I second the cricket sound 😁

Try again is implied by giving the commsnd again.

Abuse??? Have you ever trained a dog doing this and there are multiple distractions? I train this way too, but during the early stages. I still use it during the later stages, but I promise you this... If a distraction such as a cat were to cause the dog to chase it across a busy highway, I promise you that a treat or tug toy is “Not” going to change the dogs minds no matter how many times you give the command/even scream bursting vessels in your neck. Fact,Fact,Fact. That’s where pressure release training comes in or for short, avoiding a ass whooping. Fact,Fact,Fact...

And I promise this. During a correction, the dog will not die.

But it could get splattered all down the highway and will surely die.

Ugh. I've officially been obsessively studying dog training vids for too long - I read your comment "if I REcall" and trying to figure out what you meant. Then realized "oh. reCALL" 😆

Likely because the dog did not do the correct behavior upon the initial command. If she rewarded, the dog could learn to sit and then stand instead of standing right away.

+Dinosaur Love Our DVDs can be purchased at leerburg.com

Lol! Idiotic!

Well - Where is your research?

good luck mate

Dr. Dale Hubbard, Ph.D. As

Dr. Dale Hubbard, Ph.D. 😂😂😂 is that a joke..?

It depends how you condition your markers. Most people define a correction as a leash pop, or the use of some other aversive tool.This would be considered positive punishment and if you paired your punishment marker (No) with a leash correction then yes, a punishment marker would still have the same physiological effect on the dog as an actual leash correction due to classical conditioning. However, a lot of people pair their punishment marker with the withholding of a reward (negative punishment) which would by most peoples definition not be a 'correction'. So to answer your question, yes, it can be, but it just depends on how you condition your dog to the punishment marker (No/Nope) and how you define a 'correction'. Hope that helps!

Ah OK, yes perfect sense - I've always considered negative punishment to be a correction too as I'm manipulating the environment and therefore still 'doing' something (withholding) to elicit a different response to the one that I've received. Glad to know it's not seen as a correction. Absolutely awesome installing this when they are a pup. Thanks.

Pretty sure she was training the specific down-to-stand cue, which is what the dog was having trouble with (while sit-to-stand was solid)

Donelle DAMS that's what I was thinking. It's just a verbal correction.

I don't really think so, at least based on what I understand of the principles of operant conditioning. The word "correction" usually equals positive (additive) punishment, where the correction itself is a bad experience for the dog and makes the wrong behaviour less likely to occur. I think saying "nope" calmly does not count as a "correction" because it is not in itself aversive to the dog. Instead, it is merely a *marker* of negative (subtractive) punishment - ie. a word that merely marks the withholding of reward, which is a punishment by not giving the food/toy. On the other hand, a verbal correction (ie. positive (additive) punishment) would be saying "no!" harshly and loudly with the intent to scare/startle/negatively affect the dog, and the harsh sound itself is the punishment (rather than the withholding of the treat being the punishment). (Edit: Leerburg replied to another comment along a similar vein.)

Not sure where you missed the point or got confused. In reward based training (which is how we train - its not operant conditioning in the true sense) the dog gets a reward for the mark. You would probably call this a positive communication. The dog learns this through what we call 'charge the mark'. When teaching a behavior we use successive approximation to reward and refine behaviors up to the point where we feel the dog understands the behavior we want it to do. We use positive markers and high value rewards to accomplish this. If the dog makes a mistake in training the handler needs to determine if he help through luring, or does the handler use a negative marker of NO or NOPE. Which means "if you want your high value food reward you will need to try again". So in essence we are withholding the food reward. So we are taking the reward away. I have been training dogs for over 55 years and come up through "the yank and crank era of dog training." Twenty or so years ago it took me awhile to wrap my head around this concept of this style of dog training. It has changed the way we communicate with our dogs. I hope this answers your question. If you want to learn how to do this correctly I would recommend the video I did titled THE POWER OF TRAINIGN DOGS WITH FOOD. on Leerburg.com - 20 years ago people thought we were crazy to train dogs with food - simple because they didnt understand the system. Its simple b ut its not easy to master.

@@efrawley55 Thanks for your reply, I know how to train this way and teach it in my classes. Your terminology as far as animal training is what I am questioning here. Too many people use the words positive and negative incorrectly. People who aren't as educated think that positive is good and negative is bad. This is incorrect and you with your 55 years experience should know this. I am not against your technique, I think the terms that you and other trainers use should be clearer. I am all for reinforcement based training, note I use the word reinforcement not positive. Your 'negative marker' is simply a reprimand (which is actually a positive punisher) indicating to the dog it has failed the command (request as 'positive trainers' like to put it). I guess we are all in it for the good of the dog so each can use whatever words sound good to the youtube watching public.

Rush is a Belgian Malinois

Leerburg Enterprises, Inc Do you guys have any books based on Michael Ellis' training techniques? I am a huge fan and want to learn marker training for my dog.

No we don't have any books by Michael, but we do have several videos with him - you can see them all here: leerburg.com/ellisdvds.htm

Is ,my Bruno look like Rush,his mother was German shepherd,pls reply _lh3.googleusercontent.com/3Ru5CosRhJ82NG4GyEsfXHkfq4m2Jr-Y7_j9KS1I3vr_I4-C-AFYsByeJXiXvwLqb3ZAxRkZxA_

_lh3.googleusercontent.com/iR57svHRODNRGSOP9rx3HKefaPQEewHrFzXI0wP3DO94a21w5HtyYcP_nZIkDNTtQmrN3IjooA_

+Lazerous You clearly have no idea what drive means.

Foamy Opals You're right I don't because it doesn't exist

Drive is simply desire. If my dog sees a toy and instantly all thought process goes out the window and she lunges for the toy that is drive. Her little dog brain clicked and immediately she said 'GO GET THAT' Prey drive. My dog is paying attention to me, we may be playing a game, suddenly she catches a scent, her nose flies to the ground and she things "OOH SMELL. FOLLOW IT" Thats drive. Training them in drive is harnessing the natural desire for these things and rewarding it. A dog trained in drive is going to be more energetic, and fast. (watch IPO obedience) a dog not trained in drive will be slower and more methodical (watch AKC obedience) Humans have drive, every living thing has drive. We are born with it. Drive to eat, chase, fight, mate. It doesnt make us mindless. It makes us animals.

Nope. Makes her an animal with instincts so strong she follows them before she thinks about her actions.

Foamy Opals Dogs are capable of thinking and are very smart and people like you do them a disservice when you say "oh dogs are highly intelligent and then proceed to say that they act only out of "drive" and don't think at all.