Q
of the week
|
Last updated April 11, 2004 Effective
Time-Outs Give
us your comments!
First
to answer - KIM
!!!!! (like SECONDS after it was posted!) I have used them and suggested them to others and have had success. Clients at work have reported they work. I can understand where the e-post is coming from too, but if you have a situation that the owner is getting more and more frustrated/angery, that owner is more likely to explode and yell or whatever at the dog. If the owner has the tool of a time out and can put the dog in the area swiftly and quietly, wouldnt that be a "lesser" reward. Much less interaction and then absence of the "reward" vs. loud explosion/in your face reaction to the dog. Make sense? I think it may be a case of the lesser of two evils. And hot on her heels, Lisaaaaaaa!!! Depends on the dog and the execution of the time out. Timeouts must be IMMEDIATE and carried out with ZERO talking, emotion and other fanfare. It takes a good pack leader to successfully execute a timeout. If the owner is chattering, warning, dragging and over-using, it becomes reinforcing. And Dana!! The definitive word here is Effective. For a timeout to be effective as negative punishment it must be delivered quickly with as little interaction from the owner as possible. No scolding, no excessive verbalizations or handling; just a quick scoop and bam! In a crate. Out the door. Whatever the pre-determined timeout is. Beaver's remark that " it may take too long for the dog to connect the behaviour with the punishment" ... huh! Howard can figure this out lady! ' I jumped on the cat and now I'm in the crate... ' Pretty clear what caused it. Again 'effective' timeout. Perhaps she meant "for a beginning dog owner, decreasing a behaviour might best be accomplished by ignoring the bad behaviour, or giving the dog a good eye-contact scowl may be easier than attempting a timeout". (P.S. Bonnie: You can't ignore a behaviour and give eye contact.) Dana ( I'm not an expert and I don't play one on TV ) Byrnes And
Diane !! Agree-----that if there's a time lag between the offensive behavior and the time out the dog may certainly not put them together as cause and result. If not caught in the act, or if lots of fussing occur before the dog is put in time out there's less chance of the dog seeing the connection. Even if the human thinks of the fussing as correction, like "Buddy I told you not to get in the garbage again......that's the 3rd time this week you've done that.........get outta there you bad dog" it's still not a direct connection. Disagree-------If, however, Buddy is caught in the act or raiding the garbage, and the owner immediately corrects, giving a leave it command, puts him in time out, and this is done routinely, Buddy may connect the two. Teach a leave it, manage the situation so Buddy can't get to the garbage in the first place, etc. Sometimes a time out for a level of activity that is out of control is a helpful thing to do, although I don't think time outs will prevent future bursts of over the top activity. In most cases I think there are better ways for the dog to learn than the time out. They don't cite a specific behavior in the quote. And definitely there are times when ignoring and eye contact speak louder to the dog than a time out. A time out for the dog is a good idea if the human is on the edge and would do something MORE destructive if they corrected the dog in another way. Perhaps it's the humans who need the time out after all! Thank you Cathy, for sharing this post! My
reply: I think the degree of effectiveness of a time-out (or chance that it might even be rewarding) depends on how much the dog values the interaction he is being removed from, how the owner executes it, and what the dog gets out of the time-out. For an aloof dog who is just as happy to be away from his owner (or even finds his owner annoying), or a dog who really wanted "out" and got put "out", or a starved for attention dog who'd settle for ANY attention (even a kick in the head), any owner response could be rewarding instead of punishing. For most normally-bonded dogs, being with the owner is something they would suffer losing. For a Golden Retriever or a Doberman who lives and breathes for proximity, a time-out can be torture. (Putting Basil in a 5 second other side of a door time-out would be as stressful as it would be punishing.) If the activity they were enjoying so much that it got out of hand is a valuable commodity and abruptly losing the privilege of playing would be punishing, a time-out will be meaningful. As far as "connecting" the behavior to the punishment, I think that is a function of the importance of using a no-reward mark at the instant the infraction occurs and then being able to put the dog *instantly* into time-out with the least possible amount of fanfare or interaction. Let's face it, one lap around the dining room table and you've reinforced, not punished, the behavior. Can dogs connect a time-out with an infraction? It is my own personal experience with many many adolescent dogs of my own and dogs we've dog-sat (Dobermans, Goldens and a particularly rowdy Boxer in particular) that when the connection is made between 'exceeding the speed limit' and the resulting (immediate, no fanfare) time-out, many dogs will put themselves in time-out without being told (in order to get their act together?) when they feel themselves spiraling up. Hence, I KNOW it works when done effectively. Ignoring. I think in many cases ignoring IS the best answer - although there are behaviors and situations where it's not practical (you're trying to talk on the phone and he won't shut up) or might be the wrong choice. Sometimes a time-out isn't used as punishment, but to give the dog a chance to unwind and get his adrenalin back in order, or to help teach him how to settle when he's spiraling up, or give the owner a chance to regain his patience. [Hooray for Kim and Diane for noting this in their answers!] Sometimes we just need a break from our rowdy adolescents! How many times have you seen students give you a complete "you've got to be kidding" look when they ask "what do I do when ..." and you suggest doing nothing? Most students just can't "not" react without really understanding how and why ignoring works and what extinction is. It's hard for them to grasp that ignoring IS doing SOMETHING. Our job as instructors isn't just to spout out quick fixes, but to teach our students how to evaluate the situation so they can make the most effective decision of if, what, and how, to respond. When to ignore: 1. When the dog is performing the undesireable behavior specifically to GET noticed and acknowledging it AT ALL could reinforce it. (Barking for attention, pestering, pushing a toy at you, parading a 'safe' stolen item just to get you to take it away, jumping up.) 2. When it's an extinction burst. When NOT to ignore: 1.
When the behavior the dog is engaging in is self-reinforcing. And what about that eye contact? An icy cold stare can be amazingly effective. IF you can get the human to close their mouth and stop breathing and just FREEZE when they give the ice queen 'don't even think about it' stare. For the student who "gets it" it can be very effective. (Most keep yapping and spoil the effect!) The big picture. The most important part is to teach and reinforce an alternative or incompatible behavior. Catch the dog doing something good. Reinforce what you'd LIKE to see. The pet owner must determine - what am I reinforcing and what am I punishing? Is the behavior increasing or decreasing? If the undesireable behavior is getting stronger, it is being reinforced, no matter what they THINK they are doing. If the undesireable behavior is decreasing, then they are accomplishing their goal of extinguishing it with a time-out or ignore. The pet owner must always ask, "what is driving this behavior, and am I making sure the dog is learning a better alternative to get what he needs?"
|
