Negative Reinforcement in Natural Dog Training: What is a shock?
TweetThe world of dog training has a myriad of opinions about the value of physical correction in a training program. The question has also come up several times here in various forms: Is it ever necessary to use a physical correction with your dog? What is the Natural Dog Training approach to negative reinforcement? Why would you ever want to cause your dog “pain”? I’ve put off answering the question until now, because I wanted to make sure that all of you had a solid foundation in what Natural Dog Training is before I brought up this (potentially) controversial topic. If you’re a new visitor to the site, please make sure that you peruse the Learn the Basics section so that you can also have a well-rounded view of Natural Dog Training. But the time has come, so tackle the subject I will.
A little personal background
The first dog that I ever had (my family’s cairn terrier, named Sparky) was given the traditional dominance-style-heavy-on-the-negative-reinforcement training. While in the intervening years I have actually seen dominance-style training be effective, I can tell you that it wasn’t very effective with Sparky. And yet it was the only thing that I knew.
Flash forward to my experience with Nola (the dog you see pictured all over this site). With Nola it was obvious that the negative-reinforcement-based approach was just causing fear (and, eventually, an emotional shutdown). I switched to traditional “positive” methods – which were great for most obedience type work in non-pressure situations, but not very effective in curing her of a deep-seated aggression towards the majority of other dogs. And if we were in the woods and she lighted on the scent of a deer – forget it, she was off. That’s what led me to Natural Dog Training (and you can follow the link to read more about my personal story).
I suppose what I’m trying to convey is my own personal concern about how negative reinforcement, as traditionally applied, can cause emotional instability in dogs. It was with this hesitancy that I opened my mind to how it can be applied in the Natural Dog Training world – and I encourage you to do the same: be hesitant, cautious, and sensitive to what’s going on with your dog. And open your mind up to a different perspective. I probably don’t have to tell you that, as I’ve come to know that all of you (ok, most of you) are a pretty open-minded bunch of people. Just wanted to emphasize the point.
When my clients ask about “correction” early on, here’s what I typically tell them:
Correction is like guard rails on the highway. You hope that you never have to rely on them, but when you do, you’re glad they’re there. Think of it like this - imagine that you’re trying to learn how to drive with NO instruction about how to operate a car. Your instructor just sticks you in a car, straps your foot to the gas pedal at the entrance ramp to the highway, and you’re off! Over time (and many collisions with the guard rails) you’ll learn how to drive, but it’ll be a long and painful process, probably causing damage to the car. On the other hand, imagine the alternative – you actually learn how to drive FIRST! Your first foray onto the highway will be much more successful. The guard rails are still there to correct you should you veer off course, but they’re not even close to being the primary focus of your skill development.
Essentially: Don’t worry about correction until your dog KNOWS WHAT TO DO. And even then it should be on the periphery of what you do as a trainer – never primary.
Let’s define what we’re talking about
The spectrum of what would traditionally be termed “negative reinforcement” is quite wide. A generic definition would be something like “cause the dog discomfort (to varying degrees) in order to discourage unwanted behavior”. Some traditional techniques employed across the doggie world are:
- A quick jerk on a training or prong collar
- A shock from an eCollar
- A loud, harsh “No!”
- Throwing a noisemaker (tin can, car keys, etc.)
- Hitting your dog (famously included, then removed from the Monks of New Skete books)
- And it pretty much escalates into a whole host of frighteningly abusive techniques at this point
While negative reinforcement as traditionally applied can certainly be effective, in my experience it tends to create fear in a dog and inhibit the expression of its nature. Since the WHOLE POINT of Natural Dog Training is to honor the inner workings of our dogs’ nature in the process of training, it should be obvious that negative reinforcement, as traditionally defined, does not have a place in the Natural Dog Training world.
So what does Natural Dog Training do then?
In the Natural Dog Training world, remember that we pretty much try to frame all of our doggie interactions as an exchange of energy. Our dogs don’t respond to the world because they’re thinking “if I do such and such my owner likes it” or “if I do this I’m gonna get zapped” – they are responding to how the world makes them feel, in the moment. If something feels good – then more of that. If something feels not so good – well, then less of that.
There is an important nugget of information in here: if a dog is in a state of drive, often ANY stimulation (except the most severe) will put them further into a state of drive. Also, our dogs rely primarily on their emotional memory (and the memory of various “feeling states”) as they respond to the world. If there’s nothing in their emotional repertoire, then they’ll fall back on the intellectual approach. But generally, if a dog is in a particular situation and recognizes the FEELING of the situation, then the dog will respond the way that they have learned to respond when they feel that way.
So where does a “shock” come in to this whole thing? Kevin Behan uses the word “shock”, which I personally don’t like as it still has, I think, a negative connotation. But whatever, let’s use it for the time being (and perhaps you, dear reader, can come up with a better term that we’ll employ from here on out). Between his book and our work together, Kevin Behan gave a few examples of beneficial uses of shock:
- Imagine a dog who has managed to bring down a deer. That deer is going to be kicking/flailing – and probably landing a blow or two to the dog. If the deer’s strike is hard enough then it will, in fact, deter the dog. However, a certain degree of physical contact will actually add fuel to the proverbial fire, giving the dog even more energy to make the kill. It’s like keeping a basketball spinning on the tip of your finger – too hard a whack and it’ll fly off, but the right ‘stimulation’ will make the ball spin faster and stay in its place.
- Imagine a dog walking down the street, when suddenly, out of nowhere, a huge branch falls – nearly missing the dog, but very frightening for the dog nonetheless. This surprise triggers “pack mode” – a defensive response for the dog – as the dog runs off in search of security among its fellow pack-members.
- Let’s say your child is about to ride their bike into the street. You see a pickup truck headed your way, and your child is going to go directly into its path if you don’t do something. You run after your child, grab the bike in the nick of time, and tip it over to keep it from going into the street – hurting your child in the process. Wouldn’t you say that the pain you caused your child was worth it in this instance?
- Some soldiers are in battle. Their sergeant yells “sniper!” and everyone hits the dirt. All except one of them, who moved a bit more slowly and…well…got shot. Yikes. The next time the sergeant yells, no one hesitates – after all, their lives depend on him.
How is this stimulation applied in Natural Dog Training?
Just to be ultra-clear, when I talk about “shock” I am talking about a quick “pop-and-release” on a training collar – either a slip collar (used CORRECTLY) or a prong collar (also used correctly, of course). This pop-and-release should be enough to cause a heightened sensation, but should not be enough to cause pain. Occasionally I might also use “discomfort” in training (as in the high collar technique, or using a slow upward lift on the leash to discourage jumping).
So, as described above, there are really two kinds of shock.
- The first kind, which I use most often (which is still occasional), is the kind of shock that actually feeds a dog’s current state of being in flow/drive. For example, when I’m training a dog in the down/stay (on the box), when the dog is secure in the “down” position I might give some pops on the leash to increase the level of energy IN THE DOWN. I’m not “correcting” them when they try to get up – I’m actually reinforcing the down through adding just enough stimulation while they’re already down. Additionally, a dog can get the association that a “correction” on the leash actually means “lie down” – since that is the feeling-state that they’re in when they’re experiencing the shock. If the dog stops doing what they were doing, then you applied too much shock – you are merely trying to keep the ball spinning, or to increase the speed at which the ball is spinning – without knocking it off your fingertip.
- The second kind of shock is meant to stop – immediately – whatever is currently happening/about to happen. I would think of it as an essential evil, kind of like throwing your kid to the ground to keep them from being hit by a car. Generally, I only use this kind of shock when I’m teaching a HARD down (i.e. a “down” under ANY circumstance) – and remember the “guard rail” analogy – it’s only effective when a dog already knows what to do. I’m going to cover training the “hard down” in its own post (so don’t go off experimenting with this, please). The idea here is that you want this hard down to be your LIFESAVER when you need it. Those times are generally going to be when your dog is in an extremely high drive (or even “overload”) state – and you need your “Down” to penetrate through the energy of the moment and elicit an immediate response. As we’ve talked about before, the only way for you to get there is for your dog to actually experience a high state of drive (or even overload) and learn to lie down within that emotional state. It’s a gradual process of getting there, and when you do it right the shock actually ends up more like “shock #1″ than the “shock #2″ that I’m explaining right now. Ultimately, though, it’s a shock that has a very limited context – it’s application is RARE but it is useful within that context.
What it all boils down to in Natural Dog Training is that there is no “negative reinforcement”
There is stimulation that fuels a state of flow/drive, and there is stimulation that interrupts that state of flow. Primarily, in Natural Dog Training we are trying to stimulate emotional energy and teach a dog to channel that drive through us. So when drive comes up in an “unwanted” situation, our focus is not on interrupting the flow (i.e. not on inhibiting the dog’s expression), but rather on redirecting the flow into an avenue that is acceptable and productive for our dogs. Over time, our dogs learn that when they feel that high energy feeling there is no conflict in being attracted to you and doing what you ask. When we use shocks, we use them to stimulate our dogs to a higher energy level (and again, I typically only use this in my training for a reliable down – not as a correction for ‘getting up’ – but instead as a way of keeping the intensity of energy high when the dog is already in a down position. It’s another way of “feeding the position” – something that we talked about in our box work).
In the rarest of moments we might use enough of a shock to interrupt the flow – but that’s only when the pattern of what to do has been well-established in higher and higher levels of emotional stimulation. In those moments there’s nothing “punitive” about what’s happening, it’s simply enough of a shock to be like the guard-rail – knocking our dog back onto course. And, more than anything, it’s done out of necessity – a method to be chosen when the time is right. Considering that the issue of shock hasn’t even really come up in ANY of our training exercises (especially NOT when we’re talking about helping aggressive dogs), that should give you an idea of how rarely the technique is a part of a training regimen.
In what you would traditionally call “negative reinforcement” those moments would be big “NO!” moments - as if you were somehow, through physical punishment, educating your dog about right and wrong. Our dogs are removed from the ethics of the situation, however, and that’s an important point in the Natural Dog Training methodology. When an intense stimulation actually interrupts the flow of what our dogs are doing then we, as trainers, had better give that energy someplace to flow TO. Fortunately all of you will have no problem with THAT part of the equation, considering that most of this dog training blog’s focus is on answering that most important question for our dogs:
What do I do with my energy?
And you know all about that, right?
Want to strengthen the connection between you and your dog?
Check out Neil Sattin's Instructional Videos - step-by-step instruction that makes it easy and fun!
Related Articles
- Friday quick links and Continuing the Discussion
- All About Dog Training Blog Carnival: 4th edition
- About
- Neil Sattin Interviewed By Dog Obedience Training Online
- “Be The Moose” Is a More Compelling Metaphor
- Natural Dog Training eBook in its Formative Stages
- Subscribing to the Natural Dog Training Blog is Good








January 30th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
Great article, I’m glad you posted it because it’s something people have misconceptions about when it comes to natural dog training.
I liken “shocks” to two kids playing on a playground. If they’re both in a playful mood, and one pushes the other down, it will encourage him to get back up faster and with more intensity. Imagine though if they WEREN’T playing, and the other boy came up and pushed the other down when he was just standing around relaxed. He’d probably say “Ow!” or, even cry! I’m not suggesting dog behavior should be compared to human behavior, but I find it to be a useful analogy when talking about this subject.
Because I don’t like using anything(other than a collar for tags) around my dog’s neck(I use a harness now), if I need to increase his drive, I lightly slap him on his haunches. Obviously, this has limitations in that my arms aren’t 6+ feet long, but it is a good trade off for us. It gets him really revved up!
When I was still using dominance and correction-based training, I noted once that if Indy was focused on the neighbor’s cat, and I applied quick corrections, it’d stimulate him to LUNGE into full drive. Same principle.
Several owners I know that have used natural dog training principles very successfully haven’t once had to apply a shock. I think it’s important to note that they most definitely aren’t required when training dogs with this method. I’d like to think that almost ALL dogs could be trained without them with enough time and patience– even though they aren’t necessarily a “bad” thing when done correctly.
I’d also like to clarify that when you say “Don’t worry about correction until your dog KNOWS WHAT TO DO.”– dogs are not consciously choosing to ignore commands just to spite you(even though it sure as heck seems like it sometimes). If they’re ignoring commands, it means their drive and attraction hasn’t been built up enough towards you. Or in other words, something else in the environment is more interesting than you! I know you didn’t imply this Neil, but wanted to comment in case anyone else misunderstood.
Kevin’s book seems to focus a bit too much on shocks in all the exercises– this may be a product of the book’s age? Has he changed his ideas a bit over the years?
January 30th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
Hey Ben,
Thanks as always for stopping by.
I know what you mean about the human vs. dog analogies – but I do think that when you use “kid” analogies you end up pretty close to the mark, as young children are still primarily following their emotional responses to situations.
I appreciate your clarification. I definitely agree with it.
And yes, I also think that natural dog training minus “shocks” can be effective for all dogs. It simply becomes useful for some dogs in certain situations, and I wanted to show how, as you put it, they’re not necessarily a “bad” thing.
I think that the discussion of shock in Kevin’s book was certainly a product of where he was in the evolution of his theory – and that has certainly changed in the numerous years that have gone by since it was first published. In many ways, pushing has become that “new” tool for accelerating drive, as that was primarily what the shocks were being used for. That being said, Kevin still uses them, and I think that he sticks to the “objective” view that a shock is neutral (i.e. not “good” or “bad”) as long as it serves to open a dog’s emotional channels – not close them.
January 31st, 2008 at 10:42 am
Neil, great post on a polarizing subject. Yeah, I’m thinking Kevin needs to come up with a different word than “shock.” Because, objectively, shock is not a neutral word, at least not in Webster’s dictionary. How about something like “attention-getter” or “refocuser”?
January 31st, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Neil, Great article. I clarify #1 and #2 by thinking of them as:
#1 Energizer
#2 Interrupter
They both result in a refocus or stronger focus
January 31st, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Karen,
I think you’re definitely heading in the right direction with your terminology suggestions. What do you think about Angelique’s ideas? I’m tempted to think that she wins the prize!
February 1st, 2008 at 8:32 am
[...] WordPress « Negative Reinforcement in Natural Dog Training: What is a shock? [...]
February 1st, 2008 at 4:07 pm
This is a great article, and I covered some of it (I think) in my article on the benefits of play. (Thanks for the plug, by the way.)
Speaking of terminology, the funny thing is, I use negative reinforcement to mean something entirely different than the way you (and a lot of others) have used it. To me a negative reinforcement is not the same as a correction at all. The negative reinforcement is the REMOVAL of an unpleasant feeling state for the dog. So in that sense, and using Kevin’s view that all behavior, learned or instinctive, comes as an attempt to reduce the dog’s internal tension and stress, then
ALL LEARNING TAKES PLACE THROUGH NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT
When his stress is reduced, that’s when the dog really learns things.
But maybe that’s a topic for another time.
LCK
February 7th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
By the way, I agree with Angelique in her use of the word “interruptor.”
LCK