guard dog. (My friend is still a good friend, and she just got a Labradoodle puppy! And pit bulls have taken over from Rotties, German Shepherds, and Dobermans as the scary breed of the moment.)

I also took horse-riding lessons as a kid, and Australian Cattle Dogs (ACD) were very popular at the stables. I was very scared of them – they’d come charging out of some unused stall when I wasn’t expecting them. I called them “unstable” dogs (rather than “stable dogs”, get it?).

Then I met Batman. Batman was an ACD belonging to my friend and colleague, Susan Ward. This is when we were both starting out in the dog training world; I think she had more dog experience and I had more training experience. Batman had had some aggression issues, but by the time I met him they were reduced quite a bit. I really got to admire his intelligence, his drive to learn, and his sense of humor. Batman passed away this May. He had completely changed the way I saw ACDs. I don’t think they’re all like Batman, but I don’t think they’re all going to bark at me around horses, either.

Often when we have a bias or prejudice, we tend to accept the examples that fit our expectations and reject the examples that don’t. “Well all Shelties are yappy. This is just an unusually quiet one,” we might say, not realizing we’d said that for the past four Shelties we’ve met. One of the things I strive to do, on a professional level, is recognize my biases, and question them. Not all Border Collies are going to charm me. There will be aloof Labs, and goofy, friendly Akitas. I understand the danger of labels and try to avoid them.

And now my 6-year-old daughter says she wants a Dalmatian…

Some very nicely-stated explanations about reinforcement and reinforcers, from Bob Bailey (from his video "The Fundamentals of Animal Training"):

First, he clarifies (as I have often tried to do) that there is a difference between reinforcer and reinforcement. Reinforcement is the process of strengthening a response; the reinforcer is any thing (object or activity) that strengthens a response.

Second, he talks about how to measure the strength of a response. One measure is the rate - how frequently the response occurs. Another measure is how resistant it is to extinction - how long will it continue even after reinforcement no longer occurs. Some reinforcers are able to create a stronger resistance to extinction than others, through a process called behavioral momentum. He gives a nice example of thinking of a behavior as a physical mass, and that reinforcement increases the mass, so that the behavior gains more inertia.

Primary reinforcer: anything the animal will work for (the animal "likes it"). (Bob then reminds us that when and where the reinforcer is delivered is important!).

Secondary reinforcer: a learned signal that tells the animal that a primary reinforcer is on the way. He says that "in the field", for practical purposes, this is synonymous with marker and bridge.

Both secondary and primary reinforcers strengthen the behavior - this is why Bob (and I) feel it's important to continue using the primary reinforcer (i.e. if you click, give a treat [food or toy or activity or praise]). The process of reinforcement does not end with the click, but ends some time during the ingesting of the primary (literally in the case of food, or figuratively in the case of an activity - think about when the enjoyment of a primary might cease).

Karen Overall in an interview with Duffer Schultz of ABRI Behavior Talk podcasts:

"We always expect animals to understand what we say, yet we’re the only species using verbal speech. If you learn a few signals in dog body language, the dogs you work with will understand you better and then they will be more invested in being willing to understand your signals and be able to work with you."

She mentions body language signaling, vocal signaling, tactile and olfactory signaling. She notes that it is always contextual – contest always comes into the meaning.

"It’s like going to a café in Italy; you don’t have to speak Italian but if you learn a few words you will enjoy your coffee better."

As a nice example, dogs who are wagging their tails are willing to interact, but the interaction might not be “good”.

See ABRI for this podcast and more.

There is a new product that I am very excited to review here: the Clicker Leash. As you’d expect from the name, this is a leash with a clicker built into the handle. No more scrambling for your clicker or trying to figure out which way to hold it; no more worries about dropping the leash as you manipulate the clicker!

The handle is much lighter in weight than I expected from the picture, and it fit easily in my hand. It does fill most of your hand, though, and it is not possible to simply put your hand through the handle to allow it to hang from your wrist (as I often like to do). This could be fixed with an optional lanyard. Having the leash in your hand might make you slightly more likely to use the leash to pull the dog into position when you fall back on physical manipulation rather than mental maneuvering.

The built-in clicker is a little softer than the regular box clicker I usually use. It is a lower-volume sound, and it also seemed to have a little more “give” and less precision. This is a really minor complaint for most pet dog training; it would only be at high levels of precision training that this would be an issue.

There are times when I’m transitioning a dog from on-leash to off-leash work by allowing the leash to drag on the ground (during recall training in a safe area, for example), and I’d be reluctant to do this with the Clicker Leash. However mine did get dragged across the ground and through cut grass without any apparent damage. The leash that it comes with is relatively short (4 feet I think); a great distance for teaching loose-leash walking. This is not the clicker you’d use to practice distance work, but it’s fabulous for use in a beginning class where you want to keep the dog relatively near you anyways.

Most of my students loved it. They liked that it put one less thing in their hand and found the handle comfortable. My Real World class students liked how easy it was to use when walking down the street. My Levels students liked it in the classroom. Most of them either actively liked the softer click-sound, or didn’t notice it.

I had a few colleagues try it as well, and they all noticed the “softer” clicker. One of my colleagues completely refused to try it, but she specializes in dealing with aggressive dogs and her concern was that her clients wouldn’t have a secure enough grip with just the handle and not extra loops of leash.

Overall I am very pleased with this product, and I intend to order a pile of them to offer to my students. For the rest of you – you can order them from www.ClickerLeash.com.

As far as I know, this is the first use of a representational match-to-sample test in dogs, as the researchers were able to get dogs to fetch a specific toy by showing the dog a picture of the toy. Fascinating! Read more here.

Just enjoyed the video "The Rules of Love", one of the submissions to the Canis Film Festival. Enjoy it here!

"Pack leader?"

Any dog trainers who are not using clicker training, but are curious about it, should check out Gail Fisher’s new book, Training a Thinking Dog: The Complete Crossover Guide to Clicker Training. Gail was a highly successful traditional trainer who discovered clicker training about 11 years ago, and her book offers a frank look at the challenges involved in switching to a new method – as well as its rewards. While I'll be honest and say I haven't read this book, I've read a lot of Gail's writing and I have great respect for her! Check it out.

I'm listening to an interesting discussion of using medication in behavior modification in dogs, here:
http://www.markiac.addr.com/PET_LIFE_RADIO/TP_player38.htm

Interacting with our dogs makes us happy.... One psychologist says, "oxytocin could explain why some owners seem more devoted to their dogs than their families"!

From the journal Hormones and Behavior (Volume 55, Issue 3, Pages 375-464 - March 2009): "Dog's gaze at its owner increases owner's urinary oxytocin during social interaction", by Miho Nagasawaa, Takefumi Kikusuia, Tatsushi Onakab and Mitsuaki Ohtaa

Abstract:

Oxytocin (OT) has been shown to play an important role in social bonding in animals. However, it is unclear whether OT is related to inter-species social bonding. In this study, to examine the possibility that urinary OT concentrations of owners were increased by their “dog's gaze”, perhaps representing social attachment to their owners, we measured urinary OT concentrations of owners before and after interaction with their dogs. Dog owners interacted with their dogs as usual for 30 min (interaction experiment) or were instructed not to look at their dogs directly (control experiment). We observed the behaviors of owners and their dogs during the experiments, and
measured OT concentrations by radioimmunoassay in urine samples from the owners collected just before and 20 min after interaction with their dogs. Using a cluster analysis, owners could be divided into two groups: one received a longer duration of gaze from their dogs and reported a higher degree of relationship with their dogs (LG); the other received a shorter duration of gaze and reported a lower degree of relationship (SG). Urinary OT was higher in LG than SG after usual
interaction with their dogs, but not in the control experiment. In the interaction experiment, a high correlation was found in LG between the frequency of behavioral exchanges initiated by the dog's gaze and the increase in urinary OT. We conclude that interactions with dogs, especially those initiated by the dog's gaze, can increase the urinary OT concentrations of their owners as a manifestation of attachment behavior.

Popular science write-ups of this at NewScientist.com and World-Science.net.

Just a link to a cartoon that says it, here.

There is a lot that can be written about using clicker training techniques to "train" or teach humans. Here are two YouTube videos I just came across that demonstrate.

This first one shows humans playing "The Training Game". The person who you see in the video is acting as the Learner, and the other person is the Trainer. The Trainer has some goal in mind that she has not told the Learner, and the Learner is figuring out what that is by trying things to see if they get clicked or not. It's kind of trial and error, but really trial and success. In this version of the game, the sound of the clicker indicates merely correct behavior - not that there is an additional reward coming. The video is here.

The second video is a little more complicated, since there are three subjects involved. In this case there is a man who is learning how to clicker train, and he is being taught through clicker training! His goal is to click and treat the dog he is working on, when the dog looks at him. The dog gets the click and the treat when he is successful. When the man is successful, he also gets a "click" - in this case a tone sound from an electronic iClick. So the dog looks at the man and gets rewarded, and the man marks and rewards the attention and *he* gets rewarded. The short video is here. Officially, the dog is being trained through Clicker Training, while the human is being taught through TAGteach. TAGteach is simply "Teaching with Acoustical Guidance" or in other words, clicker training for humans. Read more about TAGteach here.

This is pretty much just a link, to Helix Fairweather's great article on how to train a dog to become toy motivated. See CyberAgiity.com.