Positive vs Aversive Training

I saw this article today and thought it worth posting:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...nced-training-fair-to-dogs-or-is-it-a-cop-out

I think the study discussed points out a MAJOR belief by those who promote training by fear/intimidation/pain - that positive based training is merely about giving a dog food constantly as a reward.

I have heard so many "balanced" trainers argue that they "train the dog in front of them" yet they repeatedly recommend punishment for every question asked about how to train. I have seen them claim that prong collars are necessary to get a dog's attention when you can't do so otherwise, yet they recommend prong collars on a 4 month old small breed puppy (seriously you cannot get the attention of a shih tzu puppy at the end of the leash without pain?). I have seen them state that they "never use the e-collar on a setting higher than the lowest", yet they recommend online posters use a shock collar on its highest setting for their dog's unwanted behavior. I have seen them claim that the prong collar is only needed for training purposes, yet their dogs wear prong collars for life.

I also think that it is very telling that the pro-aversive trainers have softened their image by renaming things. We're "balanced" trainers - yet the only positive training method used is treat rewards and only for a small percentage of the training process. We use e-collars - ummm, no, e-collars are those Elizabethan collars used to prevent a dog from bothering an incision, etc. You are using a SHOCK collar plain and simple. And so on.

Another issue with aversive based training is that they claim that their tools are safe "if used correctly" and "on the right dog". Yet, they recommend these tools to every Joe Blow on the street without providing even a basic set of instructions on this "proper use". To me, that is not only heartless, but it is criminally negligent. I'd like to see these aversive positives get prosecuted for every time someone they recommended an aversive tool to ends up hurting their dog. Recommending positive based training methods and tools will never result in the damage these aversive tools cause. And positive based trainers usually add information about how to lessen any possible risk (ie, recommending the person decrease the dog's meals to compensate for the added treats used for training to prevent weight gain in the dog).

I agree that it is time to make a stand against inhumane treatment of animals disguised as "legitimate training methods". Lobotomy was once a legitimate treatment for mental health issues but society has since realized it is inhumane.

This is the link to the study mentioned:
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/14/1...to7FVdDXNHdaDren9Q_aem_IxXUe3Iy5pEIcu2JQVhXgQ

P.S. I saw the "controversial" tag and was about to use that, but then I realized that calling this "controversial" ignores the science that has disproven aversive training methods as inhumane and unnecessary. Using positive based training is NOT controversial. The number of people who think that they themselves would learn better by being shocked for every wrong answer is miniscule. I have no doubt that dogs agree that it is NOT the best way for them to learn.

I strongly agree with you on this, I think it’s the most cruel and torturous thing that I have seen, why on earth would you dream of putting these on any animal, to me that is no way earning any respect from an animal. How would people like it if they were made to wear them for a day let alone months/ years day in and day out? I see there is/ was a banning of them in the uk on https://www.change.org/p/boris-johnson-mp-make-pinch-collars-illegal-in-the-uk
But definitely something should be done about this. Whoever thought these collars up and thought they would work must of been sadistic in mind.

Busy today so I will read the articles later.
My first dogs were trained during the 1950's and 60's. Teaching in those days was a militaristic, 'march round the room and come to an instant halt', method. We all used choke chains - but did try to only apply the least check possible. With a strong dog that would often be too much. Our dogs obeyed but I don't think that training was much fun for the average dog in those days. Prong collars were curiosities seen in equipment catalogues, and I don't think electric collars had been invented.
Electric collars have been illegal in Wales for over 10 years, and became illegal in England from the 1st. February 2024 - though I must admit that I haven't heard much about it. I don't know whether the law included electric ring fencing for dogs. Scotland is expected to pass similar legislation. I don't think the prong collar petition made great progress.

For the types of dogs that I have had since the 70's, (toys and hounds), training has to be fun and the reward be the right one for the individual dog. Biddable types may be happy with a tickle and a 'Good Dog', while others will sell their souls for a tennis ball. Many toy-dogs refuse food when they are in a strange area, but the majority of dogs are very quick to make the association between good behaviour with a food reward. The downside is that if overused, the dog comes to expect a food reward for everything it does. (Are you listening Tally?). That may be OK on home ground, less so when under test conditions. It is this tendency that the so called balanced trainers despise.
I have stolen this as I can't put it better.

I know when I first left home and we had our first Rottweiler I took him to dog training as he was around 6 months old and we had to use choke chains then, but it was a mix of young dogs with older dogs and was trained to keep them in check with the lead, I never had a problem with him and other dogs until a springer spaniel that live Nextdoor had bitten him and then he just didn’t like other dogs after that, so I used to just walk on the old airfield out the way of other people and animals after that. But he went through a chewing stage of chewing anything and everything, cables, shoes, tv remotes and stripping wallpaper off the walls. To deter him from this when we was at work or nipped out ( we was never told anything about separation anxiety then) we would smear bonjela on the things we couldn’t put away. He hated that, so once in his mouth and he got the taste he’d spit it out and wouldn’t touch it again, he soon got over it and learnt that we was coming home again as I only worked part time anyway. But I would never of used anything so barbaric like those prong collars even if I’d of known.

When I started training in the 70s, we used choke chains. I remember the difficulty in training people how to use them correctly - that "quick snap" vs choking the dog. I also remember seeing people being dragged along by their dog wearing a prong collar. They were told "if your dog pulls, use a prong collar to get them to stop". But there is one very obvious fault in that idea (besides the cruelty):

A dog who will immediately behave when you put a prong collar on them doesn't need a prong collar. A dog who "needs" a prongs collar will keep pulling ignoring the pain caused.

I remember going places with friends and pointing out those dogs with the comment "now see, this idiot thinks that by simply putting a prong collar on the dog, the dog will stop pulling. Now they have a dog who is completely immune to pressure on his neck - so the dog will never stop pulling.". And there would be the person getting dragged around by a large dog in a prong collar. The dog is coughing and hacking away but still pulling against that collar.

My first training experience was my rescue boxer. The easiest job in the world. My next experience was a Siberian. A huge difference but he enjoyed it so it wasn't terrible. Then I had shepherds and shepherd mixes. They were so easily motivated by praise that I truly got spoiled. Any time I hear someone say how difficult it is to train their shepherd, I know exactly what the problem is - they failed to bond with their dog. And THAT is because they kept the dog at a distance. Keeping her outside all the time or in a kennel is the number one reason as shepherd won't bond. They have been bred to need to be with their person. It is what makes them great service dogs - they will do everything and anything for their person.

Over the years I have had or worked with corgi mix with extreme abuse issues, terrier with major fear aggression, severely neglected akita, husky mix, pit mixes, many shepherd mixes, chow, doxie mixes, boxer, dobie, rottie, labs, golden, and lab-bassett mix (she was a doll), airdale, border collie, and now Tornado-dog. My techniques have adjusted over the years. They've become softer and gentler. And they've become more about what is good for the dog vs having the best trained dog ever.

I'm OK if my dog stops to sniff every 5 seconds, etc, if he's happy. My leash rule is basically "don't drag me and don't trip me up".

With Cat-dog, I've had to give up on the "ignore other dogs" rule. She was so traumatized after being attacked that she will never get over that. The meds have helped but it's something I've learned to deal with. I won't abuse her in order to not deal with it. And to me that's the crux. People who use aversive tools do so because complete obedience is more important than anything else. They get off on the control of a living creature.

And frankly, those are the last people I ever want to be around - let alone let them around animals or other people.

@CaroleC that's a great statement.

I think it could be altered like this and still be true:

Using averside methods to train is cruel. Always. Without exception.

Now it may be effective training to use aversives, but it is still cruelty.

Aversives may stop the dog from pulling. Still cruelty.

Aversives may get immediate results. Still cruelty.

Prong collars, shock collars, physical or verbal reprimands, and other aversives. Still cruelty.

It is always cruelty. Those who think it isn't need to go back to the books and learn more and/or brush up on their training mechanics.

Yeah there's so much *real* cruelty to animals going on that many people are not focused on the use of prong/shock collars when it comes to cruelty.

I see them anytime I go where dogs are allowed. I don't personally use them but the dogs typically don't seem harmed by them.

As a child, I remember strangle collars/choke chains. They worked well for some dogs who would stop pulling as soon as they felt it tighten, but determined dogs would pull and pull until their tongue turned blue and they injured their necks/throats.

I rarely see choke chains now - but see prongs ALL the time on large breed dogs. Also such tools are not used to gain respect - but merely compliance. People do not need the "respect" of a dog.

Comparing or even remotely trying to compare the use of a shock collar on a dog to a LOBOTOMY on a human is wild though!

I do see your point though... as I agree that all these "aversive" tools are generally unnecessary, especially if you're raising a puppy.

My dog Malone is a high energy Spaniel mix who gets excited sometimes and starts jumping and running all over the place like a maniac. Occasionally I do find myself raising my voice at him or even yelling. Sometimes that's what I find works the best when he's bolting around like that. If that is considered "cruelty" to someone - so be it.

My comparison to the lobotomy is simply to point out that as we gain knowledge, things that were once considered acceptable and/or necessary are now accepted as cruel and unnecessary. Take your pick on the many many things that humans once did that are now considered inhumane.

Likely you haven't seen any dogs harmed by prong or shock collars because the harm has already been done. The dog has shut down emotionally.

I saw a 6 month old shepherd mix have a prong collar put on her because she was so hyper. Even without anyone tightening the leash, she was cringing in fear every time she felt the slightest touch of those prongs on her neck. She just sat there cringing in fear and yelping. The trainer ignored her fear and forced her to heel. If she balked or cringed, he jerked the leash poking her with the prongs. Sure after a month of this, she will not balk or cringe, she will be very well behaved and you will think "she doesn't seem harmed". But that's because the damage has already been done. She's been taught to not express emotions, to ignore her instincts and needs and only focus on what the trainer wants. Outside you see a "well trained dog". But that dog's mental health has been severely damaged and their trust in humans is completely destroyed. The dogs who are physically damaged end up put down, rehomed, or the human figures out how awful those collars are and stops using them.

I hear the argument that choke chains are so much worse than prong collars, but that's a fallacy. A prong collar has the same faults - if you don't know how to "properly" use them the potential for seriously injuring physically and/or mentally is extreme. The difference is that with a choke chain you are simply choking the dog to death. With a prong collar, you are choking them to death AND puncturing the dog's neck.

To me these tools aren't "generally unnecessary". They are absolutely unnecessary. I have never met a dog who needed a prong or shock collar to learn. The only purpose they have is to hasten the subjugation of the dog. And that is not what training is supposed to be about. Training is not to force the dog to obey no matter what. Training is about teaching the dog how to best interact in our world for their own best interests.

No one is perfect. Occasionally raising your voice at your dog because you are frustrated is not cruel - it's just life.

But there is a huge difference between getting frustrated at the park and yelling at your dog to "knock it off!" and training your dog by screaming at them every time they make a mistake. If your kids runs into traffic, you're going to scream at them to stop - that's a reaction to an immediate threat. Same if your dogs runs into traffic.

But you don't scream at them to TEACH them not to run into traffic - you calmly explain how they should behave around traffic and that they need to stop and wait for you to tell them it's safe to cross. And you train this behavior BEFORE you put them in such a situation.

So we live in different places. Dogs who are "emotionally damaged" as you say by prongs aren't put down etc. They are kept on prongs by their owners for their entire lifetimes. Many people who use prongs have pure bred dogs that they spend a ton on and actually generally take great care of. This is because prongs are simply not viewed that way here by many people. Also prong and choke collars almost never result in death or serious injury... so you aren't truly "choking them to death". Most dogs truly aren't physically harmed. *most*

I'm sure you would just call these people ignorant, but they'll just have to be ignorant because they truly do implement the collars as a training tool and view the collars as something to help keep their dogs in line and safe. They are not *intentionally* harming the dogs and do not believe that the prongs are capable of this. You disagree! Fair enough. I am in the middle. I believe the collars CAN do harm but generally don't and for some owners, can be beneficial. And again - the collars are not used to gain the dogs "respect" or "trust", they are used only to gain the dogs compliance. Dog complies and "problematic" behavior ceases, tool is considered successful.

And once again - children are people. People and dogs are different. Children can understand English and are more intelligent than dogs. The way we teach them is not the same.

And you also have to understand... whether you like it or NOT, that tons of dogs will be owned by incompetent people who really don't need to own them. In these cases, the dogs simply will never be properly trained and *any* easy method will be applied. Keeping dogs away from these people merely means putting a TON more of them down... so sometimes you cannot win either way.

Untrained pit bull loose behind a 4 foot fence that he can clear, chained to a tree behind said fence, or sitting in a high kill shelter to be euthanized due to being unadoptable... take your pick!!!

Also in violent crime and war stricken areas - it goes without saying that dogs do not take priority in any way and never will. It is actually to me a privilege to even be able to focus on animal rights... because it means that human issues aren't a crisis where you are.

But you are correct - the tools are never *required* from what I have seen either... some owners just take to them because they are misguided, misinformed, or simply unable to train their animals another way due to incompetence.

I feel like you are intentionally arguing that dogs just don't deserve ethical treatment because some people are not treated ethically.

We've had that discussion before and I don't want to get into it here. This is strictly about the use of aversive tools in dog training. If you don't believe it is an important topic then you are free to not participate. But please don't trivialize the topic because you don't care about it.

On topic, science has proven that aversive methods are no more effective than positive training methods and that they have a much higher risk of physical and/or mental damage to the dog.

If you can get full compliance without scaring, hurting and/or punishing the dog, they why would you ever condone the use of fear, pain and/or punishment to train a dog? It's like recommending someone replace their kitchen floor because they spilt a glass of milk - it's way overkill when simply mopping up the milk will be as effective.

As for compliance, this is the whole point about all this. Compliance by force does not create a strong human-dog bond. I hear people say things like "I'm gonna raise him mean so he'll protect me" or "that dog will do as I say or else". What a horrid existence for any creature.

It's time that people understand that forcing compliance is ruling by fear - it will backfire sooner or later. Maybe not this dog or the next, but one day a dog IS going to retaliate against your hard handedness. And every dog up to that point will be stressed out and shut down emotionally.

It is absurd to suggest that I have something against the ethical treatment of animals. I own animals and I do my best to treat them well. I don't even use the tools you speak of and never have. As you said - I merely don't find them necessary at all.

Half of what you are saying is simply not true in all or even MOST cases IMO. You're putting a blanket over the issue for emotional reasons. Not all dogs that use prongs are emotionally shut down. Many of them behave like normal, happy, excited dogs. Not all of them will eventually retaliate and most do *not* actually. Not all the owners are intentionally cruel. Not all or even MOST of these dogs end up in alternative homes or euthanized. Many owners who use them truly mean no harm.

Dogs bite for many reasons... and prong and shock collars are typically NOT the reason. I am not trivializing the topic, but again much of what you're saying isn't true and I don't think that using extremes and taking things way too far such as saying that the collars are "choking the animals to death" is okay to say. They're simply NOT doing that 99% of the time.

Yes they're uncomfortable. Yes they're unnecessary. But the way you're painting them is not the way it is to me. When I've gone to dog parks, many/most of the dogs on prongs seem totally well adjusted and happy. They're not shaking, fearful messes like you claim. Those are purely LIES and it really puts the owners in a light that they DO NOT deserve to be in in my opinion.

You are presenting everything you're saying as facts, when it's simply not. Say what you want to about prongs/stun collars but leave the exaggerating and the shock factor OUT.

"It's time that people understand that forcing compliance is ruling by fear - it will backfire sooner or later. Maybe not this dog or the next, but one day a dog IS going to retaliate against your hard handedness. And every dog up to that point will be stressed out and shut down emotionally."

These types of statements are unfounded and based on *maybe* a few personal studies of small size and the conjecture of a person with an agenda. There's no way that any of this can be proven as hard-core facts. Making statements like this is what I have a problem with because we just cannot say that all dogs are stressed out with these devices because many of them simply do NOT seem that way. These comments are based on some people's personal opinions of these tools as a whole - no *real* facts or studies. Many people who view the devices that way have never used them, don't live in an area that uses them widespread, and merely have tiny studies or rare personal viewings of the devices used to go by. How are those fair assessments of MOST dogs and owners that use the tools?

There is no exaggerating. You are the one who stated "determined dogs would pull and pull until their tongue turned blue and they injured their necks/throats" - that's as close to choking to death as possible. But yes, dogs have choked to death due to choke chains. I have known dogs who have died from them. In most cases, it's because the owner had no clue of the potential risk in using the collar and therefore did not pay attention. In some cases, it's because a trainer used the collar to string the dog up for non-compliance. In all cases, it was a death that didn't need to happen.

I have known more dogs who have had injuries do to choke chains, prong collars and shock collars. Some may be minor - just abrasions or small puncture wounds on their necks. In other cases, their trachea have been damaged or major puncture wounds have occurred.

You are correct, many dogs wearing prong collars are not "shaking, fearful messes" simply because aversive training punishes dogs for showing emotions. Are ALL dogs adversely affected to complete shut down - no. But the number of dogs who ARE adversely affected by these tools is far greater than acceptable. And this is because these "balanced trainers" recommend and push aversive tools to their clients regardless of the dog's personality and/or sensitivity and regardless of the owner's understanding of the risks of such tools.

Sure I'll agree that the majority of dog owners use these tools with no intent to be cruel - because they are routinely told that these are great tools that will get instantaneous results.

And THAT is the point of the article and this post.

Instead of saying "people don't know better and don't mean to be cruel" and blowing off the concern, we need to spread the knowledge that these tools ARE cruel and unnecessary to have a well trained dog.

Read the link I provided. Read the study they referenced. There are many other studies that prove prong and shock collars do more damage than good to dogs. I am not making this stuff up. It is out there in legitimate studies.

And, by the way, the only study that concludes that these tools are not damaging is the one this article refers to you and it is a very faulty study on many counts.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but my personal choice is they are CRUEL, @mjfromga I also have a high energy working spaniel that pulls until he’s coughing when we first go out in the morning for his run around and yes one or two times he’s pulled my arm nearly out my sockets to get where he wants to be!! But I wouldn’t dream of putting something so wrong around his neck to keep him in line, but I now put a figure of eight on him, which I don’t like doing but he knows he can’t pull me with it, it comes off his nose as soon as we get to where we want to be. He and the doxie have been taught from day one that they can not cross any road until I tell them. Springers are later in life in calming down especially when they come from working breeds. But even so NO dog should have to endure pain, regardless to how big or boisterous or out of control they are,. I was always told ( the dog didn’t ask to come to you and if you can’t look after it in the right way then don’t have one!!) so if these people can’t sort their dogs out in the way that just takes perseverance then why did they got one at the end of the day?

I do think that choke chains are particularly bad... as some dogs were seemingly not intelligent enough to realize that pulling MORE will not allow them to escape and just ended up making the problem worse.

Prongs and shocks don't tend to illicit this response from dogs, which is why they are far more widely used.

I think "head halters" are bad also. I've seen excited dogs yank their heads sideways from them before. And then you have "martingale" collars - which are basically choke chains without the chains. All are unnecessary and "aversive" to me.

And if I went into the reasons why people in some areas got dogs, it would start an entirely new discussion/argument... as many people get dogs for personal protection and other reasons I'm sure most people on this forum would not agree with.

In the end - I think people know that prong collars aren't necessary. I don't think we have to tell people that in general.

But a figure of eight is not a halter, it can be released without having to unclip all the malarkey that you do with a halter straight back to a slip lead, they are more humane than collars or even harnesses, that make some dogs pull like freight trains and trust me I know!! as they are not around the neck at any point ( unless it’s turned into a slip lead) and only across the nose and around the back of their ears, they do not stop the dog picking anything up like a halter could as they are not across the mouth or restrictive in taking them off. Also if they are pulling these halters off then they must be wrongly fitted or to big for the dogs face surely?!

A martingale collar is NOT a choke chain without a chain. Martingale collars come in all chain, partical chain and no chain versions. They do not tighten indefinitely - they only tighten by 2-5 inches and you fit them so that when tightened they are tight enough to keep the collar from being pulled over the dog's head but not enough to exert any choking pressure on the dog's neck. When not tighened, they easily slide over the dog's head.

And you can attach the leash to one ring for training that allows the collar to tighten if the dog tries to pull away (preventing them from getting loose and taking off) or to another ring once the dog is trained that turns it into a simple flat collar.

Yes, head halters, etc, can be dangerous if the dog jerks their head, etc. In that they CAN be aversive. I have only used them once with a severely abused dog who had been dragged around by her collar and because of that went into a rage if she felt anything around her neck. The head halter avoided that sensation so she learned that walking on a leash was not going to result in her being dragged. It broke the connection. Once she realized that walking on a leash was not bad, I was able to reintroduce to a collar without issue.

You keep making assumptions that I obviously am not around these aversive tools. You have no clue of my experience. I have far more experience in these tools than you think. Most of us on this forum have been involved with dogs far more than just having a pet. We have actively trained dogs. We have been involved with dog sports and/or rescues. We have had experience with multiple breeds over the years. What is your experience other than living in an area that appears to think prong and shock collars are reasonable training tools?

@Tone even the figure eight harness can injure the dog's neck if they suddenly turn their head or try to run off. The injury would in line with whiplash - as when the dog rushes forward or turns, the head hits the end of the leash and gets twisted or yanked back.

Any collar or harness can injure a dog. That is inherent in any form of restraint. The goal is to find a collar/harness that is least likely to cause harm for your dog. In most cases, that is a harness, a martingale, or a flat collar.

One thing you might try with him is to identify the purpose of the walk. Are you taking him out for him? Or are you taking him out for you?

I see a lot of folks taking their dogs to the dog park. They fight to keep the dog from sniffing anything. They won't stop to let the dog watch the squirrel in the tree. It is all about getting the dog to the park so he can have fun...

And by focusing on getting to the park, they are denying the dog a ton of fun. So, let them set the pace as long as they don't pull. The more you let them enjoy what is around them, the less they will try to run.

With that initial "we're going out I'm so excited" psychotic behavior, I usually just walk them in circles for a few minutes. Not going anywhere but letting them sniff all they want. I find that gives their brains time to re-set before we start walking.

@Toedtoes to be honest he does wear a flat collar as it is law here that they wear one out and about but exceptions if they are working. I only put it on for all of 2/3mins otherwise he would choke himself on a flat collar, I honestly make him sit a wait while I go out the door and sort the other dog out too, he is rushing to get from one side of the road to the other and when he pulls I stop then he stops and backs up ( he even understands the word ‘backup’) back in line, he isn’t interested in sniffing, he has to get where he wants to be( in the field) if I wasn’t on a bus route with so many cars too I would just let him go across but I haven’t got that option. He stands and then waits until I take the lead off and then waits for his ball. He doesn’t do it going back home funnily enough, It’s just pure excitement that he gets to run about, he’s not interested in what’s or who’s around him or even treats, he is so fixated on his ball. When we walk to different places then he’s a totally different dog because that’s not his play area so he does sniff then and pees up anything and everything and we can take ages to get just a few feet down a path. So I would rather put the figure of eight to cross the road than to make him cough and struggle and totally hurting his windpipe for the sake of 2/3 minutes and have my arms in their sockets to be able to throw a ball for him.

That makes sense. That it's just for that one situation, I agree the figure eight sounds like a good option.

I wish we had a collar law. I cannot count the number of times I've been out with one of my dogs on a leash only to have an unleashed dog rush up in excitement. And the owner is just running around screaming because they can't get hold of the dog because they aren't wearing a collar or harness of any kind.

In the UK, the Control of Dogs Order 1992 states that any dog in a public place must wear a collar with the name and address (including postcode) of the owner engraved or written on it, or engraved on a tag.
Beau’s has a reflective chevron around it so you can see it in the dark too his details are hidden away in a screw tag. The same as they have to be chipped aswell.
I know that putting anything on any dog has it’s risks, but the reason I used it was for that particular reason and he pulls with excitement, but not so excessively when it’s on and it being quicker releasing and better than a halter as they are restricting around the mouth when picking up the ball.