Clicker Training Research

So that follows with distance work. Let's say have the dog on her 20 foot lead and I am with her 19 feet from her rug. I send her to the rug. I click. She turns to face me. I say/sign down. She downs. I click. I say/sign stay. I walk the 20 feet, circle her, and return to the heel position. I click and treat while she is still down IN position. I release her and we heel off. How could I treat for each step occurring 20 feet away from me? The click is the confirmation the action was right and a treat is coming at the end of the sequence.
That sounds like a remote TV control dog training:wink2: Never seen one quite that way. I do recognize that clicker is sold at any pet stores without any instructions or referral but it is fairly easy to obtain info just by googling net without attempt to invent the wheel. Good thing with science gravity exist whether you believe in it or not:smile2:


This isn't true.
I would be careful making judgements like this based on your own limited experience.
 
I'm afraid I also have to disagree with the concept that the click itself after a while becomes a reward. A reward = something nice and meaningful. I like seing my paycheck envelope because I know what's in it. The envelope itself is irrelevant if empty!

Clicker training is a presicion tool if used correctly and works because the learner is going to repeat an action that it gets rewarded for. The method is based on trust, if the dog hears the indicator noise (click) the reward for doing the action is going to follow shortly. When I am training I do sometimes mark totally the wrong thing. But if my dog hears that click he gets his reward, no matter what. As SheltieChe says, withholding the reward because the action was not what I was looking for will mean the power of the clicker as a marker is diminished and he will start to lose faith that the click ALWAYS indicates a reward. Why is he then going to be motivated to earn that click if it doesn't pay out?

For an example of expanding/enhancing a behaviour, when I'm teaching heelwork, I start off by clicking and treating every little good thing so the dog learns his position is by my side. Once the dog has the idea, then I start witholding the click for actions that are less good (right position but too wide) and only marking the best ones (in close)- that will improve the behaviour because the dog learns that only if he is right on my leg does he get that reward. Once I have the position satisfactory, then I will start witholding the click to maintain it for longer - so to begin with he gets clicked for each step, then every other, then every third and so on - but to keep motivation I will click and treat after one good step every so often (about once in 10-15 clicks). In this way the dog works extra hard because he doesn't know exactly when that payout moment will come. I've actually found with the more experienced dog that he 'ups the ante' if he doesn't hear a click for a bit because he really, really wants to get it then.

It is a balancing act witholding the click long enough to get to the 'OK I'm really trying now' point but not long enough that the dog stops trying and not giving so frequently that he isn't stretching himself. This random rewarding plays on the dog's gambling mentality to extend the behaviour.

My understanding of clicker training, having studied quite a few books and DVDs on the subject, is that it is a means of teaching the dog a new behaviour or behaviour chain. It is not something to be used as a reward on the completion of a seperate series of behaviours. So I would use the clicker to teach heelwork, to impove the position and to teach the dog to maintain the position over an increasing period of time. But I wouldn't go out and do a round of heelwork with sits, turns etc then click the dog and give him a treat at the end of it. There is no way that every single one of those actions will be perfect and therefore clicking the dog after a couple of minutes performing different actions will be meaningless. Nor would I click after completion of an agility course for the same reason. In these situations the dog is performing a series of seperate behaviours that it knows how to do and therefore I am not going to be teaching it, but I will be rewarding it at the end. The dog in this situation needs to have an expectation he will get a good payout at the end so you build this into training - once the behaviour is correct.

I think it is very sad to see dogs in competition come out of the ring and the handler witholds the reward because perhaps the dog missed a jump or broke the wait on a recall. If he has done the majority of the round well he will have no understanding of why he isn't getting his reward and the disapointment is evident. Where is the motivation for him to work with enthusiasm again if he is performing a complicated set of behaviours but with the liklihood of no reward? If I wasn't paid one month because I had made an error but no one told me that I'd done something wrong then I doubt I would feel like bothering to turn up the next month!

However, that doesn't mean the clicker can only be used to teach one action in isolation as you can use it to build a behaviour chain.
As an example, one of my favourite things to teach is a sendaway to something and lay down. I shaped Epic to do a basic sendaway to a mat 2 meters away in ten minutes with one and a half sticks of 'Schmacko' using the clicker (& backchaining). I will add that at the time, he had no prior experience of shaping (figuring out how to earn the click rather than being lured). So the dog learns to perform several actions (look at mat, run to mat, lay down )to get one click. The important thing here is that they are all part of one behaviour chain in response to a single cue - away.

What I wouldn't do is add in a recall off the mat before clicking unless I wanted the dog to run to the mat, down and then return off his own bat. My recall is a seperate behaviour in response to a different cue and I don't want the dog to take this action unless I ask him.

So my rule is clicker for teaching a behaviour, enhancing it and incorporating into a behaviour chain. Click is given at reasonably frequent intervals and always followed by treat.

On something like obedience/agility round where dog is performing several seperate actions on my cues for an extended period of time he will get a jackpot reward at the end, but no click.

I think the basic principals of clicker training are quite easy but it takes considerable practice to get the skills necessary to use it to teach difficult/complex behaviours and to improve a behaviour. I've been clicker training for about 8 years now and am a lot better than I was but a long way still to travel. :wink2:

Thank you for taking your time and phenomenal write up!
 
Extending duration

Following on, I struggled with the click effectivly ending the behaviour until quite recently. So teaching a stay I would withold the click for increasing periods of time to get the dog to maintain position for longer and the click signalled the release - until I got Epic.

Teaching him a stay seemed impossible as he simply couldn't/wouldn't hold the position after a certain period of time. Going back a step and clicking after a shorter period only made matters worse as he just popped up quicker. At a year old his sit stay was at best unreliable and only for a few seconds with me by his side. He was too excitable and lacked confidence. I tried waiting until he sat/went down again before giving the treat but he seemed to interperate this as meaning sit - click - jump up - sit -treat. Not really any better.

Then I watched some videos of Silvia Trkman's foundation class and it was like a revalation. The click was used with rapid rewards for holding a position. So as long as the dog stayed put, it was a case of clicktreat, clicktreat, every second. Not increasing periods without an indication of success or support as I had been doing then click, dog moves and gets reward five seconds later.

I tried this first with Epic's two on two off contact behaviour and the improvement was staggering. He very quickly got to the point that I could move away, click and return to treat while he held the position because he had learned the click didn't mean stop it meant treat and stay there for another c&t.

The other insight was rewarding in response to a release cue. I've never before rewarded my dogs for reacting to the release. (I think, because I've done obedience where the release is really 'excersise over' whereas in agility it means progressing onto something else so a different concept). So previously the click was the release signal, now I tried saying 'break' throwing the treat and clicking as he moved. He got no reward for moving on his own so there was further incentive to stay until told and move when told as he was rewarded for both. Using the release itself as a rewardable action seems to work much better than not giving the dog any indication he has done the right thing by moving - I hope this makes sense!

There seemed no reason why this shouldn't work with the stay and so it proved true. Having c&t reguarly while holding the position rather than only at the end was just the support he needed. I've since used this for remedial stay training with Yogi and he is significantly better too.

I don't have the clicker on the agility course or in the stay ring because once the dogs understood the behaviour and were performing it to an acceptable standard I faded it out and replaced it with the reward/jackpot.

Just to add I do reguarly maintain the obedience stay criteria in training with the clicker for motivation (it's a dull excersise) and also because there are no degrees of correctness, the dog either stays or it doesn't so it demands perfection which requires regular practice.
 
Let me repeat something I said earlier, "I know next to nothing about dog training." That said, I find the following comment interesting:



I've read SN posts, internet articles and viewed videos that advocated fluffy squeaker filled toys, ragged ropes as tug toys and hearty over the top enthusiasm to be used as "rewards" for our dogs, not to mention some of the oiliest, foul smelling bits of edibles used as treats. As a result, I'm not sure I follow the reasoning that a clicker cannot be considered as a part of the "reward". Perhaps if the use of the clicker was never used in conjunction with other treats, it would make more sense to me, but it would seem that (in my mind) the dog would consider it a "reward" because of the method of using it with the treat at times. I wouldn't think that he would consider it a "high value" treat, but I understand the theory that the click is a part of the reward system.

I totally get the analogy of the paycheck and the envelope, but the comparison falls short because of the differences between us and or dogs. I mean, we are talking about sentient beings, but they are beings who get excited when we do circus leaps and make goo goo faces in the back yard at night while dancing around a pile of poo. If they can equate that to a reward, why not a click which at least sometimes is followed by a tasty treat. Oh, and back in the day before direct deposit, I always found my pay envelope in the mailbox a bit of a reward. At least until the check was removed. :smile2:

We getting into some deep territory here. If you happen to have Ken Ramirez presentation in your neck of woods, I highly recommend it. His DVD are great too. Tawzer dog will have their Thanksgiving 50% sale soon...
Here is from Patricia McConnell review of Ken's seminar
https://www.patriciamcconnell.com/t...secondary-reinforcers-wisdom-from-ken-ramirez
Clicker is secondary reinforcer thought by some dog trainers and is marker by Ken's definition. Food, water etc are primary reinforcers. We could go into some deep discussion about what is and is not which is beyond this forum capacity...:smile2:

"Here’s what I didn’t miss: some excellent points about what are often called “Secondary Reinforcers.” [Note to training geeks: there are some details about terminology that Ken went into that I found fascinating, but it would take a couple of posts to explain them, and you're better off going to see Ken in person if you are interested in terminology.] But here is a summary of points that I think are relevant to all of us:

First, many of you know that “Primary Reinforcers” are things that are inherently reinforcing (that automatically cause an animal to increase the frequency of a behavior). Strictly speaking, they are things that an animal needs to survive: food, water, etc. When you give your dog a treat for sitting on cue, you are using a primary reinforcer.

Secondary reinforcers are things that are learned by an animal to be associated with Primary Reinforcers, and thus eventually elicit a similar response through classical conditioning. For example, if you repeat “Good Dog” and follow up it with a treat enough times, eventually your dog will work to hear you say it. But here’s what I learned from Ken:

It is critical to continue to link a secondary with a primary part of the time, no matter how long you’ve been using it. In his experience with his animals (who have to perform perfectly in shows and when being treated medically), even if the animal inherently enjoys the secondary reinforcement, it has to be maintained with a primary if you want a totally reliable behavior. That’s true even if the animal loves the secondary reinforcement. For example, at the Shedd, Beluga Whales love having their tongues rubbed, it clearly feels good to them and they seek it out. However, Ken considers it still a secondary reinforcement, and is very careful not to over use it.

He advises that you condition ALL secondary behaviors as if they were a behavior. In other words, rub tongue, give treat. Rub dog’s belly, give treat. Even if your dog likes it inherently, initially reinforce it with food if your dog likes food. That makes it much more powerful in the long run.

Once your dog is clearly thrilled with what you are doing, then begin to use it as reinforcement by asking for a simple behavior, then use your 2ndary R, and follow with the primary R. After that, for a long time, use the 2ndary by itself only twice in a session, and never in a row. Gradually increase the use of the 2ndary, but be very careful not to overuse it. (By the way, he is NOT talking about a click for those of you who are clicker trainers. He considers that a marker, not a reinforcer.) Clearly there is a lot to talk about here, but this is enough for now to get us all thinking about the issue."
 
So that follows with distance work. Let's say have the dog on her 20 foot lead and I am with her 19 feet from her rug. I send her to the rug. I click. She turns to face me. I say/sign down. She downs. I click. I say/sign stay. I walk the 20 feet, circle her, and return to the heel position. I click and treat while she is still down IN position. I release her and we heel off. How could I treat for each step occurring 20 feet away from me? The click is the confirmation the action was right and a treat is coming at the end of the sequence. It is a given that each of go to rug - down - stay were individually taught prior to mastery level with click/treat. Chained, the reward comes at the end of the treat but the clicks in between are a YES confirmation of correct action. I don't think everyone is making the distinction of one single basic task (such as sit or down) being taught and a chain of mastered tasks to form a more complex maneuver (such as send to rug/down/stay or call forward return right).

In your example, I presume the behaviour you are looking for is the dog to go (in response to a cue) to the rug and lie down and stay there until you give the release cue as in the sendaway? It seems there is some confusion in the backchaining training here - I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong as it is a relativly new concept for me! But I would do this by first teaching the dog to lay on the mat next to you- c&t for that action. Then move the mat gradually further away so dog has further to go to before it lays down. It only gets the click on the completion of the behaviour of laying down on the mat but by increasing the distance you are extending the criteria to reach the end point. The dog cannot perform the lay down on mat until it has got to the mat. The action of running out is not a seperate behaviour but a means to an end. Now if you wanted the dog to run to the mat, wait until you cue down then lay down those are two seperate actions. I would train and proof until they were individually reliable before asking the dog to do one followed by another. Once you are at this point you don't need the clicker as a marker as the dog knows the action and can perform it on cue so you would simply test and reward if done correctly and return to training it (with clicker) if not.

With something like a retrieve that has multiple seperate behaviours, I almost never combine them all apart from in competition because it is too difficult to isolate issues. I cannot explain to him that he isn't getting a reward because he has faulted early in the sequence. A retrieve is one excersise but several behaviour chains combined into a sequence. 1. Sit 2. Wait 3. Run out 4. Pick up 5. Return 6. Sit. 7. Give 8. Return to heel. The dog can still grab the dumbell if it has broken his wait, or drop it on return and still present correctly. If I clicked each action but he sat crookedly at heel there is a dilema - if I reward him he will remember the last (wrong) behaviour and think the reward is for that. If I don't reward then the clicking earlier has not told him anything because it has no follow up. I don't want to click once at the end because each behaviour requires a cue from me and I don't want him doing the whole lot independently.

This isn't true. The sound of the click is very meaningful. It delivers the message that the dog performed something correctly. While not a "reward" per se, it means YES-correct-a-reward-is-coming-keep-doing-what-you-are-doing-and-what-I-am-further-asking. They GET it. They know what it means. If the sound of a click is worthless and carries no information to the dog, why bother? Why click or say yes or whistle or anything? Why do shepherds whistle and call to the border collies or the hunters whistle and signal their dogs as they go for the bird? Why does anyone say good boy/girl? It's feedback and confirmation along the way, be it a yes, whistle, click, hand signal, etc. The treat will come when the multi-step task is completed.

Again -- I don't think everyone is making the distinction of one single basic task being taught and a chain of mastered tasks to form a more complex maneuver.

I do get what you are saying here. When I'm practicing difficult weave entries with Epic I use 'Yes' as a support to tell him he has made a correct entry and to carry on. For us it is a form of praise. Admittedly I do also use it in leiu of the clicker if one isn't to hand but it doesn't have the same power as the clicker to mark the correct action - probably because it is also my supportive word! What I really need is a different verbal 'click' word that I condition a response to so the word = treat but 'yes' means good start carry on.

I think you seem to be using the click as support for a task correctly completed (like me saying yes for the weave entry) rather than to actually say to the dog "this is what I want you to do!" It's a subtle difference and if it works for you then that's great - certainly positive training so I don't have a problem with it. :smile2:

But the clicker can be used (if you wish) with more presicion to fine tune the behaviour by pairing it with a reward every time. So in your sendaway for example, you get a quick down by only clicking the fast ones rather than clicking when the dog gets to the floor. If it gets the click just for going down there is no way of communicating that you would prefer an instant response rather than a long pause while the dog scratches and looks around before finally dropping slowly down. If you just click and follow on with something else before rewarding then the dog has no incentive to improve its performance so long at it has done the basic action and got the 'praise'.

The sound of the click tells the dog only what it has learned to associate it with. For Epic, it means a treat is imminent in the next couple of seconds. He wants the click because it indicates a tasty morsel so he tries very hard to make that sound happen. If I had followed the click every time by a smack on the nose he would soon have learned to hide when he heard it. Same noise, indicating entirely different things are about to happen will produce vastly different results.

The whistle is different as it is not a reward or form of praise, it is a command. The dog learns to associate the whistle with the action it is doing at the time in the same way as repeating 'sit' as the dog sits will gradually become associated in the dog's mind. Eventually after much repetition the word/whistle will prompt the action to occur.

"Good dog" is praise and with experience dogs do pick up the words to mean you are pleased (especially if accompanied with food/petting) but shout "Good Dog" in an angry voice and again the reaction is different. This is feedback but only if done in a certain way.

Hand signals are cues - not feedback - and often the residue of lured behaviour. Epic's beg cue is my hand flipping up (because it took ages to teach and I had to feed from the target hand so it became a lure.) He will do a beg if I flip my hand up now but flipping my hand gives him no indication he has done the right thing because it is a forerunner to him performing the action.

I really would recommend Karen Pryor's book as I know you would enjoy it because clearly you think a great deal about the mechanics of dog training and how dogs think. Even if you don't agree with it all I do think you would find it interesting. :biggrin2:
Knowledge is after all not as much about doing everything you learn about but learning about everything so you know what you want to do. :wink2:
 
Last edited:
Let me repeat something I said earlier, "I know next to nothing about dog training." That said, I find the following comment interesting:



I've read SN posts, internet articles and viewed videos that advocated fluffy squeaker filled toys, ragged ropes as tug toys and hearty over the top enthusiasm to be used as "rewards" for our dogs, not to mention some of the oiliest, foul smelling bits of edibles used as treats. As a result, I'm not sure I follow the reasoning that a clicker cannot be considered as a part of the "reward". Perhaps if the use of the clicker was never used in conjunction with other treats, it would make more sense to me, but it would seem that (in my mind) the dog would consider it a "reward" because of the method of using it with the treat at times. I wouldn't think that he would consider it a "high value" treat, but I understand the theory that the click is a part of the reward system.

I totally get the analogy of the paycheck and the envelope, but the comparison falls short because of the differences between us and or dogs. I mean, we are talking about sentient beings, but they are beings who get excited when we do circus leaps and make goo goo faces in the back yard at night while dancing around a pile of poo. If they can equate that to a reward, why not a click which at least sometimes is followed by a tasty treat. Oh, and back in the day before direct deposit, I always found my pay envelope in the mailbox a bit of a reward. At least until the check was removed. :smile2:

Ok, if the click is followed 'sometimes' by a tasty treat the dog might be reasonably happy to hear it in anticipation. I guess the degree of excitement depends on the frequency a treat is produced and the temprement of the dog. The pay check envelope analogy was to show that the precursor itself loses value if there is routinely no follow up - a bit like the boy crying wolf or repeated fire drills. If every now and then there is a paycheck in the envelope, a wolf in the village or a fire in the building you are not going to totally ignore those signals just in case but if there was a result every time your reaction would be prompt and immediate. :biggrin2:

The percived value of the reward is also irrelevant so long as its what the dog wants. My training treats are tiny cubes of liver cake. My shelties love this stuff but the BC I train isn't as food motivated but will do anything for a tennis ball. My paycheck means nothing to the dogs but a great deal to me! Beauty in the eye of the beholder as they say! :wink2:
 
sorry, disagree with clicking but withholding reward
Yes, a click in itself is information and can be rewarding for some dogs in itself. But you should not lump things like a yes no yes together...

I agree you can work distance and you reward from a distance to mark THAT moment, but you should never lump activities together in training like clicking one but not reward and then adding a non reward marker after... this will undermine the power of the clicker, it waters it down, IMO
 
I answered the yes - no - yes scenario multiple times.

You stop and correct either by a re-do or retrain that step in isolation and then re-chain them. You don't just skip over it and let it slide.


I am going to end my part in the thread. What has worked for teaching mine rapidly has worked for ME. What started out as me trying to say how it worked for ME turned into ME trying to clarify some things and has turned into some kind of unfair statements to me though a very nice explanation if someone wants to really delve into clicker training. SO, I am saying I am taking a click AND treat and being DONE with it.
 
Last edited:
I answered the yes - no - yes scenario multiple times.


... What has worked for teaching mine rapidly has worked for ME. What started out as me trying to say how it worked for ME turned into ME trying to clarify some things and has turned into some kind of unfair statements to me though a very nice explanation if someone wants to really delve into clicker training...

Mom2Melli:
I realize that you have signed out of the discussion, but please take the following elements with you: 1). I thought (and still think) that your explanation was pretty good. I can't say that I will ultimately agree or disagree with your overall concepts yet, because this is all new to me and when I have actual experience I may see things differently. 2). I'm not sure which statements you found "unfair" but I would hope that none of mine were deemed as such. Quite frankly, when some of the more "spirited" responses occur, I quite often skip through the balance of the answer because what I'm here for is the "who", "what", "why", "when" and "where" of the discussion. As such, I often miss some of the more "unfair" remarks. At any rate, I appreciate your answers to my questions along with those that others directed to my queries.
 
it's too bad that a good thing like positive training turns into an emotional response. Opinions are just that, no reason to get emotional just because not everyone agrees. Simple disagreements aren't normally personal, unless one makes it so.

I believe that everyone who disagreed also explained their opinion, no reason to bow out. But that's just another opinion, nothing more!
 
Back
Top