|
Post by 2 bays & a grey:D on Dec 30, 2010 9:48:44 GMT 1
i am finding this thread very interesting as I have started target training (something I learned with LizP & Sarah Weston) & I have found it very useful in doing carrot stretches, she touches the target encouraging her to stretch, she then gets a click, she is then asked to turn her head away & then she gets the treat. It has been fab as I have always been mugged & nearly lost fingers!!!! It has taught her not to mug & be polite around food. I have just ordered Alex Kurlands book, however, I am now concerned as in her book is the 'pose', which some of you are suggesting is wrong . I thought it was great as it teaches the horse to self carriage without the additional weight & confusion of the rider, what am I missing here ? I am hoping to extend my clicker training to my school work as I think Nancy would really benefit & start to find her work 'rewarding', but as I said I am very new & very naive about CT, hence why I am waiting to hear back from a reputable trainer . I do agree about the ear thing as has been said their ears are used to express themselves, which is very important for us to enable us to assess their emotions & mood.
|
|
|
Post by Yann on Dec 30, 2010 11:41:34 GMT 1
I think as in all things you need to consider other people's opinions, but also do your own research and come to your own conclusions. Few things are totally right or wrong, not until people get hold of them anyway If it's the same book I started with a few years back then it's as good a place as any to get you going. I do personally think anyone who is able to do groundwork and the like successfully with a relatively straightforward horse is probably capable of starting to use the clicker without expert intervention, though that will always help. I think having reasonable timing is the most important thing I've always thought (and obviously so have many others) that clicker is eminently compatible with the IH approach and arguably a logical extension of it, if we all want to use the best and most humane methods that we can. I think it's almost inevitable that it is likely to play a larger and more significant part as time goes on.
|
|
|
Post by ghostrider on Dec 30, 2010 12:26:54 GMT 1
In my opinion/experience (and remember, it’s just my view) what’s good about clicker training? It’s great for building/improving relationships It helps horses find their work rewarding, they become more willing and enthusiastic It helps the owner with timing and builds their confidence It emphasises the importance of breaking things down into small steps and rewarding the try – and that alone is worth its weight in gold. It is helpful with difficult horses when the handler knows what they are doing It gives us different tools to work with – targeting, freeshaping, working without restraint without having taught it through the use of negative reinforcement (ie, I’ll make life hard if you go away, so you had better stick with me) It makes training things like ground tying, standing for mounting, confidence building/spook busting etc very easy (as long as there are no underlying pain/fear issues). What’s it good for: Touch acceptance Leading and ground work exercises Foot care and handling Confidence building/spook busting Loading General husbandry tasks – bathing, injections and so on Standing for tacking and mounting (after ruling out pain and illness) Resolving fear related problems (after ruling out pain and illness) Basically anything that we need to teach our horses to get along in our world is made a lot easier with CT. I think riding would benefit hugely from the inclusion of positive reinforcement – but that does not need to involve, or be paired with a clicker. We can praise and scratch our horses in ways they enjoy, and give them food treats from the saddle without the use of the clicker. Riding becomes a lot nicer for the horse if we do that kind of thing. One problem with ridden work with the clicker is that every time you click the horse will stop – often quite suddenly, imagine it from a trot or canter – not good for the horse - but you can get round that by stopping the horse first and then rewarding the stop. The halt becomes the predictor of the reinforcer, so it is reinforcing in its own right. It also does mean that you get very good brakes. Re: the pose – it is relatively simple to teach horses to trot around with their necks arched and their heads tucked in if you use a clicker. At first glance, it may look OK – but are these horses working properly? Yes, Alex teaches wither lifts and ‘pilates’ for horses – but I don’t see many pictures in her books of horses working in a way that I am comfortable with – her pictures of “excellence” are questionable in my mind, and I would worry about following a programme that had this kind of movement as the end goal. Maybe not all horses who are trained with clicker to this level end up looking like this – but I think that the picture(s) that the person chooses to put on the front of their book, or highlight on their website speaks volumes www.theclickercenter.com/2004/store/book_riding.phpI would love, love people who disagree with what I am saying to point me to some you tube videos that show horses trained by CT and working correctly and happily. I have looked and I can’t find anything. But if someone could show them to me, I would be very happy, and would re-consider everything that I am saying about clicker here. But, cynic that I am, I need to see it with my own eyes – words just won’t be enough – sorry. And I also need to see how much the trainer is relying on negative reinforcement, and how salient the clicker is in the whole process – ie, it really is being used to mark and reward specific movements, not just used as positive reinforcement, which could be done equally well without the clicker. So, to my mind, CT is absolutely fine (and probably the best approach) for teaching horses everything they need to live in our world, be “happy hackers”, (although I would use +R without the clicker for the ridden stuff) or indeed doing horse agility, or some of the exercises needed for trec and so on – but if you have aspirations to take it into ‘correct’ ridden work, I think with CT you need to tread with caution. When we start interfering with how horses move and carry themselves I think we have to be very careful, and very sure and clear that we know what we are doing. The clicker is a powerful training tool, its effectiveness should not be underestimated, and it is very precise. You get what you click for – I see plenty of ‘dressage’ riders who have clearly focussed on pulling the horse’s front end in to the detriment of what is going on in the rest of the horse’s body – it’s very easy to ‘pull the front end in’ with a clicker (no pressure needed) and the horse may look ‘pretty’ and feel very ‘light’ but the horse may still not be working through correctly, and you may end up with a backward thinking horse, focussed on a treat, and with stilted motion which does his body no good at all which is surely the very opposite of what we really want in our horses? I suppose the saving grace to all of this is that there are plenty of horses out there already working incorrectly (using “strap you mouth shut nosebands” and all the rest of it) and at least the CT’d horses wouldn’t need those kind of gadgets, and would be getting treats for their troubles … but I’m afraid it’s not enough of a saving grace for me. I’m not wanting to ‘knock’ Alex K – I think she has been a great pioneer for CT with horses, she holds clinics every year in this country which I have been to myself and learnt a lot from, and I know a lot of people appreciate her work, and there is no doubt that there is a lot of good and sensible stuff in her books and for anyone starting out in clicker they are required reading – there is an absolute black hole out there when it comes to decent material on clicker training horses – Ben Hart’s book is another I would recommend – although he does use the clicker differently to AK and it is worth bearing that in mind not to confuse yourself – all I would say is, as with all approaches to training, do not just read the words, or listen to what someone is saying, but look very, very carefully at the pictures and see if you think the horse is saying the same thing. At the end of the day, Bronte and Nancy, remember, we've just got our own opinions based on our experience and coloured by the way we see the world. Enjoy your clicker training - and I'm sure your horse will - but my advice would be not to start teaching poses and the like until you've had a good read of the book, looked at the pictures and can see where it is all going. Even without the 'pose' you will still learn loads and have lots of fun. Good luck.
|
|
|
Post by mandal on Dec 30, 2010 14:25:46 GMT 1
Re using CT for training 'moves' and posture, can you reward effort rather than a shape/position? Does that make sense? Just wondering how to avoid rewarding unnatural carriage and shape. A sound knowledge of what you are trying to encourage I would imagine is paramount here as well as good CT skills. Tbh I didn't really notice the poses or look at teaching them I was after the basics and concentrated on that, mostly the target training. Since then I've had a blip in reading. Not something I know about so just thinking around the subject as I have in my other posts Bronte & Nancy. Tbh I found Alex K's book the simplest and easiest to understand for the basics but I'm sure for experienced peeps there are 'bones of contention' no two Trainers see eye to eye 100% surely. mta. oh, and for book covers I was recently amused by this one after some discussions. www.amazon.co.uk/Equid-Ethogram-Sue-McDonnell/dp/1581500904/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1293716725&sr=1-1-fkmr0
|
|
|
Post by ghostrider on Dec 30, 2010 15:20:57 GMT 1
If you use treats you can end up (like someone I know) who has a horse that will do ANYTHING for the clicker because it equals the possibility of food. But he won't do anything for her. No clicker, no treat, no co-operation.
unfortunately that's a problem with the person's training - not the method itself. The clicker is a tool to teach a behaviour. When the behaviour is learnt, the clicker is faded (used less and less and then not at all) and just praise and scratches used with the occasional food treat for doing the required behaviour. The clicker is used to teach new behaviours, not used continually.
If you use praise (which I do) why not use praise without the clicker? Cut out the middle man?
Because praise alone is frequently not a salient enough reinforcer to maintain the behaviours without relying on significant amounts of negative reinforcement - which is one of the things CT'ers try to avoid/minimise. The clicker is also a very precise marker - usually more precise than verbal praise.
|
|
|
Post by ghostrider on Dec 30, 2010 15:30:24 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by ghostrider on Dec 30, 2010 15:33:31 GMT 1
I can assure you that I do not use negative reinforcement in any way shape or form.
oh, dear, I'm sorry, but I can absolutely promise you that you do - unless you do nothing whatsoever with your horse. Anyone who trains horses uses negative reinforcement - impossible to do so without it :-) (if you don't you've just invented a completely new way of training horses, which you'll have to share with us! :-) )
|
|
|
Post by 2 bays & a grey:D on Dec 30, 2010 15:33:53 GMT 1
Thanks for the response Ghostrider. I found a youtube extract where Alex encouraged the house to lean on its haunches, I understood this to be teaching the horse to use his behind. I am not sure I would use CT for the 'pose', it was just a question I had as I thought it was a good idea, but I agree completely with look at the horse and see how he is feeling. I want to incorporate CT into Nancy's school work to make being in the school pleasurable, as we have had some horrible times in there and she associates the school with pain (she had grade 3 ulcers and i was trying to work her through it, resulting in me ending up on the floor), so what I am wanting to achieve is her acceptance of work and wanting to make it fun for her. I don't reward on every click as I don't want her to expect a treat on every click.
|
|
|
Post by ghostrider on Dec 30, 2010 15:38:20 GMT 1
For example when you lead your horse, ask him to move back or step over, ask him to halt.
It's pressure and release. :-)
|
|
|
Post by ghostrider on Dec 30, 2010 15:42:06 GMT 1
Thanks for the response Ghostrider. I found a youtube extract where Alex encouraged the house to lean on its haunches, I understood this to be teaching the horse to use his behind. I am not sure I would use CT for the 'pose', it was just a question I had as I thought it was a good idea, but I agree completely with look at the horse and see how he is feeling. I want to incorporate CT into Nancy's school work to make being in the school pleasurable, as we have had some horrible times in there and she associates the school with pain (she had grade 3 ulcers and i was trying to work her through it, resulting in me ending up on the floor), so what I am wanting to achieve is her acceptance of work and wanting to make it fun for her. I don't reward on every click as I don't want her to expect a treat on every click. Yes, make it fun and take it slow - lots of stuff not necessarily connected with her having to work her body hard to begin with I would say. Good luck! I don't reward on every click as I don't want her to expect a treat on every clickDo you use Ben's method then?
|
|
|
Post by 2 bays & a grey:D on Dec 30, 2010 15:47:17 GMT 1
I didn't know Ben Hart used that method, it was what I wanted to do, hadn't read it anywhere, not knowing much about clicker I thought it may have been the norm
|
|
|
Post by ghostrider on Dec 30, 2010 15:55:22 GMT 1
the 'norm' is one click = one treat - but people do adapt it.
Ben uses multiple clicks as a "bridge" - so say you want your horse to walk over and touch a target, you'll keep clicking until the horse touches the target - then put your hand in the bumbag for a treat. That's the "terminal" or 'end of behaviour' signal - it tells the horse she's done the right thing, and the treat is on it's way. The drawback (to my way of thinking) is that you may get a horse keeping an eye on your hand to see when it moves (and lots of people move their hand before they finish clicking - so it can be a bit confusing) - but it obviously works well enough for him and lots of others so its horses for courses.
the general rule, as I say is one click, one treat, with the click saying "yes, that was right, treat on it's way" - and then gradually fade the clicker and treat less. I think it minimises confusion for the horse - but if you are doing OK on treating every couple of clicks stick with it for now - when you read Alex's book (if it's the latest one) you'll read her thinking in there on why it should be one click one treat and basically I agree with her - bottom line is she says if it's good enough to click it's good enough to treat!
I'm sure you'll have fun finding out about CT and trying stuff with your horse - so long as she's enjoying it that's the main thing - especially given the awful time she's had with her ulcers, bless her :-)
|
|
breezy
Grand Prix Poster
Posts: 1,065
|
Post by breezy on Dec 30, 2010 16:02:53 GMT 1
negative reinforcement means the removal of something - its not always aversive! It might be better understood if the terms were clearer - reward reinforcement (+R) and removal reinforcement (-R).
Bx
|
|
|
Post by ghostrider on Dec 30, 2010 16:03:19 GMT 1
For example when you lead your horse, ask him to move back or step over, ask him to halt. It's pressure and release. :-) Ok that explains it! Our definition of 'negative reinforcement' differs. I take negative reinforcement to be aversive stimulus to increase certain behavior or response, where 'aversive' means causing avoidance of a thing, situation, or behavior by using an unpleasant or punishing stimulus. I certainly don't do anything that my horses give any indications to myself or anyone else that it is unpleasant or punishing for them. In fact I'm usually accused of quite the opposite. I strongly disbelieve in the 'wrong thing hard right thing easy' mindset. I wouldn't rank my horse stopping next to me, or walking with me as negative reinforcement and I've taught a fair few youngsters to lead. I take negative reinforcement to be aversive stimulus to increase certain behavior or response, where 'aversive' means causing avoidance of a thing, situation, or behavior by using an unpleasant or punishing stimulus.yes, that's near enough. When teaching a horse to lead, most people apply pressure (may be very light pressure) to the rope, and release the pressure when the horse moves or stops according to what they want. The horse learns to avoid the pressure by producing the required behaviour - thus stopping/halting behaviour (for example) increases when pressure is applied to the line. It doesn't have to be 'harsh' or 'painful' - it can be relatively light - but it must be signifcant/aversive enough to cause a change in behaviour. For example, if I rested my hand on your shoulder it may be fine to begin with but eventually you would shrug your shoulder or shift your weight to remove my hand - just the pressure of my hand on your shoulder would be aversive enough to create a behaviour change in you to remove it. That's all negative reinforcement is - although judging by some threads on forums in the past it is the work of the devil!! On the other hand, heavy negative reinforcement, which moves into the realms of positive punishment is, of course, much more unpleasant, and worth avoiding if at all possible.
|
|
|
Post by twilight on Dec 30, 2010 16:09:20 GMT 1
I'm new here but I would just like to say what a joy it has been reading this thread.Best discussion and explanation of stuff Iv'e heard in long time.Thankyou .
|
|