By Dale McCluskey
www.k9pack.com One of the issues that can be very confusing and deceiving when it comes to behavior is recognizing the difference between associative vs relational change. While both offer the same physical response from first appearances only relational change influences unwanted behavior it comes to impacting the decision making process of the dog. Associative change happens mostly within learning based models via the concept of connecting or associating a negative experience by the dog to getting something good such as a treat. This learning based concept is commonly used for situations where the dog is displaying highly dominant or aggressive responses towards people and or situations. This is when the targeted person offers the attacking dog a treat to create a different association. As this concept is repeated several times the dog expects to receive something positive. To understand why this concept breaks down for many one must be able to shake free from the ideological restraints and consider that physical response may not always represent a like minded state and that relational change is moving forward. To understand how physical response can be disconnected one only needs to take a look at the narcissistic individual to gain insight into the problems with learning ideology. The underlying motives for response and what influences it must be put within the proper relational context. Associative change can be compared to repainting a vehicle without replacing any of the important parts under the hood that makes the vehicle move. It will look great, appeal to the emotions of the person and make a sale until you turn the key to drive down the road. Associative change is like changing out the picture and imagery from the surface but that is as far as it goes. It paints a false image of nature. The dog will associate the person or situation to something good but it is comparative to merely creating another narcissistic supply source. This acceptance by the dog is based on role reversal fulfillment. Those who mirror their emotions via the relationship are also getting their needs met based on this role reversal. This is the reason why it is so difficult to get people to change based on both getting their needs met but for the wrong reasons and based on the opposite roles. Those who promote learning ideology have great difficultly connecting these dots based on the core tenants and interpretive script in play. Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/8399607
0 Comments
For me nothing represents confusion more than seeing a dog owner with a treat bag on one side of their hip and remote collar hanging off the other. While these hybrid approaches are often referred to as balanced the tipping point when it comes to success or failure for both dog and owner is weighed against those who fail to recognize training for what it really is.....an intervention. Behavior issues represent a relational misalignment is already happening at some level with the dog's decision making process pushing beyond the boundary lines of the follower script and role. Every interaction becomes contaminated as a result. Owners can be left feeling as if they are caught in an endless loop of frustration, avoidance and failure from which there is no escape. This is simply not the case when it comes to the relational model.
By approaching the relationship as an intervention even difficult and seemingly hopeless behavior issues such as fear and aggression can be resolved over time. Have you ever finished shopping and upon approaching the check out be drawn to the latest trash articles put out by such publications as The National Enquirer. The guilty glancing as you casually take one from the shelf and read the latest gossip on Hollywood goings on. I have even bought an issue or two during a moment of weakness. For me the new National Enquirer has become the trash science of dog training articles put out via various promoters of these feelings based groupies. The latest article called "A Dog Died Today because of a Trainer" was written by a member of the purely positive group. As I read the foolishness contained in this made for TV scripted article I couldn't help but flash back to my National Enquirer articles where UFO's had come down to abduct Tom Cruise finally. I am still trying to figure out how promoting bite suit pants and the death of a dog at the hands of a fictional dog trainer fit.
To some the truth is an insult, to others life from the dead. –Gary Amirault The purpose of this page is to lift the curtain on the ideology which is being marketed to the public as the science of dog training. While there are many layers to this ideology the main issue is what it represents as a whole at the relational level for the majority of those needing help to overcome behavior issues with their dogs. What I show very clearly is that this ideology puts many dog owners at very high risk of failure especially those who need the most help with creating relational change. One of the deceptions is that many go through the motions of training without even realizing that physical response is not always representative of relational change. The underlying motives attached to response must be put into right relational context. It is no different than the narcissist who objectifies while going through the motions to obtain supply. The motivations are difficult to perceive for those who are emotionally invested. The issue of physical response and relational disconnect is one of the big problems that is happening between dogs and owners. In my book, Mind and Body Kinetics, I discuss this issue at length. The reasons why so many are not willing to trade this ideology for truth is because it has morphed into a belief system. Considering that 4 millions dogs are being destroyed every year in North America and the shelters are filled to capacity the hard truth needs to be put out front and center. Those who are misrepresenting the dominance issue while exploiting learning need to be challenged and held accountable. It is clear that the group how are promoting this agenda are not willing to put the interests of dogs ahead of their ideology. It is the only way things are going to get better. I am probably the first trainer who can show the relational connection issue and what it represents at this level.As an self described expert on understanding the issues of relational connection with how it influences a dog's decision making process I can clearly show that many are not only misrepresenting the issue of dominance but also exploiting learning theory at the same time. The break down points of learning theory are consistently predictable based on using relational connection as a model. The ability to discern the type of influence taking hold within any given learning model only comes from understanding this connection issue. I show the various relational interplays which reveal the influence of this connection on the decision making process of the dog. Further I would argue that it is impossible for those promoting the science of dog training to accept what I show based on already established tenants and positions regarding the core issues of dominance and learning. The campaign by this group to bully their way beyond the inconsistencies and problems while exploiting the feelings and emotions of dog owners only serves to support my position. While my goal continues to be to help individual dog owners overcome their behavior issues and problems my other focus is to shine the light on the reason why so many are still struggling with their relationships with their special pack members. My hope is that the information I provide will open the eyes to what has been happening and focus attention to this problem. Truth is beautiful, without doubt; but so are lies - Ralph Waldo Emerson Click here to listen to my radio show segment on the Science Delusion When it comes to nature there are no accidents or coincidences. The goal of this page is to expose the mess of what has been happening in the dog training world for far too long. Dog owners are being sold down the tubes by trainers who have aligned themselves with the type of methodology and relational connection / bond that is causing high rates of failure for dogs and owners. I clearly show how learning theory is being exploited while the relational connection issue is being mocked, ignored and dismissed by those who are on their knees worshiping these ideas as the second coming to dog training. The issue of dominance is being misrepresented and exploited as a cheap marketing tool by this group to draw in the masses. It is like fishing with dynamite based on societies current attitudes towards dogs. It is clear that this branch of science is not walking hand in hand with truth. Those involved are demanding validation while attempting to use intimidation, exploitation and popularity, based on exploiting feelings and emotions of owners via the dominance issue, to bully their critics into silence. My hope is that as more begin to make the relational connection they will start to seriously question the motives of those pushing this corrupt agenda. I make it clear they are the biggest reason why dogs are being given up on and destroyed based on the type of connection this methodology aligns with. Those promoting this agenda are not only overselling this ideology but in many cases are outright misrepresenting the facts. A dog's decision making process is influenced at the relational level and I clearly show this point by point. This is in fact the primary motivating and influencing agent. If you are interested in reading more regarding this issue I have two books which will help provide more in depth answers. The Mind and Body Connection and Mind and Body Kinetics. Both of these books are available via this website. Go to the next level of dog training with this one of a kind guide. Mind & Body Kinetics provides unique insight into the relational dynamics at work between dogs and their owners. Topics include:
Training as an intervention Defining relational vs corrective influence Follower Moments as the Building Blocks for Change Comparing the Relational model with the Learning Based Model To check out this fully illustrated guide go to http://k9pack.weebly.com/guides.html People often ask me what is the best path to take when it comes to gaining insight into the dog and human relationship. The fact is that if your a parent who sets boundaries and limits on your kids which includes saying what you mean you are already light years ahead of the majority of dog trainers currently in business, especially dog behaviorists. You don't even need to own a dog so long as your psychology and ideology is aligned properly as it connects to the authoritative style of parenting. The sad truth is that the epidemic of narcissism which is consuming this generation of youth is directly connected to this self focused and permissive ideology. It has the same negative impact both in the human and dog world.
The fact is the majority of dog behaviorists represent the bulk of this bridge to no where ideology. They are are the same ones who can't get their kids out of the toy department at Walmart but are the first ones to hand out parenting tips even though you never asked for any. They represent your crazy co-worker who actually thinks they should be running the entire show. The foolishness is indeed at a all time high in the dog training world. My advice to anyone seeking to gain real and meaningful experience when it comes to dogs is to take on some tough and seemingly hopeless dog cases. In fact just hang around with some behaviorists who promote the trash science of dog training as they will have lots of dogs available which they are trying to blame and sweep under the carpet. The shifting sands of what defines control and change for the dog owner goes deeper than what is seen from the surface or appearance of things. What is seen via the physical by way of response must be put into proper relational context to assess if meaningful change is actually happening. Often dog owners and even trainers assume that relational change must be happening if the dog is responding and going through the motions of various routines. This simply isn't always the case. Those who approach training as a learning based exercise run a high risk of being deceived. The issue of what I define as physical response and relational disconnect is a very real problem. Physical response does not always represent a like minded state the way it is being defined by many. Within the learning based model a fail rate of greater than 50 percent is the norm. Those who fail never get a sense of failure until they leave the controlled training environment and return home with their dog to discover that nothing has changed.
People often ask what is the main problem in society today. My answer would be love of self or what the Bible describes as idolatry. What is happening now within the dog world and our relationship with our pets is reflective of a bigger picture of what is happening in our society at large. In the Book of Jeremiah God calls the people of Israel for out for being "Insane with their Idols" . Jeremiah who was a messenger from God was in fact called the weeping prophet because he had nothing good to say with what was about to happen to Israel and its people. The King at that time even attempted to create a false narrative via false prophets to marginalize Jeremiah and his warning. Israel was ultimately brought into captivity by their neighboring enemies. The fact is they were already in bondage from idolatry before the attack even started. The culture of that time was all about appearances and the worship of self. The fact is the core of idolatry is about self.
I personally believe that the issues taking place at this current time within society represents deeper meaning as it aligns with where we are standing in history. Embracing ideologies which attempt to re-define and change while promoting a false narrative that elevates ourselves above Creator God. It is another bite of the apple. The issue of idolatry impacts everything. As the period of Grace closes and judgement begins there will be no real answers without having a right relationship with God. Those who seek success and identity without seeking God first will be overrun. There will be no winners but only losers for those left to attempt to make sense of what is happening. It will be an identity crisis like no other. Just prior to the tipping point of past judgements it was business as usual. The majority never saw it coming. Jesus predicts the same attitudes would exist just prior to the final curtain call on this fallen world. Scripture predicts that "Love of self" or what is labelled as narcissism would be one of the prevalent attitudes abounding during the last days. This is the most narcissistic generation bar none. If your hope and identity isn't in Jesus than it will be somewhere else. The real question is where is your hope ? While groups such as Beyond Cesar Millan continue to run a campaign of personal attack and hatred one needs to dig a little deeper to see what attracts people to this group and ideology in the first place. This group states that while Cesar’s methods work they are not recommended due to the discomfort and pain it inflicts on dogs. My question is “Well what is it ?” Either they work or they don’t. This inconsistent statement is a common thread which runs down the middle of this ideology which focuses on the feelings and emotions of dog owners. My argument has been that if this approach worked as well as it is being promoted than there would be no need to run a negative campaign against those whose methods challenge the core of this ideology . While this group attempts to counter this by stating the issue is that there is a better way one must go deeper to see what is really going on beyond the marketing, arguments and hype. The dirty little secret is that this ideology takes priority over dogs. It is no coincidence that most of my client base comes from those experiencing limited results and failure within these treats and reward based systems of training. It is natural for the majority of those in need of help to gravitate towards these systems based on the attitudes of society towards dogs. The lines being crossed when it comes to learning theory and the dominance issue are the very reason why those who are sold out to this ideology must go negative in the first place. Limited results and failure are merely inconvenient truths which are part of this science experiment. What I clearly show is that the consistency of those breakdowns lift the curtain on dogs as relational beings. In my book, Mind & Body Kinetics, I define relational influence and the impact it has on a dog’s decision making process and more specifically unwanted behavior. While the evidence is indisputable it goes beyond what has now become a hard and difficult truth for many to accept. Beliefs have the ability to do that and make no mistake that is what this ideology represents, a belief system. While this ideology continues to gain in popularity it seems that 4 millions dogs being killed every year in North America is not enough to bring most back to their senses. Perhaps the Beyond Cesar Group merely represents a type of what is happening on a bigger scale. I tend to think so. While many continue to focus on their 10 feet of real estate sooner or later they are going to wake up and discover that the rug has been pulled out from under them.
The Academic Divide
By Dale McCluskey The real searcher after truth will not receive the old because it is old, or reject the new because it is new. He will not believe men because they are dead, or contradict them because they are alive. With him an utterance is worth the truth, the reason it contains, without the slightest regard to the author. He may have been a king or serf — a philosopher or servant, — but the utterance neither gains nor loses in truth or reason. Its value is absolutely independent of the fame or station of the man who gave it to the world. — Robert G. Ingersoll – (1833-1899) American political leader, orator To better understand what is happening within the dog training community one needs to gain deeper insight into what is fueling this ongoing discourse between behaviorists and traditional trainers. You may not be aware of it, but there’s a quiet war raging right now in the dog-training world. It’s a conflict between positive reinforcement (+R) trainers and behaviorists like Ian Dunbar and Nicholas Dodmanwho base their methods on the principles of learning theory. They’ve pitted themselves against traditional or dominance trainers like Cesar Millan and the Monks of New Skete, who follow the alpha theory. (Lee 2010) While many are under the opinion that behavioral science is losing the training wars this may be premature based on the weapons within the behaviorist arsenal. The increasing popularity of the behaviorist model of training has been fueled by an aggressive marketing campaign aimed at appealing to the feelings and emotions of the dog owner. The APDT quickly grew to become the world’s largest organization dedicated to the training of pet dogs. Since its inception there has been a worldwide explosion of puppy classes run by reward-based trainers. (Lee 2009) Many trainers have taken full advantage of this marriage of behavioral science and the exploitation of conditioning along with a feelings and emotions agenda. Along the same lines, I no longer use the words “obedience” or “command” in association with training. According to The Oxford Dictionary, “obedience” means “submissive to another’s will.” The word “command” has its negative connotations as well. Instead I use the words “training” and “cue.” Because training should be a fun and positive experience for both the dog and its guardians, I have chosen to remove all words from my training program that imply unpleasant associations or any type of force. At that point in my career I didn’t realize there were many trainers already using positive methods. I was convinced I was the only one in my city with the beliefs I held, and I felt very much alone. Since then, I have met so many of like-mind, and I’ve learned so much. I continue to learn every day. I’m happy to say, my city now consists almost totally of positive reinforcement dog trainers. (Laurette 2006) This unholy union of behavioral science with feelings and emotions has created the perfect storm which is raging against nature. As behaviorists continue to promote and market an agenda fueled by feelings and emotions it has become clear that popularity has become the focus. The saying that a good defense consists of a great offense takes on new meaning when it comes to how behaviorists market and attempt to validate their interpretation and approach to the dog and human dynamic. This aggressive campaign to marginalize and target those who go against the current of behavioral science has done little to stop the ongoing questions and challenges. Cesar Millan has become the target as a charming, one-man wrecking ball directed at 40 years of progress in understanding and shaping dog behavior and in developing non punitive, reward-based training programs (Derr 2006) Behaviorists continue to demand validation and that their voices to be heard while at the same time ignoring and dismissing serious questions and concerns associated with their methodology and approach to the dog and human relationship. The following responses to the Time Magazine Article Dog Training and the Myth of Alpha-Male Training are typical of the public attitude towards the “as is” science. C.S Dominance theory is dead. Talk it til your blue in the face. To ignore the numerous studies and to keep bringing this down to one or two people is ridiculous. The evidence has mounted. Organizations comprised of 1000s of professionals have researched this through and through. It’s time to move forward. If you smoke and still do – you at least admit it’s not good for your health, no? Well, if you believe in dominance…start to at least admit and digest the fact that these thoughts are antiquated and recognize that the evidence has been presented. Response J.S Maybe in your mind. You can talk until your blue in the face. One or Two people? More like hundreds of thousands of dog owners recognize it is not wrong or have you not been reading the posts here and at the yahoo Time article site or visited the Dog whisperer site or the Dog Whisperer Yahoo Group. The majority of posters recognize that dominance theory is alive and well and believe it and have seen the results on our own dogs. You PHDs can have fun writing your journal articles that the common person cares nothing about debunking dominance theory for the rest of your lives. It’s not going to change the minds of us who believe what we see with our own eyes and have common sense. What does smoking have to do with this argument? There is no way to make a reasonable analogy. Where is this so called evidence you have? Hidden in some PHD Journal Article somewhere? Response by another poster TimidDog “The evidence is probably in some biased PHD study that skews the results to make the the theory work.” Funny you should say that, since that’s exactly how the Alpha/Dominance Theory of wolf packs originally came about. Even the guy that came up with it says the original wolf study was skewed. That’s what I hate about those silly PhD’s and scientists, they are more interested in continuing to learn and evolve than they are in proving they were right fifty years ago. In reality the entrenched positions behaviorists have taken regarding dominance leaves them held within a defensive position. To change their views regarding this issue would cause their model of training to collapse. Reputations and careers sold out to this model of training would be over in an instant. The following exchange between myself and a behaviorist on a popular internet dog discussion forum illustrates the typical response to specific questions and challenges to this method of training. My question “Tell me why some owners are successful while others fail using the same exact models of training ???? “ Answer by behaviorist Human error : “bad timing”and inconsistent. Which is true for ALL types of dog training. My question ” Conditioning is used within several models of training however the behaviorist model of training has a much higher failure rate, why is that ??? “ Behaviorist response Can I see YOUR research and evidence on this before answering?? My question “Why do owners who connect with dogs on a higher emotional level have the most behavior problems and issues ????” Behaviorist answer Can I see YOUR research and evidence on this before answering?? My Question ” When some dogs move around for treats and clickers and behavior issues don’t diminish why is that ????? ” (This question is regarding why some owners succeed why others fail using the exact same devices, methods, techniques and interactions) Behaviorist Response Can I see YOUR research and evidence on this before answering?? This type of avoidance to questions is typical when you begin to pin down and focus in on the problems and issues. Behaviorists are clearly against the wall based on the type of psychology they have aligned themselves with and the positions they have taken regarding dominance. The behaviorist response of bad timing and inconsistent training leads to ultimately blaming the dog and or owner when meaningful influence fails to grab hold and unwanted behavior issues fail to diminish. I remember reading somewhere that if something isn’t working, Don’t Shoot the Dog! Of course McConnell didn’t shoot the dogs in this case, but she did give up on them. That’s the really sad thing. She won’t give up on her belief in her beloved behavioral science -even though that’s what the data is telling her — but she will give up on her dogs. McConnell had 4 years to “condition” these behavioral problems away, with little or no success. What are those 4 years of data telling her? That sometimes conditioning doesn’t work. Why doesn’t it work? Because it’s based on an inaccurate and incomplete model of learning, one that fits perfectly with how rats learn to run through a maze, or how pigeons trapped inside a box learn how to peck a lever to get a piece of food. But in this case, it didn’t work to foster a positive social connection between two well -bred dogs, when dogs, as a species, are inherently, with no conditioning needed, the most social animal on earth. I’m not blaming Patricia McConnell for anything except for a failure to re-consider, re-evaluate, and re-think the validity of behavioral science. (Lee 2009) The until death do us part mentality that behaviorists such as McConnell have with the bridge is out science delusion illustrates the reason why academics have a credibility problem with this issue. What is seen from the surface through conditioning gives behaviorists the illusion, or delusion, that bridges can be built even when they can’t. This suicide pack behaviorists have with behavioral science illustrates why this debate, discourse and division shows no signs of abating anytime soon. Behaviorists feel they hold to keys to knowledge and are the final governing authority when it comes to understanding the dog and human relationship. References Alpha Theory;Why it doesn’t work (2010). American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior. (2008). Position Statement on the Use of Dominance Theory in Behavior Modification of Animals Bradshaw, John. (2009). Dominance in Domestic Dogs-Useful construct or bad habit? Call, Josep. (2003). Domestic Dogs (Canis familiaris) Are Sensitive to the Attentional State of Humans, Journal of Comparative Psychology Copyright 2003 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 2003, Vol. 117, No. 3, 257–263 Cherry, Kendra. (2010). The Four Styles of Parenting, About.com Guide, Psychology Coren, Stanley. (2010). Obtaining Status, Rather Than Enforcing Dominance Over Dogs: A Positive Program, Psychology Today. Derr, Mark. (2006). Pack of Lies. DeMar, Gary (1989). Behaviorism Dictionary.com, “influence,” in The American Heritage® Dictionary of Idioms by Christine Ammer. Source location: Houghton Mifflin Company. Behavior. 125, 283-313. Dodman, Nicholas (2010). Ethology: The Study of Animal Behavior. Dunbar, Ian (2010). Science Based Dog Training – With Feeling Dunn, Ellen (2010). The Parent and the Pendulum Fact-index.com (2011) Animal Cognition. Frijda, Nico (2000). The influence of emotions on beliefs. University Press, Cambridge. Hackbarth, H. (2008). Comparison of Stress and Learning Effects of Three Different Training Methods: Electronic Training Collar, Pinch Collar and Quitting Signal. Hannover Univ. Hare, Brian (2005). Human-like social skills in dogs? TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences Vol.9 No.9 September 2005, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Deutscher Platz 6, Leipzig, Germany Julian Rubin. (2008) Operant Conditioning Kelly, Lee Charles. (2009). Of Mice and Mutts: Is Behavioral Science Failing Our Dogs Kelly, Lee Charles. (2009). Of Mice and Mutts; Why Behavioral Science is Losing the Training Wars. Laurette, Norma Jeanne. (2006) The Dominance Theory Lloyd, Robin. (2006). Emotional Wiring Different in Men and Women, Live Science Lockman, Darcy. (2010). Rehabilitate Your Reactive Dog, The Dog Daily. Mech, L. D. (2008). What Happened to the Term Alpha Wolf? International Wolf, Winter 2008, pp. 8 Mech, L. D. (2010). Alpha Status, Dominance, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs. Millan, Cesar (2006). Cesar’s Way Ogburn, Philip (1998). Comparison of behavioral and physiological responses of dogs wearing two different types of collars. University of Minnesota, Department of Physiology College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University. Pavlov, Ivan P. (1927) Conditioned Reflexes: An Investigation of the Physiological Activity of the Cerebral Cortex, Lecture One Pavlov, Ivan P. (1927) Conditioned Reflexes: An Investigation of the Physiological Activity of the Cerebral Cortex, Lecture Two Perry, Gaille. (1992). Aggression in Dogs: A Complete Review. Plataforma SINC (2009). Dogs Are Aggressive If They Are Trained Badly. Remote (2010) Examining our opinions about dog training and other things. Ryan, David. (2010) Why Won’t Dominance Die? Sands, Jennifer. (2002). Social dominance, aggression and faecal glucocorticoid levels in a wild population of wolves, Canis lupus. Department of Ecology, Montana State University. Sprain, Leah. (2006) Sending Signals from the Ivory Tower: Barriers to Connecting Academic Research to the Public Sizer, Sally (2010). Calming Signals in Dogs. Temple Grandin. (2005). Animals in Translation, pp 309 Thagard, Paul (2006). How Cognition Meets Emotion: Beliefs, Desires, and Feelings as Neural Activity, University of Waterloo University of Bristol (2009). Using ‘Dominance’ To Explain Dog Behavior Is Old Hat. Vetinfo (2010) Understanding dog memory: Associative Memory Versus Real Memory: Negative Versus Positive Associations Waggoner, Brad (2010). Operant Conditioning Welfare in Dog Training. (2010) What’s Wrong with using ‘Dominance’ to Explain the Behavior of Dogs? Wynne, C. D. L. (2001). Animal Cognition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Yin, S. 2007. Dominance Versus Leadership in Dog Training. Compendium Continuing Education for the Practicing Veterinarian 29:4-32 |