WHY ELECTRIC SHOCK IS NOT BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION
Journal of Veterinary Behavior Vol3, Issue 4, P171-175 (2007) Editoriall
by Karen L. Overall, Philadelphia, PA
.These conclusions give lie to the assertions that "taps" are "imperceptible" and "tickle" human beings (Goldberg, online), and that when fitted with electronic collars people are surprised that they feel so little. In short, if the 1/1000 of a second "tap" (no information on how such data were acquired or validated) only generates a reaction so subtle that a dog might only look at you or flick his ear (Goldberg, online), why are we not using a clicker or a voice to get that response? If the "stimulus" is just to get attention (Courtney, 2005; , 2004, online; Hassen, n.d.), this becomes all about timing and getting the dog's attention. Do we really need an electric collar or shock to do that? If so, we have likely overridden many of the dog's normal responses. In such cases the obvious conclusion is that these dogs would have responded and will respond to clear signaling and humane training designed to provide them with a clear, contextual set of instructions...
ELECTRONIC TRAINING DEVICES: DISCUSSION ON THE PROS AND CONS OF THEIR USE IN DOGS AS A BASIS FOR THE POSITION STATEMENT OF THE EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF VETERINARY CLINICAL ETHOLOGY
Sylvia Masson et al. - Journal of Veterinary Behavior, Volume 25 June 2018
In recent years, the affirmation of a greater ethical sense and research generating a better knowledge of the mechanisms of animal learning, evidence of the existence of an animal mind, and studies on the dog-human attachment bond have led to changes in the dog-human relationship. These changes have caused a notable improvement in dog training techniques. Increased emphasis on dog welfare, overall, led to questioning of many training techniques and tools that used aversive means. Recent research on the use of aversive training devices has been performed and, on this basis, it has been possible to create guidelines to inform the public about utility and the possible detriments related to the use of these devices as a tool in dog training. The European Society of Clinical Animal Ethology has released a public position statement based on the current scientific information available on e-collars, punitive training techniques, and canine welfare. This study elaborates and discusses the arguments “pro and contra the use of e-collars and aversive training methods” leading to the statement in more detail. As a conclusion, European Society of Clinical Animal Ethology strongly opposes the use of e-collars in dog training and urges all European countries to take an interest in and position on this welfare matter.
BARRIERS TO THE ADOPTION OF HUMANE DOG TRAINING METHODS
Zazie Todd, Companion Animal Psychology, Journal of Veterinary Behavior, June 2018 Vol. 25
The use of aversive dog training methods is associated with risks to animal welfare, yet most dog owners continue to use positive punishment and negative reinforcement at least some of the time. This study reviews the barriers to the adoption of humane dog training methods by the general public. Lack of knowledge of the welfare risks, the poor quality of much information available to dog owners (should they seek it out), lack of regulation of dog trainers, and theoretical and practical knowledge of dog training will all affect people's choice of method. The differing positions of animal behavior and veterinary organizations and dog trainers may contribute to the idea that there is a lack of consensus on appropriate methods. The reasoned action approach, which is one of the most extensively tested models in health promotion and psychology, is a promising way of understanding people's intentions and likelihood of using humane dog training methods. Suggestions for future research include developing an understanding of how perceived social norms link to dog training behavior and the best ways to teach humane dog training methods.
THE WELFARE CONSEQUENCES AND EFFICACY OF TRAINING PET DOGS WITH REMOTE ELECTRONIC TRAINING COLLARS IN COMPARISON TO REWARD BASED TRAINING
J. J. Cooper, N. Cracknell, J. Hardiman, H. Wright, D. Mills, PLOS ONE 9(9), October 2014
These findings suggest that there is no consistent benefit to be gained from e-collar training but greater welfare concerns compared with positive reward based training.
A REVIEW OF RECENT EVIDENCE IN RELATION TO THE WELFARE IMPLICATIONS FOR CATS AND DOGS ARISING FROM THE USE OF ELECTRONIC COLLARS
Ruth Lysons, MA MSc VetMB MRCVS, Nick Coulson, MA MBA PhD VetMB MRCVS 16 November 2015
...Dr Lysons concluded …" that the animal welfare cost is likely to exceed the benefits from use of electronic collars as training devices, since they may cause pain, effective alternatives exist, and the scope for misuse or abuse is too great."...
CONSIDERATIONS FOR SHOCK AND 'TRAINING' COLLARS: CONCERNS FROM AND FOR THE WORKING DOG COMMUNITY
Karen Overall, Journal of Veterinary Behavior 2007
"Absolutely, without exception, I oppose, will not recommend, and generally spend large amounts of time telling people why I oppose the use of shock collars, prong collars, choke collars, and any other type of device that is rooted in an adversarial, confrontational interaction with the dog..."
STUDIES TO ASSESS THE EFFECT OF PET TRAINING AIDS, SPECIFICALLY REMOTE STATIC PULSE SYSTEMS ON THE WELFARE OF DOMESTIC DOGS; FIELD STUDY OF DOGS IN TRAINING
UK Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
"The project had a single aim, namely to assess the impact of use of remote static pulse electric training aids (e- collars) during the training of dogs in comparison to dogs referred for similar behavioural problems but without e- collar training.”
TRAINING DOGS WITH HELP OF THE SHOCK COLLAR: SHORT AND LONG TERM BEHAVIOURAL EFFECTS
Matthijs B.H. Schilder a,b,∗, Joanne A.M. van der Borg a
Department of Clinical Sciences of Companion Animals, Department of Ethology and Socio-Ecology, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. October 23, 2003
We concluded that shocks received during training are not only unpleasant but also painful and frightening. Furthermore, we found that shocked dogs are more stressful on the training grounds than controls, but also in a park. This implies, that whenever the handler is around, the dog seems to expect an aversive event to occur. A second unwanted association might be that the dogs have learned to associate a specific command with getting a shock. Apart from the acute pain and fear, these expectations may influence the dog’s well being in the long term in a negative way. To counter misuse of the shock collar, it is proposed to ban its use for “sports”, but save it for therapeutic applications, such as for suppressing hunting and killing sheep. The effects we found occurred in spite of the fact that control dogs also underwent fairly harsh training regimes. Trainers and handlers should study learning theory far better and review the structure of the training in order to teach the let go command in an earlier phase and to reduce the number of mistakes. They should incorporate more rewards during exercises. Also, less temperamental and less forceful dogs should be bred. This also would decrease the chance that dogs make mistakes for which they could receive punishment.
"QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY ON THE USE OF DIFFERENT E-COLLAR TYPES IN FRANCE IN EVERYDAY LIFE WITH A VIEW TO PROVIDING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POSSIBLE FUTURE REGULATIONS"
Sylvia Masson, Isabelle Nigron, Emmanuel Gaultier, Journal of Veterinary Behaviour Volume 26 48-60, May 2018
"...In conclusion, this survey highlights a high ratio of e-collar use in a country without regulations. It also shows that real-life conditions are far from the idealized conditions in which experimental studies were undertaken, thereby putting dog welfare at higher risk than what is presented in scientific literature. In addition, this study reveals differences between collar types in terms of efficacy and effects on welfare. These factors should be taken into account to determine a precise regulation. Furthermore, this study shows the urgency to regulate this tool in Europe because dangers of use, which were already known, are proven to be aggravated in real-life situations..."
CHARACTERISTICS OF ELECTRONIC TRAINING COLLARS FOR DOGS
J. A. Lines, K. van Driel, J. J. Cooper, January 2013, Animal Behaviour Cognition and Welfare Group, School of Life Sciences, University of Lincoln, UK
A wide range of electronic dog training collars (e-collars) is available in the UK, but information enabling purchasers to compare the important characteristics of these collars is not available. In this research, the electrical characteristics of 13 e-collar models were examined, and an approach to ranking the strength of the electrical stimuli was developed...’
"CAN AGGRESSION IN DOGS BE ELICITED THROUGH THE USE OF ELECTRONIC PET CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS?"
Dr. Richard Polsky, Ph.D., Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science Vol. 3 2000 No. 4, June 2010
Five cases are described that involve severe attacks on humans by dogs who were being trained or maintained on an electronic pet containment system. The system is designed to boundary train a dog through the use of electric shock in an escape-avoidance conditioning paradigm. Data were collected from legal documents filed in personal injury lawsuits. Analysis of the findings show that all dogs lacked a marked history of aggressive responding, all were adult males, and most were reproductively intact. All attacks happened near the boundary of the property. In every case, the system was operational at the time of attack. Moreover, in most cases, the dog received shock. Findings lend themselves to possible interpretation in terms of unconditioned aggression as a result of a dog having received electronic shock and avoidance-motivated aggression mediated through fear reduction toward human stimuli. For full commentary and study click Electronic Pet Containment Systems.
THE USE OF SHOCK COLLARS AND THEIR IMPACT ON THE WELFARE OF DOGS.
A review of the current literature Dr Emily Blackwell BSc PhD CCAB and Dr Rachel Casey BVMS PhD, Department of Clinical Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, 2006
There is little doubt that high intensity electrical stimulation causes a physiological stress response in dogs (Schalke, 2005). Application of initial high intensity shocks has also been found to elicit behavioural responses associated with fear and distress in the dog, including yelping, struggling, biting, freezing, withdrawal, hiding, running to the owner, cowering, trembling, defecation and urination (Tortora, 1982a). Whilst the stress response is a normal/adaptive physiological response that allows an animal to cope with changes in its environment, this can be detrimental where the animal cannot predict and control the situation, for example if the dog being trained is unable to learn how to avoid the shock. Where cortisol levels in dogs exposed to predictable/unpredictable and controllable/uncontrollable exposure to shocks have been measured, they have shown an increased cortisol response in dogs that were unable to avoid the shock (Dess et al, 1983)
The author states, “Aversive tools such as electric stimulation (shock), prong, or training (choke) collars that require pulling and jerking to work, hitting and scolding can increase anxiety and therefore increase the risk of biting; in addition, they are likely to lead to treatment failure” purchase
In a new, year-long University of Pennsylvania survey of dog owners who use confrontational or aversive methods to train aggressive pets, veterinary researchers have found that most of these animals will continue to be aggressive unless training techniques are modified.
TRAINING METHODS IN DOGS: WELFARE IMPLICATIONS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES
Rachel Casey1, BVMS, PhD, DECAWBM, CCAB, MRCVS, World Small Animal Veterinary, Association World Congress Proceedings, School of Clinical Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol, UK, 2015
'Accurately determining the underlying motivation for a behaviour requires specialist expertise, as does assessing the risk that an aversive experience might actually increase the severity of a problem behaviour or induce new ones. Because of the serious risks of using punishment-based techniques, even when applied 'accurately,' most professional behavioural clinicians very rarely advocate the use of any punishment-based training techniques in the modification of dog behaviour. As owners, trainers or clinical behaviourists, we all share a responsibility to the welfare of our dogs to use the least aversive methods available to us to change our dog's behaviour without the need for pain or fear.'
CLINICAL SIGNS CAUSED BY THE USE OF ELECTRIC TRAINING COLLARS ON DOGS IN EVERYDAY LIFE SITUATIONS
E. Schalke,, J. Stichnoth, S. Ott, R. Jones-Baade, Department of Animal Welfare and Behaviour, Veterinary School of Hannover, Germany, 2007
The results of this study suggest that poor timing in the application of high level electric pulses, such as those used in this study, means there is a high risk that dogs will show severe and persistent stress symptoms.
We recommend that the use of these devices should be restricted with proof of theoretical and practical qualification required and then the use of these devices should only be allowed in strictly specified situations.
WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS OF USING TRAINING TECHNIQUES WHICH INDUCE FEAR OR PAIN IN DOGS?
Article from Welfare in Dog Training
Accurately determining the underlying motivation for a behaviour requires specialist expertise, as does assessing the risk that an aversive experience might actually increase the severity of a problem behaviour or induce new ones. Because of the serious risks of using punishment based techniques, even when applied ‘accurately’, most professional behavioural clinicians very rarely advocate the use of any punishment based training techniques in the modification of dog behaviour. As owners, trainers or clinical behaviourists, we all share a responsibility to the welfare our dogs to use the least aversive methods available to us to change our dog’s behaviour without the need for pain or fear.
Our results demonstrate through direct evidence from real life situations, that the reward-focused training was, indeed, more efficient than methods which included potentially aversive stimuli such as electric stimuli or excessive lead pressure. Whilst our results may reflect general differences in training style of the trainer groups involved in the study rather than use of E-collar per se, we would argue that because the trainers who used E-collars were put forward by industry representatives as exemplars of best practice; their data (at least in relation to E-collar use) should be taken to represent a best case scenario for professional E-collar training. It is likely that less experienced trainers and owners would be less skilled and thus less effective in their use of the device