# Advantages of Reward-Based vs. Compulsion-Based



## David Ruby (Jul 21, 2009)

From what I'm gathering, it sounds like the trend in dog training is and has been going from compulsion-based training to a more reward-based system. By compulsion, I mean a simple leash correction for mistakes and praise for rewards once the dog knows the basic commands, not beating the dog or being harsh or excessive but a clear, fair, consistent correction. And by reward-based, I mean the food-or-toy reward when the dog does something right and generally a "no, try-again" when the dog does something wrong, with compulsion either being used much later as I understand it or occasionally not at all. Obviously there are different ranges between the two, but those are the basic presentations of the two I have been exposed to.

Two fairly general questions:

First, for those of you that have done both, what has been your experience in the difference between the two? How have the dogs reacted differently, (i.e. what pro's & con's have you noted one way or the other, have the rewards ever become a bribe, does one lead to the dogs working more with/for you as opposed to working for the reward or to avoid a correction, etc.)? I have read arguments for both (ala the Search function), however I would be interested in what people who have done both feel one brings to the table over the other and any elaboration over their personal experiences/preferences and why.

Second, for the typically old-school breeds or lines of dogs historically bred/trained with a heavier form of compulsion than is in vogue in the U.S. (e.g. older style of Rottweilers, traditional German-type dogs, KNPV Dutch Shepherds, etc.), how do they react to a more motivational/reward-based system when brought up that way from a young age, or transitioning an older dog brought up with a compulsion-based background (e.g. a PH1 dog or similar) if that is realistically possible? Would a dog like what I've heard of Wibo or Carlos or Arko do well brought up under that a more reward-based system or a gentler/more-restrained compulsion system (or I suppose, have pups from their line done well in that kind of system), or would they be less inclined to accept you as being over them in the hierarchy?

-Cheers


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Quote: 
From what I'm gathering, it sounds like the trend in dog training is and has been going from compulsion-based training to a more reward-based system.

Sure for those that never get anywhere. Foundation work should be reward based, but it depends on the dog. Esko sometimes want the food, but sometimes doesn't care, and is in general, a butthead. If I use the tug, then he gives me incomplete downs and such. It is just the dog, and he will be trained with compulsion and rewards. 

New trainers look for a "system" or "plan" that will work. You just need to go and train the dog the best you can. If you can start with inducive methods, then great, if not, then mix the two. No dog is alike.

Many of the people that have a "system" also are choosing their dogs very carefully and discard those that do not fit. THis is common, but I doubt that you are far enough along for that system type process.

New dog trainers suck at training. Just how it is, so don't be afraid to start and see how different your thought process become as you go along.


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

I have used a mix of both. Keep in mind what Jeff said about what a dog will actually work with and do that. My boxer is learning to down with a mix of escape and food reward. I couldn't get him to bait into position like I wanted without putting a hand on his butt. Therefore he is escaping the pressure of my hand on his butt, while getting food reward at the other end. He is progressing quickly with this method, but on some dogs that stimulate more when you touch them this might not work. Ideally for me, a dog bangs his downs hard with no touching and just food.

Once everything is going well with food reward He will have some compulsion in his life. Period. There will be consequences for doing the wrong thing, and he'll have an e-collor or pinch/choke chain for me to reinforce the consequences, whenever he is out, long line in place, so I have access to a correction. 

SO-I want to teach the behavior first (baiting), then I want to reward the behavior (command=execution of the comman=reward) then I want to introduce distractions to get the dog to have to deal with competing motivations, and maybe need a correction. I think a combined method to the training is the best way to go.

As far as the search function, what are you talking about? The searching ability/desire crushed by too much correction based obedience?


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

David Ruby said:


> From what I'm gathering, it sounds like the trend in dog training is and has been going from compulsion-based training to a more reward-based system.


As a PSD trainer, I think many folks are surprised that 90% or better of our training is reward based. Whether that comes from some of the more self-rewarding functions such as bite work, to using a ball/tug/toy and for some even food reinforcement for detection work. Some compulsion is used, probably on most dogs in a few areas, usually assosicated with control while doing bite work. Genereally speaking though, the tasks associated with PSD training are in themselves rewarding for the dog. Those highly rewarding tasks, can be used to as reward in the less rewarding tasks. Such as reinforcing a proper release, with a bite. The release is less rewarding, than the bite. 

DFrost


----------



## Max Orsi (May 22, 2008)

You are confusing "foundation" with "training".

All succesfull trainers use corrections, what differ from "old school" and modern training is how you lay the foundation for the dog to learn behaviours, which is usually reward based.

Foundation is teaching the dog how you communicate and developing mechanical skills in the dog (behaviours), before you correct him for doing something that he does not know how to do.

Once the dog has the mechanical skill to perform any given behaviour, you ask the dog to peform such behaviours rewarding only the wanted execution.

You use corrections as hard or gentle as they need to be, depending on the dog, when the dog has shown that he understand the behaviours to extinguish his resistance and mistakes.

It is not Black and white as most people assumes.

A sytem without the skills to properly apply it is as worth as any other.

I have owned a hummer and neils since I was in my teen, but I would not call myself a carpenter or nor I blame my hummer when I Ef up some jobs I try to do.

Happy training

Max


----------



## David Ruby (Jul 21, 2009)

Dave Colborn said:


> I have used a mix of both. Keep in mind what Jeff said about what a dog will actually work with and do that.


This actually comes from a fork in the road. There are two trainers in this case. Trainer A is motivational/positive-reward based, but thinks there is a place for compulsion yet uses it very seldom and only under certain circumstances. This is somebody I haven't worked with, but is very accomplished and who I would be interested in working with and in a sport I'd be interested in. The other, (well, two others, I know and have worked with both, but same basic methodology) Trainer B essentially teaches the dogs what is expected and once the dogs understand it they get praise when they do something good, a correction when they know what to do but decide not to do it, then they continue and life goes on. I have worked with Trainer B and seen quite a bit about how they work with dogs (working dogs, and rescue/OB), and think their approach works.

Trainer A reacted distastefully to a very mild leash correction on a dog that I had at training (the dog knew the commands, was distracted and got a light pop) and she flat out said that it was compulsion-based, the dog was only working to avoid the correction (which I disagree with to an extent, but see her point) and if I wanted to use that method of training to go elsewhere, but that she'd teach me how to use a reward-based training method. It wasn't a big deal to the dog, but it was abundantly clear the chasm between the philosophies and I respect how this person wants to train.

Trainers B & C see compulsion as making the dog work for you, not the treat, as well as just learning to deal with a correction without wilting just seeing it as a correction (when done appropriately and fairly). They also see compulsion in a more positive sense, more like gently pushing the dog (as opposed to harshly forcing the dog) to do things in OB and then praising them when they do, sort of building them up like a personal trainer (to be fair, that's my view/analogy, not theirs); I mention that because it is not harsh or abusive training, but it is very black-and-white once the dog knows what is expected/asked of it. They have bred and worked this line of dogs for several years and generations.

Both options seem to work. Honestly, the dog will be fine with either in either way of training, it's a matter of me making a conscious decision between the two. If I go with A I can't use the same methods as B & C. If I tried both I'd be building in inconsistency or trying to find some compromise since what A would do in a given situation is radically different than what B & C would do. Hence, I'm curious what others have experienced as I try to make up my own mind.



Dave Colborn said:


> As far as the search function, what are you talking about? The searching ability/desire crushed by too much correction based obedience?


I meant the search function of the board at the top-right of the screen.

-Cheers


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie (Jun 8, 2008)

I think Max has put the best spin on what I am working with in herding in terms of laying the foundation and then working with the dog post learning/teaching phase. I think it very much depends on the dog and there are no absolutes. I have increased the consistency of my dogs with marker based training. But it does not make them little compliant robots. The other thing I've learned that if you don't continue to work the marker trained behaviors, they do extinguish. As Max indicates ultimately for me it has become a communication tool. The dog knows 100% when it is right in my eyes and it helps eliminate confusion/stress in the learning phase. You still have to go through the process of working in duration, distance and different locations because dogs are so specific. Until you've done that the dog is still in the learning phase.

Terrasita


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

Max. If foundation isn't training, what is it? 



David, that whole search thing threw me pretty good. 


So you are trying to decide which trainer to use. My suggestion would be to use the compulsion based one and tell them that you want to use some reward aside from praise to work the dog. I am guessing they would be much less thin skinned than your trainer A.


----------



## Jennifer Coulter (Sep 18, 2007)

What is your goal?

To me there is a difference in the finished product of most dogs trained with ONLY praise and corrections, vs. a dog trained with things such as marker training and higher value rewards...even if the latter also employs corrections.


Do you just want a dog that is obedient? Would you rather the dog looks spirited (gay) when performing tasks? Are you going to be training things like come, down, stay....or do you want to train more complex behaviors?

I started training my dog with praise and corrections only, as that is what I was taught. My dog was not too motivated by praise, and he would get pouty if he got a correction he didn't understand. His obedience was very complient, but kind of ho hum.

I retrained everything from the begining with markers and using some toy and food rewards and my product is much better. My dog has a better communication system with me now, and I can train much more complex behaviors more easily. If I use a leash correction now he does not shut down, as he knows what he is being corrected for. So I don't end up using too many corrections, but when I do they work better!

I am not against corrections at all. I do get my hackles up a bit when people say they want a dog to work "for them" not for rewards, I find that view of dog training a bit anthropomorphic, but hey, whatever floats their boats. I am just as put off by treat trainers that never get past luring or bribing their dogs and that think a leash correction is evil.

I am a novice like you, I don't have "a trainer". I have however put a lot of stuff together into a system that works for my dog and I. I am not NEARLY done learning yet, I am sure I never will be. I look at dogs and performances I really like and say...gee, how can I get there?

I should have just typed "What Max said", because it was pretty smart IMO.


----------



## Kyle Sprag (Jan 10, 2008)

What is the best combination to motivate the dog for what you wan't it to do. This is what a trainer does. Reward, correction, conpulsion; food, tug, ball, praise, Pinch, choke, ecollar, hang.........:-s


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Having taken both methods to the extream I can only say it depends on the dog, the handler and everything in between. Simple huh! :grin:
You have to decide what works for you and your dog. Without expierience that can be a crap shoot.
I think compulsion or reward OR a combination of both still take constant work to stay on top of it. 
They aren't machines! 
I lean towards more reward based work, both training and continued work. Mostly because I can be a real ahole if I let the day get the best of me.
Corrections can become punishment and rewards can become bribes. There is a middle ground!


----------



## Max Orsi (May 22, 2008)

Dave:
"Max. If foundation isn't training, what is it?"

Foundation is giving basic comunication skills.

It would be a litte like A human (baby) learning to speak from its parents (basic comunication skills), but in order to become a lawyer, a doctor, an scientinst or a carpenter he is going to need specific good training from someone who speaks the same language.

The better the basic comunication and understanding skills, the better the success with his later specific training.

Happy training


----------



## Jennifer Marshall (Dec 13, 2007)

I agree with Jeff and the others that have stated it depends on the dog, and the goals of your training. I don't teach with compulsion. I teach with possitive motivation and markers/rewards, add distractions, and finish with corrections when necessary. 

I personally train in 3 stages: learning, distraction, and correction. The last two I sometimes combine, and I will go back and forth depending on the dog. Example, a mature pet dog of a client's has been taught sit but never taught to down. The dog can be corrected for not sitting, but is in the learning stage of laying down. I don't correct a dog in the learning stage unless it is for inappropriate behavior like barking, pawing, mouthing, etc. the correction is tailored to the dog and what it is doing.

When a dog is corrected it is learning something. The timing, type, and level of the correction determines what the dog just learned.

I learned from working with pets that no one way works perfect every time. The more extreme a dog is on one end of the scale or the other (nervy/fearful - hard/dominant aggressive) the more you have to think about what you are doing, and why. They can teach you a lot but you still have to remember that each dog will be different, even if they very similar temperament types, because of how they have been previously handled/worked with.

I am not good enough to train without any form of physical correction at all. It takes more time and a LOT of tolerance. I guess I'm just lazy and impatient ... LOL


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

David, 

I think this the problem all trainers face. What I mean is, We all are trying to figure out what's the most effective route to getting the desired behavior. The stumbling blocks I have faced along the way are trying to anticipate what the dog will learn, and what by-products may come from it. And being wrong many, many times. But those mistakes were and still are essential part of the process of becoming a better trainer. So do not fear making mistakes, embrace them, and go back to the drawing board. For me in the beggining the easiest thing to do, and really the only option was just to adopt someone elses program for a bit. Just because I did not know anything That gave me a starting point. I also tried a lot at the beggining to educate myself through the boards, and books, videos and what not on how to become a good trainer....Though I am not sure that has come to pass yet. I feel I am at least on the right road. I found that the reading books and videos for countless hours were worth the same as being on the field with my dog for a ten minute session...and doing a trial was worth about 10 training sessions in my education. I use to fear going out on the field and not doing well because I was very concerned that others thought I was good trainer...I found out later, most people are so self-asorbed they either did not care if I did good or bad, or they forgot about it before they got in the car to go home. I am not bagging on anyone...I do the same thing. But coming to the point where I am now, The best thing I did was go and train and trial. It seems to be with me that experience is not the best teacher it's the only teacher. And maybe I am just stubborn. I love to learn, and hate to be taught.

Now to answer your question more directly. I have found that I tend to go to punishment by default when I am clueless on what to do. This obviously does not sound like a good idea, but this is always fueled by fustration and heat of the moment reactions. This usually creates more problems, confusion and delay. The problem is not so much that I use correction, it's that I am stupid with it. When I use punishment intellgently and think it out...I usually have more success. It does not take much and we move on with training. The next problem I have with punishment is I use it when I mis interpet why the dog is making mistakes. I notice this usually really quick....because I am thinking.

If I could train a dog purley with motivation I would. It preserves more of the dog, the dog does not worry about me. The dog never tries to offer behaviors in rapid succession to avoid a correction, the dog remains more clearheaded. The problems I have with motivational training is basically timing and interval. Most of my big problems in trials is that the dog expects a reward and because I have done a bad job of timing and giving rewards. The dog starts to try and make me give the reward, or simply becomes confuses and starts to second guess herself if she is doing the right thing. 

So, I think the problems are not within the method themselves...but more within the application. That's been my experience. And I am always leary of people who think they got the market and push one or the other. The purley positive folks tend to be motivated by ethical reasons. And the complusion trainers think they are doing the dog a favor by being a "good" leader. And all will be quick to point out the problems with the other. And all of them seem to have 20 years experience....but what that really means is they have one year of learning and 19 of doing the same thing over and over again. What I see with the folks having the most success, is they have the experience to accuratley predict how the training is going to come out. And this is the skill I wish to have. each training session better than the last, and each dog better than the one before it. Not going to the field and just dishing out the same thing over and over again.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

How do you relate to the person who wants to use rewards only to eliminate undesired behavior such as a dog chasing cats or an incessant barker?

For things like that I know only correction to re solve the problem and it is an ongoing type of thing [bark collar for the barker, not trusting the terrier around cats if the dog is not under my immediate verbal control]


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

James, I can agree with a lot of what you say, especially about making mistakes! It's bound to happen so no one should not be afraid of making them. 

I think more importiant than wondering how to train, motivationally or compulsively, is to get to know your dog and see, through playing, through teaching him things (not necessarily for the dog sport) how he reacts, willingly or disinterestedly, and act on this in training. I teach my pups "Yes" and "No" the second they enter the home and find it useful later in training.

Most important, I find, is to believe that what you are teaching the dog is going to work. Just copying a method from the Top Ten will most likely fail, however good the exercise is. The more experienced you get, the more you can think the exercise through beforehand and recognise possible flaws. But, if you see it's not working for the dog, end up with another exercise that can't fail, go home, and, as James said, back to the drawing board.

I'm emotional when training, so can show when I'm pleased but also when I'm narked. I wish I were a "cool" trainer, but I'm not so my dogs learn to live with this. Luckily I've never had a downtrodden dog and they "pick themselves up, wipe themselves down and start allover again"!

There's too much talking about training, maybe. Do what you think suits you and the dog. If someone tells you to use more compulsion but you don't want to, find another way to train him, but your own way. If you think compulsion is necessary, then use it. Both are to be found in good training.

As for motivation, I like to see the dog motivated by the exercise in the long run. And it's up to me to reach this goal by being convinced by "my" methods.


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

"No one should not be afraid of making them"

Forget the "not"!


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

Nancy Jocoy said:


> How do you relate to the person who wants to use rewards only to eliminate undesired behavior such as a dog chasing cats or an incessant barker?
> 
> For things like that I know only correction to re solve the problem and it is an ongoing type of thing [bark collar for the barker, not trusting the terrier around cats if the dog is not under my immediate verbal control]


 
Just like I would relate to someone who thinks that thier is no place for discpline when raising a child. I would smile politley when they told me about their methods....then the minute I got around the corner 'dI talk trash with my buddies about what a fruitcake they are. LOL


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

Nancy Jocoy said:


> How do you relate to the person who wants to use rewards only to eliminate undesired behavior such as a dog chasing cats or an incessant barker?
> 
> For things like that I know only correction to re solve the problem and it is an ongoing type of thing [bark collar for the barker, not trusting the terrier around cats if the dog is not under my immediate verbal control]


I have an incessant barker - an idioctically (?) territorial dog. I've cut off the barking by means of flat collar twisting - I've told him the dogs are harmless (nearly more response?) I've pressured him, I've "downed" him. I'm of the impression that traits like these which I call "territorial instincts" are hard to elimiate, but force doesn't seem to be the answer.

Welcome for other answers!!!!


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

I had a dog who was fence fighting, barking her head off...she would not listen, the bark collar became useless, she would run from me, and go right back to the fence. I have not elimanted it but I made it much less.

What I did was. I blocked the yard so to limit her escape routes/ When she barked I hollared no! and then I went out there and chased her till she quit. When she figured out I was not going to stop...she got worried. She used to run from me without a care in the world. And when I caught her, I put my boot in her ass. She has learned quick, If I say no...there is no escape.

Sounds mean, But I know a ladie who stopped a neighbors dog from incesstantly barking with an air rifle pumped only a few times to just deliver a nasty sting. Not saying I like the method....but it was effective.


----------



## Chris Michalek (Feb 13, 2008)

James Downey said:


> I had a dog who was fence fighting, barking her head off...she would not listen, the bark collar became useless, she would run from me, and go right back to the fence. I have not elimanted it but I made it much less.
> 
> What I did was. I blocked the yard so to limit her escape routes/ When she barked I hollared no! and then I went out there and chased her till she quit. When she figured out I was not going to stop...she got worried. She used to run from me without a care in the world. And when I caught her, I put my boot in her ass. She has learned quick, If I say no...there is no escape.
> 
> Sounds mean, But I know a ladie who stopped a neighbors dog from incesstantly barking with an air rifle pumped only a few times to just deliver a nasty sting. Not saying I like the method....but it was effective.



I controlled it by allowing it to be a reward. Give a command. Dog does it. Release back to the fence. After a few sessions of this the dog would just come to me the second I walked outside because she anticipated the recall command. Then I would just redirect her attention. Then she just stopped altogether because she knew the second she started I would show up. A few months after that, I moved to AZ. Problem solved forever!;-)


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

James, I don't think anything is "mean" in dog "education". 

Keep on rolling with the answers, although in early Spring we are going to raise the height of the fence and then, I will try with all of the devices I have at my disposal and not just at my legal disposal! Otherwise it could run fail.


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

James Downey said:


> Sounds mean, But I know a ladie who stopped a neighbors dog from incesstantly barking with an air rifle pumped only a few times to just deliver a nasty sting. Not saying I like the method....but it was effective.


:-$ :grin: You have tritronics for multiple dogs for about $700..... or....you have a Daisey Red Ryder for $29.95. Holds 400 BB's so you don't have to charge it very often.
Very effective, very humane because it stops the shit immediately. Tied a red bandana to the barrel and one to the stock so they can easily see it when I step out on the deck and the world comes to an immediate halt. Just got to shake it once oer twice....or slam the door when going out.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

Nancy Jocoy said:


> How do you relate to the person who wants to use rewards only to eliminate undesired behavior such as a dog chasing cats


Usually I point out that while they are against correcting their dog for chasing the cat, and instead want to try a more "humane" (and usually MUCH longer) training method that is nicer to the dog, the cat is being abused. I have the same problem with the "purely positive" trainers I see out at herding, who are horrified at the idea of correcting their dog. Umm, OK, and while they want Rover to have a wonderful feel good experience, with no corrections, what about the sheep that are being torn up in the process? I guess their concern for "animals" is really only concern for Rover.

I'm not saying all purely positive trainers are like this, some will make sure that while the dog is being trained, the other animals are not being abused, but I see way more who seem to forget their dog isn't the only animal in the mix. 

Personally I train with a combination of reward and compulsion. Train being used meaning the entire start to finish. I teach with reward, but once I feel the dog understands what it is being told to do, I will reward for the right behavior and correct for the wrong one. 

I have never really understood the whole "purely positive" training thing. Other then to see if you can do it, why? Life is full of rewards and corrections, so why do some trainers feel it is ethically wrong to correct a dog when it ignores a command? Even a young pup is corrected by the adults around it when it ignores a command. I know if I ignore something my boss tells me to do, I get corrected. So how did it suddenly become "wrong" for someone to correct their dog?


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

I hate to see the kids some of these folks have.

I still recall when my oldest was two, a friends kid bit her and my husband grabbed the kid and screamed "no bite" in his face.....

Kid started crying and the mother actually said "David feels so upset when he realizes he has hurt someone" and my husband and I are thinking....he just scared the kid shitless..kid had never been disciplined in his life before that, kid did not know how to process it, but I doubt he ever bit again. 

And we were NOT particularly harsh parents. The typical physical corrections for serious infractions of social behavior [like biting] or safety issues [like trying to put things in outlets] but mainly consequences tied to actions. Kids not dogs so they can deal with a different approach than dogs. A lot of people don't get that "furbabies" are dogs, not people and are much more "in the moment" than humans.

------------

But I think for dogs, train with rewards and correct once they know what is expected.


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

Chris Michalek said:


> I controlled it by allowing it to be a reward. Give a command. Dog does it. Release back to the fence. After a few sessions of this the dog would just come to me the second I walked outside because she anticipated the recall command. Then I would just redirect her attention. Then she just stopped altogether because she knew the second she started I would show up. A few months after that, I moved to AZ. Problem solved forever!;-)


 
AHH The premack princpal.


----------

