Cage Cleaner wrote:I'll clarify.
What I meant was that when an animal (not a bird, as stated above, obviously) acts out of line, the first and initial reaction would be to react back aggressively, and send a clear message that that kind of behavior is absolutely unacceptable. However, as soon as the animal knocks it off (sometimes they don't, immediately), you reward them with petting/treats/praise, etc.
I work with horses on a daily basis. Some of these horses are young and going through the phase where they try to dominate -everyone-. That is what they do in the wild at this age. They challenge the lead stallion. When a horse bites or kicks or acts aggressively (it's happened... many times) you smack him back, hard, tell him 'NO" very clearly, and act big. If he keeps at it, you might kick him. If it still keeps going on, you leave, get the whip out, and quickly come back so that he doesn't perceive it as a victory, and then carry on until it gets the message. A misbehaving horse is not a pretty picture.
This situation applies for when the horse is acting dominantly, not out of fear, obviously. I just say it so that bleeding hearts don't bring it up as a counter argument, heh. That is a whole different situation. There are other times, when one wishes to fix smaller bad habits (nudging, pawing, removing saddle pad from self) where one would just ignore it. The idea is that any attention is attention. However, this doesn't apply for when the horse attacks you.
As SOON as the horse calms down and displays signs of submission, you immediately let off and reward him. Both by stopping the negative reinforcement, as well as by giving pets, kisses, treats, whatever, etc. So, the point in my previous post was that you do use strong negative reinforcement to correct behavior immediately, but what was left unstated was that it's also backed up by positive reinforcement.
I wouldn't know about the aquatic animals, although I have been interested in that, lately.
Cage Cleaner, it is very interesting that you work very closely with animal training and have not heard that many of the myths of dominance training have been debunked.
I grew up on a farm around horses, and never ONCE was a horse ever HIT by a human. It was just never considered a thing to do--hit a horse.
I am certainly not an authority on the subject, and I'm actually quite new to it, as I have been researching training for my parrot a lot lately. I do believe that more research is needed in the field of positive reinforcement training, but it has been shown over and over to work if the correct methods are used.
There are many reasons that trainers would use "Positive Reinforcement" over dominance or negative reinforcement training.
Recall Flying with birds is an easy example as to why positive reinforcement is a must. But, It is not just bird trainers who use the method.
You can apply this idea to marine mammals, like dolphins who are trained by the Navy to search for mines, or object recovery. The US Navy REQUIRES that marine animals be trained using ONLY positive reinforcement. The last thing I would use to describe Navy personnel is "bleeding hearts"!
There have been at least a few studies done on positive reinforcement, and they mostly show that it does not take any more or less time to train animals using this method.
Doing a few simple searches will come across a few websites with authority on the subject:
http://www.apdt.com/petowners/choose/dominance.aspx and http://www.apdt.com/petowners/choose/do ... myths.aspx
http://www.imata.org/index.php/mission_&_values
And my favorite animal trainer: http://www.goodbirdinc.com/barbaraheidenreich-bio.html who specializes in bird training, but has also been employed by many zoos and animal facilities all over the world using ONLY positive reinforcement techniques. Many of the animals she trains other than birds were at one time or another thought to be only trainable by dominance or pack/herd theory.
And lastly, you may find this website interesting, giving its insight on a modern approach to horse behaviour and training through positive reinforcement: http://www.training-horses-naturally.co ... avior.html and specifically talking about dominant horse behaviour: http://www.training-horses-naturally.co ... avior.html
I use these above examples because in my own personal findings and research, and as I previously stated, "a lot of behaviour scientists and animal trainers are beginning to disagree with the 'dominant theory' for most (if not all) other animals as well."
I believe that animal training doesn't have to be about dominance or hierarchy. In fact, I find it very interesting that animals are willing to accept us as their equals through positive reinforcement.
How better to understand and connect with an animal than to try and perceive humans through their eyes?
