Skinner vs Pavlov

[polmaise]

Reinforcement has nothing to do with pleasure.
Punishment has nothing to do with pain.

If the application of a stimuli, results in an increase of a behavior, it reinforced it.
If the application of a stimuli, results in the decrease of a behavior, it punished it.

Rewards are stimuli.
Aversives are stimuli.

It is a lot easier to reinforce with a reward, than it is to punish with it. But, depending on the association that we have classically conditioned with that reward, it is possible to use it as positive punishment.

It is a lot easier to punish with an aversive, than it is to reinforce with it. But, depending on the association that we have classically conditioned with that aversive, it is possible to use it as positive reinforcement.

What allows us to "flip" that, is first establishing a classically conditioned response to that specific stimuli.

Or ,you could just hold the bowl in yer hand?

[copterdoc]

How do you apply indirect pressure with the collar...? It doesn't exist...The only thing we apply is direct pressure every time we push the button..A term used to describe a dog getting religion on the next command .... It is use to get the next command given not something that is going on at that moment in time..Steve S

It's impossible to not apply indirect pressure, when you press the button and directly reinforce a conditioned response.

The question is, what did the dog associate that indirect pressure with?
Was it the cast refusal that it just gave you?
Was it the bank that it just beached on?
Was it the bird boy, that he was heading towards?

We have to be careful.
Even though the pressure we are using to punish is indirect, it can still punish the wrong thing.

[copterdoc]

....How would one create the association of an aversive to allow it to become a positive reinforcement?

While it is aversive, it is also stimulus.

We can classically condition an association with ANY stimulus, and the dog will then perform the conditioned behavior, in response to that stimulus.

[Jon Couch]

It's impossible to not apply indirect pressure, when you press the button and directly reinforce a conditioned response.

The question is, what did the dog associate that indirect pressure with?
Was it the cast refusal that it just gave you?
Was it the bank that it just beached on?
Was it the bird boy, that he was heading towards?

We have to be careful.
Even though the pressure we are using to punish is indirect, it can still punish the wrong thing.

Because you have Classically Conditioned the dog to sit on the whistle?

[copterdoc]

Because you have CC the dog to sit on the whistle?

That's part of it.

That does allow the collar to be used as positive reinforcement for sitting to the whistle.
However, you can't forget that when you apply reinforcement using collar pressure, you are ALWAYS applying indirect pressure at the same time.

We can't afford to punish the act of fetching, with indirect pressure.
So, before we can safely apply positive reinforcement on sit with the e-collar in the field, we need to have also conditioned the dog to fetch in response to collar pressure.

[DarrinGreene]

Your take on this is sounding more and more like sadomasochism.

In force to pile or force fetch or force to water, the force is not used so the dog will like it, right? Isn't it used to convey: "you're not going fast enough, you must get there now" and in order to escape this electronic pulse, you must go and get there now? Thus creating a fast response to escape the nick/burn or stick on your ass. So, if my thinking on this is right, the nick/burn used in force training is not an indicator that dog is about to be rewarded with a retrieve, it's to say:you're going to get burned until you escape it by doing this drill and show a compulsion to get to the pile or water. Right?

You're very entrenched in your emotions here Jenn. Anthropomorphism at it's finest! It is the simple use of a negative re-enforcement strategy to increase the likelihood of behavior to a point where it becomes reliable. That's all, no more, not big intimidating threat from us terrible humans. Simple negative re-enforcement that, when applied faithfully is quite easy on the dog.

I did a little demo today for a number of folks involved in a positive only training program for working dogs. I had to use some compulsion from the e-collar to maintain my training and with the exception of a minor head twitch that the head trainer did notice, the rest of the crowd had no idea. No screaming, no jumping, no wailing, just re-enforcement of a known behavior.

[Pete]

So are you saying CC is a by product of OC ? I don't know. I'm trying to assimilate this info but I'm actually more confused now than when I woke up this morning.

CC seems to have an anticipation factor,,,, No? Is this because it has been conditioned through OC,, ?

Pete

[copterdoc]

So are you saying CC is a by product of OC ? I don't know. I'm trying to assimilate this info but I'm actually more confused now than when I woke up this morning.

CC seems to have an anticipation factor,,,, No? Is this because it has been conditioned through OC,, ?

Pete

I've tried to type up an answer to this, that will help clarify it for you.
But, I think it's just going to add to your confusion.

[Jennifer Henion]

You're very entrenched in your emotions here Jenn. Anthropomorphism at it's finest! It is the simple use of a negative re-enforcement strategy to increase the likelihood of behavior to a point where it becomes reliable. That's all, no more, not big intimidating threat from us terrible humans. Simple negative re-enforcement that, when applied faithfully is quite easy on the dog.

I did a little demo today for a number of folks involved in a positive only training program for working dogs. I had to use some compulsion from the e-collar to maintain my training and with the exception of a minor head twitch that the head trainer did notice, the rest of the crowd had no idea. No screaming, no jumping, no wailing, just re-enforcement of a known behavior.

Darrin, I think it's you that is entrenched in emotion, given the nature of your reply. I was responding to a statement Copterdoc made about a high stimulus from an ecollar being trained to be a pleasurable thing to the dog. That statement was wrapped in the discussion about what force training is. Force training is escape training, no? I didn't say anything about screaming, jumping or wailing. Nor did I say force training was bad or cruel. It works, I know. You can do it soft and not hurt anyone, I know. What I was writing about was Copterdoc saying you could train a dog to see a high burn as pleasure.

[DarrinGreene]

So are you saying CC is a by product of OC ? I don't know. I'm trying to assimilate this info but I'm actually more confused now than when I woke up this morning.

CC seems to have an anticipation factor,,,, No? Is this because it has been conditioned through OC,, ?

Pete

I know you're not talking to me Pete, but I think CC is instinctual in all animals as a built in means of survival. We simply leverage this instinctual ability to make associations and anticipate events by applying the principals of OC.

I think all of our dog's conditioned responses are built using this this instinct, whether we as trainers realize it or not.