The Predictable Chain Reaction of Obedience Commands without corrections?

[arturios]

In your predictable chain reaction of commands when the dog disobeys we say "no" which is always followed by correction if the dog still disobeys. What do you think of using the same chain reaction but without using correction (as in purely positive training). In this way "no" would mean "correct yourself or you won't get a treat, ball, or whatever". I've seen people doing it like this. Do you think it can work? If so what would be its effectiveness compared to your style? If not, why?

[ChrisNJudy]

Hello,

The predictable chain reaction for obedience is set up the way it is to for the most effective outcome. Mike in creating this chain reaction, took a little bit of the best of both worlds (positive motivation and negative motivation) and then also within the training method he throws in the distractions, which give the best of all worlds.
See the Trinity chart and details in the "dog training articles" section under "Dog training forms and cheat cheat sheets" it is the one called "Dog Training Trinity"

When training, he mixes all of the above so that the dog understands that there are consequences to their wrong actions, but also there is a reward to the correct actions as well. In using all three in the training allows for the dog handler to have the most effective control without the dog getting discouraged during the training. In realty, once the training is done and the dog fully understands the chain reaction and that they will get a reward with the correct action and a correction with the wrong action, you will rarely have to utilize the correction unless it is in an emergency or a situation that there is something new and intriguing to the dog where he is willing to test the waters.

Now, to go back to your question, Strictly positive motivation works to an extent, but unless you are going to always be in an empty room with no distractions, chances are there will be times where the dog will run into something that is better than what you are offering and without any consequences for the actions set in place, it won’t be long before you are outside with your little buddy and they find something on the ground (i.e. food, an animal, etc.) they are really interested in and you are trying to do a recall and they all of sudden became def and they are completely ignoring you.

Another issue that can arise with strictly positive motivation is, what happens when you do not have any treats, toys, etc. on you, are you always going to have treats on you everywhere you go every day. Dogs are pretty clever and once you do a couple of recalls with them and they are getting nothing in return for coming back to you, what will be their motivation to come back to you when they have a nice pile of cat poop on the ground or something else that they are interested in.

I Hope this helps answer your question.

[Mike D'Abruzzo]

Thanks for the good answer Chris.

Arturios, the way you describe the use of the word "no" is a good idea if someone was only planning on using positive reinforcement alone.

But, since in this style we are giving the trainer the option of teaching the dog a higher level of responsibility the word technically becomes a warning to the dog. The "correction" is actually taught super light in the phase 1 obedience on the climb command. The "no" is used to teach the dog how to avoid the super light correction so that the dog will understand how to avoid more motivational corrections later during high distraction training.
There are many dogs that can get by in life fine with just positive motivation based training, but for the dogs that will benefit from both ends of the spectrum we want to try to make it as fair as possible for those dogs and that's what the predictable chain reaction is about. It is designed to mimic as closely as possible what dogs will do naturally to one another if exercising discipline - which will consist of a predictable communication, warnings, and corrections at the mildest level necessary to reinforce the warnings. This works well when you need a higher level of control when handling an aggression case in public, personal protection dogs, or any dog in an area that may present some environmental dangers.

Ultimately, it is up to the person whether they feel it is necessary to move onto phase 2 training and higher. If doesn't apply to them there is nothing wrong with doing as you suggested.

But, if someone plans on teaching their dog a higher level of responsibility and they fail to follow the "no" with the light corrections (if you would even call the light guidance that) in phase 1, than the dog will experience unnecessary stress if they ever get a correction that they didn't know was coming in phase 2 or 3 since the way you describe the use of "no" the meaning would be "wrong, try again" and not "this is your second, but last chance before a correction".

Also, keep in mind you would not use a motivational correction on a dog unless you were sure they weren't still guessing as to what the meaning of the word is (another purpose of phase1). Therefore I don't use the word "no" when teaching commands like "sit" - instead I just withhold the reward and ask again (while possibly helping with body language) until the dog gets it right - since dogs will keep trying without you needing to say "no" if they are motivated enough for the reward.

The word "no" is added to the chain reaction with "sit" in phase 2 after they have learned what "sit" means in phase 1 and what "no" and the rest of the chain reaction means in phase 1 (during the climb command). Even then, you don't jump into corrections but do the "transitional" exercises to make it as easy as possible for the dogs.

It is amazing how smooth training can go - even when adding discipline to the mix- when we remain super technical and predictable to the dogs. Things gets complex by phase 3, but the dogs can learn it easier than the handler if we build to that point. Phase 3 is the level of training that I use to control the personal protection dogs during chaos and other high charged distractions without having to use harsh corrections.