When I haven’t been at Simba this summer, I have been spending a lot of my time trying to learn as much as possible about different philosophies of dog training and then comparing them to decide which I like best. There are obviously a lot of ways in which the different schools of thought diverge and overlap, but one of the most divisive and interesting topics for me is the “No” debate.
First, there is the issue of whether or not you feel that corrections should be a part of dog training at all. This is the question that divides the more traditional school of positive reinforcement trainers (in which bad behavior is ignored and good behavior rewarded) and the more recent wave of pack leader-style training. Within this second group however, there are various subgroups of trainers who disagree completely on which physical and verbal corrections are appropriate and which are not.
My dog Zeus and I are currently enrolled in the Basic Obedience class at the Humane Society of Boulder Valley where the basic philosophy is to use only praise and treats to elicit proper behavior in dogs, never using leash corrections and especially not the word “No.” In contrast, when the two of us attended a session with Tenderfoot Training last year Doug Simpson taught me that in addition to rewarding good behavior with verbal and physical praise, it is also important to correct bad behavior with appropriate physical and verbal reprimands, sometimes including the word “No.” I learned a similar philosophy from the Monks of New Skete’s book How to be Your Dog’s Best Friend, but in Cesar Millan’s Cesar’s Way, he insists that the only verbal correction should be the short, quick “tsst” sound that has practically become his trademark.
At first I was a bit overwhelmed by all of these contrasting viewpoints, as I’m sure many dog owners are, and I wasn’t sure who to believe. Unlike most dog owners, however, I have the good fortune to work in a place that exposes me to an extremely wide variety of dogs and behaviors, as well as myriad opportunities to help steer confused pups in the right direction and a great group of coworker-friends with whom to discuss problems and breakthroughs. Together, all of these influences have helped me to form my own somewhat educated opinion on the use of the word “No,” which I humbly submit for your consideration here:
(Please bear in mind that the learning process is never over and that my opinion may change in the future.)
First, I must admit that while I do think that positive reinforcement is a very effective tool in teaching and training dogs, I do not think it is in the best interest of the dog, the handler, or the relationship between the two to ignore bad behavior when it surfaces. My work at Simba Ranch alone has taught me that effective leadership of a pack of dogs must include the identification and correction of certain unwanted behaviors, such as dominance or possessiveness. If ignored these behaviors will inevitably escalate and jeopardize the safety and tranquility of the entire pack.
Second, I have learned that regardless of the word or sound that we choose to reprimand our dogs, it is important not to overuse it, or they will simply learn to tune it out. Since “No” is such a natural response when we witness bad behavior, it is also one of the easiest reprimands to overuse, but substituting some other word or sound and using it just as often isn’t any better.
The best methods to express displeasure with a dog’s actions without being abusive or repetitive that I have discovered so far are the ones described by Tenderfoot Training and The Monks of New Skete. Both of these philosophies use a variety of words and sounds (”No,” “uh uh,” “quit,” “off,” “leave it,” “tsst,” whistles, hand claps, etc.) which are each associated with a specific unwanted behavior. Rather than saying “No” in every instance, it pays to say “Out” (of the kitchen), “Off” (of the furniture), and “Quit” (barking), for example. Rather than resulting in a negative exchange between the owner and dog in which an unwanted behavior is simply stifled, this type of communication engages the dog and creates the possibility for a positive interaction by asking them to perform some other behavior.
-Patrick
