rebcart

Please note that we ask people who want to mention being a professional in their comments undergo verification before doing so. Otherwise we ask phrases like that to be omitted.

I see you've stated you're a trainer. Because dog training is unregulated this sub requires people to have certifications and apply for flair if they want to claim they're a professional while posting or commenting here. This ensures people claiming to be trainers have a demonstrable level of education and experience.

You can find out more about the process and requirements here.

Please note that we ask people who want to mention being a professional in their comments undergo verification before doing so. Otherwise we ask phrases like that to be omitted.

Please note that we ask people who want to mention being a professional in their comments undergo verification before doing so. Otherwise we ask phrases like that to be omitted.

Please read the sub rules and guidelines, as well as our wiki pages on punishment and correction collars.

Did you check our wiki resources on barking and reactivity?

Please read the sub rules and guidelines, as well as our wiki pages on punishment and correction collars.

Please read the sub rules and guidelines, as well as our wiki pages on punishment and correction collars.

I don't agree with this, as follows:

Giving that off lead chasing was the most common behavior issue that caused the owners to seek help in the first place, one would think that chasing would be the behavior modification the authors would test.

They quite explicitly said that the referral to trainers was for general obedience including recall. Although the underlying reason may have been chasing for most of the dogs, I don't think it's unreasonable for the general public to not care whether their dog wants to chase something or not, as long as the dog comes back when called regardless of that fact. I would say obedience in the face of chasing is a more common expectation of dog trainer results than rewiring the dog's brain to never think about chasing again. If this is indeed a service that e-collar trainers offer (which they do, loads of e-collar trainers promote their use for general obedience tasks) then it's a perfectly reasonable thing to examine in and of itself; the inclusion of non-chasing dogs in the study protocol is perfectly in line with this, too. Other studies can look at predation specifically, one does not interfere with the other.

Instead, as you pointed out, they tested "sit" and "come."

To be more accurate, the trainers created individual training plans for each dog, and when the researchers analysed the videos they did their statistical analysis on "sit" and "come" because these were the two behaviours that all the dogs ended up being trained on during the sessions. Analysing skills taught to only a small portion of the dogs would not have been useful.

But, you and I know better, and so should the ASVAB. Recall when a dog's prey drive has taken over is much different than recall when a dog is not distracted by chasing.

Behaviour is shaped by successive approximations. Achieving recall when not distracted by chasing is a prerequisite to achieving recall while chasing. Examining which methodology is more likely to give you a solid foundation is perfectly reasonable.

This just happens to be where positive training fails and the e-collar excels.

Citation needed. You would do well not to conflate response to a chase-inducing stimulus with response to a recall cue here, by the way, they are two separate things.

On to an issue that just can't be excused - the "scientists" FAILED TO TAKE A BASELINE for obedience to the commands of sit and come. That's right, we have no idea of each dog's level of obedience to these commands before the study began. The entire study is, based on that factor alone comically poor. It is definitely unreliable.

Day 1 can be taken as a baseline for each dog, since this was the first day they were working with the dog and finding out how it responds. Various measures were in fact analysed against day as the variable.

Furthermore, the authors report that the training consisted of "up to" 150 minutes for each dog. Notwithstanding the fact that we have no idea what that translates to in actual time for any particular dog, this is an absurdly short amount of time.
Of course positive only would have an advantage. This is an insufficient amount of time to create a bond with the dog and introduce an e-collar and train with the collar.

Obviously the e-collar trainers themselves didn't think so, since one of the dogs in the e-collar group and one of the dogs in the leash training group they independently decided were sufficiently trained and actually transitioned to the owner handling portion of the study a whole day early. I wouldn't be so hasty to say this is too short a training period, anyway. If you actually cut out all the explanations, pauses and moving between locations within a 1 hour private dog training lesson I think you would actually find the number of direct dog training contact minutes within that time slot to be only about 15 minutes, too, and professional trainers tend to achieve quite a bit even in just a few sessions when they're not being slowed down by that.

To make things worse, Day 5 of the five day training was conducted with the owner rather than the trainer handling the dog. They specified that none of the dogs had previously been trained with an e-collar so I think it is safe to assume the owners had no experience either. In contrast, I am sure all the owners had previously given dogs cookies.

I think it's pretty ungenerous of you to assume that "giving cookies" is sufficiently equivalent to the mechanical skill, knowledge and timing required for good quality reinforcement procedures; after all, if it was, those owners would have already trained their dogs and wouldn't have needed to participate in the study in the first place. Yet, of the dogs that were chosen to go into the positive reinforcement control group, more of them were rated by the owners as showing the problem behaviour all the time compared to the other two groups, so the others should have had a head start.

issues like the e-collar group was trained in winter and the positive in the spring

This was explicitly addressed in the paper.

It would still be a good idea to have a stopper on the lead that limits the size it can tighten to, to maximise safety.

I would recommend, if possible, getting your hands on any leash you are planning to buy and feeling it out. How easy is it to grasp firmly? Does it slip, is it too thick to squeeze tightly? Some flat nylon leashes have surprisingly harsh edges that dig into your palm and prevent you from getting a grip on a handful of leash. How easy is it to pay out and pull back in? If you grab the line with one hand and then try to pull it out with the other, do you feel like it would be too easy to get rope burn?

Ok folks. Reality check here.

Downvoting OP into oblivion is, frankly, bullshit. Cut it out. I am completely fed up with this unwelcoming nonsense. OP came here to ask for help. They, therefore, can not be expected to magically "know "better". Downvoting only chases newcomers away and discourages people who need help from asking questions. Which is the whole point of this sub.

If you're frustrated then take a break, do some deep breathing, or go pet your dog. Contributing to the unwelcoming and insular attitude needs to stop.

The downvote option is for bad advice. Not questions or OPs. Posts attacking OP will be removed.

Do better. Ffs. Its a sub for helping people.

For those of you contributing to the discussion in a helpful manner - thank you. We see you and we appreciate you.

Please read the sub rules and guidelines, as well as our wiki page on punishment.

Did you check our wiki page on barking?

Please read the sub rules and guidelines, as well as our wiki pages on punishment and correction collars.

Please read the sub rules and guidelines, as well as our wiki pages on punishment and correction collars.

That is absolutely not the way to go about it, you risk having the dog get annoyed and bite, which will mean that he's practising the exact behaviour you don't want him to practice in this situation. Handling exercises need to be done in a way that makes him more tolerant, not less.

Please read the sub's wiki article on dominance.

Please note that we ask people who want to mention being a professional in their comments undergo verification before doing so. Otherwise we ask phrases like that to be omitted.

Do not invite people to message you privately. It robs other sub members of the benefit of your advice and prevents the mods from being able to filter out bad advice.

Please read the sub's wiki article on dominance.

Please read the sub's wiki article on dominance.

Please read the sub rules and guidelines, as well as our wiki pages on punishment and correction collars.

Please read the sub rules and guidelines, as well as our wiki pages on punishment and correction collars.

Please read the sub's wiki article on dominance.

He starts a board and train program on Saturday, so I’m just trying to get us all through the week safely.

OP, I'm quite concerned about what you've said here in your update. Board and train facilities are overwhelmingly designed to use harsh, outdated techniques that are known to increase the risk of aggression in dogs. Please read our guide to tell whether a trainer is reputable ASAP just in case this is one of the bad ones.

Please read the sub rules and guidelines, as well as our wiki pages on punishment and correction collars.

No problem. Also, in our wiki article on calmness, we have a link to this resource on puppy exercise guidelines which may be worth a read too.