It cracks me up when people refer to "non-force, or positive only" training methods as being "new" ... as though it is the "enlightened" approach.
People were trying to train this way in the 1960s when I got started. Nothing new about it at all.
And it is no more successful now than it was then. When someone talks about doing it "successfully" without corrections, better find out exactly WHAT they're considering success.
And while I'm ranting, how accurate is it to label a method as a "force program" simply because it includes, along with huge amounts of reinforcements, an element of force. Bull.
Tail-waggin' dogs, regards,