# No. No reward marker. Yes. No



## Shade Whitesel (Aug 18, 2010)

If you are doing reward based training, like for example: teaching new behaviors and the dog gets a reward; tug, ball, treat, bite decoy, whatever the dog wants, why use a word that means the dog didn't get it right? I mean, doesn't the dog know he didn't get it right since he didn't get the reward in the first place? Aren't you then rubbing it in and possibly creating frustration and conflict in the higher drived dogs, and shut down behavior in the lower drived? I'm talking when teaching new behaviors only. Sit=ball, no sit=nothing, 
heeling in proximity to decoy=bite command and bite decoy, no heeling =no chance to bite


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

The no reward marker is supposed to create the same moment in time for the dog as the reward marker and have it think "what in that sequence did I not do right?" I don't think it's "rubbing it in." I think it helps with clarity. Besides, it's supposed to be with as little emotion as possible, not a verbal correction, just like saying "colder, colder, ice cold" to someone playing a game of hot and cold. Probably why some people use a no reward marker that is less likely to sound like a verbal correction. Like I use "nope" or "ah ah" out of habit, but I know others that use "try again" or "sorry" or whatever, which is probably better as frustration tends to creep in my voice with the first two. 

Can a no reward marker be stressful for a high drive dog? Sure, my male Malinois is difficult to free shape because of that. If he doesn't get something via free shaping in 2-4 times, he'll start to bark in frustration cause he wants to figure it out so badly. But think about it this way. I'd still rather play a game of hot and cold and figure it out on my own than have someone scream, yell, or even just chastise me (mostly in their frustration) because I had never done something before. Which happens on almost daily basis in vet school. #-o:-\"


----------



## Jonathan Katz (Jan 11, 2010)

Shade Whitesel said:


> If you are doing reward based training, like for example: teaching new behaviors and the dog gets a reward; tug, ball, treat, bite decoy, whatever the dog wants, why use a word that means the dog didn't get it right? I mean, doesn't the dog know he didn't get it right since he didn't get the reward in the first place? Aren't you then rubbing it in and possibly creating frustration and conflict in the higher drived dogs, and shut down behavior in the lower drived? I'm talking when teaching new behaviors only. Sit=ball, no sit=nothing,
> heeling in proximity to decoy=bite command and bite decoy, no heeling =no chance to bite


Marker based training is so helpful for properly comunicating with your dog. If we are going to tell him when he is doing something right, why not tell him when he is doing something wrong? Using your No, will help the dog to not get frustrated. Just like a human coach, you are coaching your dog on shaping the behavior you are looking for step by step.


----------



## Shade Whitesel (Aug 18, 2010)

But the dog already knows he did it wrong by not getting the reward. 
And the hot cold game can be played just as well by eliminating the cold.
And verbal cues are not the dogs first language, so he has to think for a moment, and interpret your no reward maker.
Food for thought?


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Maybe the dog knew, maybe they didn't, but at least you told them specifically what in that sequence, particularly if you back chain behaviors, was not performed successfully. Simply withholding the reward without telling them why isn't really teaching. Like say you're teaching a dog to front finish from a recall and come around to heel. You're likely going to get much faster results if you back chain the desired behavior into smaller pieces and actually tell the dog where they went wrong instead of trying to string the whole series together by trial and error. It's like getting a paycheck withheld because of a poor performance review, but you never being told why or what you were doing wrong to deserve the poor review. That'd be way more frustrating to me at least and less fair. *shrug*


----------



## Shade Whitesel (Aug 18, 2010)

I can totally see the value of using a no reward marker when chaining behaviors together. Since I originally taught my dog the parade finish (Michael Ellis term), then got docked for it in two Sch 3 trials, I spent a year retraining Fus as a flip finish. If my dog reverts to his old finish behavior, I will tell him he's wrong, Try Again.
Or if I'm doing a recall, then straight front, then finish, I could tell him which behavior he got wrong. 
But I'm talking about one behavior at a time, new behaviors only. 
And I like that he's guessing, or trying to figure out what I want at least. 
He's pushing me to reward him by trying different behaviors. And he's not wrong, just not right. 
So perhaps not as complicated as a paycheck withheld for poor performance.


----------



## Michelle Reusser (Mar 29, 2008)

If you don't put a word to good or bad, what will you do when you don't have a reward handy? You then can't give it or take it away. My dog is very easy to direct with yes or no. That is all the reward he needs anymore. A YES will get him to do something over and over and no will get him going in another direction or trying it a different way until he gets a yes.


----------



## Shade Whitesel (Aug 18, 2010)

Good dog does quite nicely. If it's something new they are learning, I am silent when they give me the wrong behavior (and deny access to something they want, like a bite on the helper or decoy). if it is a continuous behavior I want, like heeling for 20 paces instead of 10, then I will tell them good with every step, and okay for the reward. I am silent when they don't heel. I phase out the good when they know the behavior.
Example: teaching tracking. If I tell my dog try again or no when he gets off the track, aren't I doing two things? Setting up me telling him when he's off the track that I have to phase out before I trial,and 2) actually reinforcing the insecurity of being off the track so that in a trial he'll wait for me to tell him when he's wrong. Isn't it his responsibility to find the track? I don't know what he's smelling. It's up to him to find the track, it's not up to me to tell him he's wrong. I can set up the track to reward problem solving and a good reward when he gets back on the track so maybe he won't lose it in the first place next time...


----------



## Michelle Reusser (Mar 29, 2008)

I don't do Schutzhund tracking so your question doesn't affect me. If I know where my dog needs to go and he is struggling, yes I help him out by changing his direction. I'm about getting it done faster not with more points awarded.


----------



## Benjamin Maulis (May 27, 2010)

The word is a "bridge." There are intermediate bridges and terminal bridges. The bridges lead to a punisher or reinforcement. "No reward" is a negative punisher. A collar correction is a positive punisher. Food or a toy is a reinforcer (a positive one). A an example of a negative reinforcer would be turning off continuous stimulation with a remote collar.

The purpose of the bridge is to associate the punishment or reinforcement immediately following the response even though practically they come as soon as possible but often later. As such, the bridges can function as secondary and tertiary reinforcers or punishers.

A dog could learn without any bridges, without any secondary or tertiary reinforcers or punishers negative or positive, and with only the primary reinforcement and punishment, but the benefit of these markers is how much more clear they can make communication for the dog by being as timely as the speed of sound, by encouraging and discouraging the dog as needed before he has necessarily achieved success or failure.


----------



## Shade Whitesel (Aug 18, 2010)

Okay, lets talk about the tracking example without the trialing aspect. ( I don't mean to talk about points, I'd like to talk about training.) The bottom line is that the dog needs to track the track, whether it's Schutzhund, police, or AKC. And since the dog is the one finding and smelling the track, wouldn't it make sense to let the dog be the one to choose the right behavior (ie: the right track) rather than us telling him and risk making the tracking behavior dependent on our bridge signals? Might make the difference between the confident tracker and the insecure one?
Again, remember I am talking about teaching new behaviors, not going through established ones.
As far as bridges go, I am only questioning the use of the no reward marker as a bridge. Certainly the dog would need his keep going coaching bridge (good boy) and his release (okay) for the reward, but doesn't the absence of good boy or release word clue the dog in to the fact that he is wrong?


----------



## jack van strien (Apr 9, 2009)

Shade when you retrained the position you said it took you a year,seems very long to me.Did you use a new command?How did you teach it?


----------



## Shade Whitesel (Aug 18, 2010)

He had already done his previous way for 2.5 years. (Straight 99.9 percent of the time) I trained a butt in cue, trained a new command for the flip finish (that took about a month) proofed it, (that took about a month) and then spent alot of time retraining the old cue to mean the new cue, new behavior. (So it was total 10 months till I trialed it.) Poor guy. I suspect I wasn't the clearest. In times of stress, like in a trial, he'll sometimes revert to the old way, but he's pretty accurate on the flip now. Complete with a little whine of frustration that I also accidently trained in....


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I agree that a dog isn't as verbal as we are. In that line of thought my "NOPE" is given with body signals of slumped shoulders, turning my back, etc. The dog reads my body language when he does wrong and the word is connected to my displeasure. 
That puts the same negative value on the word "NOPE" as the positive value of the "YES". 
Once the word is connected with positive or negative the body theatrics can be phased out.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Shade Whitesel said:


> He had already done his previous way for 2.5 years. (Straight 99.9 percent of the time) I trained a butt in cue, trained a new command for the flip finish (that took about a month) proofed it, (that took about a month) and then spent alot of time retraining the old cue to mean the new cue, new behavior. (So it was total 10 months till I trialed it.) Poor guy. I suspect I wasn't the clearest. In times of stress, like in a trial, he'll sometimes revert to the old way, but he's pretty accurate on the flip now. Complete with a little whine of frustration that I also accidently trained in....


I am a big fan of just using another cue word if you're re-training something. So I was trying to get my dog ready to do the PSA TC back in July (which unfortunately now longer exists), so what I did was use the fuss for the come around to heel (which he, like your dog, knew for ages) and use au pied for the flip finish. I do this for the standard down from a sit (platz) and then the folding down where the elbows go down first (coucher), which works better for in motion exercises. I haven't trained in Schutzhund in about 4 years...they require you use one language throughout? Cause I use a combo of English, German, and French... :-\" Wonder how doing this whole BH will go if we give it a whirl... :-D


----------



## Shade Whitesel (Aug 18, 2010)

unfortunately if you are hitting the National trials in Schutzhund they will knock you for using irregular commands. Same in French ring. You have to use the same language throughout. I probably made it harder on my dog by allowing him to practice his old way of finishing with the french command since I was training french ring exercises at the same time as retraining his "fus" cue. 
Good luck on your BH. Depends on how sticky the judge wants to be but just say your cues softly and normally in a BH they don't care.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Nah, if I try to trial in Schutzhund again, it'd probably just be the BH and AD. I rather like PSA more now.  However, I do not know where I'll be when I graduate next spring, so whether it's PSA, FR, MR, or back to Schutzhund, I suppose we'll have to be flexible...PSA allows whatever combo of languages, as far as I know.


----------



## Michelle Reusser (Mar 29, 2008)

Shade Whitesel said:


> Okay, lets talk about the tracking example without the trialing aspect. ( I don't mean to talk about points, I'd like to talk about training.) The bottom line is that the dog needs to track the track, whether it's Schutzhund, police, or AKC. And since the dog is the one finding and smelling the track, wouldn't it make sense to let the dog be the one to choose the right behavior (ie: the right track) rather than us telling him and risk making the tracking behavior dependent on our bridge signals? Might make the difference between the confident tracker and the insecure one?
> Again, remember I am talking about teaching new behaviors, not going through established ones.
> As far as bridges go, I am only questioning the use of the no reward marker as a bridge. Certainly the dog would need his keep going coaching bridge (good boy) and his release (okay) for the reward, but doesn't the absence of good boy or release word clue the dog in to the fact that he is wrong?


I don't so much track my dogs, but hide stuff they need to find using their nose. Usually a thrown object into tall grass or placed by me with no real track. More a search. I like to help my dogs and we only do it as a game but I feel me helping, builds a trust that we can work as a team, to accomplish a common goal. The dogs don't always need my help but on a still day or if he is up wind or he is taking too long and I'm in a hurry to split for whatever reason, I speed him along with some help.


----------



## Chris Smith (Jul 29, 2010)

Using a Negative marker extends the time you have to correct (a bridge ty ben) If you only reward correct behavior and ignore poor behavior or lack of desired behavior you risk loosing balance in training and confusing the dog. You may be able to train in positive reinforcement only but you will never reach the full potential of the dog unless you train balanced.


----------



## tracey schneider (May 7, 2008)

I'm confused and maybe its the format. Did you say you use no words and witholding to mark the bad and words to mark the good. But then wean off the word? So wouldn't that be confusing to the dog since your trying to communicate to the dog that nothing means wrong? Again maybe I'm not reading this correctly...

T


----------



## tracey schneider (May 7, 2008)

I'm not a tracking guru by any stretch, but I will allow my dogs a chance to refind the track and when they do and commit to it mark it. I think learning how to get lost then found is important for them... Within reason, if its too extreme and there doesn't look to be much hope as they are that far off then I will "help" them in whatever way seems fitting at the time. But I def. Think its important for the dog to learn on his own how to find his way back...

Tqa


----------



## Shade Whitesel (Aug 18, 2010)

hi Chris, 
Remember, I'm only talking about teaching new behaviors. I would add the balance (or the no reward marker) in later once the dog understands what to do. 
So yes, I would reward undesired behavior with silence or lack ofconditioned reinforcer and reward. I would consider it undesired behavior at that point because if I am teaching, then it's not "wrong" behavior.


----------



## Timothy Saunders (Mar 12, 2009)

Shade Whitesel said:


> If you are doing reward based training, like for example: teaching new behaviors and the dog gets a reward; tug, ball, treat, bite decoy, whatever the dog wants, why use a word that means the dog didn't get it right? I mean, doesn't the dog know he didn't get it right since he didn't get the reward in the first place? Aren't you then rubbing it in and possibly creating frustration and conflict in the higher drived dogs, and shut down behavior in the lower drived? I'm talking when teaching new behaviors only. Sit=ball, no sit=nothing,
> heeling in proximity to decoy=bite command and bite decoy, no heeling =no chance to bite


One reason that you use a no is what happens when the reward is stopped? You stop the reward and the dog takes it as a no. another is when the dog does not know the behavior he will start doing other behaviors. the no will let him know those behaviors are wrong as well. Also when you first teach a behavior you reward the action even if it isn't perfect . the no helps with that as well. lastly No help with what ever you are doing stop it ... this is just the way I use it


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Timothy Saunders said:


> One reason that you use a no is what happens when the reward is stopped? You stop the reward and the dog takes it as a no. another is when the dog does not know the behavior he will start doing other behaviors. the no will let him know those behaviors are wrong as well. Also when you first teach a behavior you reward the action even if it isn't perfect . the no helps with that as well. lastly No help with what ever you are doing stop it ... this is just the way I use it



I personally don't like to use a "no" when first teaching a behavior with a young dog. With some it can confuse the dog and stop all behavior. Of course that's reading the dog.


----------



## Mary Buck (Apr 7, 2010)

Obedience , some dogs are fine with waiting it out and offering different behaviors until it hits on the one you want. I think this can backfire and drive a smart/motivated dog into conflict. Then you can get the scream/ whining and frenetic behavior. I think some dogs like black /white..yes this is what I want...nope that's not quite it . It's still positive and its still motivational..I think its just giving the dog better information.


----------



## Michelle Reusser (Mar 29, 2008)

I agrew ith the above. I don't get beating around the bush? What dog can't handle a no?


----------



## Jo Radley (Jun 19, 2010)

Example: Putting a dog over the A frame. Supposing the dog runs around the A frame to get the dumbell. When would the dog get 'no reward'? It would reward itself with the dumbell. You could also use a no reward marker to tell the dog it was incorrect at the time it heads for the side of the A frame rather than going over it. Doesn't that give a clearer message to the dog?

My dog is a high drive beast who does get frustrated quite easily. If I use "no" which is a telling you off word, she gets frustrated and the fight drive comes up. If I calmly say 'wrong' which is my no reward marker she just stops and thinks about what she needs to do. I would rarely use 'wrong' in shaping unless she has gone way off hot into the very cold zone. 

It is better to set the dog up for success, especially when teaching new behaviours. It is better to think "how can I make the dog successful at this?" than to allow it to get it wrong and not reward.

Perhaps with teaching new behaviours, if the dog gets it wrong we should think "oh rats I didn't set the exercise up" properly, rather than "bad / stupid / naughty dog you didn't do it"

Can't say I am the perfect trainer as I need to learn to control my frustration more but working with a very high drive dog certainly makes you think :smile:


----------

