The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 41

Thread: Carr based training system?

  1. #11
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Kansas City, MO
    Posts
    5,170

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RetrieversONLINE View Post
    Robert,


    Disagree!

    Escape and avoidance responses are an integral part of Operant Conditioning theory. In "Carr-based" retriever training a behaviour always precedes the stimulus. That is the behaviour targetted. A command also precedes the stimulus which starts a behaviour. That is the behaviour that is increased or decreased (reinforced or punished). In negative reinforcement, the dog escapes or avoids the stimulus and the behaviour preceding the stimulus increases.

    For example, commands such as sit or back are followed by the onset of the behaviour and then the stimulus occurs and is escaped or avoided by completing the behaviour. This increases the liklihood of the sit or back occurring next time and the behaviour is reinforced.

    You don't just turn on the e-collar and then get the dog to sit. The dog is already conditioned to a command.

    Furthermore, if you would have trained with Carr or many of his disciples you would also see that they use all 4 of +ve and -ve R and P. which was my original statement. Incidentally, I have never seen a trainer use praise as strongly as Rex did.
    I whole heartedly agree. "Fracture 'em" regards!

    Evan
    "Prepare your dog in such a manner that the work he is normally called upon to do under-whelms him, not overwhelms him." ~ Evan Graham

    “People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.”

    ― George Bernard Shaw


    The Smartwork System for Retriever Training (link)
    http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?...59&ref=profile

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    698

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RetrieversONLINE View Post
    Robert,


    Disagree!

    Escape and avoidance responses are an integral part of Operant Conditioning theory. In "Carr-based" retriever training a behaviour always precedes the stimulus. That is the behaviour targetted. A command also precedes the stimulus which starts a behaviour. That is the behaviour that is increased or decreased (reinforced or punished). In negative reinforcement, the dog escapes or avoids the stimulus and the behaviour preceding the stimulus increases.

    For example, commands such as sit or back are followed by the onset of the behaviour and then the stimulus occurs and is escaped or avoided by completing the behaviour. This increases the liklihood of the sit or back occurring next time and the behaviour is reinforced.

    You don't just turn on the e-collar and then get the dog to sit. The dog is already conditioned to a command.

    Furthermore, if you would have trained with Carr or many of his disciples you would also see that they use all 4 of +ve and -ve R and P. which was my original statement. Incidentally, I have never seen a trainer use praise as strongly as Rex did.
    Was the "atta boy" tone on the tri-tronics collar Rexs' doing or did that come later?

  3. #13
    Senior Member mitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    2,251

    Default

    Would someone pretty please clarify: Is the Rex Carr method...

    A. The sequence of learning in Basics.
    B. The application of operant conditioning to dog training.
    C. Both A and B
    D. Other
    Renee P

  4. #14
    Senior Member mitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    2,251

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rmilner View Post
    Dennis,
    Technically speaking, the training of the root behaviors of Carr-based training is not operant conditioning. Skinner-based operant conditioning deals with the reinforcement of behaviors thru the application of a stimulus (reward or punishment) immediately following the occurrence of that behavior. Thus when a sit occurs and is immediately followed by a reward, then that sit will tend to occur more frequently. When a sit is followed by a punishment, then that sit will tend to occur less frequently.
    The root behaviors of Carr-based training are force fetch, force to pile, force to sit, force to come. These are all trained as escape responses. The stimulus (shock) comes before the behavior. The stimulus is applied and the following behavior is guided into the applicable escape response. In force fetch by successive approximation you pinch the ear and guide the behavior into grabbing the dummy. In force to sit, you apply the shock and guide the following behavior into a sit. Operant conditioning doesn’t deal with behaviors that follow the application of the stimulus, be that stimulus positive or be it negative.
    Operant condition;
    Behavior------------apply stimulus ---------------increase or decrease in that behavior

    Escape response
    Apply Stimulus --------- behavior (escape response)----------increase whatever that escape response is
    I'm a new student of dog training. The characterization of punishment following failure to obey the sit command etc. as escape behavior confuses me. Characterizing the sit-response as an escape behavior seems semantic.

    Let's define the realm of possible behavior responses to the command "sit" as either sit vs. no-sit. If sit command is given and the dog response is a no-sit behavior, it is punished. This should decrease the likelihood of dog exhibiting no-sit behavior in the future, and therefore sounds like positive punishment to me. Is this not operant conditioning?
    Last edited by mitty; 12-15-2012 at 11:36 AM. Reason: typos
    Renee P

  5. #15
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Kansas City, MO
    Posts
    5,170

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jeff evans View Post
    Was the "atta boy" tone on the tri-tronics collar Rexs' doing or did that come later?
    Rex made his disdain very clear for all the gimmicks TT experimented with over the years. He said they sent him every new buzzer, bell, and whistle they came up with. He just wanted an efficient electric collar with as little delay as possible.

    Evan
    "Prepare your dog in such a manner that the work he is normally called upon to do under-whelms him, not overwhelms him." ~ Evan Graham

    “People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.”

    ― George Bernard Shaw


    The Smartwork System for Retriever Training (link)
    http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?...59&ref=profile

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    2,792

    Default

    I'm a new student of dog training. The characterization of punishment following failure to obey the sit command etc. as escape behavior confuses me. Characterizing the sit-response as an escape behavior seems semantic.
    That's because punishment doesn't generally produce an escape behavior..it generally produces an avoidance behavior.
    However a single correction can be applied in such a way that it mimics an escape behavior. And this is with a dog which has never been conditioned through NR methods I don't know why for sure .

    But also NR can produce indirect avoidance behaviors.
    it all depends what the dog is thinking about at the time of application I guess

    Pete
    Last edited by Pete; 12-15-2012 at 01:19 PM.
    John 5 :30
    I can of my own self do nothing ,as I hear , I judge,,and my judgement is just, because I seek not my own will,,but the will of the father which hath sent me
    John 7:16 -- Jesus answered them and said my doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.
    mark 16:9 -- So then after the lord had spoken unto them,he was received up in heaven, and sat on the right hand of God
    I Tim. 2:5 --For there is one God and one mediator between God and man ,, the man Christ Jesus

  7. #17
    Senior Member JS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    2,443

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rmilner View Post
    Technically speaking, the training of the root behaviors of Carr-based training is not operant conditioning. Skinner-based operant conditioning deals with the reinforcement of behaviors thru the application of a stimulus (reward or punishment) immediately following the occurrence of that behavior. Thus when a sit occurs and is immediately followed by a reward, then that sit will tend to occur more frequently. When a sit is followed by a punishment, then that sit will tend to occur less frequently.


    .......
    This is a gross oversimplification of Behaviorism or Operant Conditioning as researched by Skinner. A thorough study of Behaviorism is much more than learning the "four quadrants" and will get you 6 hours or more credit.

    And others took Skinner's findings and explored them much more deeply. If you really want to understand Behaviorism theory, including Operant Conditioning, take a look at Kurt Lewin's stuff. "Principles of Topological Psychology" will keep you busy for a while but will provide great insight into how it applies in actual practice.

    P+ or R- regards,

    JS
    “Don’t wave your phony patriotism in MY face! If you really love America, open your wallet and hire an American kid to build what you buy. Think of all our problems that might solve.” Doug Fraser (paraphrased) 1980

    Real Americans buy American.



    Snowshoe's All American Guy SH, UDX, WCX ... CODY ... at the bridge
    CH. Snowshoe's Girl Crazy MH, UD, WCX, SDHF, OS ... PRESLEY
    ... at the bridge
    Millpond's Baby Boomer MH*** ... BABE
    Snowshoe's Crazy For Lovin You SH ... NELSON

  8. #18
    Senior Member RetrieversONLINE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Lindsay, Ontario
    Posts
    663

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mitty View Post
    Would someone pretty please clarify: Is the Rex Carr method...

    A. The sequence of learning in Basics.
    B. The application of operant conditioning to dog training.
    C. Both A and B
    D. Other
    It's far more than C. just as TRT or Smart Works or Fowl Dog or any of the programs are. The Rex Carr method could hardly be described in a book. I suspect few truly understood it. Perhaps his greatest disciples were Judy Aycock and more recently at the end Dave Rorem. Both would admit they didn't understand it all.

    I hope Vicki is still tackling the Rex Carr book project!!
    Dennis

  9. #19
    Senior Member RetrieversONLINE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Lindsay, Ontario
    Posts
    663

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mitty View Post
    I'm a new student of dog training. The characterization of punishment following failure to obey the sit command etc. as escape behavior confuses me. Characterizing the sit-response as an escape behavior seems semantic.

    Let's define the realm of possible behavior responses to the command "sit" as either sit vs. no-sit. If sit command is given and the dog response is a no-sit behavior, it is punished. This should decrease the likelihood of dog exhibiting no-sit behavior in the future, and therefore sounds like positive punishment to me. Is this not operant conditioning?
    Renee

    Trying to analyze all the things that occur in a single training session can make your head spin. The best advice I have is to try to think more about increasing desired behaviours rather than stop un-desired behaviours. This will make you a better trainer and your dogs will have a better attitude towards learning and life!

    In your sit example, I would rather have the dog thinking that if he sat real quickly whenever commanded he would either receive a reward(praise/bird/food/chance to go get a bird) or he would avoid/escape any aversive. That is the basis of reinforcement training-increase the liklihood of a behaviour.

    Thinking about stopping behaviours still may not achieve the desired behaviour. IE it's not that we want him to stop standing, it's that we want him to sit. So I don't think about punishing him for a non-sit behaviour. Of course, the complexity arises when a dog stops one behaviour and does another and it's desired. That's when the R/P labelling can make your head spin. A prime example is how we use Indirect Pressure all the time in training.

    Think teach good behaviour, not stop bad.

    Cheers
    Dennis

  10. #20

    Default

    then when carr applies the 5 steps, like when he stick fetches a dog on his tape, how does that fit into operant conditioning? teach, force, no force, praise, no praise
    elmer

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •