The Education of Positive Dog Trainers (and Why Balanced Trainers Should Get On Board)
With ever more opportunities to learn about reward-based dog training, comments from so-called balanced dog trainers are still concerning.
 |
| Photo: Kseniia De Netto/Shutterstock |
This post contains affiliate links which means I may earn a commission on qualifying purchases at no cost to you.
There have been huge strides in positive reinforcement training over the last decade. While celebrating those changes, it’s also frustrating that there are still dog trainers who take people’s money to use aversive methods to train their dog. This despite the fact that aversives aren’t necessary and have some rather serious downsides.
We’ve known for a long time that the use of aversive methods, like shock and prong collars and leash “corrections”, has risks for dog’s welfare and can affect the dog’s relationship with their human.
As well, punishing a behaviour out of a dog doesn’t teach them what to do instead or change their feelings about the situation that caused that behaviour to arise in the first place.
These days, almost all professional organizations recommend the use of reward-based methods. There are thousands of graduates from the excellent schools where trainers can learn more about positive reinforcement training. This means that instead of having to give long warnings to someone looking for a dog trainer like we used to, we can say to pick someone who is a member of one of those organizations.
Another big change is that there’s a wider variety of books, videos, and podcasts on this topic than ever before. Whereas in the past, many of the top dog training books could not necessarily be trusted, these days the most popular books are mostly very good ones. (As I write this, the top book on dog training on Amazon is the second edition of Alexandra Horowitz’s Inside of a Dog. Seriously, go read it!).
And yet, despite all this, some dog trainers continue to use aversives. (And to be clear, I’m only talking about professional dog trainers in this post).
In a way, it’s not surprising, because they are making money from it and it’s legal.
But from another perspective it is very surprising, because if you are drawn to a career due to your love of dogs, why would you choose to use an approach that risks causing them harm?
I can only assume that in part it is because they don’t have the skill to use reward-based methods, otherwise they would not need to resort to aversives. But if you love dogs, wouldn’t you take the time to learn?
I find this conundrum confusing, and yet it is regularly reinforced by comments and messages left on my social media.
Why are “balanced” trainers?
It’s not just about skills. There are probably also differences in their views on dogs, the extent to which they recognize them as sentient beings, and the extent to which they appreciate modern approaches to animal welfare.
But the comments that are left on my social media by “balanced” trainers whenever I share something about the importance of reward-based training methods speak to a lack of understanding, both about the power of positive reinforcement and about the technicalities of actually using it. And that’s very concerning.
I’m not talking about the personal insults that get left, of which there are plenty, or the expletives. I’m sticking to the comments about why they use aversives. And since I’ve had thousands of these comments over the years, I’m not speaking about individuals, but in generalities.
For example, some leave comments showing that they seem to think that it’s impossible to use positive reinforcement unless your dog instantly does the behaviour you ask them to do.
Hmmm.
Then why are so many people able to do so, and not just professional trainers but also many ordinary dog guardians? As Jean Donaldson said in an interview on this blog 10 years ago,
“The reality is that then we need to account for the thousands – if not probably tens of thousands – of practitioners who are already out there, daily, getting the job done both in training, behaviour modification, management of animals, the full gamut of case types, and they’re doing so without aversives.”
The comments that aversives trainers leave for me also belittle the expertise of reward-based trainers who have taken the time to learn about things like learning theory, dog behaviour, timing, choice of reinforcement, and how to follow a gradual training plan.
A good dog trainer is curious about dogs and wants to learn as much about them as they can. And curious about psychology too, because the job involves working with people.
And that should be easy, because lifelong learning is an essential quality in a dog trainer.
There are, in fact, many reward-based trainers who started out using aversives and have crossed over. They are excellent trainers and colleagues. The fact that they have successfully changed their approach should give hope to “balanced” trainers that they, too, can learn another way.
What if “balanced” trainers changed?
Many so-called balanced trainers claim to use positive reinforcement to train dogs some of the time. It’s hard to understand why someone who loves dogs doesn’t just stick to those cases. These days, there are plenty of reward-based trainers around who can tackle the full spectrum of dog behaviour issues, and plenty who specialize in particular issues like fear and aggression or separation-related behaviours too.
Imagine if every “balanced” dog trainer decided to refer every single case where they thought they needed aversives to a reward-based trainer instead. Overnight the “balanced” trainer would become a reward-based one, only taking the cases that they knew they could do with positive reinforcement.
Wouldn’t that be great for dogs?!
It would be great for the trainer too because it would give them a pause in which they could upskill and learn more about the species they love.
But for some reason they don’t do it.
The fact that this doesn’t happen means we have to keep working to educate dog guardians on the best training methods and about the reasons why aversive methods risk making their dog’s behaviour worse. And it also means that legislation is needed to set professional standards in dog training. We’ll get there.
In the meantime, it’s important to keep spreading the word on reward-based methods even if it feels like we are saying the same thing about dog training over and over again.
I’ve got lots of posts on this blog about ways to get that message across, but the best place to start is with this one: to promote positive reinforcement dog training, teach, engage, amplify.
Don’t worry, I will keep shouting it from the rooftops for as long as is needed. But I’m very grateful that there are so many others like me too.
Although there are days when it feels like we still have a lot of work to do, I really do think we’ve made huge changes.
Thanks to all of you who advocate for dogs (and cats)!
P.S. If you want references, check out my dog training science resources page or my books Wag: The Science of Making Your Dog Happy and Bark! The Science of Helping Your Anxious, Fearful, or Reactive Dog. You can read these 2 books in any order; start with the one that most appeals to you. They are available wherever books are sold, including from Bookshop which supports independent bookstores in the US.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
