# marking, releasing and rewarding



## Elliot Parker (Jan 7, 2008)

A previous thread about releasing and rewarding got me thinking about marking a behavior and then the release and reward. For example, in teaching a dog to focus on the handler, one would give the command, mark and release. For me I would say "me" wait for my dog to make eye contact with me, mark with "good" and release with "okay". Over time I want to build the length of time my dog focuses on me before releasing/rewarding but when should I mark the behavior. In other words, should I mark as soon as he focuses but wait thirty, forty, fifty, etc... seconds before releasing/rewarding? Is there a verbal cue I can give my dog to let him know he is doing what I want and keep it up and he will get his reward? I hope this makes sense.


----------



## Jerry Lyda (Apr 4, 2006)

It makes perfect sence Elliot.
""In other words, should I mark as soon as he focuses but wait thirty, forty, fifty, etc... seconds before releasing/rewarding? ""

Yes as soon as he focuses on you. You can tell him in a low ,quite. calm voice, good. As time goes just say good pause and say good again and again so that he knows you are pleased with his focus or anyother command you may be working on. Clear communications (Ivan). (Me) if you can keep the gray color out then he will know black from white, right from wrong.The trick is getting the gray out.


----------



## David Scholes (Jul 12, 2008)

For me, I prefer to use "good" as a reinforcing marker, letting the dog know they are on track doing what I want and keep doing that and you might earn a reward. I use a tongue click as my marker which also acts as the release. To me the marker signifies the dog just won a high value reward and should receive it promptly so I also consider it a release so I can give the treat or ball etc. So, I essentially sometimes use soothing praise while I want them to hold then mark & treat. Just gradually increase the duration before the marker and they'll get the idea they need to hold or they won't earn a reward. Later I transition to an okay for a release without a reward (other than some praise). I personally don't like using a word for the marker because I want it to be quick for marking the desired action the moment it occurs and I don't want any confusion on if they earned a reward or not.

I've only learned this from reading then experimentation on horses (mustangs) and now dogs so if anyone has any ideas for improvement, I'm all ears.


----------



## David Scholes (Jul 12, 2008)

I use the tongue click while riding my horses to train various actions. Heaven help a rider who clicks their tongue while galloping at high speed on one of my horses. The brakes go on instantly so they'll fly over the horses head if they aren't expecting it.


----------



## Michele McAtee (Apr 10, 2006)

Jerry Lyda said:


> It makes perfect sence Elliot.
> ""In other words, should I mark as soon as he focuses but wait thirty, forty, fifty, etc... seconds before releasing/rewarding? ""
> 
> Yes as soon as he focuses on you. You can tell him in a low ,quite. calm voice, good. As time goes just say good pause and say good again and again so that he knows you are pleased with his focus or anyother command you may be working on. Clear communications (Ivan). (Me) if you can keep the gray color out then he will know black from white, right from wrong.The trick is getting the gray out.


It can sound like this: 
"Goooooooood. Gooooooooooooood. Thas right..." (JMO) 
and eventually add pets or a dangling tug for distractions.

That's pretty funny (?) about your horse, David.


----------



## Elliot Parker (Jan 7, 2008)

Jerry, David and Michele - Thanks for your feedback. 

One other question. In teaching a new comand, let's use the focus as an example again, if the dog looks away after the mark but before the release should I just mark again as soon as he re-establishes eye contact or tell him "no", give the comand again and mark. Thanks again.


----------



## Michele McAtee (Apr 10, 2006)

David Scholes said:


> For me, I prefer to use "good" as a reinforcing marker, letting the dog know they are on track doing what I want and keep doing that and you might earn a reward. I use a tongue click as my marker which also acts as the release. To me the marker signifies the dog just won a high value reward and should receive it promptly



David says it well there.

The mark is the release. 

IE: You say me. Dog looks at you. You mark (with your word--OK) and then treat or ball a clear second later as secondary reinforcer. The "good" comes in while the dog is doing what you are asking him to do.

Leerburg just release a new DVD on marker training
http://leerburg.com/219.htm
(BTW, that is my pup on that page-Heh!)

and heres some further information:
http://leerburg.com/markers.htm


----------



## David Scholes (Jul 12, 2008)

Elliot Parker said:


> Jerry, David and Michele - Thanks for your feedback.
> 
> One other question. In teaching a new comand, let's use the focus as an example again, if the dog looks away after the mark but before the release should I just mark again as soon as he re-establishes eye contact or tell him "no", give the comand again and mark. Thanks again.


NO. THE MARK IS THE RELEASE. The only time I would do what you describe is if my timing was off on the mark and I marked at the instant the dog looked away (in focus example)... but I wouldn't say "no".. i'd just ignore and redo the command and mark the desired behavior (which also releases) and give reward.

My strong opinion is that if you do a MARK then also a separate RELEASE command... you will confuse the dog and your mark will not have the impact of success (yea I did it right!). It's not a mark if the dog hasn't already earned it's reward.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

There are several different styles of doing this.

Click with no bridge. The click ENDS the behavior. Duration is added BEFORE the click. Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mi5sO_C9G2A 

SATS Kayce Cover and Julie Kinsey are the experts on this, but the emphasis is on a bridge (a cue that means, that's right, keeping doing it). The bridge ends with a "terminal bridge" equivalent to the click. I've found this works to add duration for a behavior like a handstand. I've found it to work on a nervous dog. I've also found that when *I* use it in other applications, my other dog (in the video above) gets dependent on multiple cues. And example of a SATS bridge is x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-Yes! 

Now I don't have a name for this one, but I use two markers. I'll mark a correct step of a chained behavior, but the mark and reward is at the end. I use this for a seek-and-find retrieve as well as attention heeling. I'll use a "yes" marker that seems to act both as a yes marker and as a bridge. Then a yes marker at the end. I don't have any video of this. It sounds confusing but it's simple.

A lot of folks use a bridge and mark, several of the above posts describe it. A common bridge is "goooood, goooood" This is different from a SATS bridge.

A lot of people use "active operant." It's more common among performance sport trainers (disc, flyball, agility, etc) This is almost identical to clicker training/operant conditioning, with the exception that the click does NOT end the behavior. 

Whether or not a bridge is used depends on the effect the trainer wants to produce. IME, a bridge produces a slower behavior. Not bad for adding duration behaviors. I find I have faster results when I shut up and let the dog think for itself. A bridge works well when a dog doesn't fully understand the clicker game. Some dogs have never learned to think and problem solve. These dogs can get stressed out in clicker training. Using a bridge can help get a dog "unstuck" in clicker training and minimize the use of "screw-up cookies."

Whether or not the click ends the behavior depends of whether or not the trainer is comfortable bridging and whether or not the trainer is consistent in the use of a release. Most people (myself included) are very very bad at releasing the dog from EVERY behavior, EVERY time. For these dog/handler teams, making the click end the behavior clarifies things for the dog and minimizes handler error. It also depends on the effect the trainer wants to achieve. 

I DEPEND of the dog's reaction to the click (as a release) in training behaviors. In the behavior of the retrieve, one common problem is the dog running over or continuing beyond the dumbell. If I have taught the dog that the click is the end and that the reward comes close to me, I can teach the dog to turn even before the dumbell is introduced. When I introduce the dumbell, I click when the dog approaches it, the dog turns on a dime and comes back for a reward. I shape this behavior until the dog is picking up the dumbell and turns immediately around to return to me.

Same applies for teaching a dog to "hit" a flyball box, turn lights on or off, vault, spin in a circle, recall. There are so many applications in which the dog's understanding of the click as the END of the behavior aids training! While I see other trainers get good results differently, I'm very set in using the click to end the behavior.


----------



## Jerry Lyda (Apr 4, 2006)

Anne, can I come train with you??????


----------



## Elliot Parker (Jan 7, 2008)

Thanks Anne for taking the tme to type all of that! This can be very confusing but I think I understand. I'll just have to try and see what works best.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Jerry Lyda said:


> Anne, can I come train with you??????


Only if you train me and leave a cute little Boston behind. :lol:


----------



## Jerry Lyda (Apr 4, 2006)

We can talk.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Anne Vaini said:


> .... While I see other trainers get good results differently, I'm very set in using the click to end the behavior.


Me too.



Michele McAtee said:


> The mark is the release.


I hope that one thing did come through clearly. For me, the mark is always the release. You can slowly add duration, but not after the terminal mark.


----------



## Terry Fisk (Jul 26, 2007)

Michele McAtee said:


> It can sound like this:
> "Goooooooood. Gooooooooooooood. Thas right.../QUOTE]
> 
> Boy does that praise phase ring a bell along with "suupahhhh". Heard that a lot from Bernhard Flinks at our seminar


----------



## Lynda Myers (Jul 16, 2008)

Elliot Parker said:


> A previous thread about releasing and rewarding got me thinking about marking a behavior and then the release and reward. For example, in teaching a dog to focus on the handler, one would give the command, mark and release. For me I would say "me" wait for my dog to make eye contact with me, mark with "good" and release with "okay". Over time I want to build the length of time my dog focuses on me before releasing/rewarding but when should I mark the behavior. In other words, should I mark as soon as he focuses but wait thirty, forty, fifty, etc... seconds before releasing/rewarding? Is there a verbal cue I can give my dog to let him know he is doing what I want and keep it up and he will get his reward? I hope this makes sense.


Hi everyone I am very new to this board and have learned quite a bit as I read over past threads. I'm training an American Bulldog and a Pitbull in schutzhund. Some would say I'm swimming up a creek without a paddle. :lol: 
Anyways I'm responding because I also train with a clicker/operantive conditioning. My question is does the dog already know the behavior? The example given was "eye focus" if the dog doesn't know it then why would you name a behavior he doesn't know? I was taught to reward the behavior you want when the dog randomly exhibits it. Which will cause him to start offering that behavior. When the dog gets to this point now you can tag it with a word. Once the dog is reliable and doing it 80 to 90% of the time when the command is given now is the time to start adding duration, movement(step or two in the case of basic position) and later linking or chaining other well known behaviors together. 
Please know that I am still learning the finer points of this training method and ask so as to get a clearer picture for myself.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Lynda Myers said:


> .... My question is does the dog already know the behavior? The example given was "eye focus" if the dog doesn't know it then why would you name a behavior he doesn't know? I was taught to reward the behavior you want when the dog randomly exhibits it. .....


Yes, I name it when the dog does it the way I want it.

That is, whether the dog has done it "randomly" (a straight sit could be a good example of a behavior that the dog might easily do with no shaping, and even maybe without luring), or I have shaped it to be what I want, that is when I name it.

You might think of it this way: Why name something "sit" if it is not what you want in a sit? Until there is a behavior that is what you want to happen when you give a command, then there is no name (command).

Is this what you meant?


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Terry Fisk said:


> Michele McAtee said:
> 
> 
> > It can sound like this:
> ...


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Since we're working on duration it's assumed that the dog has a solid understanding of the command of sit/down, etc. 
With that in mind I'm working on time in position!
I don't mark until the time I'm going for is passed.


----------



## Lynda Myers (Jul 16, 2008)

Connie Sutherland said:


> Yes, I name it when the dog does it the way I want it.
> 
> That is, whether the dog has done it "randomly" (a straight sit could be a good example of a behavior that the dog might easily do with no shaping, and even maybe without luring), or I have shaped it to be what I want, that is when I name it.
> 
> ...


Yes, Connie, because to my way of thinking doing it the other way seems as though there's going to be a lot of rework. Where as let's say I'm teaching the basic postion(fuss). In the beginning I would reward the dog for just being somewhere on my left side. Then progressing to only rewarding when the dog is sitting by my left leg gazing directly into my eyes. When I can get that behavior 8-9 times out of 10 this is when I would introduce the Fuss command.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> Since we're working on duration it's assumed that the dog has a solid understanding of the command of sit/down, etc.


Yes, really critical point about perfect command before duration is added.

Also, Bob, your point about not adding distance and time together (long ago) has also stood me in very good stead .... or distance and distraction, etc.


----------



## ann schnerre (Aug 24, 2006)

to continue the discussion a bit, i've "loaded the marker 'yes' " with both Grace and Edge. 

my specific question is: how often does one mark a desired behavior? Edge will sit and do eye-focus ALL the time hoping to get a treat out of it, from distances as far away as 15'. so far, i've only been marking/treating when he does the behavior when i want him to do it (before getting his food, when i call him to me, or when i've been actively loading the marker). 

i ran into this same problem w/Brix when he was young. do i reward only when he's doing what i want, when i want it, or every time he offers a wanted behavior? i'm probably making this harder than it has to be, but that's just how i operate


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

As the dog learns behaviours you start chaining them together. Reward after 2-3-6-etc but also continue marking and rewarding on single behaviours randolmly.
I will never gi ve up marking and rewarding entirely just as no compulsion trainer will give up physical correction. Both reward and correction are reinforcments for a behaviour. 
Random is the key to marker training once the behaviour is learned.


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

ann freier said:


> to continue the discussion a bit, i've "loaded the marker 'yes' " with both Grace and Edge.
> 
> my specific question is: how often does one mark a desired behavior? Edge will sit and do eye-focus ALL the time hoping to get a treat out of it, from distances as far away as 15'. so far, i've only been marking/treating when he does the behavior when i want him to do it (before getting his food, when i call him to me, or when i've been actively loading the marker).
> 
> i ran into this same problem w/Brix when he was young. do i reward only when he's doing what i want, when i want it, or every time he offers a wanted behavior? i'm probably making this harder than it has to be, but that's just how i operate


 
When I am teaching, I keep food on me or near me all day long. So I can catch behaviors when ever the dog performs them by accident. 

After they have learned. I only reward for behaviors I have asked for. The problem that comes with continuing to reward behaviors you have not asked for is: the dog will offer behaviors randomly in a hope to hit to the right one that pays. 

I believe the Marines call this the spray and pray tactic.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

James Downey said:


> When I am teaching, I keep food on me or near me all day long. So I can catch behaviors when ever the dog performs them by accident.
> 
> After they have learned. I only reward for behaviors I have asked for. The problem that comes with continuing to reward behaviors you have not asked for is: the dog will offer behaviors randomly in a hope to hit to the right one that pays.
> 
> I believe the Marines call this the spray and pray tactic.


I do the same. I reward EVERY repetition of the behavior up until the point I put a verbal cue on it. After that, I only reward when I've asked for it. 

I learned this the hard way and had a rotten awful time with a previous dog's spontaneous rehearsal.


----------



## ann schnerre (Aug 24, 2006)

that makes sense-thanks. anne, at what point do you start the verbal cue? i haven't started any yet, but probably should (pup's 10 wks old),at least the sit and "me" (watch me) commands as those are the 2 he's best at at this point.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

For a puppy up to 12 weeks, I don't name anything. I try to capture every behavior I will train the dog in it's lifetime. The rate of learning between 6 and 12 weeks is faster than at any time in its life. Imprinted behaviors are retained. At this stage I am clicking almost everything the pup does. 

I spend 75 - 80% of training time on focus, attention, recall, heeling. It is my experience that the first named behaviors will be retained and offered best. The first behavior I name is focus and recall which I ut on the dog's name. I don't use the dog's name for any purpose other than to get it's attention.

I add in names one at a time in the order of what I want to be retained best.


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> Random is the key to marker training once the behaviour is learned.


If you do free-shaping like Anne has described, is there a possibility you'll get a dog who "experiments" with various behaviors unless you reward the correct behavior every time? For example, you reward every time for sit. Then you ask for sit and don't reward. The dog thinks it is performing the incorrect behavior and then tries a down or a bark or whatever.


----------



## Chad Byerly (Jun 24, 2008)

If you don't want to mark a behavior (and give a reinforcer), just tell the dog good (if it did right) and then "free" with the release word. Otherwise the dog doesn't know it's finished... Releasing the dog is great because it makes clear "now I'm not asking things from you" (and hopefully the dog wishes I would again).

I like releasing to be totally different from marking. I think different markers can be great too. So that one means "yes, food coming", and one means "YES, play coming", or just release the dog if done (still might ask for informal stuff like "settle").

[in free shaping, which I must admit I don't do much of, when done with clicking sit, I'd release the dog and then start another session in a minute. Clicker savy dogs who understand shaping games will throw behaviors but not get too stressed while finding the one that makes the click. I would personally only be clicking/marking and rewarding with food in shaping]


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

> If you do free-shaping like Anne has described, is there a possibility you'll get a dog who "experiments" with various behaviors unless you reward the correct behavior every time? For example, you reward every time for sit. Then you ask for sit and don't reward. The dog thinks it is performing the incorrect behavior and then tries a down or a bark or whatever.


This does happen occassionally, but you'll see it more if you don't mark. If duration is introduced too soon, inconsitently, if the dog doesn't understand the mark as the end of the behavior, if the marker is used inconsistently, or if the dog is not consistently released from duration behaviors.

I assume at the point that the dog understands a no-reward marker. A word or sound that means "That won't get a reward." I introduce this marker right before adding duration to cues, or when a dog offers behaviors in excess.

So let's say it's a sit-stay. After a moment's duration in the sit position, the dog offers a down. Say the no-reward marker, reset (start over) and ask for the sit again. This time, make sure you release and reward before the dog gets up. Repeat the short duration 2 - 3 times and problem solved.

Now I find the opposite problem more often - a dog begins to offer duration. In a sit example, the dog offers a sit, and then offers DURATION in the sit position. This is equally as simple of a fix. A no-reward marker or, if the dog has been taught a cue to begin offering behaviors, use that cue. I imprint the cue "Go figure it out" or "Show me something new" for this use.

Back to the original question. Keep the mark consistent. Release every behavior. Make the reward random. Very random. 

Also keep duration random. I'm not a huge fan of stay training. And it shows sometimes  Emma figured out that I might ask for random duration, but not more than 15 seconds. Whoops. I had to retrain the stay to break my handling pattern.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Chad Byerly said:


> I like releasing to be totally different from marking. I think different markers can be great too. So that one means "yes, food coming", and one means "YES, play coming", or just release the dog if done (still might ask for informal stuff like "settle").


Do you get different responses with the different releases? I can imagine it being a problem in a dog with uneven or very high drives.

I had a dog that would jump up and snap in anticipation when he heard the marker - expecting a treat dropped. Out on the field, if he heard the marker he froze and his head flew up - looking for the disc (frisbee) that was his reward.


----------



## Chad Byerly (Jun 24, 2008)

Anne Vaini said:


> Do you get different responses with the different releases? I can imagine it being a problem in a dog with uneven or very high drives.
> 
> I had a dog that would jump up and snap in anticipation when he heard the marker - expecting a treat dropped. Out on the field, if he heard the marker he froze and his head flew up - looking for the disc (frisbee) that was his reward.


This is the reason I like the dog to know what's coming after the "click". When the play marker is given the dog is already exploding out for play, and when the food mark is given you don't get your hand bit in the confusion. Most dogs have a preferred reinforcer (sometimes different in different contexts), and even if they like both you can see disappointment (or something like it) when you present what they didn't expect to receive at that time. Anyone else use multiple markers, or use cues for highly reinforcing behaviors to mark?


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Anne Vaini said:


> Back to the original question. Keep the mark consistent. Release every behavior. Make the reward random. Very random.


When you say make the reward random, do you mean you click but don't reward every time? Is that when the behavior is learned or while you're training it? Just trying to get the jist of what you're saying. My interpretation of what Bob said is that he click-treats every time while training the behavior, but clicks and treats randomly once the behavior is learned.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Konnie Hein said:


> When you say make the reward random, do you mean you click but don't reward every time? Is that when the behavior is learned or while you're training it? Just trying to get the jist of what you're saying. My interpretation of what Bob said is that he click-treats every time while training the behavior, but clicks and treats randomly once the behavior is learned.


What Bob said. :lol: Follow the dog's cues - it's about a partnership and communication with the dog, not about a set of rules.


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

I thought that was what you meant, but I just wanted to make sure we were using the same terms. I've seen dogs start to experiment with behaviors when the handler's reinforcement schedule is too variable or random, which is why I asked if anybody had seen that too. 

Having been involved in training USAR dogs for almost 10 years now, I completely understand the lack of rules thing.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Konnie Hein said:


> When you say make the reward random, do you mean you click but don't reward every time? Is that when the behavior is learned or while you're training it? Just trying to get the jist of what you're saying. My interpretation of what Bob said is that he click-treats every time while training the behavior, but clicks and treats randomly once the behavior is learned.


 
Spot on!
Think slot machine!
People continue to pull the handle because they "know" it will soon pay off. They are looking for random reward. 
If they continue to long with out reward then the behaviour will become extinguished. The exception is OCD. That will keep people and dogs trying withoout reward but that's another area.
Think cookie jar!
If a kid continues to find the same cookie every day, day after day, the "drive" for the cookie goes down.
If the cookie is RANDOMLY changed, even RANDOMLY missing, the drive for a cookie will go up. 

Random reward and random timing = heightened drive = try harder

I would add that a NON reward marker "Nope" is given for an incorret, offered behaviour.
I also don't care if the dog jumps up iin anticipation of reward after the marker. It's done the behaviour I've asked for. It's a release command for me also but WITH a reward.
A normal release, "okay" just tells the dog the behaviour is over. That's a part of random reward. 

When the dog is first understanding that behaviour brings reward it will throw known different behaviours trying to get ther reward until it finds the right behaviour and gets the reward. 
We want the dog to drive us to give a reward but only when it's connected to the correct behaviour. 
Rewarding unsolicited behaviours will only tell the dog it controls random behaviour not random reward.
Make sense?


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> Random reward and random timing = heightened drive = try harder


Maybe I should have worded my question differently (maybe I should invest more time thinking out what I want to say instead of quickly typing while walking by my computer!). I might have saved you some typing! I understand the theory behind it, just making sure we were talking about the same thing. Seems we are. 

This was my basic question:
So, when you get to the point where you use random reinforcement, you _definitely_ see an increase in the drive to perform the behavior? Your dogs _don't_ offer other behaviors when you start to use the random reinforcement?


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Konnie Hein said:


> Maybe I should have worded my question differently (maybe I should invest more time thinking out what I want to say instead of quickly typing while walking by my computer!). I might have saved you some typing! I understand the theory behind it, just making sure we were talking about the same thing. Seems we are.
> 
> This was my basic question:
> So, when you get to the point where you use random reinforcement, you _definitely_ see an increase in the drive to perform the behavior? Your dogs _don't_ offer other behaviors when you start to use the random reinforcement?


I definitely see and increase in drive to perform with random reinforcement.

Except for the problems noted previously, which are caused by imperfect training and which are easily fixed, I don't see random offering of behaviors.

I only see random offering in 3 situations: the dog does not hear or otherwise misses the cue, I ask the dog to be operant, extreme drive (she has those days and it's easily resolved as described in previous posts.)


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Thanks, Anne!


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Konnie Hein said:


> When you say make the reward random, *do you mean you click but don't reward every time? *.... My interpretation of what Bob said is that he click-treats every time while training the behavior, but clicks and treats randomly once the behavior is learned.


I do what Bob does, and I never mark without a reward.

I want the marker to mean one thing: _Correct! Reward coming!_

If I started marking without the reward, I think that the marker would be weakened for further use in teaching new behaviors.

So when I go to random rewards, there is no empty marker given in between.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Connie Sutherland said:


> If I started marking without the reward, I think that the marker would be weakened for further use in teaching new behaviors.


I have not found this to be the case. However, I am somewhat insulated from the possible effect of this because:


I use a cue to let the dog know that we're starting a totally new behavior and it's time to offer behaviors.
I *usually* use a clicker for new behaviors and shaping learned behaviors, but I use a "yes" for learned behaviors.
I spend a great deal of time on foundation behaviors. Later, almost anything can be chained or shaped out of existing behaviors(eliminating "new" behaviors)

To me random does not mean occassionally leaving out treats/toys. That is part. I might give one kibble for a long sit stay. Because the RELEASE (movement) is the reward. But the next thing will probably be asking for a sit and a huge food jackpot immediately. (No duration, huge reward). Random means random types of rewards, random durations, and occassionally a lack of food/toy reward, but not a total lack of reward.

Rhythm, repetition, attention, movement, energy can all be rewarding. Withholding the obvious reward (food/toy) does not remove ALL reward.


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Anne Vaini said:


> To me random does not mean occassionally leaving out treats/toys. That is part. I might give one kibble for a long sit stay. Because the RELEASE (movement) is the reward. But the next thing will probably be asking for a sit and a huge food jackpot immediately. (No duration, huge reward). Random means random types of rewards, random durations, and occassionally a lack of food/toy reward, but not a total lack of reward.
> 
> Rhythm, repetition, attention, movement, energy can all be rewarding. Withholding the obvious reward (food/toy) does not remove ALL reward.


This is what I was asking before as well. I asked Bob, does random = click but no reward. So, you're saying that for you a click/marker always = some type of reward, but not necessarily food or toy.

I think it's really interesting how folks do this differently. I don't think there's a right or wrong, and I really enjoy reading how everybody interprets the different terminology and puts it into practice. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

All of our ideas change over time. My thoughts and use of reward started changing after reading "Purely Positive" and after talking with Kayce Cover and Julie Kinsey.

Some problems I had with a previous dog have led me to the conclusion that following the Karen Pryor clicker training rules (in intense training) can lead to problems - not in the trained behavior, but in the manner of the dog. I can't quite describe it in words. It just wasn't right. I haven't seen the same problems when the same training is used moderately.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I think once the dog understands the command enough to go to random reward then it wont offer random behaviours. 
If it's still offering random behaviour it's still trying to figure out what your asking it. 
IF I mark/click a behaviour the dog WILL get a reward. That may be a treat, toy or a pat on the head depending on the dog and where it's at in it's training.
I will add that even if I make a mistake in timing or whatever, I will still always reward the mark. 
I don't want the mark to be without value. 
At worst the dog gets a freeby treat. 
That's a whole bunch less harmful then giving a poorly timed correction.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Anne Vaini said:


> All of our ideas change over time. My thoughts and use of reward started changing after reading "Purely Positive" and after talking with Kayce Cover and Julie Kinsey.
> 
> Some problems I had with a previous dog have led me to the conclusion that following the Karen Pryor clicker training rules (in intense training) can lead to problems - not in the trained behavior, but in the manner of the dog. I can't quite describe it in words. It just wasn't right. I haven't seen the same problems when the same training is used moderately.


 
Anne, I think following KP to a T can occasionally create more of a mechanical dog. As you say, "not in the behaviour, but in the manner of the dog." 
I always want a connection and not just turning on a machine.


----------



## Chad Byerly (Jun 24, 2008)

Anne Vaini said:


> Some problems I had with a previous dog have led me to the conclusion that following the Karen Pryor clicker training rules (in intense training) can lead to problems - not in the trained behavior, but in the manner of the dog. I can't quite describe it in words. It just wasn't right. I haven't seen the same problems when the same training is used moderately.


I would love to hear more specifics on this, Anne - do you mean, as Bob says, a more "mechanical" dog? Or something else? My experience has been the exact opposite of mechanical, and it is precisely the "manner of the dog" that I have liked so much. In fact, the more I learn of KP et al's training philosophy and methodology (and the more closely I follow it) the more I bond, laugh, play and enjoy my time with a dog who looks like anything *but* a stiff obedient robot (although I do really like the type of precision and engagement that "pure clicker" makes possible). IME the more I commit to these methods, the more I see a spark and a looseness that I really like. Of course, Bob said "occasionally" so maybe it is just not a style that works for everyone. 

And, as we have seen in this discussion, there are loads of different applications of marker training that are likely all being evaluated under one umbrella.



Bob Scott said:


> Anne, I think following KP to a T can occasionally create more of a mechanical dog. As you say, "not in the behaviour, but in the manner of the dog."
> I always want a connection and not just turning on a machine.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Chad Byerly said:


> I would love to hear more specifics on this, Anne - do you mean, as Bob says, a more "mechanical" dog? Or something else? My experience has been the exact opposite of mechanical, and it is precisely the "manner of the dog" that I have liked so much. In fact, the more I learn of KP et al's training philosophy and methodology (and the more closely I follow it) the more I bond, laugh, play and enjoy my time with a dog who looks like anything *but* a stiff obedient robot (although I do really like the type of precision and engagement that "pure clicker" makes possible). IME the more I commit to these methods, the more I see a spark and a looseness that I really like. Of course, Bob said "occasionally" so maybe it is just not a style that works for everyone.
> 
> And, as we have seen in this discussion, there are loads of different applications of marker training that are likely all being evaluated under one umbrella.


First, let me mention that by intensely - I mean training the dog 4 or more hours per day, every day.

The dog became dependent on loading. She adopted the absence of reward as punishment. She adopted the absence of bridge as punishment. Nervous spontaneous rehearsal. CONSTANTLY. Always in the same order. Never offering new behaviors, only previously learned behaviors.

She was doing some super cool stuff, but she wasn't doing well. I starting using SATS with her and breaking the clicker training rules and saw improvements.

This dog is (IMO) the coolest little dog in the world. She was my learning dog and I made all sorts of mistakes with her. She was pending euthanasia (at 4 mo old) in a shelter when I got her. Major issues with barking, housetraining, escaping, hyperactivity, a good amount of dog aggression and dominant as all get out. I started off with Koehler training plus classical conditioning as that is what I knew at the time. 8 hours a day for 2 weeks to turn her around. 

I really can't put my finger on it, but it's wasn't the manner I see in the dogs I clicker train now. Something was not quite right. I've heard similar comments from others who have stuck to closely to the rules.

http://www.stuntdog.com/ She's the dog on the right (after you enter the site) Look at her face... Doesn't that sum it up?!

Another thing I've noticed isn't in the behaviors - but in the in-between of the behaviors. Again, can't quite describe it. It's like the dog can't function without being told what to do and because it's operant it never stops offering behaviors... I don't like energizer-bunny-dogs.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I don't have a problem with offered behaviours. Once they learn correct behaviour with correct command then the offered behaviours will stop. 
Nothing wrong with the energizer bunny as long as it stays energized on me. :wink:


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Bob Scott said:


> I don't have a problem with offered behaviours. Once they learn correct behaviour with correct command then the offered behaviours will stop.
> Nothing wrong with the energizer bunny as long as it stays energized on me. :wink:


After two years of the offered behaviors not stopping... Always presented in the same order. 

At a worst point, you could give her any command and she would rehearse the same 12 or so behaviors in a row.

I tried some different takes on clicker training and got that sorted out. But WOW. Ummm. Yeah.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Anne Vaini said:


> After two years of the offered behaviors not stopping... Always presented in the same order.
> 
> At a worst point, you could give her any command and she would rehearse the same 12 or so behaviors in a row.
> 
> I tried some different takes on clicker training and got that sorted out. But WOW. Ummm. Yeah.


 
Very interesting! 
I've not seen anything to that extent.
I'm curious what methods you used to break the chain.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

I did everything I could think of. I don't know what worked. I wasn't keeping good training logs at the time. I remember using a no-reward marker, then a no marker and eventually physical correction to end the spontaneou rehearsal (the progression over a period over several months). I taught the 4-on-the-floor. I put becoming operant on cue. I didn't allow her to shut down - worked her through it. I used heavy bridges - like SATS. 

Basically I treated it like a behavior problems, tried positive ways, but eventually had to break the behavior with correction and start from zero to build enthusiasm, confidence and trust. It was totally uncool.

I think I could have done a lot to prevent the situation. Loading her for training so she knew what set of behaviors to expect would have gone a long way. Using bridging all along would have done her tons of good.

She had about 100 trained behaviors when I placed her. We had our own sign language all worked out. It was way cool. She taught me about chaining. She had 8 positions, about 60 actions, plus locations. So I could send her to a location (mark, place, crate, vraous, heel, home, car, on my back, on my chest, under object, on object, etc), give the position (sit, down, zen, beg, stand, stand tall, bow, etc) and tell her what behavior (speak, sneeze, growl, whine, tic, head up, head down, paw, dig, wave, wait, etc), I wanted her to perform while in the position. My intention for her was media, even though she ended up in performance. 

Someday I will get a cool little dog and train it the same behaviors without making all the mistakes!


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Sorry - double post


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Sorry - double post


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Bob,

You might have seen these before - videos of working her through frustration and shutting down. This was as she was getting much better - we had made a lot of progress at this point.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ad73qREMQBI&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8Vv3hlv93E&feature=channel_page

For reference: This is what I expect out of a clicker trained dog: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2r6vRfl-hH8&NR=1

And here is how Abby finally settled in: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0ls3ZMVi4Y&feature=channel

Wow! That's much better!

Do you see the difference in the way she offers behaviors? I was able to drop out all the coddling crap and go back to the rules.

Also, the last video shows unrewarded clicks. Her reaction to teh click shows that it still holds value.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Very interesting videos! Were the offered behaviours just because she didn't yet underestand the requested behaviour?
Just a though viewing this from the outside. 
Could you get better behaviour on th "kick" if you worked it on a carpeted floor or outdoors? She may have a bit more confidence in her "grasp" of the floor.


----------



## Chad Byerly (Jun 24, 2008)

Thanks, Anne. You're right, you really aren't a Karen-Pryor-type trainer. It's interesting to see how others train, and I see what you mean - you do things very differently than the "clicker" camp.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Bob Scott said:


> Very interesting videos! Were the offered behaviours just because she didn't yet underestand the requested behaviour?
> Just a though viewing this from the outside.
> Could you get better behaviour on the "kick" if you worked it on a carpeted floor or outdoors? She may have a bit more confidence in her "grasp" of the floor.


She understood. I trained and re-trained the handstand 5 different ways over more than a year. (one at a time) The one that got us the closest was an "awbrey" position handstand. The Awbrey is the position where the trainer lies on his/her beack, legs extended into the air and the dog hops up on the trainer's feet (like in the photo on the www.stuntdog.com link). It limited the behaviors she could offer and it's a position she is very confident in.

She never did get the duration part. I still am not sure how I could have done it differently to get her to stay in that position. I have to assume she was confused about what I was asking for. Once I found a way to communicate what I wanted, she learned instantly. Most of training time was spent with me on the couch or on the forums trying to figure out how to tell her what I wanted.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Chad Byerly said:


> Thanks, Anne. You're right, you really aren't a Karen-Pryor-type trainer. It's interesting to see how others train, and I see what you mean - you do things very differently than the "clicker" camp.


Those videos aren't the best examples, but yes, I do it differently. I don't think I could do the Karen Pryor thing if I tried to! :lol:

I use a lot of markers - 8? And I change what I do and how I mark and bridge depending on what the dog is offering (or not) at the time. One thing "clicker-nazi's" vehemently oppose is the use of a negative marker. I use a marker that means "correction coming" and I have one very reserved that means "stop or die." :lol: I hear a lot that I am going to "poison" a cue, but I find that will consistent negative markers, the cue is never poisoned and the markers retains so much value that often, a physical correction is unnecessary. (And that is the whole point.)

Every dog teaches me more. With Abby - handstand dog - I was her cheerleader. With Emma it's different and it shows in the style of training. Here's Emma: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mi5sO_C9G2A For her, bridges are unnecessary and can backfire. She offers so many _new_ behaviors making the excessive chaining I was accustomed to with Abby unnecessary.


----------



## brad robert (Nov 26, 2008)

Anne can you clear something up for me. I have read where you said you shouldnt offer the treat before giving the command because it can set you up for disappointment later but in the video you have your hand in the food bag i know you arent waving the food in front of the dogs face are you trying to give the dog the idea that there is food coming just stay with me and offer behaviours and its coming and later do you remove the hand from the bag when things are more solid.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

brad robert said:


> Anne can you clear something up for me. I have read where you said you shouldnt offer the treat before giving the command because it can set you up for disappointment later but in the video you have your hand in the food bag i know you arent waving the food in front of the dogs face are you trying to give the dog the idea that there is food coming just stay with me and offer behaviours and its coming and later do you remove the hand from the bag when things are more solid.


Brad, I'm not Anne and don't pretend to answer for her, but I can tell you that when I asked about her hand in the bait bag (because I like to keep my hands neutral), she said that it was a bad habit that she was trying to break.

I urge you to keep those hands neutral.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

brad robert said:


> Anne can you clear something up for me. I have read where you said you shouldnt offer the treat before giving the command because it can set you up for disappointment later but in the video you have your hand in the food bag i know you arent waving the food in front of the dogs face are you trying to give the dog the idea that there is food coming just stay with me and offer behaviours and its coming and later do you remove the hand from the bag when things are more solid.


Brad, my hand in the treat bag is my VERY VERY BAD habit. I'm trying to train myself out of it! Please don't copy that! It has caused me a whole bunch of problems. :lol: I am seriously considering having having someone work an ecollar on me as I can't seem to break the habit. :lol:


----------



## brad robert (Nov 26, 2008)

Thanks anne and connie for clearing that up


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

We call the hand in the bag or reaching before the mark as "gunslinging". 
That can possible be a reason for a lot of offered behaviours??? Just a thought!


----------

