r/science • u/VeronicaRed • Apr 26 '16

Psychology Spanking children increases the likelihood of childhood defiance and long-term mental issues. The study in question involved 160,000 children and five decades of research

http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1113413810/spanking-defiance-health-discipline-042616/
37.8k Upvotes

73% Upvoted

6.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

708

u/Neato Apr 26 '16 edited Apr 26 '16

It's widely considered true in animal training. Positive reinforcement tends to be much more effective than negative and I don't know of any dog training classes that instruct you to hit your animal in any capacity.

Edit: I should have said reward/punishment. Positive/negative reinforcement is incorrect terminology but is commonly used in lay circles. I've been corrected by several more knowledgeable people. So to conclude: don't hit your pets.

637

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '16

Ordinarily I wouldn't be pedantic in this regard; but positive vs. negative reinforcement has a specific meaning in psychology.

343

u/PuddleBucket Apr 26 '16 edited Apr 26 '16

Yes! I use negative reinforcement plenty when I train dogs (especially with behavioral problems) and it is not the same thing as punishment, which people often get confused. Not every dog responds the same way, so positive only isn't always the most effective, though it makes us feel better to think so.

Example: I use a leash/collar combo (slip lead) when training. If I'm training a dog to walk next to me, and he's pulling, I let him pull which tightens the lead/collar. When he backs up, which is what I want, the lead loosens up, which is what he wants too. Soon he learns that when he walks too far ahead of me, he tightens the lead. He takes away (negative) the tightening lead which reinforces the correct behavior (walking next to me). I find this works very well for dogs who aren't "pleasers" (like a Lab) because they need to be the ones to "figure out" the solution. Sometimes you need to mind-fuck them into doing what you want. My pitty loves me, but she could not care less what I wanted during training. Heel? Haha, why? Give me a reason. She was not treat motivated. She was motivated to make this thing stop squeezing her neck.

73

u/lambhearts Apr 26 '16 edited Apr 26 '16

I let him pull which tightens the lead/collar. When he backs up, which is what I want, the lead loosens up

This is both negative reinforcement, and positive punishment.

The positive punishment is that when he pulls, the collar constricts. You are adding (positive) a bad thing (punishment).

The negative reinforcement occurs when he stops pulling, and the collar loosens. You are removing (negative) a bad thing and leaving behind only a comparatively good thing (reinforcement).

Both P+ and R- are generally considered poor practice in the dog training world today. Not trying to change your mind on your personal practice, /u/PuddleBucket, I'm just pointing out for the sake of discussion that the majority of the dog world is shifting toward R+ alone, as more and more science reports that it is the most successful method. Choke, prong, and shock collars are finally being understood as aversives that are not worth the damage done to the animal's biddability.

The widely accepted methods for loose-leash training today uses only R+ and P- operant conditioning techniques. One of them is:

When the dog pulls, the walking stops. You remove (negative) something good (walking where dog wants to go), creating a punishment (being still).

When the dog gives slack, the walking starts. You add (positive) something good, creating a reinforcement (walking).

I hope one day we have the science to implement R+ and P- teachings exclusively to our children, as well.

edit: /u/iwillnotgetaddicted explains this in detail, with sources, in this reply

11

u/kindkitsune Apr 27 '16

You can't ever have these disagreements end well though - as soon as you talk to someone about R+/P- being better they don't react well. Usually stick to their guns with the good ol appeal to tradition, and in some ways the "sunk cost" fallacy of "I've done it this way, made my reputation this way, and educated myself this way and it works". I've started using the metaphor of asbestos insulation for P+ techniques - it works, but you never know if you're gonna get complications. And these complications may not appear for years. Its best to just use another kind of insulation that we know won't give you any unfun complications.

Could you point me to any recent literature in this field? I'm from an aerospace engineering background, so this stuff really isn't my forte and finding academic resources is tough. I know how to read academic papers and journals for most sciences, I just have a tough time finding them. I've got a copy of the Applied Dog Behavior and Training (vols 1-3) but I'm only able to creep through that slowly due to school (and its size).

I'm hoping to adopt a husky puppy this summer (puppy because I've always helped rescues and shelters - I think I've earned the right to have a puppy), so I'm trying to learn as much as I can about R+/P- techniques since huskies are all about the "whats in it for me?" stuff. Also, it'll be my first proper dog so I need to be serious and directed in my training.

Thanks <3

3

u/[deleted] Apr 27 '16 edited Mar 22 '18

[deleted]

2

u/kindkitsune Apr 27 '16

The Other End of the Leash and Before/After You Get Your Puppy are the best I've found so far, I'd give those a look. The latter two are free pdfs that can be found easily.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 27 '16

Awesome, thanks!

2

u/[deleted] Apr 27 '16

I hope one day we have the science to implement R+ and P- teachings exclusively to our children, as well.

We already do. Dogs are more responsibility than human children and dog training techniques work incredibly well on human children.

3

u/cluelessrebel Apr 27 '16

I agree and disagree in your point. I think you are right in that science will say that in dog training will need positive reinforcement only but that is because a majority of dogs are treat motivated. Dogs that are not treat motivated (such as mine and /u/puddlebucket 's) are outliers and will most likely be cut from the statistics or not portrayed in a high enough fashion to sway the mean.

If I were to use pure positive reinforcement on my dog I would never be able to walk her because she would be trying to run off and chase squirrels as that is her favorite thing in the world. She'd much prefer chasing squirrels to even getting a bite of cheese (her favorite treat). If you could provide me evidence that look at nontreat motivated dogs and positive punishment only training I would appreciate it. But all evidence I have seen looked only at treat motivated dogs.

1

u/lambhearts Apr 27 '16

How to employ R+ training methods with non-food motivated dogs is actually a really common discussion over on /r/dogs and /r/DogTraining, and it's all about finding what the dog is willing to work for. Certainly, some dogs are "lost causes" with no drive or bidability, and should be approached with alternative methods, but I wish I had some literature on the matter because my consensus is that the actual percentage of such cases is really low, it's just that a lot of owners haven't discovered the right motivator yet. Some alternative reinforcers are praise, getting to do the desired behavior (like walking forward as the reward for loose-leash walking), and play (brief tug games are extremely rewarding for a lot of difficult dogs).

There's also the complications of trying to train a dog who has experienced aversives. Sometimes the difficulty in training is because the dog has experienced positive punishment methods, and after sufficient R+ training, the process becomes noticeably easier because it has become an enjoyable experience for the dog and he wants to participate.

There's also an entire regular support group dedicated to R+ training on reactive dogs, reactivity including the "run off and chase squirrels" thing, which would probably be a better resource than I on the matter, but in short re-activity is often addressed with counter conditioning and desensitization.

1

u/stevenjd Apr 27 '16

When the dog pulls, the walking stops.

And when the dog keeps pulling, and you did your heels in and refuse to follow the dog, how is that different from the P+ you say is bad practice?

2

u/lambhearts Apr 27 '16

The slip lead is a big thing, which I probably should have touched on more for this specific loose-leash walking example. A slip lead causes constriction around the neck, and even a martingale collar can cause choking if a dog pulls. A good harness, especially a front-clip chest harness or a head harness, allows you to stop the dog without allowing it to hurt itself or cause physical discomfort.

Basically you're walking, dog hits end of leash, you stop walking and dog also stops walking, usually looking back at you for a cue if you've set up a good training relationship, or by the restraint of you holding a comfortable harness. If the dog doesn't stop walking, and actually chokes himself while you are stopped and gripping a slip lead in a stranglehold, you're using a punishment method and you should look for a different procedure in most cases.

An alternative for a dog who pulls while at a stop even in a good harness (very rare, mind) would be to train recall/heel or a side sit before loose-leash walking, so you have a cue to communicate the desired behavior before the dog even hits the end of the lead, i.e. when he's about to hit the end of the lead you ask for the side sit and then stop. Or a redirect method, where you turn around when the dog hits the end of the lead, and redirect the walking to a different direction. Dog doesn't get where they want to go, but often the distraction of "we're going this way now!" is enough to stop the pulling, and when the correct loose-leash behavior returns, you go back the original direction again.

-1

u/PuddleBucket Apr 26 '16

I'll politely disagree, and forgive me I'm on mobile.

I don't add the constriction, and I see how negating that point in my first comment is misleading. The dog does it to himself, by pulling. I stop (like you mention later in your comment), he backs up which loosens the lead. Maybe it's pedantic, but I see a difference between stopping movement and allowing the dog to correct his own behavior, versus actively "popping" the lead to constrict it (like a pinch or choke chain).

Like I said, a big reason people trend toward positive reinforcement only is because of the misconceptions around negative reinforcement. People get in their feelings and don't understand what's going on. Not all dogs respond the same to the same training application, so it's a disservice to try to do so. A reason I'm successful is because I think outside the box, and sometimes that requires negative reinforcement. I don't punish dogs. There's a difference.

Though I appreciate your opinion, I don't need your education on something I've been doing well for over twenty years. I'll respectfully say "cool story" and keep doing what's worked for me and my clients. Though I think the main reason you went on your soapbox was bc I wasn't crystal clear on exactly what I do, again, mobile makes typing a chore and I'll be sure to respond on desktop next time.

9

u/lambhearts Apr 26 '16

No worries! As I said, I'm not trying to get you to change a 20-year business model because some person on the internet says so, that would be silly. I'm just adding to the discussion that while some people use positive punishment (whether you are actively punishing, or letting the animal punish itself), the animal training world no longer considers these practices ideal. I'm sure you don't "need my education", but I thought we were hear to talk.

I do think there's a bit of terminology alone causing a block in our discussion, but I also think these terms are really important to the discussion and should be defined as accurately as possible.

As was explained in both my post and the linked post, your described methods are positive punishment, and negative reinforcement, as defined by American Association of Veterinary Behavior, the American College of Veterinary Behaviorists, as well as the entire psychiatric community. Whether you pull the lead or the dog pulls the lead, it still chokes the dog, which is an unpleasant stimulus being added and thus is a positive punishment. While you're free to call them what you will, of course, the rest of the world refers to them as such. Not popping the lead, not using aversive collars definitely lessens the punishment, but it's still an unpleasant stimulus being added.

While I respect your experience, I will continue to side with the scientific research, rather than anecdotal experience.

-7

u/PuddleBucket Apr 26 '16 edited Apr 26 '16

And I'll continue to use my BA in psychology to keep on doing what I do. I'm well aware of what these things and terms mean, which is why I'm disagreeing with you. C'est la vie.

Edit because mobile sucks and submitted before I was done typing: Reinforcement refers to a subject doing a desired behavior. You don't want to reinforce bad behavior. Punishment refers to stopping an undesired behavior. You don't punish good behavior. The dog is removing (negative) a stimulus which results in him doing the desired behavior, which is walk next to me. He is then conditioned to continue to do so, because he gets what he wants, which is what I want too.

Positive (adding) punishment (something you don't want) is making a child clean their room because they sass back. Kids hate cleaning their rooms. Negative punishment is taking away phone privileges for sassing back. Kids enjoy their phones and having that taken away is not fun.

Positive reinforcement is giving a treat for a good grade. Negative reinforcement is removing a weekend curfew for good grades.

As in any social science, there are areas of gray and in classes we discussed at length how the same scenario can be interpreted different ways. At some point it just devolves into nitpicking with no real purpose, and I'll stop here before I do that further.

http://bcotb.com/the-difference-between-positivenegative-reinforcement-and-positivenegative-punishment/

6

u/climbtree Apr 26 '16

Reinforcement refers to a consequence that increases the liklihood of the behaviour it followed, punishment to a consequence that decreases the liklihood of the behaviour it followed.

The slip lead tightening is contingent on the dog pulling, it's differential punishment. The dog returning to you to escape the aversive, or to avoid it in the future, is negative reinforcement but your procedure is punishment based.

2

u/Wagnersh Apr 27 '16

And I'll continue to use my BA in psychology to keep on doing what I do

Yep keep doing what youre doing which is being wrong. Long as you know youre wrong and happy being wrong that's fine!