-By Chad Mackin
The moment we start teaching the dog we are presented with a problem. How do we get the dog interested in learning what we are going to teach? The fact is that the dog will not learn unless he is motivated to learn. In a sense the first ‘command’ that our dogs must respond to is ‘learn this’. Think about it. In order for a dog to learn, he must put forth some effort. It may require a minor effort, or a great effort, but anyone who has spent enough time on the end of the leash will tell you that some dogs simply want to learn, and others couldn’t care less. Dogs that are characterized as stubborn, dumb, or hardheaded are often simply not motivated to learn what they are being taught.
So the first question we must ask ourselves is, “How do I get my dog interested in what I am going to teach?” Most people rely on using outside (extrinsic) reinforcers to motivate the dog, such as giving the dog a treat, or a pat on the head, or using some type of negative ‘punishment’. All effective training involves these extrinsic motivators and they are certainly valuable tools. However, it is my opinion that these motivators are largely misunderstood. As a result their potential is rarely realized. Worse than this, improper use of extrinsic motivators can contribute to certain behavior problems and even long-term emotional disorders.
The common understanding of extrinsic motivators is that the dog learns in an effort to earn the reward, avoid the correction, or earn the reward while avoiding the correction. In other words, the dog’s primary motivator is the reward, or the avoidance of the correction. I disagree with this assumption.
Alfie Kohn questioned the value of extrinsic motivators in his book Punished by Rewards (NY: Houghton Mifflin 1993). For example on page 68 he states, “Few readers will be shocked by the news that extrinsic motivators are a poor substitute for genuine interest in what one is doing.” This, by itself, should be enough cause to reexamine our thoughts regarding motivation, but there is more. Kohn goes on to say “What is more likely to be far more disturbing is the further point that rewards, like punishments, actually undermine the intrinsic motivation that promotes optimal performance.” This statement might sound absurd at first, but if you think about it you will begin to see the logic. On page 76 of the same book Kohn explains “…anything presented as a prerequisite for something else – that is, as a means toward some other end – comes to be less desirable. ‘Do this and you’ll get that’ automatically devalues the ‘this’”.
Kohn’s words present us with a problem. We can readily see that proper reinforcement does seem to create more interest in learning, but we also know that just the opposite should be true. If we make the sit command nothing more than a method to earn a reward, we devalue the sit command. It becomes a means to an end for the dog. Likewise if we make it simply a way to avoid a correction, the word “sit” will automatically become a source of stress for the dog. Yet we see dogs enthusiastically sit when told to under all sorts of reinforcement methods. So what is happening?
The answer lies in the most powerful motivator we, as trainers, have at our disposal: relationship. The dog has an ongoing interest in his relationship with us. A scratch on the head, a treat, or a judicious leash correction becomes a sign of the state of that relationship. The reward is not the motivation. It is a message. The reward lets the dog know that you are pleased with him. Now, I don’t for a minute wish to suggest, dogs just want to please. I have spent too many years with a leash in my hand to buy into that myth. But, if the relationship is properly structured the dog does have an ongoing interest in maintaining the quality of that relationship.
The dog wants to learn because he likes you, because he enjoys interacting with you because you are his pack mate, and leader. Dogs are fundamentally relationship driven. In the best dog training the dog does not view the commands as a means to an end. They are not a way to earn a reward, or a way to avoid a correction. They are part of a valuable interaction. The relationship represented by the interaction between handler and dog is the reward. Praise, food, and leash corrections are ways that we signal the status of the relationship with the dog.
Consider the exercise of the ‘sit restraint’ as presented in The Art of Raising a Puppy (The Monks of New Skete, 1991: Little, Brown). The handler sits on the floor with dog in front of him and places the dog in a sit position. The handler then tells the dog to stay. At this time the dog does not know the meaning of the word stay, but he will soon learn. The handler will talk to the dog in a soothing voice while calmly petting him. Every time the dog gets up, the handler changes his voice to a less friendly tone and says “no”. He then physically places the dog back in the sit position. There is no physical correction, no unpleasantness nothing to convince the dog to stay except for the kind words and pleasing touch of the handler. The dog does learn to stay, usually in a few minutes.
Let us look at this technique in terms of motivation. Why does the dog want to learn what we are teaching? Some might suggest that the dog wants the physical praise, that he is enjoying the attention. I am sure that this is true, but I am also sure that this is not the primary motivator. It is not hard to demonstrate this. The reason we have to stop the ‘reward’ of praise and petting is precisely because the dog is trying to get away from us. To suggest that he would rather get the praise than go away when he is trying to go away is self-contradictory. We simply cannot conclude that the dog stays only because he wants to continue the praise and affection. We have to accept that there is something else at work. Likewise we cannot conclude that the threat of physical punishment is the motivator either. The answer lies elsewhere.
If we look at the praise and the affection (and the cessation thereof) as signals of the condition of an ongoing relationship, that relationship being the motivation, the puppy’s response makes perfect sense. When we stop the praise and affection and we change our tone of voice, we communicate to the dog that the state of the relationship is changing for the worse. We then put the dog back where he was and resume the praise and petting letting him know that everything has been set right again. It is this relationship that motivates the dog. He will do what he pleases so long as the relationship remains unchanged.
For the most part, the dog's natural motivation to learn is the relationship. Regardless of what the owner understands about this process, the dog is always seeking to improve the relationship, unless we inadvertently program him otherwise.
If we are to understand our options for motivating our dogs and why our choices are so important, we need to understand some of the basic drives that are shared by all dogs. There are three common desires of all dogs, and these drives are the basis for most reinforcement.
The drives that drive the dog:
· Food drive
Comfort drive: I used to call this the avoidance drive, but comfort drive more accurately describes its function. The comfort drive is the drive that causes the dog to seek the most comfortable existence. It is this drive that compels him to seek shelter against the elements. It is also the drive that compels him to avoid pain and discomfort. Once again owners often appeal to this drive in attempts to train their dog. Most frequently it is thought to hold the solution to behavior problems. Any attempt to ‘punish’ a dog is an appeal to the dog’s comfort drive. “If you want to avoid this, then you had better…” Leash corrections are similar in nature, but strictly speaking, are not punitive. Again misuse of discomfort in an attempt to teach a dog to mind is a common abuse. So much so, that some trainers have denounced the concept of physically correcting a dog as barbaric and useless. The problem with this is that anyone who has watched dogs interact for any length of time knows that dogs physically correct each other. It is part of their dynamic, and as such we should recognize it as having a place in responsible training. Why should we limit our shared vocabulary because the idea of physical correction offends our sensibilities? Of course all corrections should be calibrated for the particular dog in question. If the correction is too harsh, the dog will get confused and/or fearful and the learning process will stop. The point of “too much” will be different for each dog.
Pack drive: This is, in my opinion, the universal drive. Pack drive refers to the dog’s desire to remain in good standing within the group. The pack drive is fundamentally tied to the other two drives and their satisfaction is dependent on this one. Astute readers may have noticed a hierarchal relationship already present. The comfort drive cannot be satisfied unless the food drive is satisfied. One cannot be hungry and entirely comfortable at the same time. So it could be said that the comfort drive is partially satisfied by the food drive. However, the food drive will not likely be satisfied outside of the pack. It could be said that the pack drive is an outgrowth of the food drive, which is an outgrowth of the comfort drive. Such as statement may lead one to believe that the comfort drive is the all encompassing drive, but that would not be entirely correct. Because of the dog’s emotional make up, the dog will not be comfortable, no matter how well-fed and protected against the elements, if he is alone, or with a poorly structured pack. The pack drive is so strong that the comfort drive must seek to fulfill it, even before it fulfills the food drive. Neither the comfort drive, nor the food drive can be fully satisfied outside of the pack relationship. Once more we see that everything ties back to relationship. (Am I beginning to sound like a broken record?)
We can (and should) utilize all three drives when they are
but the food drive and comfort drive should always be viewed in
pack drive (this is how the dog will naturally frame them
Building it bigger, or tearing it down?
One thing we must always be aware of as we train our dogs is the ‘build it bigger’ effect. Whichever drive or drives we use to motivate the dog will, by that process, become stronger. Think of it like exercise, the more you exercise a muscle, the bigger and stronger it will get. This is the same for all skills and even fundamental drives.
A man who habitually eats too much will end up with a more voracious appetite than someone who can only afford one meal a day. When we focus the dog’s attention on gathering food, for example, we condition him to go to extreme measures to get food. Trainers who use food as their primary motivator can readily attest to the results. The more food is used, the more the dog focuses on food. If we are not careful we can unnaturally inflate his food gathering instinct, possibly giving it precedence over his pack drive (and even his comfort drive). Such dogs are being inadvertently (let us hope) conditioned to seek food above everything else. They often become annoyingly insistent, constantly nudging those around them in an effort to get more food. It is not unreasonable to expect that these dogs will readily dump trashcans, and climb on counters to get food.
The same thing can happen if we over-emphasize the comfort drive and diminish the pack drive. In those cases we get a dog that sees pack interaction as a potential danger and will withdraw from it. The dog should find comfort in the pack, even if he is physically in pain, even if the pack is causing the pain. A dog with a strong pack drive will accept reasonable corrections without running away. However, if the dog is over-corrected or corrected inappropriately and unpredictably this may change. The comfort drive may become more powerful than the pack drive. Such dogs might become withdrawn, and resistant to handling. The dog may seek to fulfill his comfort drive outside the confines of the pack. In this effort the dog will fail. His internal programming will not allow him to be satisfied outside of the group. Such a dog must either learn to trust his pack, or he will forever fall short of his potential.
Likewise, if we concentrate on exercising the dog’s pack drive,
be able to put the “build it bigger” effect to good use.
will increasingly crave those rewards and avoid those
because of the food drive and the comfort drive, but because of
drive. This will have the result of building all the
at once, but they will be built in the proper context and
This will give us a better, happier, and more responsive
Fully Functioning Motivation
Most people are not aware of the vital role relationship plays in the motivation and learning process, and therefore either don't consider it at all or take it for granted. They get married to a reinforcement process without truly considering the motivation that makes the reinforcement work.
As Kohn pointed out, nothing replaces genuine interest an activity. In the relationship based model the activity of interest is the conversation between handler and dog. The dog is motivated to learn, and respond, not because he fears the correction or craves a scratch, or a treat, but rather he avoids what the correction signifies, and craves what the reward represents. It is all about relationship.
Throughout the training process we should encourage, enhance and clarify this relationship. The commands, the corrections, the rewards, should all be seen as tools to accomplish this. If the dog has a genuine interest in interacting with us, and a genuine interest in maintaining the relationship he will be ready to learn, ready to comply, and will genuinely enjoy the training process. This will become a self-perpetuating cycle. The more time we spend engaged in activity with our dog, the more interested he will be in the process. The more interested he is in the process, the easier and more enjoyable it will be for us to train him. The more enjoyable it is for us to train him, the more time we will spend training him, which, as stated before, will make him even more interested in the process. There is a catch however. In order for this to work we must keep the process interesting for him. If the training becomes boring, the dog will begin to lose interest, and that will strain the relationship making it harder to teach him.
You see, maintaining the relationship is a two-way street. It is not merely about our getting out of the dog what we expect or want. We must provide the dog with a reason to want to be with us. Again that reason should not be something that we sporadically interject into the relationship such as a treat or a pat on the head. A dog that is not mentally engaged in the training process will get bored and stop working for rewards, and to some extent will begin to ignore corrections. You may not see the dog refuse to respond (depending on the dog) but you will, at the very least, see less enthusiastic responses.
Some might say, “It doesn’t matter if they are bored, they must learn to obey whether they want to or not”. There is a certain truth to that statement, but also a certain absurdity. A dog will never do anything he doesn’t want to do, unless he is physically forced to, and in that case he isn’t really doing it. But still the point is well made. Boredom is not an excuse for disobedience, neither is excitement or distraction. However, excessive boredom will have a detrimental effect on a dog’s approach to the training process. I don’t suppose a dog has to enjoy a training session in order to learn, but remember what we established early on: “There is no substitute for a genuine interest in what one is doing.”
So we must maintain an enthusiasm for the process. We can do this by adding new elements, or new commands interlaced with the familiar ones. We can combine commands into patterns of behavior that can be performed on cue. We can work in new environments. There are all sorts of things that we can do to keep dog’s interest. Treats will not keep the dog’s interest, and neither will incessant corrections. These things might get his attention but not his interest. There is a difference.
Training is a conversation, not a lecture. It involves a form of listening as well as speaking. When handling a dog we must speak with our whole body, not just our mouth. We must recognize that the dog is speaking to us with his entire body. By paying attention to what we are doing, and what the dog is doing, we will begin to pick up on his signals and recognize how our signals affect him. This ability will aid us in all interactions, not merely the moments of training. Relationships are built on trust. Trust is built on communication. Without real communication we have no real trust. Without real trust, we have no real relationship.
Our relationship exists outside of, as well as within, the training sessions. While our communication may be more methodical during formal training sessions, our relationship should not change between formal sessions and mundane interaction. Whatever strides we make during formal sessions should carry over into all aspects of daily life. Likewise, progress made during daily interactions should directly affect our training sessions.
Early on, I suggested that rewards and consequences were merely symbols communicating something more vital to the dog. I said that they were indicators of the state of the ongoing relationship. Any time we train, we emphasize and amplify at least one of those basic drives. As trainers we must determine which drive will produce the best long-term results. For my money, the clear answer is pack drive.
In the weeks, and years to come, as you approach your dog for
I want you always be thinking in these terms: “Am I
and leadership or am I tearing it down?”
I would like to thank Roger Hild for inspiring this article. He provided the quotes from Alphie Kohn that prompted me to solidify the things that had been kicking around in my head for some time. All Kohn quotations are the fruit of Roger’s research, he was gracious enough to allow me to benefit from his hard work and for that I am very grateful.
I would also like to thank Maryna Ozuna for her invaluable help and encouragement in creating this document.
© Copyright Chad Mackin 2004. All rights reserved.