Home Current News News Archive Shop/Advertise Ridecamp Classified Events Learn/AERC
Endurance.Net Home Ridecamp Archives
ridecamp@endurance.net
[Archives Index]   [Date Index]   [Thread Index]   [Author Index]   [Subject Index]

Re: [RC] Getting in the trailer - Sara Garrett

A kindred spirit! Do you do Lyons or PNH? I do Lyons, mostly. Have you done any clicker training? I'm interested, but haven't tried it yet.

Sara


> Similar thought: A food trained dog will work for you only because he is
looking for the

> next treat, not because he wants to please you.

A food trained dog will work for you because he has learned that doing
something you want results in something he wants. A correction-trained dog
will work for you because he has learned that not doing something you want
results in something he doesn't want.

All of us -- horses, dog, people, anteaters -- work for one of two
reasons: to get something we want (positive reinforcement) or to avoid
something we don't want (negative reinforcement). In both cases, the
"something" may be internal or external.

Examples:

I do charity work because it makes me feel good, because I like feeling
like I've helped someone.  (Internal positive reinforcement)

I avoid my neighbor in the store because I feel guilty that I skipped out
on bridge Friday night. (Internal negative reinforcement)

I worked hard in school because I wanted A's because my parents and
teachers made a fuss over me. (External positive reinforcement.) (If I had
done it because of a desire to do a great job, it would have been internal
positive reinforcement.)

I do the laundry because if I don't my clothes will be dirty and
unwearable and society frowns on that. (External negative reinforcement.)

Horses are no different. They will work either because it benefits them or
because something bad might happen if they don't. Traditionally, horse
training is negative reinforcement -- release of pressure and other force.
It's easy to fall into the trap of thinking that one type of reinforcement
(positive or negative) is innately more reliable than the other, but it
simply isn't true. Every specific instance of reinforcement falls on a
continuum between "so mild that barely any change was made" and "so
powerful that change was instantaneous." Some instances of positive
reinforcement are more powerful than some instances of negative
reinforcement and vice versa.

There are pros and cons to each, which I'm not going to get into. The best
of all possible worlds, in my opinion, is a horse or dog or person who
does what you ask out of internal positive reinforcement. Second best is
external positive reinforcement. I don't take a lot of pride in people or
animals working because I've somehow inspired fear or shown them that I
can make life miserable for them if they don't.

That doesn't mean that I think negative reinforcement is evil -- but it
does mean that I would seek to use the most mild instance I could, and
then I would use, in addition to release, positive reinforcement to cement
the lesson.

Melissa Alexander

_________________________________________________________________
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp
Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp

Ride Long and Ride Safe!!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=