Seeing as the term 'cognitive dissonance' keeps being thrown around - particularly with regards to R+ in certain threads, it led me to wonder what that reaction means in terms of people not being able to accept that their theory might be wrong, or at least being prepared to consider it.

I found this and thought it summed it up really well:
Cognitive Disequilibrium | Lisa E. Scott

I found this paragraph especially interesting (my emphasis):

'Accommodation requires more mental energy than assimilation, but it ultimately leads to cognitive growth. According to Piagets theory, intellectual growth is an active response to clashing ideas and challenging experiences. Cognitive disequilibrium is an inevitable experience for every developing person. It would be interesting to learn why a person would choose to assimilate rather than accommodate.'

I think this can very definitely be applied to the aversives / R+ debate!

(all credit and whatnot to 'Kelly' on the website)

Yes, this is a very interesting topic. It is not until the age of adolescence that people can begin to take on abstract and concrete ideas and take heed of other people's ideas, possibly changing their own. But that begs the question- what happens to already existing ideas in the mind, and how does the person handle the arrival of new ideas?

When someone asks me about the 'pack theory' and dominance traits of dogs, I answer that they are very quickly turned to because of an inability to understand anything else (at that time- not saying people can't learn). So, if someone says humping is a fixed action pattern, but someone else who's used to the traditional interpretations thinks it's dominance, I think there is definitely some assimilation going on there as the idea of fixed action patterns is far afield of the whole idea of dominance/power struggles and pack leadership.

Similar when people see behaviours that they don't understand- pulling on lead, jumping up on the couch etc. Dominance is a very successful meme and thus is applied or assimilated by the brain to account for new, unknown behaviour patterns.

I'm rambling here.

That's basically what I had to go through, when I found what worked with previous puppies was obviously not working.

One problem was having faith that alternative would actually work long term, a nagging doubt. Also I found it very hard to grasp and internalise, took a while to really get it, but then it became obvious of advantages, and the apparent drawback of being slower actually wasn't the case.

The hard thing is, without lots of personal study, it's not obvious which old ideas are solid keepers and which need ditching!

__________________
For eager & reliable recall, be fun for the dog to come back to! Then often send them off right away to do what they wanted!
DT&B - Glossary of acronyms & jargon terms.
Encouraging good behaviours, whilst consistently avoiding practise of bad alternatives leads to extinction of the bad. So if dog sits 6/10 times it doesn't sit 4/10 times, encouraging with the right rewards (positively-reinforcing) enough for 9/10 times means it now fails to sit only 1/10 times, sit 10/10 means...

Or simply approach everything with an "open mind" There is learnig for all through concise and factual debate. in which case subjective matter and anecdotal reference should be taken lightly.

But actually being open minded and following the recommendations of the best experts interpretting and communicating the rather dry raw science, rather than sticking to what had worked well in past, means paradoxically appearing "close minded" in practice.

There's a huge peer pressure that has to be resisted, with (mostly older) people sagely advising to "Tell him off sharply! That'll soon stop him." and such like. You can explain the reasons why it's not the best idea, attempt to gain cooperation with an issue caused by strangers like jumping up, due to the way they greet a cute puppy; but at end of day, you have to take charge of a situation, be in control, and rather close mindedly consistently follow a line.

There has to be a choice, either you work positively with a calm & happy dog, or you allow physical force and coercion through use of aversives. Mixing does not work well as the implied threats disrupt the non-fearful eager experimentation of a purely rewards based* approach during active dog training, which offers behaviours and is not scared to try new things.

Very few ppl really seem able to grasp from just reading, ideas like requiring a desirable altnernative behaviour, the speed of a dog's brain (3 second window) nor let go of human concepts like "justice" or "but it's a dog" and the "dominance/submissiveness meme".

Seeing the power of a technique like counter-conditioning, applied consistently, with obvious progress made rapidly then be jeopardised by a well meaning but illogical person wanting to "sort things" by a quick fix without regard to potential fall out, is extremely frustrating.

It is also an error, to regard all techniques coldly with regard only to "effectiveness", morally a method which avoids intimidation or fear is superior and should be the first choice.

That goes very much against the interests of "drop your dog off" trainers, who want to offer services and instant results to dog owners, rather than coach them how to train and modify a dog's behaviour themeslves. Where money and livlihood is concerned, people are naturally self serving and promote their own business interests. Techniques where Owner & Dog enjoy the activity and DIY have to be attacked and undermined by spreading, fear, uncertainty and doubt.

Shame you weren't with me at the Agility Nuts event, because then you would have seen with own eyes, well handled happy dogs, well behaving and clear evidence of the techniques emploed to achieve it. The general public are just way behind and their dogs are much worse behaved!

* Originally used a term purely positively trained, as short hand. The intention was to convey eschewing the deliberate use of P+/(R-) by the dog trainer.

__________________
For eager & reliable recall, be fun for the dog to come back to! Then often send them off right away to do what they wanted!
DT&B - Glossary of acronyms & jargon terms.
Encouraging good behaviours, whilst consistently avoiding practise of bad alternatives leads to extinction of the bad. So if dog sits 6/10 times it doesn't sit 4/10 times, encouraging with the right rewards (positively-reinforcing) enough for 9/10 times means it now fails to sit only 1/10 times, sit 10/10 means...

I think the problem is that we think we are approaching something with an 'open mind' but the refusal to change our beliefs when confronted with alternative evidence shows just how close minded human nature is.

I completely agree with the points made about the dominance debate as per Rob's and Rottiefan's posts.

I have been to a training class which I tried to persevere with and in the end just could not justify it to myself. This class involved chokes, prongs, alpha rolls and indeed, the dreaded shock collar.

The displacement behaviour going on was incredible. But no-one seemed to want to see it. Especially as the trainer kept reinforcing us with 'does this dog look stressed to you, No.'

He even asked me - when trying to demo my collie - whether my boy was going to bite him. I wanted to ask whether he was going to do something that was going to make him bite.

I often see that trainer around and would love to ask him why he stays with methods a la CM (I was told by one of his assistants that he was the British version ) but it would likely be pointless.

People are definitely 'assimilating' a lot more than they think.

Sigh. It`s a dog. You don`t need a PH.D to train a dog.
All you do is...
make it rewarding for the dog to do what you want.
Prevent the dog doing what you don`t.
Dog training is really really simple.
We will never know how a dog truly thinks. And we can only make guesses at how it learns - through observations that are ALWAYS coloured by our own perception and culture.
Go on - work out how to show someone where their dinner is without using language. That`s how you train a dog.

__________________
Pet Portraits and People Portraits!
www.sitandfidgetarts.co.uk

Yep...but humans are stubborn! We make it difficult for ourselves

The latest series of CM the DW shown, features "Junior" flinching when other dogs are corrected, displacement lunging, nipping and other behaviour, which I associate with rescue dogs recovering from abuse.

You also see Cesar rationalising it, but I wonder how long before the audience will cotton on, and start seeing this as a sign for concern? May be Junior will be discretely retired from on screen.

We've noted here many times, it is far easier to modify a dog's "problem" behaviour than it is to change a so called "rational" mind.

__________________
For eager & reliable recall, be fun for the dog to come back to! Then often send them off right away to do what they wanted!
DT&B - Glossary of acronyms & jargon terms.
Encouraging good behaviours, whilst consistently avoiding practise of bad alternatives leads to extinction of the bad. So if dog sits 6/10 times it doesn't sit 4/10 times, encouraging with the right rewards (positively-reinforcing) enough for 9/10 times means it now fails to sit only 1/10 times, sit 10/10 means...

Interesting ramble? Is there a little buzz, from an easy explanation, that evades actually thinking objectively, or trying to understand something?

It shocks me, how little most ppl want to think about anything, and very many want snap judgements when they ask questions rather than a considered response. This applies particularly to "the suits" and management types, who want to be seen to be doing something so fall prey to slavish follwing fashions & trends, rather than actually analysing anything.

__________________
For eager & reliable recall, be fun for the dog to come back to! Then often send them off right away to do what they wanted!
DT&B - Glossary of acronyms & jargon terms.
Encouraging good behaviours, whilst consistently avoiding practise of bad alternatives leads to extinction of the bad. So if dog sits 6/10 times it doesn't sit 4/10 times, encouraging with the right rewards (positively-reinforcing) enough for 9/10 times means it now fails to sit only 1/10 times, sit 10/10 means...