No. It isn't.

The word "punishment" is used by most people to mean what a professional steeped in training theory would call positive punishment.  Most people would also talk of punishing the dog until it does as it is told (negative reinforcement), or withholding a reward until the dog behaves as wanted (negative punishment).  Recognising this is not being patronising - it is accepting that the dictionary definition is going to be more widely understood, and remembered, than the training jargon!  Anyone other than trainers steeped in behavioural theory will therefore read "giving permission to punish" as "giving permission to hurt" - which I am sure is not what you intend at all.  I don't think describing something as "a way to stop behaviour" is using a synonym for punishment - I, like you, can think of several ways to stop a dog jumping up that would involve nothing but positive reinforcement, and others that certainly would not involve the real-world meaning of "punishment".  I would agree with those trainers who avoid the word altogether - we live in a culture that is already quick to punish: let's not even inadvertently encourage owners to use such outdated and ineffective methods with their dogs.

Let's be careful here.  I think we tread on dangerous ground when we start suggesting that punishment, even harsh punishment, is ineffective or doesn't work.  In technical terms, it doesn't qualify as a punishment unless it works.  In the non-technical sense, owners often find the relief and release provided by punishment to be effective in making them feel better, even if it doesn't change the dog's behavior.

There is no argument as to whether or not punishment works.  It does.  That's a fact.  Choke chains work.  Shock collars work.   

The question is:  What are we willing to do in order to get the results we want? 

This is the question I pose to clients.  They have every right to choose the punishment they would like to use.  If I don't offer an alternative, if I don't explain the differences, if I don't have the punishment conversations...the topic remains taboo and secretive, and THAT is dangerous.

I would venture to guess that if a client is not given humane options for punishment they will lash out in frustration at times (scream at dog, spank dog, grab collar roughly) but they will never tell the trainer or anyone else.  If we demonize all forms of punishment, we prevent education.

A well taught "time out" can save many a dog from much scarier punishments. 

I personally don't love the word "punishment" because of the connotations it brings -- and because people often misunderstand the word and thus "do it wrong".

But I agree, as a concept, it is effective in dog training -- I've never been a huge fan of the positive-only training either.

I always use the term "corrective training" for it -- ie, it is ok to "correct" unwanted behavior (in a constructive manner) -- this gives the owner "permission" to use negative reinforcement for their training (vs positive only) and in mindset, sounds a little more like a simple leash pop vs a dominance move that flashes to mind scenes from the dog whisperer.

I have to agree with FJM on this one.  If we don't change the vocabulary, we just accede to the behavior we would like to stop, namely punishing dogs in a manner inconsistent with good science and kind treatment.  Punishment, scientifically speaking, is just adding something that stops behavior.  But, I find that people don't really grasp that concept well.  So, I often opt for using terminology such as "this is how I would alter that behavior" and leave it at that.  People want to change what the dog is doing, so that description works.  It's also helpful to ask the person, given that their dog is doing something they don't like, "What do you want your dog to do instead?"  Then, teach them how to train to get that result. 

spiritdog says:  "Punishment, scientifically speaking, is just adding something that stops behavior."

Punishment is anything (added or removed) that decreases behavior over time.  The only way it can be called a punishment, within the framework of learning theory, is if the behavior actually decreases over time. 

Positive and negative describe the adding or removing portion.

I would continue to argue that I don't want to stop people from punishing their dogs and certainly don't want to trick them into thinking they're not.  Most of all, I don't want to perpetuate shame associated with punishment.  We give words like punishment, discipline, leadership, consequences and balance all kinds of power and ability to be misused when we don't remain completely above board.

My hope would be that we could start talking about punishment, between trainers and with clients, without all the emotional baggage and tiptoeing.  It is what it is. 

One other thought...if the students in my class have their own connotations of a word, isn't it my job to define, educate and make clear what the definition is in the context of our class/training?  For instance, when a trainer tells her students to bring treats to class, it's amazing how many different definitions of "treat" there seem to be.  We have handouts and discussions about what a treat is, what it isn't, what size it should be, etc.  Why can't punishment be treated the same way?  I don't have to go into a full-on discussion of nutrition in order to educate students about training treats, so I don't feel the need to fully explain learning theory in order to help a student understand that a time out is an effective punishment and a choke chain is not necessary.

Cindy Bruckart

It's very interesting to watch these comments roll in, already someone is using your argument to justify physical punishments

"it is ok to "correct" unwanted behavior"

This is justifying physical punishment by giving it another name. We've seen this before and Cesar uses it all the time. This guy thinks he's on your side. (Maybe he is?)

And then Cindy says this:

"There is no argument as to whether or not punishment works.  It does.  That's a fact.  Choke chains work.  Shock collars work."

You've just inadvertently given a whole bunch of people permission to continue to use harsh punishment to torture their dogs. Even worse, your statement isn't even true most of the time. It's only true with a small subset of dogs in a small subset of situations with a small subset of people that know how to use those methods. Statistically, almost never.

Most people who read that comment are not going to take statements like that in context. They're not going to take the time to learn to correctly use those methods. They're not going to look at your body of work, because that's not how many people behave. Isn't that exactly what we talk about all the time on this blog?

You're fighting to win an academic and personal point. By trying to get the satisfaction of being right, people will use what you say to hurt their dogs.

You almost always have to choose between "being right" and getting what you want. What you want is to "be right", so I'll give you that, "you're right."

I'm personally going to behave and speak in a manner that will allow me to get the results I want: for people to have happier lives with their dogs by treating them better. I don't care about "being right" or academically correct. Dogs are being abused, and people are frustrated and unhappy.

__________
doxienews.com

Cindy,

I agree wholeheartedly with your post above.  I really believe that by acknowledging that YES, used "correctly" a choke chain, electric collar etc will work and then by explaining that if you choose to train that way there will be consequences to this and you can set up a whole other set of problematic behaviours to deal with.  Not to mention the damage that is caused to the relationship between person and dog.  You will throw water on the flames instantly.   

In my experience once you explain this to a person even if they used these methods for previous dogs and their dog "turned out fine" they are not prepared to take the chance for their new dog.  You then have a person who is 100% on board with your methods of training and will now trust you and your abilities because you have explained the WHY behind it all :)

There should be no mystery or magic to dog training and behaviour - the science is proven and therefore there is no reason it should not be explained to the general public.

I am so glad I started this topic.

Lisa Whelan BSc CPDT HNC APDT(853)(UK) CAP2

Doxienews I am saddened by your response, you are implying that an average person is "looking for an excuse to abuse their dogs". 

Firstly this is not my experience at all, people are looking for solutions.  (We have over 5000 dogs on our books since inception, so I think it's safe for me to give that opinion). If somebody can explain the best solution they will take that.  These posts have nothing to do with academia or "gaining points".  Education is the only way to solve problems like the ones you are describing.  The longer dog training is deemed to be a little bit magical to ordinary dog owners the longer aversive style training will exist.

Even worse, your statement isn't even true most of the time. It's only true with a small subset of dogs in a small subset of situations with a small subset of people that know how to use those methods.

That above statement is wrong, if you understand learning theory, all four quadrants (or boxes) do actually work - that is the science of learning theory.  In order to teach people you need to understand that.  If you don't then you will struggle when dealing with a client who found that it did work in the past, they won't believe you and you will loose them and they will return to the methods that "worked for them in the past".  People base their opinions on their own personal experiences, so it is much healthier to acknowledge those and provide a better solution.

Lisa Whelan BSc CPDT HNC APDT(853)(UK) CAP2

It's very interesting to watch these comments roll in, already someone is using your argument to justify physical punishments

"it is ok to "correct" unwanted behavior"
Where in that sentence do you see physical punishment? Did it slip your notice that the person who made that statement was agreeing with your aversion to the word "punishment" and suggesting "correction" as an alternative? Gee, maybe playing word games does just lead to more confusion.

This is justifying physical punishment by giving it another name.

Even though I disagree with kcdogblog on this one, I'll defend his point. (I think it's "he"? Is that you?) No, he isn't. He's actually trying to implement what you want - avoiding the word punishment because it has negative connotations. But oops he picked another word that has negative connotations too! We're going to run out of words before long! And what's your reaction? You jumped right to assuming that he uses physical punishment when the problem could just be a politically incorrect thesaurus. Poor him!

We've seen this before and Cesar uses it all the time. This guy thinks he's on your side. (Maybe he is?)

Who is it that has a problem with words again? The average pet owner, or could it just be you? I'm starting to wonder. Because a simple debate over how we commiunicate has turned into mudslinging.

You're fighting to win an academic and personal point. By trying to get the satisfaction of being right, people will use what you say to hurt their dogs.

First of all, I think you have an inflated opinion of my influence here. Second, as others have said - the people I meet want a solution to their problems, not an excuse to abuse their dogs. You have a very sad and cynical view of people, or at least of the average dog owner.

I'm personally going to behave and speak in a manner that will allow me to get the results I want: for people to have happier lives with their dogs by treating them better. I don't care about "being right" or academically correct. Dogs are being abused, and people are frustrated and unhappy.

Yes, and accusing me of being just like Cesar because of my vocabulary is a great way to start your "better communication by careful word choice" program. Best of luck with that!

I may be cynical. I think you guys are right again:

• People never suggest that you swat a dog on the butt to potty train him. That's not a common thing for a new dog owner to hear.
• People never suggest that you shake a can of coins at a dog when he does something bad because "he doesn't like it and it hurts his ears."
• Nobody ever makes their dog aggressive by using a choke collar or a shock collar. All these people want the best for their dog and always put the time and effort in to learn to use those tools perfectly.
• Nobody is ever lazy and just hit their dog when it does something bad. They always consider training as an option.
• Nobody ever gets the impression that alpha rolls are the first line of defense against any "aggressive" appearing behavior.
• Nobody ever spits in their dog's food or water to make sure the dog knows they are the master. I must have imagined that.
• Nobody ever takes their dog to be euthanized after they have screwed it up themselves giving the dog full on PTSD so it can't be rehomed before its unfortunate death.
• And most of all, when you use the word punishment, nobody will ever ever get confused by what you mean. And they certainly won't think you are approving of their incorrect shock collar usage. Like you say, it's not a big deal, because shock collars work.

How did I get so bitter and cynical? How did I ever get the idea these things happened?

All dog owners are good healthy people (just like all parents are), they take the time to make sure they have the correct information, and they all have unlimited time to perfect their training skills.

__________

doxienews.com

I don't how you got so bitter and cynical, Kody, but you certainly haven't said anything to change my opinion.

You're convinced that dog owners have no critical thinking skills and that any exposure to aversive methods or even a modicum of confusion will result in dogs being abused. I have more faith in people than that, and my experience so far has proven me right. Of course some people are more gullible than others, and some people are going to be abusive no matter what, but I feel that filtering information because you don't trust anyone to exercise good judgement is cynical and incredibly arrogant. I also think it's pointless because if we've learned anything from the Internet, it's that trying to control hearts and minds by hiding information is futile.

You've also decided that anyone that doesn't see it your way is not just mistaken, but implicitly responsible for abuse. You've also apparently decided that by attacking us you can shame us into agreeing with you. When it comes to people, positive punishment, intimidation, and harassment is just fine. I see this a lot from dog trainers. I fell into this trap a few years ago and still regret some of the things I said.

I'm not going waste my time fending off any more cheap shots, Kody. I've provided a lot of information about how I train and what I believe both here and at my own site. Cindy has done the same, except for a while longer and quite a bit more skillfully. If you really think we are contributing to the abuse of dogs you have two choices:

1. Keep insulting us.
2. Put your R+ where your mouth is, and try to have some kind if adult conversation.

It's your call.

--------------------

Eric Goebelbecker
eric@dogspelledforward.com

All I can offer you is my point of view on all this.  First, I think the fact the a discussion about a word and it's scientific definition so quickly causes such personal emotion is proof that we MUST get more comfortable with it.  As long as we allow it to represent all the evil in the world, it will remain the powerful "that which cannot be named" force that keeps all of us "good people" living in fear.  It becomes a weapon instead of a word.

Yes, there are a lot of people in the world who treat dogs and children horribly.  However, that is NOT the average pet dog owner.  The average pet dog owner is a person who is doing the best they can with the knowledge they possess.  It is not cruelty that causes a person to swat a dog with a newspaper.  It is ignorance.  The ONLY defense against ignorance is education.

As an example:  I got a call the other day from a man who has a 9 mo old Boxer with no recall.  In fact, he explained that he chases the dog for 15 minutes around the yard to get him in the house.  As we talked, I found out that this man was given a shock collar by a family member when the dog was just a pup.  Well, he put it on the dog and he zapped him a few times.  He said he (the owner) didn't really like doing that, so he put it back in the box and put it away.  Now, with the frustration of chasing his dog all over, he's been thinking about getting the collar out again.

At this point in the conversation, I could have let him know how horrible it is to put a shock collar on a puppy.  But, to what end?  To shame him?  My goal is to make sure that shock collar never comes back out of the box.  My job is to help this guy see things from the dog's point of view.

So, I asked him what else he's done to deal with the recall issues.  He said he's spanked the dog, yelled at him and put him in his kennel when he finally got ahold of him..."but nothing works, he won't listen to me!"

So...I remained relaxed and said, "You know, if you're at the bar with the boys and your wife calls demanding you come home right now, how quickly are you gonna head home?"  (he laughs a little) I continued, "I mean, if you're already in trouble and you KNOW she's gonna yell at you when you get there, why not have a few more beers, right?"  At this point he must have "got it" because he really started laughing.

I explained that punishment just doesn't work for recall, because we're trying to teach the dog that coming to you is a GOOD thing.  We want the dog to want to come, and he's not going to want to if he knows he's going to be punished.  This dog owner will be coming to class and I'll have the opportunity to give him lots of options. 

My other thought is this:  If we don't talk plainly about punishment, how are dog owners going to become better at sifting through the crappy advice and the good advice?  You cannot improve critical thinking by withholding information.  In fact, critical thinking REQUIRES a non-emotional assessment of all the information.

(This conversation is reminding me very much of the old sex education debates.  The idea that withholding information about sex would keep kids from being sexually active and that giving them information would be like giving them permission to have sex.)

One more thought:  If you want people to be held accountable for their actions, you should be in favor of giving them as much information as possible.  Not one of my clients can use the excuse of ignorance if they choose to use harsh physical punishment with their dog.  I have explained to them the many options for punishing a dog, and explained the dangerous side effects of others.  I don't tell them not to watch the DW, I explain what's happening on the show.  I have to arm them with knowledge or I leave their dogs vulnerable.

"Well, if I'd known better, I'd have done better."  ~ Maya Angelou

Cindy Bruckart, CPDT

I am old enough to remember when Barbara Woodhouse was the last word in dog training - and her methods were considered "kind" in comparison to what had gone before.  Only a few years, when I knew less than I do now, I took my young dog to a training class that advocated leash jerk "corrections", and pushing dogs into a sit or a down.  We didn't stay long - the level of stress and anxiety amongst both dogs and owners was palpable.  I have a friend who, after professional advice, bought an electronic collar to stop her dog barking when left alone in a strange flat.  Every one you meet now considers themselves an expert after watching dog training shows on television.  There is a huge amount of contradictory advice out there that dog owners have to navigate.

I am not a professional dog trainer - I am a reflective dog owner.  I read books, I dig around web sites (which is how I found this site!), I am fortunate to have found several helpful professionals and an excellent vet, but when push comes to shove I have to make decisions on behalf of my dogs, and to be their advocate in dealings with other humans.  For me, as a graduate in English, the word "punishment" is inextricably linked with the concepts of crime and guilt.  "Correction" is pretty much in the same camp.  I can quite see that if, as a trainer, you are dealing with dog owners whose response to any behavioural failings in their dogs is to blame the dog and want to punish them, then the debate about what dogs find aversive is one that is very necessary, but I do find that very sad.  I look back at that unhappy training class, and then at the rapid, happy progress I made with my dogs when I discovered clicker and reward based training, and the effort they put into finding out just what they need to do to make me click and treat, and I know which works best for me.  

We are at last leaving behind the days of "spare the rod and spoil the child" - time outs and the "naughty step" are the recommended punishments for every day naughtiness in children.  We are a very long way from that for dogs - electric shock collars, for example, are on offer as a "training aid" to anyone with the money to buy them - and for this reason I am very wary of the idea of "giving the owner permission to punish the dog" - especially if the owner finds "the relief and release provided by punishment to be effective in making them feel better, even if it doesn't change the dog's behavior".  There is too much room for escalation if the dog-friendly methods taught in class don't show instant results. 

(Cindy's post about the boxer pup came on line just as I finished writing this - I think we are in absolute agreement about what is and is not ethical - just struggling with the semantics!).

It's always very hard to have a discussion where I feel like I totally agree with the people in many ways, but people don't want to agree with me. I feel like you guys have decided to make me into the bad guy here and for some reason, you will not concede even a single point to me.

I agreed in the last discussion that use of the word punishment is absolutely fine in the context of our discussions. In a previous comment, I said:

"Obviously there's nothing wrong with using the term punishment in a discussion like this."

And I would agree that with your clients, I trust you to shape the conversation around the word punishment into good results.

But for people who don't work with a professional dog trainer, who are the vast majority of dog owners, I get concerned about use of the word punishment and to explain why, I'd like to agree with Cindy that this conversation is almost exactly like the sex education debates. 

I think that kids will be safer, happier, healthier, and accidental pregnancy will be reduced with sex education. But the thing is, nobody would say we should start talking to kids about oral sex when they are 8 years old. In fact, we want any discussion we have about sex with our kids to be very tightly controlled because we know the path to sexual maturity is a long one that, frankly, most adults don't ever achieve.

So, if someone came over to my house and said, "Oral sex is great!" in front of my kids, I would ask them not to say that. To which they might reply, "But it's true! Are you trying to censor your kids? Are you saying sex is bad? Do you want your kids to grow up repressed?"

I would reply, "No, it's just my kids aren't ready for that kind a statement yet. Furthermore, the statement you made is generally true, but it is not always true. Without a thoughtful discussion, my kids are likely to misinterpret that statement and may take actions based on that statement that they aren't ready to handle. They have a tough enough time as it is without someone trying to put confusing statements into their minds. My kids are still learning, they are trying their best, but they are struggling to grow up at the right speed."

Sex education is a process which starts with the difference between boys and girls, and then how babies are made, and then that sex can be enjoyable but it's a big responsibility, and then how people can manipulate other people with and for sex, and on and on... 

So to bring it back to punishment. That guy who's watched two episodes of Cesar Millan and has just started alpha rolling his dog is not ready to hear the words "punishment works" come out of your mouth, especially if he's not paying really close attention, and if you're on a TV show, a podcast, or even a casual blog, he most likely isn't. He's possibly going to take that in a way that you did not intend and it's going to make his dog's life worse. I'm not saying he's a child, I'm saying as far as dog training goes, he's right near the beginning of his journey, and he probably isn't even considering hiring a professional trainer ever in his lifetime.

So is punishment a bad word? Around some people, yes it is. People's maturity as a "dog trainer" must be taken into account before throwing words and phrases about willy nilly.

__________

doxienews.com

The big difference between the sex talk and the punishment talk is, as you mentioned, one is aimed at kids and the other at adults.  I would agree with everything you've said if I were writing for a kid's website, talking at a school or talking to kids in my class.

However, adults are responsible for their actions.  Watching The Dog Whisperer doesn't excuse anyone from treating their dog harshly or inhumanely.  Neither does reading my blogs or comments.  I am responsible for sharing what I know, discussing what's out there in the dog training world and educating my clients.  That's it. 

The client is responsible for getting other opinions, checking the facts and doing what they feel is best.  If you do something stupid because someone told you to, it just means you're stupid enough to listen to stupid people.  No one, not Cesar Milan, Ian Dunbar or even little ol' me have some secret knowledge about dog training or behavior.  It's all out there, for anyone to access. 

This is nothing personal, Kody.  This is a very old discussion among dog trainers.  My professional stance goes beyond the word punishment and seeks to address the continual message that dog owners are too stupid, too cruel, too angry, too confused, too non-compliant and too immature to make wise, rational and well-informed decisions.

I strongly believe that the longer we treat the average pet dog owner as a child who can't make decisions on their own, the longer that very statement will be used as an excuse for abuse.  If all of us are speaking plainly, openly and honestly about punishment, how could anyone even begin to pretend to not have known what they are doing.

Cindy Bruckart

For a long time people believed in being alpha; now they believe in being the pack leader. Whether we like it or not, these terms let 'joe public' believe that keeping their dog "in-check" involves showing them who is boss - either actively, or passively.  There is no doubt in my mind that your "average joe" dog owner includes (one or more) actions like smacking, pinning, scruffing, leash pop, exclusion, shocking, or choking in their definition of punishment.  It's not that these people WANT to abuse their dog, it's just that they have come to believe these are some of the ways you would normally punish a dog.  If you use the word punishment (without repeatedly defining it) then you are running a risk that individual may believe this is the type of action you want. 

I've recommended many fantastic training books to friends and I always seek their feedback. The feedback I  often get?? They don't want a science lesson!!  They want to understand what's wrong and find out how to fix it.  People already have a perception of what punishment is, perhaps it's not so easy for them to alter that definition? Perhaps they don't want to? If they don't want to accept and use the scientific terms of positive & negative, punishment & reinforcement, then what?  If you were to tell me that a red light was not in fact a stop light, but a signal to drive on; how long would it take before I could see that red light without wanting to stop the car?  Maybe the clients perceptions will take longer to shape? 

This debate should not be about what TRAINERS think, or what BEHAVIOURISTS think; it's about what your CLIENTS needs! Have you asked them what they believe punishment is? Have you asked them if they want to alter that definition? Have you given them the option of referring to this 'discipline' using completely different terminology? Punishment isn't what you think it is, or even what you may have told the client it is. It's what the client believes it is - their perception is their reality (and their dog's!!).  If you say in a blog "punishment is acceptable" then that will mean different things to different people (unless you repeatedly define it).  

I'm not a PC type of person (I'm more a foot-in-the-mouth sort of person), but I do believe there is a need for change in training communication. Is changing the terminology easier than changing the individuals perception...I don't know?!  A business should always ensure they are communicating with their target market in a clear & effective way. However, there seems to be many professionals, who are so keen to demonstrate that they have the correct understanding of the scientific terminology that they communicate in a way easily understood by their peers & not so easily understood by their clients. Or they use terminology that means one thing to them and another to the client.  

I suspect this is one of the reasons Cesar is so successful.  He is using SIMPLE words & easy to understand concepts. He's working with the definitions people already hold.  He's the dog training equivalent of Simon Cowell - all "pop" and no substance (and very,very rich).  Operant conditioning needs a marketing makeover, if it is going to compete! Whether we keep existing terms, create new ones..something needs to change, because when the professionals can't even agree about the terminology, what chance have the public got? 

I absolutely agree with Kirsty.  Cindy - in your conversation with the owner of the boxer, did you at any point actually discuss punishment at all?  It sounds to me that you very sensibly took the situation as it was, and offered him some dog-friendly ways of resolving it, after helping him see why his punishment based approach was not only ineffective, but counter productive.  I used to be a management consultant - believe me, trainer-speak has nothing on management-speak when it comes to jargon!  One lesson I learned was that using jargon weasel words gets everyone to an apparent consensus very quickly, because they are ambiguous enough for everyone to stretch them to include their own interpretation.  Specific, simple language is much harder to misinterprete. Of course you need to discuss punishment with dog owners - every class I have ever attended has done so, emphasising why it is not a good way to train.  Hence the mantra "Reward the good, ignore the bad".  Of course the dog experiences being ignored as a "punishment", but if you asked average dog owners to define what it means to "punish", to "discourage" and  to "ignore" their dogs I think the answers could be very revealing! 

The concerns about talking about punishment seem to me to be missing the point.  I certainly teach my students how to punish, and I don't use the terminology of operant conditioning with beginning students at all.  Crate timeouts are punishments, so are body blocks to teach/enforce a leave-it.  So are lots of other perfectly gentle ways to reduce the occurrence of a behavior. 

I seem to be hearing people say that every sentence of every blog post most be carefully constructed to ensure that it doesn't inadvertently reinforce misguided attitudes, practices, or beliefs that are pervasive in our culture.  I just don't think that's realistic.  I also don't find that this is a real issue in dealing with the public.  I agree that people don't want a science lesson.  They also don't want lectures about the moral way to treat their dogs.  

When I first crossed over to using positive methods, I used to spend a lot of time on why we had to be positive with our dogs, and I saw eyes glazing over.  I saw how committed some people in the training world to heavy-handed methods and I felt that I had to work to wean my students from that commitment.   

I don't mean this to be insulting, but thinking otherwise is a common mistake of newbie trainers and people who have recently adopted gentler methods after experience using more forceful ones.  There's a common tendency to think that it's really hard to convince people not to be rough with their dogs.  I once thought it myself, but with time and experience I found that most students don't come in with a lot of pre-conceived notions and the ones they have are usually easy to change.    

People just want advice that works, and they want it to be honest advice.  I do have clients that are already committed to heavy-handed methods, but those people have generally used them and seen them be effective.  Refusing to admit that will only reduce our credibility.  Give people accurate information about the dangers of heavy-handed punishment and tools to reduce behavior more gently and respect them enough to make their own decisions about what to do with it.  No jargon needed.  Many will take it heart.  Many won't, but I don't think that bending over backwards to avoid saying anything that they might take out of context to support their existing ideas is going to make me more effective.       

I'm having more the experience that Jeff describes.  Not all of my clients have heard of the Dog Whisperer.  The majority of my clients are relieved to find that I'm not going to ask them to choke their dog or shake a noisy at can at their dog.  I find that clients are thrilled to find out that they can relax and enjoy their dog instead of acting like a prison guard on constant vigil against canine mutiny.

Do I have clients who haven't given much thought to the possible fallout of harsh punishment?  Of course.  I also have plenty of clients who are simply doing what their families have always done, what the neighbors told them to do or what they saw on TV.  But I don't find these people defending the need to punish.  I really don't.  I talk openly about the fact that what they do can work, how it works and why other choices might give them better results.  I have yet to meet the owner who has refused to at least try something different.  Afterall, if what they were using was so effective, they wouldn't be talking to me in the first place, would they?

I do not leave things at "reward the good, ignore the bad".  I don't think that's enough information.  I do talk about punishment clearly.  I don't give a learning theory lesson, I simply give the client alternatives for what to do when the dog is not responding the way they would like.  I also tell them what they could do, like using a choke chain or shock collar and explain why I wouldn't suggest such action.  I do that because I want them to be armed with some information should someone else suggest they go that route.

And yes, I did discuss punishment with the Boxer owner.  We talked about other behaviors he wants to stop and I explained that punishment is effective in some cases, not in others and that there are far better ways to punish than using a shock collar and/or painful or scary stuff. 

One thing I've begun to notice about the trainers on this site is that you all seem to be in a bubble. You think that your clients who care enough about their dogs to pay $50 - $200 an hour for a trainer's help are representative of all dog owners.

I guess it makes sense, these are the people you're around day in and day out. But people that are willing to pay you are the very very top dog owners. And they represent almost an insignificatly small percentage of total dog owners.

Do you realize that the vast majority of dog owners never even consider going to a beginning training class? And that if they see one or two episodes of a tv show, which will most likely be Cesar Millan, that's all they're going to get, for the whole life of their dog.

You keep using your clients as examples. But your clients are not at all examples of the vast majority of dog owners.

So yes, one sentence heard on a TV show or a blog can be significant to the average dog owner. This is why people are all trying to be the pack leader. It's not that they've watched and studied every episode of The Dog Whisperer, it's that they've watched one, and their friends said Cesar Millan was cool.

__________
doxienews.com

I disagree.  Actually, even though it might be hard for us (and certainly the AI contestants) to swallow, most of what Simon says is spot on.  Cesar, not so much.  This discussion illustrates why I rarely discuss training techniques and concepts with my clients in the scientific context.  I explain how dogs learn in the simplest terms I possibly can.  New trainers find the 4 quadrants confusing let alone the general public who just want their dogs to stop jumping on them and yanking their shoulders out of socket when they're pulling them down the street.

And lastly, regardless of what we want to call it, tomato, tomahto, everyone uses punishment in some capacity, whether intentional or not, and in all our relationships, with dogs and humans.

Director of Training and Behavior Counseling Pup 'N Iron Host of Dog Sports and Performance Network on Pet Life Radio

I have to agree with Kody on this point; the vast majority of people I come into contact with are average dog owners and many baulk at the though of paying a trainer. These are people not involved in any dog training, dog sports, they don't use dog daycare and their only contact with the 'dog world' is the dog park & their vet and perhaps a breed-specific forum.   Convincing them to see a vet or behaviourist can be a real struggle, especially when the information they receive (from rescue volunteers, breeders, other dog owners, the internet & even vets!!!!) say these issues can be sorted using the types of punishment we are trying to move away from.  They seek a lot of information from TV and the internet, so if I refer them to a blog that says "punishment is acceptable" that often has a different connotation to that of training class students. I realise that it's not your responsibility if that person takes the comment as license to smack/choke/scare, but it can make it 100 times more difficult for people like me to convince them that there is a 'new way' & to seek professional help. 

I spend (or should that be waste?) a lot of time on dog forums (mainly of rescues I volunteer with & breed-specific) trying to convince people to look at different ways of training. The advice often given out   - by these rescue volutneers/breeders, who are seen as an authority on dogs - is rattle bottles, spraying water and showing the dog who is pack-leader, using rank reduction methods.  I first try and convince the person seeking advice to see a vet/behaviourist/trainer and when that doesn't work I suggest books and post links to good resources.  It's an uphill battle, but every now and again someone will ask for a recommendation to a trainer or behaviourist. More often, sadly, people take up the other advice and then tell me that x,y,z website also says this is the way to do it.  I am a member of one forum where that's not the ethos, because it has a number of trainers & behaviourists on it, but that is not not the norm (from my experience).

I am in the UK, so I guess there could be some difference? Having recently seen the fabulous work done by Coalition to Unchain Dogs (NC), I struggle to believe that the majority of US dog owners are so different from ours.  These are also people who don't want to abuse their dogs, it's just all they know/can afford.  Many of the owners say they love their dog, yet their dog is there chained up and prevented from performing normal behaviours. I see the same thing in owners who use punishment. They love their dogs and they don't understand it can be abusive. Time & time again they get information saying punishing is correct, where punishment has not been clearly defined, how can we expect them to know?

I think the important thing is we need to always be thinking about the main audience. What type of owner is most likely to be reading your blog? Attending a class? Coming to a seminar? What is punishment likely to mean to each of them? Does hearing, or reading, the word 'punishment'  conjure up physical punishment, mental punishment,  negative punishment, negative reinforcement, positive punishment.  

I'm not saying don't use the word at all. I do think it's very important that people understand that punishment covers an extreme spectrum of actions. I also think it's important that trainers are realistic enough to accept that we don't all have the patience of a saint and sometimes offering an acceptable punishment is actually preventing the owner from a) becoming angry and using a harsher punishment or b) loosing all faith in the "reward the good, ignore the bad" advice from the trainer and reverting back to their old ways. Maybe it's time to "call a spade a spade" - maybe we should all just say "remove from room", "withold treat". Afterall, the feedback I've been getting is that this is the type of advice many owners want. Maybe it's time to stop arguing about what the word itself means and just spell out what you expect the owners to do? 

Actually, many of us do a lot of volunteer work, visit dog parks frequently and happen to live on the planet Earth...so I don't think we live in any sort of bubble. 

As for myself, I live in a "neighborhood" where my five dogs are the ONLY dogs within a good distance who have collars, leashes or a fence.  Most of my neighbors' dogs have never, and will never, be indoors.  I know neighbors who use the nearest branch or whatever tool they have in their hand to hit their dog when it misbehaves.  AND, if any one of these free-roaming dogs were to step foot into the horse, alpaca or sheep pastures in the area, they would be shot.

I am surrounded on three sides of my small mountain home by suburb-type-towns.  Within these small towns there is a great variance, I'd say the full spectrum, of dog-owning attitudes.  There are people who pay a lot of money for training from the moment they get their dog or pup, and there people standing outside the grocery store with boxes of "free" puppies.  Some dogs in town live like royalty, some have an outdoor run with some hay for warmth. 

Twenty five miles away is the city of Portland, which was touted as Dog Town, USA a few years back and has a reputation for dog-friendly ways and a huge number of dog trainers and dog daycares.  That doesn't mean that we don't have dog fighting, hoarding, abuse and all of the other things that the rest of the world has.

I don't know any dog trainers who aren't on several of the discussion lists you mention doing what they can to educate the public.  In fact, I have often joined other trainers in scouring Craigslist to jump into the horrible training advice that often goes on over there.

We (trainers) get tired, we get frustrated and we even get angry sometimes over the continuation of the alpha fallacy and CM's negative influence.

All that said...no one can argue that punishment doesn't work.  To say that would be to lie.  The majority of dog owners want to do right by their dog and are not looking for excuses to abuse their pets.  Most people are not so stupid that they can't handle the truth, and in fact will remain "stupid" if they are coddled and protected from it.

Perhaps...just maybe...there is another bubble where one seeks out those who need to be "saved" and comes to think that everyone in the world is that way.  I know it happens to social workers, therapists, rescue workers and others.  In fact, it happened to me when I used to work with a community action program for people with low incomes.  Day in and day out I was with people in crisis, people who needed basic neccessities, people who were suffering.

One day, we had a community information fair at a local mall.  I will never forget my  moment of absolute shock when I realized that there were LOTS of people who had money, who weren't hungry...people were shopping and buying giant pretzels and were doing just fine.

The bubble theory works both ways. 

This discussion is very interesting and has gotten me thinking.  I guess all this time I have either consciously or subconsciously avoided using the word punishment.  I steer my students/clients toward the concept of providing consequences to help their dogs learn the difference between desirable and undesirable behaviors.  Behaviors that are followed by pleasant consequences are likely to be repeated.  (Yeah, Premack but I would never explain it as such).  Behaviors followed by unpleasant consequences are likely to stop.  Then I give examples of acceptable unpleasant consequences that won't provoke fear and/or damage the relationship.  I actually can't really remember using the word punishment for quite some time.  Wow.  Light bulb moment.

Director of Training and Behavior Counseling Pup 'N Iron Host of Dog Sports and Performance Network on Pet Life Radio

Laurie, sorry I keep forgetting this site is mainly USA residents...my bad! I was referring to the  drivel popmusic/artists Simon polluted our charts with, not his comments as a judge on AI (which I've not watched). 

Cindy it sounds like you have taken some of the comments I've made personally. I'm sorry if that is the case. I am just talking in general terms and not aiming comments at anyone specifically. 

no one can argue that punishment doesn't work.  To say that would be to lie

As far as I can see, noone is arguing about that. If punishment wasn't effective in some circumstances then people wouldn't be so keen to use it. Showing the pros v cons of punishments would be a lot easier! People have seen the pros and often don't recognise the cons are the root of some of the behaviour issues they are now trying to resolve. People need to go way beyond saying 'punishment's not a bad word' or 'punishment is acceptable' if they want to ensure that the average owner isn't getting the wrong message. . 

The majority of dog owners want to do right by their dog and are not looking for excuses to abuse their pets.

Again, no disagreement from me on that.  People using physical/mental punishments (and those neglecting their dogs needs) often are very loving owners BUT they don't know it's no longer consider acceptable or necessary. You only need to speak to a few CM fans to understand they don't see any of the techniques he uses (and they replicate) as abuse. They often don't understand what they are doing could be considered abusive or harmful.  They are not 'looking for an excuse to be abusive' but they can be inadvertently using potentially abusive techniques with no real concept of the pitfalls.  

The definition of abuse, welfare and punishment is the perception of that individual. If you don't know what that perception is, then you can be sending out the wrong message.  

Most people are not so stupid that they can't handle the truth, and in fact will remain "stupid" if they are coddled and protected from it.

It's got nothing to do with thinking they are stupid. I actually think that's a pretty offensive assumption. Just because some people are more cautious about using specific terminology, that does not imply they think the dog owners are stupid.  It's more a case of being cautious to take time to define and explain punishment (or avoid the term if you don't have the time to do that), depending on who is likely to be the recipient of the information.  It's about ensuring you don't accidentally reinforce the old beliefs.   I've already said I don't know if it's easier to alter the persons definition of punishment, or simply explain acceptable punishment using another term.  I genuinely think the answer to that could vary depending on the audience.  I can see both sides of the coin on this one...

I don't know any dog trainers who aren't on several of the discussion lists you mention doing what they can to educate the public.

I didn't mention any specific ones? There are no trainers/behaviourists promoting positive methods on a few I can think of.  In fact one rescue even gives out rank reduction advice (no humping, be calm assertive etc) on their website, written by a "qualified" behaviourist.  I'm not trying to "save" anyone on those forums, I'm simply trying to be a sign post pointing them toward alternative advice, because 90% of the advice they are being given has more risks than benefits and ,right now, they don't know it. 

Perhaps it should be common sense? But so should changing a wheel and I couldn't manage that yesterday!!

When I'm out and about with my guide dog pup I am constantly being asked about training.  I carry some cards for various training classes to give out to these people, because I'm not qualified to help them.  These conversations pretty much go the same way "my dog has x,y,z issue and I was thinking about getting shock/prong/choke/spray collar etc."  Most of these people love their dog, it's apparent. Most of them are really intelligent people, who just don't have the time or inclination to go out and research for themselves (even if they did; the library and internet is a minefield). Generally they want someone to say this is the problem, do this do that to fix it.  I'm never going to say to these people "punishment works" or "punishment is acceptable" - it has NOTHING to do with thinking they are stupid, or whether I am trying to be PC, or whether I agree/disagree with those statements; I know that sort of advice would be totally unhelpful and inappropriate in this context. 

I'm just going to bow out on this point (general point, not aimed at anyone, just part of the discussion);

If think it's pertinent that any trainer/behaviourist etc. giving information saying it's ok to punish, ensures that information goes hand-in-hand with a clear definition of what you mean by punish and when it's appropriate to use it. 

Like Kirsty, I am in the UK, so perhaps our perception of this issue is different.  I agree entirely with her post.  We are none of us experts in every area of our lives (Ian Dunbar uses the analogy of computer literacy - or think of programming a DVD recorder).  Sometimes we just want to be given straightforward advice that works.  Who are you addressing when you make statements such as "You have permission to punish your dog" or "of course punishment works", and are you absolutely certain that they have stayed around, and stayed attentive, long enough to hear and comprehend your caveats?  Or do you genuinely believe that the dog is the property of the human, and that the human therefore has the right to inflict pain on an animal in order to force it to obey their will?  I am honestly getting confused on this point, as that is the way the debate seems to be going.  

Eric, when you started this topic you said that you anticipated being flamed, let alone disagreed with, yet there seems to have been a very emotional response to even mild disagreement.  Why is this such an emotional issue for both sides of the argument?  If we are all agreed that mild, so-called dog-friendly aversives are sufficient, combined with reward based training, to solve 99.9% of training issues, why should it matter whether we call them aversives, discouragements, mild punishments, cauliflowers or xygrigioses?  It seems to me that the issue only arises if one is coming from a position that considers punishment - "putting the dog is his place", "not letting him get away with it" - an essential part of training the dog, and therefore has to include something labelled punishment in the tool bag - or that you feel you need to offer your clients something that can be labelled "punishment" to meet their idea of value for money.  I find it very interesting that there have been no responses from dog owners, as opposed to dog trainers, advocating the use of the word punishment - so far, at least! 

For the record, I discussed this topic with a dog owning friend of mine this evening - one who does not read books, nor attend training classes.  She said of course she occasionally told her dog off, and would always wait for her to sit before giving her a treat, but she never punished her.  I believe her - they have an excellent relationship, and punishment, in the sense that the word is usually given, does not enter into it.

Kristy,

Actually, my last comments were in response to Kody's bubble theory, and I should have mentioned that.  Sorry for any confusion.

I'm not sure how others are feeling, but I don't have a lot of emotion going on about this subject.  In fact, my whole stance on the subject is that taking the emotion, connotation and the "everyone has their own definition" out of it would be of great benefit.

Again, the fact that many people are walking around with an unclear or incorrect definition of punishment in their heads is simply not a valid argument for ignoring, manipulating, stretching or hiding the facts.  My goal would be to increase the number of people in the world who DO understand the wide range of punishments, how they work, what the dangers are and how to do it in a human, dog-friendly way.

To be fair, I will reveal that I also never created fake names for my children's body parts or bodily functions.  I do have a bent for calling things what they are and doing it right from the start.  I'm also pretty sure that my credibility would go straight down the tubes if I started calling punishment broccoli.  :-)

~Cindy Bruckart, CPDT

Very disconcerting to read the many comments attempting to defend the indefensible on this wonderful site.

People tend to gravitate towards solutions that fit their preconceived notions of this or that, punitivive modalities of dog training being first and foremost.

People with an "authoritarian" mindset will look for training which reinforces that construct.

I probably should let this lie, but I can't.  The discussion here has been a bit heated.  I don't undestand exactly where everyone is missing each other, but I feel like we are.  In spite of that, everyone has been respectfully trying to communicate their postitions and making good faith efforts to understand others'...but "indefensible?"  What exactly is indefensible here, norske?  Is it the very use of the word punishment?  Is it acknowledging the simple fact that a lot of the nasty things people do to their dogs to stop or decrease behaviors actually do stop or decrease behaviors?  Perhaps it's body blocks or time outs?  You've lost me completely.   

I use the word punishment rarely, consequences regularly. I prefer to use analogies as well (like Cindy). IF I use either of these words they are explained to the person I am speaking with, to clarify their meaning. Words have power, whether we like it or not. Power to inform, deceive, harm and help. Choosing the right words in the right situation takes practice and careful thought.

I think that in communicating with others it is very important to keep the individual or group's personality and communication style in mind. In a group (or open forum like this) it is vital to be as explanatory as possible to try and ensure your particular point is clear to as many of the readers as possible. Invariably you will lose a few to misinterpretation. Such is life.

I think that's what happened here in this discussion. My question to Kody here is...how many average joe dogowners, the ones that know or care little would be reading Eric's post in the firstplace? He geared his post to his audience, which is MOSTLY experienced dog people with at least a basic understanding of learning theory. Saying this gives carte blanche to abusively punish dogs is unfair and unrealistic.

I am curious though, if we, as trainers or dog lovers can learn how to read our dogs, why can't we be as good at reading the humans at the other end of the leash? I try to read the client, read the dog and then read the relationship to find the best way to communicate holistically to ensure understanding. It doesn't work ALL the time, but it does work.

Using those R+ skills in communicating with our clients and with the public is undervalued. Be nice. Be clear and relate to the individual. Whatever words you choose to use, there are no "bad" words, only bad communication.

Maggi Burtt Tailspin Petworx

Hooplady, I think you may not have read the comments completely. You are actually agreeing with me not Cindy. First of all I want to clear something up, you said:

My question to Kody here is...how many average joe dogowners, the ones that know or care little would be reading Eric's post in the firstplace?

I agree, in fact I've stated this repeatedly, now for the third time, here's what I said the previous time, referring to the first time:

I agreed in the last discussion that use of the word punishment is absolutely fine in the context of our discussions. In a previous comment, I said:

"Obviously there's nothing wrong with using the term punishment in a discussion like this."

To catch you up on the discussion, I'm agreeing with you 100%. I, like you, have said that you need to choose your words based on the situation and the skill level of the people you are talking to, just like you say.

However Cindy and Eric are taking the extreme position that "punishment" is never a bad word. According to them, you should say whatever you want at all times, including the phrase "punishment works" and assume that people are adults and will sort it out for themselves. Cindy and Eric believe that all dog owners are capable and willing to sort out all dog training words and phrases with little or no help. I, like you, believe that we are going to much more effective when we focus on communication and admit to ourselves that sometimes certain words can be dangerous if not used in the appropriate contexts. 

I would think the near atrocities caused by people following Cesar Millan would be clear proof of this, but for some reason Cindy and Eric don't see it that way. Why aren't these capable adults sorting it all out for themselves as Cindy and Eric say they can. 

__________
doxienews.com

Someone posted a link to this blog, from Dr Ian Dunbar (2006), on another forum I use. When I read it, I thought how relevant it (and in particular the comments on it) are to this whole debate about the use of the word punishment.

http://www.dogstardaily.com/blogs/non-aversive-punishment