Moderne Hundeerziehung im Blickpunkt

[Bine]

Du hast es wunderbar auf den Punkt gebracht Andrea

[Getier]

Wo wurde denn da gestresst und überrumpelt zurückgelassen? Da wurde danach der Hund an die Halterin übergeben und es wurde sowohl drinnen als auch draußen beim Gassigehen ruhig das neue Verhalten der Halterin geübt.
Und die Hündin war draußen wahrscheinlich so ungestresst wie in ihrem Leben noch nie zuvor.
Aber das is ja eigentlich nicht Inhalt von diesem Thread hier...

Guck mal, dort habe ich was dazu geschrieben: Maike Maja Nowak auf ZDF

[chino]

Ivan Balabanov über positive Verstärkung, was sie kann und besonders was sie nicht kann:

One of the latest laws that got passed in Switzerland from January - the fursavers type collars must have a middle ring so it can not tightened Supposedly this will also reduce dog abuse.?! It is amazing that the animal rights activists are so active and the people who are the best in working with dogs are so afraid to stand up and educate!
Here is an excellent beginning written by Gary Wilkes enjoy:

Toward a Less Coercive World Via Skinnerian Ideology

In Science and Human Behavior, B.F. Skinner laid out an impressive plan for the creation of a science of behavior. His logic was that after two major wars in the first half of the 20th century, human behavior is the next logical area of serious scientific study. To paraphrase his points, science has created awesome tools of destruction and science can also impart wisdom that will prevent such weapons from being used. In Skinner’s mind, the world can achieve utopia through careful behavioral control. Ironically, the very thing that Skinner cited as the root cause of our problems – instinctive behavior – is something Skinner never studied and studiously avoided during his whole career. Additionally, the idea that watching the behavior of rats and pigeons in micro-boxes that allow only a single behavior can be extrapolated to vast human populations is on its face, ludicrous. Yet that’s exactly what he did throughout his entire career. Just six months before his death he spoke in Japan on the creation of the “coercion free society.” As if he had some actual knowledge of how to control the population of planet Earth. To quote the motto of the American Skeptics Society, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Skinner does not offer proof directly, but the results of his work, do. This is what “coercion free” environments look like.

In 2010 a captive Orca at Sea World grabbed his trainer and dragged her underwater by the arm. He then took his time and bit off the arm leaving her body mangled and lifeless – just as his wild counterparts would handle a sea lion. A little less violently, perhaps, but the outcome was the same. Though the news spin has marked this animal as some kind of psychotic killer, this is a natural behavior that can be seen in all Orcas, all over the world. This type of behavior starts as soon as the animals are weaned and continues through their lifetime. It is integral to what they do and why they are colloquially called Killer Whales. http://www.cbsnews.com/…/killer-whales-killing-sea-lion-pu…/ No one who has ever studied them could claim ignorance of that kind of behavior…other than Sea World management. When a female Orca killed herself by ramming another Orca, a Sea World spokesman said the most contradictory thing I’ve ever heard in a single statement. I will paraphrase…”It’s a natural behavior that occurs in the wild. We couldn’t have known this might happen.”

After OSHA sued Sea World, testimony revealed that marine mammals in captivity – the much lauded legacy of Skinner and his protege, Keller Breland, attack their keepers regularly. It’s not a fluke, it’s the norm. That is because positive reinforcement or the removal of positive reinforcement cannot stop or inhibit behavior. Trainers at Sea World are touted as the top of the food chain of trainers, yet they are unable to control aggression in complete captivity. If you are wondering what this is leading to, it’s simple. The death of a trainer at Sea World (and the dozens of other serious attacks cited in the Osha law-suit) refutes several of the principal beliefs of anyone who uses Skinnerian operant conditioning, AKA Learning Theory, as the basis for their training methods.

Extinction – if you simply ignore a behavior it will go away.
You don’t have to know anything about the instinctive repertoire of a species in order to train it.
Reinforcing an alternate behavior stops a behavior from occurring in a given context.
You can control behavior with exclusively “positive” methods.
Information taken from scientists is automatically valid and needs no confirmation from “common observation” or “anecdotal” sources. If wide-spread observation of nature contradicts “scientific” training principles, nature is to be ignored.
If you buy all of those principles, I would make a simple suggestion. Please do not attempt to be a dog trainer. Dogs bite. Then you will bleed. It will hurt. It may cause permanent damage or disfigurement. Worse, they may bite someone else on your watch or attack another animal. Caution – their biting behavior is not extinguished by ignoring it. That is only logical. Aggression is not created by reinforcement and “removing reinforcement” to control it is a non sequitur. You also cannot control it by teaching an alternate behavior. No treat can prevent it. That is because, again, positive reinforcement cannot stop a behavior or create a future inhibition. By definition, positive reinforcement increases behavior. Negative punishment – withholding a reinforcer – will not block the future occurrence of a behavior.

The Skinnerian world is one without coercion and therefore without inhibitions. All aspects of an animal’s natural repertoire are available at all times. Inevitably a behavior pops up that has never occurred before that causes some naive soul to say, “Gee, he’s never done that before.” This often follows a serious injury. A knowledge of animal behavior requires that you know what to inhibit and then know how to inhibit it. Trusting to exclusively positive methods abdicates responsibility for preventing dangerous behavior before it occurs or stopping unacceptable behavior when it emerges.

p.s. The death of the Sea World trainer caused a huge flurry of contradictory statements from experts about orcas and marine mammals in captivity. Here are a few thoughts that may help cut through the nonsense.

If Killer Whales are as intelligent or more intelligent than humans, it means that when they injure someone they know what they are doing. If we are supposed to believe that they are brilliant it means they are culpable for the harm they do. “He’s so smart he didn’t realize he was killing her” doesn’t really make sense.
If they are so smart, why do they keep screwing up performances? (Perfect routines are rare at marine parks even though the animals are trained constantly.)
If they are aggressive predators, why would it be unusual that they would attack a member of a different species? In reality, it is surprising that the level of aggression is limited. If you wish to read more of this, I suggest Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck. Same circumstances, same outcome.
Why do virtually all captive whales have bite marks from other whales on them? (Dolphins, too) Why don’t the trainers use Skinnerian methods to divert the aggression? (The answer is that the method cannot do what they want it to do. I gave a joint seminar at the San Diego Wild animal park. About 20 of the trainers in attendence were from Sea World. Three things emerged; they were operating from a myopic mantra, they do not really understand how to use aversive control, but they are really good at creating aversive environments and they use food to keep the animals passified. Sorry, that doesn’t work. Even fat Orcas are capable of killing someone, just for the fun of flexing their natural repertoire. Just ask Roy Horn of Sigfried and Roy. They didn’t use punishment, either.)
NOTE: Postive reinforcement cannot stop or inhibit any naturally occuring, learned behavior or combination of the two. If you wish to disagree with this article, that is the concept you will have to disprove.

Quelle

[Getier]

Das merk ich mir mal für heute Abend.