Why Isn't Clicker Training on Oprah?

Aaron Clayton's picture

Oprah and the Dog Whisperer

We received a lot of e-mail and calls after the Dog Whisperer appeared on the Oprah Winfrey Show. To the uninitiated, the Dog Whisperer is a trainer whose approach is to show the dog that the owner is dominant and the dog is subservient. In other words, the "show'em who's boss" method of training.

The calls and e-mails shared a theme:

    "How unfortunate it is that this kind of training still gets so much widespread coverage!"
    "Why does that happen? Why aren't clicker trainers on Oprah?"
    "Why doesn't clicker training get this kind of national coverage?"

Excellent questions. There's more than one answer. Ask a sociologist, you'll get the answer: Culture. Ask the public relations specialist, you'll get a different answer: Connections. Ask an economist and get yet another answer: Market demand.

As a business owner with vested interest in clicker training, these questions aren't academic to me. That single broadcast just made it a little harder for every clicker trainer in the US to win new customers. Oprah showcasing the Dog Whisperer got under my skin because millions of people were just "told" by cultural icon Oprah that dominance is the way to go in developing a relationship with your dog! Talk about irony. Isn't Oprah all about healthy relationships? Like so many of you, I want to see clicker trainers, rather than traditional dominance trainers, make it to Oprah. Apart from the humanitarian motivation, exposure on Oprah would help clicker training grow and help get closer to a more ambitious objective: clicker training as the people's first choice for training their pets.

Where to begin

"If we want to help clicker training become the people's choice, we need to help them set goals that only clicker training can meet."

So whose perspective is the one that can most help clicker training grow?

Let's begin with the sociologist. Surprised? Here's why. For clicker training to become the peoples' choice, to reach the mainstream of America , clicker trainers need to recognize that we are up against a deep-seated cultural bias, one that severely limits pet owners' expectations from dog training. Our task is to help people replace that narrow vision with a broader vision and higher expectations, with "something more." We can do it if we can show people that clicker training uniquely delivers that "something more." With me? Keep reading.

What we're up against: a culture of obedience

Most people would accept as reasonable the assumption that the average pet owner simply wants their dog to do what they tell them, when they tell them to do it. Pet owners just want an "obedient" dog. When pet owners go to choose a training class, what do they look for? Someone who will teach their dog to obey their commands. The training class marketplace clearly reflects this demand; the most commonly used name for an introductory dog training class is, of course, "obedience class." Even some trainers who use positive methods or clicker training, those who use no aversives, call their courses obedience courses! Why? Because pet owners gravitate toward classes that promise obedient dogs.

I believe this is because we live in a pervasive "culture of obedience." A lot of value is placed on obedience in our society. Obedience provides order, prevents chaos, and ensures safety. Until very recently, obedience overwhelmingly defined capable parenting: good children are obedient children. It has been a key ingredient of successful businesses for a long time. A senior executive of a Fortune 500 company once told me (quite seriously) that he "did not pay employees to think, just to do." It is the essence of military function. A good soldier obeys (moral) orders without thinking. And a good dog sits when commanded to sit and stays when commanded to stay.

Yet as the foundation for any relationship between intelligent living things, this culture of obedience imposes a low, unimaginative threshold. As a result, the goals of most pet owners for training their dogs are low and unimaginative and defined by obedience. So why is that a problem? Don't we want our clicker trained dogs to be obedient? Clicker trained dogs are obedient; clicker trainers call it reliable behavior on cue. But , many training methods that compete with clicker training also produce obedient dogs. Why, therefore, should pet owners select a class that uses clicker training over any other? For one thing, clicker training offers a more humane way to produce obedient dogs than these other methods. That's a big difference isn't it?

Creating demand for "something more"

Now, I turn to the economist for help. The economist might look at the market for training services and ask whether "nice" is enough of an advantage to persuade the majority of pet owners to make clicker training the "peoples' choice." I think the answer is, no. Not enough pet owners will turn to clicker training because it's nicer than other methods. Nicer must compete with other things that pet owners care about, too, like closer, cheaper, faster, and simpler.

If we want clicker training to become the people's choice, we need to offer something more, something that:

  1. People really want from their investment of time and money in training their dog; and
  2. Only clicker training can provide.

Something more

Clayton Family
Aaron Clayton with Tucker and family

My household consists of a 79-pound, two-year-old black Lab named Tucker, two elementary school-age kids, their friends, lots of older and younger nieces and nephews, two working parents, and a guinea pig.

When I started training Tucker, I thought first about the goals for my life with my dog:

  • I wanted Tucker to be happy and safe in the environment of our home and family and my work.
  • I wanted to enjoy living with Tucker and for him to enjoy living with us.
  • I wanted Tucker to be a rock-solid family dog, a dog whose food bowl you could take away while he's eating and whose tail could be pulled without complaint, a dog who is thrilled but calm when he sees every member of my family, my friends and their dogs, gerbils, or guinea pigs. (I'd made an exception for the neighbor's cat.)
  • I wanted Tucker to wrestle with me!
  • I wanted to be able to take Tucker to lots of new places, to be able to adapt to new environments like friends' houses, new walks, or my children's schools.
  • I wanted him to demonstrate, each day, that he possessed that fine balance between enthusiasm and self-control.

That's what I wanted, and that's what I got. Like every other pet owner, I wanted Tucker to do what I asked of him, but obedience was not the explicit and overarching goal. It was just assumed and, actually, subsumed by this richer vision.

The "something more" training goal: life skills

In order to achieve these goals with Tucker, I needed an entirely different set of training objectives from those traditionally taught in dog training classes. I needed to teach Tucker self-control, to desensitize him to all kinds of touch, to leave things that aren't his. I needed to teach him to look for direction from me in uncertain situations. I needed to have a sustainable system for teaching him to be an enthusiastic learner his whole lifetime. In short, I needed to teach my dog life skills.

The "something more" training method: clicker training

What type of teaching and training would best help me achieve these goals? Only clicker training can get me there. Like it or not, one can teach many common behaviors using dominance-based training, which is intrinsically aversive—but can anyone compellingly argue that the general public can teach their animals to be enthusiastic learners that way? Can the pet owner develop robust learning and life skills in her dog with those approaches? No. Those goals can be achieved only by clicker training.

Do your customers want "something more"?

If you're a teacher of pet classes, do you know what your students want out of the time and money they spend with you? Can they articulate their vision? Can you help them cross the threshold from wanting simple obedience to desiring "something more"? Can you show them how the clicker trainers' way uniquely helps them achieve their vision?

I believe that expanding their vision is the first, most important step a pet owner can take, and the first training topic that every teacher should cover with a pet owner. In your first class, ask your students and clients to write down their training goals. Give them a sudden glimpse of what a CLICKER dog can do and be. Guide them in seeking a richer relationship with their dogs, more than simple obedience. Guide them to "something more."

People will train using the methods that best meet their goals. If we want to help clicker training become the people's choice, we need to help them set goals that only clicker training can meet.

And what about Oprah? Now that we have "something more" to bring to the public, it's time to pull in that PR perspective. So, does anyone's personal organizer out there have an entry under O. Winfrey?

Aaron Clayton is President of Karen Pryor Clickertraining and will be teaching a session on growing training businesses at ClickerExpo. Also visit the Business Success Center for Professional Clicker Trainers at Clickertraining.com for programs, tools, and ideas to grow your business.

About the author Aaron Clayton is President of Karen Pryor Clickertraining and TAGteach International, and a member of the ClickerExpo Faculty.

Are you brave enough to change your mind?

I find clicker training fascinating, but almost as fascinating is the reaction it elicits. I feel that sometimes people feel threatened by an idea that might cause them to develop their own ideas – this is normal, but it creates a trap.

All training is about communication. Punishing / dominant training can be very effective in developing loyalty and love for the punisher, especially when used with variable rewards – this is why women who are beaten by their husbands tend to stick around for so long and often go back to them. However, use of positive reinforcement can also do that and can be much more effective at creating a versatile “trainee” who is continually striving to do better for you. The clear imperative, though, is about being strict with yourself as trainer and making sure that your lines in the sand are not crossed.

I admit, I am new to clicker training, however I found an epiphany on every page of “Don’t Shoot the Dog” because I saw clearly how I was already using the techniques, how I could use them better, and why certain behaviour was resulting when I was using more aversive methods. (My animals live in a high reward environment where the dogs get to sleep in my bed on occasion and the horse gets sporadic treats just for the fact that I want to go and say hi to her!)

I believe that drawing a line in the sand is relatively easy, it is just a question of choosing for yourself what behaviour you are after and that which you are not. However, the very act of doing so is a demonstration of dominance. Hence a horse that decides to rear underneath you is clearly a danger to both you and the horse. Belting the horse / kicking it on is one method of stopping the behaviour immediately, however, a thrashing will likely create a conflict between rider and horse. This can therefore be part of a battle ground where you show the horse who is boss, and which is part of a longer fight that you aim to win, but where the horse becomes more of an automaton, not willing to strive lest it fails and get punished for that.

On the other hand, it can part of the partnership building process where, when the horse has gone forwards, you pat and speak nicely to the horse – there is a reason why the horse reared, you are giving it a good reason not to, but hopefully in a sympathetic fashion so that it realises you are a partnership. (To change the motivation for rearing it would be worth finding out why he was rearing – are you too heavy, has he got a bad back, is he just being petulant because you are heading away from the other horses?)

If the horse trusts you, the horse will look after you better, try harder and will go with your judgement more easily. He will trust you enough to attempt difficult jumps because he knows there is reward for going for it and he will not be beaten if you fall off (why do people do that?!! the other day I sprained my fingers after falling off a strange horse because it pulled the reins out of my grip after my fall as it tried to get away from me, clearly expecting to be beating)

There are many ways of developing behaviour, and I do believe that punishment has its place, but rather as spurs can be an effective tool for communicating with the horse but are more often used by inexperience riders who use them in an indiscriminate attack on the poor horse’s ribs, punishment must only be used as a final method to show that the line in the sand is final, so the weapon of last resort – and as such most people would be better off training themselves how to be more effective at the other methods rather than lazily relying on the stick (after all, anyone can turn a TV off by throwing a brick at it!).

Everything is relative, however for those that still struggle with the concept of a training system that challenges your beliefs, remember that changing your mind about anything requires bravery. Unltimately though, changing your mind says one thing: I am wiser today than I was yesterday.

balanced training

When training a dog, you need to keep yourself in the leader position while also being kind and rewarding positive behavoir. If you let the dog be your "pack leader" then you have little control over the dogs behavoir because they think you should listen to them. A lot of behavoir issues in dogs are caused by a dog being the dominant one in the owner/dog relationship. Ceasar Milians methods are effective while not being cruel or anything. When I train dogs, I use Ceasars methods to get a calm submisive attitude established, then I use clicker training to teach actions (sit, lay down, ect.). That way, you are the leader of your dog while being able to teach commands and tricks effectively with a clicker. That is, in my mind, a balnced training system between dominance and positive reinforcement. So why choose to use only a clicker system or only the dog whisperers way if you can use both in harmony?

Jenny Ruth Yasi's picture

Should you listen to your dog?

Well, I would agree with the dog who thinks that his handler should "listen to him." Just today, my dog "misbehaved" because first she wanted to get a drink of water. THEN she got the ball. She also didn't respond promptly to a cue because she wanted to be introduced to the stranger who had just walked into the garden first. That's okay by me. Dogs aren't robots, they aren't slaves. They are interesting thinking beings. I reinforce them for "talking back" to me, because I'm interested in understanding the ways they think about things. Often, I watch my dogs and wonder, "I wonder what they're thinking?!" When you have an educated dog who can communicate with you and well as you can communicate with the dog, this is much nicer than having a dog who simply "obeys." My issue with Ceasar Milan is that he doesn't really explain his method. He should be clear about the science of behavior, which has proven the results of reinforcement are much more predictable than the results of punishment and coercison. What exactly does being the "pack leader" mean? Does it mean holding the collar up higher on the dog's neck, where the choke is more effective? That's what it means to Milan, but it's not what "pack leader" means to me. To me, being "pack leader" means being in control of the reinforcements, and yes, that's important to clicker trainers too!

www.wholedogcamp.com

smart dog university's picture

One Stop Shopping (er...Training)

What I love about clicker training is that it ISN'T a method. It's a science. Anyone can do it, you don't need karma or juju or any type of "energy." You simply follow the laws of behavior and you're on your way to a well-behaved dog who trusts his leader.

No need to "become the alpha," or worry about dominance. A good benevolent leader will always make it very easy for the dog to get things right, and very difficult for the dog to get things wrong. And a benevolent leader also, by default, controls access to the resources and uses clicker training to dole out those resources.

Examples of that in my house happen every day:
Want to go outside and play in the yard? Sit first.
Want your dinner? Watch me first.
Want a tummy rub? Speak first.
Wanna play tug? Go get your tug toy from the basket first.
Wanna romp and roll? Down, then roll over first.
Want up on the couch with me? Watch, speak, and sit first.

It's really the simplest, fairest, and most fun way to live with and enjoy your dogs. And you don't have to worry about dominance!! (That's the best part!)

Laurie Luck, CPDT
Certified Pet Dog Trainer
Smart Dog University
http://smartdoguniversity.com

Clicker Use/ Disuse and food

This may be a dumb question ......Wondering if using the clicker will set me up in a situation that when the (Horse) behavior is desirable and gets the reward what happens when they do the correct behavior and do not get the reward? Meaning they have been trained to do what I ask, will I always have to reward with the food forever?

Jenny Ruth Yasi's picture

clicking

Ideally, your whole relationship, all your interactions with your animal become rewarding. We'll always have to feed our animals, and we try to educate our animals with the when/where and how of our delivery of food, but food is not the only reinforcement that is educating them. Horses also learn from the when/where/how of the way we open the stall door, and get out the saddle, clip and unclip a lead, and brush and pick feet and hopefully he'll learn that you make so much "sense" with the way you help him earn things he wants in exchange for doing things you want, you're so helpful to have around, you make learning so much fun, the rules of the game are so easy for him to understand, that just having you nearby becomes a treat!

PR problems

This weekend at ClickerExpo Los Angeles I learned
a very valuable lesson about how to teach both
dogs...and people. Both learn very quickly when
we use paired opposites.

Come forward. Back up.
Turn left. Turn right.
This is good. That is bad.
Our way is good. Your way is bad.

Ouch.

Unfortunately, the power of opposites is seductive.
They help us a great deal. But they can also be
dangerous.

Because: they can set up resistence when introducing
a new idea. People then naturally ask, "if
this is new, what does it replace?" "Is this
an attack on how I am currently doing things?"

There is a reason why one principle
of operant conditioning is to ignore the behavior you
don't like, and focus on reinforcing that which you do.

I spoke with Aaron at the Friday movie night
about the PR problems that clicker-training
has. "That's an old fad." "I tried it and it
didn't work with my dogs." "It's bad to use
food as a reward."

Assume the sell. Assume that people will
love clicking. Assume that they haven't heard
of the science of clicker training yet, and when
they discover it, they will be delighted.
Hire a good PR firm for gosh sakes! Promote the
science, and you will go far. Science is on your
side. Leverage that as much as possible.

It's a loosing battle to suggest that Clicker training
is a replacement for dominance, or obediance, or
emotional interpretation of the dog's pychology.

Yes, I read the excerpt of Cesar's book, and it would
make Skinner want to turn over in his grave. Dog
psychology? It's all about ENERGY! Oh my god. Where
is the barf bag? But people still love to read this
stuff. They love Oprah. They love Horoscopes. They
love psychics and mood rings and "energy" readings.
It isn't science, but don't fight it. Just add tools
from science to make people more effective.

So pick your battles carefully. The two most compelling
things for any (non-scientist) human are dominance and
emotion, in that order. Don't fight them. Leverage them.

Emma Parson's book on healing aggression has the owner
do all the same pack-leader establishing stuff that
any good animal trainer would do, still in the context
of clicker training. Use these examples of how to combine
the precision timing of the clicker to enhance the dominance/
status work in any household.

Ignore the stuff that rubs you the wrong way (especially
when it has national TV coverage and Oprah behind it),
and position clicker skills as an incredibly valuable
ADDITION to anyone's toolkit.

Especially the head of the family/pack who would
like to have happy and well-behaved
dogs while using as little force and as much praise
as possible. As usual, it's simply IGNORANCE of what
is possible that keeps people from using the best tools
available. ASSUME that people are doing the best they
can with what they have, and help them to learn. WRITE
a CLICKER TRAINING VIDEO GAME for gosh sakes. Virally
market mini-versions of it. If you know your clicker
training, you know how to create addictions with variable
reinforcement. What if, in the video game, people had
the option to punish, and the game showed the results of
that--fear, slow learning, forgetting cues, having to
review the learning more often, barfing in the car on
the way to the vet, more aggression, and so forth.
What if on the creativity tasks (maybe level two?),
the video game clearly taught people the results
of the science: the only way to get discretionary
effort, maximum creativity, and indeed to deal with
cats at all, is to use precision timing and positive
reinforcment.

I might actually believe an argument that said that
the leader/alpha/dominant role can be gentle 99% of the time
because they are willing to use force to ensure safety 1%
of the time, and because they use positive reinforcement
to keep happiness going that 99% of the time.

High status feels good. As most excellent teachers and leaders
have learned, positive reinforcement is the most effective
way to lead. Position science based clicker-training as
the tool of choice for leaders. Because we hate having to
resort to force as a last resort, when we much prefer to
lead by much more intelligent negotiation. Operant conditioning
makes that negotiation possible.

"WRITE a CLICKER TRAINING

"WRITE a CLICKER TRAINING VIDEO GAME for gosh sakes."

All video games are just clicker training for humans. ;)

They are the most beautifully pure example of operant conditioning around. And now I think I'll go play WoW...

Jenny Ruth Yasi's picture

What they want

Fantastic article, really a tricky subject, and what is a leader, anyway? Expanding the vision is a tremendous sticking point. What expanded my vision was seeing first hand the results of clicker training in my teachers' amazing dogs. It showed what is possible, inspired me to reach for my clicker!

It hurts and fails us as much as it hurts and fails our animals to believe we are dependent on force. Real life experiences that disprove this perceived dependency on force are crucial.

Happily, clicker trainers don't even attempt to be leaders in the sense of slave owners who dominate. Instead, we teach animals not to bite, fight or steal, to be gentle and tolerant -- like a spiritual leader! We use understanding, not force. Playing the role of guru with my dogs (I do suspect they pray to me!haha) is a lot more fun than playing the role of slave owner. Seeing is believing. You are so right. We need to show Oprah our dogs!

Yasi