SplishSplashCrash
01-29-2008, 09:53 PM
This was just released:
AVSAB's position is that punishment1 (e.g. choke chains, pinch collars, and electronic collars) should not be used as a first-line or early-use treatment for behavior problems. This is due to the potential adverse effects which include but are not limited to: inhibition of learning, increased fear-related and aggressive behaviors, and injury to animals and people interacting with animals.2 AVSAB recommends that training should focus on reinforcing desired behaviors, removing the reinforcer for inappropriate behaviors, and addressing
the emotional state and environmental conditions driving the undesirable behavior. This approach promotes a better understanding of the pet's behavior and better awareness of how humans may have inadvertently contributed
to the development of the undesirable behavior. Punishment should only be used when the above approach has failed despite an adequate effort as part of a larger training or behavior modification program that incorporates
reinforcement of appropriate behaviors and works to change the underlying cause of the problem behavior. AVSAB recognizes that both positive reinforcement
and punishment require significant skill, effort, and awareness on the owner's part. Both must be applied as the animal is performing the target behavior or within one second of the behavior to be most effective. Additionally,
both work best when applied every time the behavior occurs so that the animal is not inadvertently rewarded for undesirable behavior during the modification process. If punishment is added to a modification plan, it should only be used if the owner has first demonstrated
reasonable ability and consistency at rewarding appropriate behaviors and removing the reward for bad behavior. If punishment is suggested as part of a complete behavior modification
plan, owners should not begin using it until they have ensured that the person helping them is able to articulate the major adverse effects of punishment, judge when these effects are occurring over the short term and long term, and can explain how they will reverse the adverse effects if they occur.1For the scientific definition of punishment refer to p. 2 of Guidelines on the Use of Punishment for Dealing with Behavior Problems in Animals2 Refer to Adverse Effects of Punishment on
p. 3 of Guidelines on the Use of Punishment for Dealing with Behavior Problems in Animals
Punishment, or the use of aversives, force, coercion, or physical corrections in order to change an animal's behavior (For actual scientific terminology, refer to p. xxx: Definition), is commonly used by the general pet owner and by many dog trainers. Some punishments are seemingly innocuous, such as squirting a cat with water when it jumps on a counter or shouting "no" when your pet misbehaves. Other punishments, such as jerking a choke chain or pinch collar to stop a dog from pulling, throwing a dog down on its back in an alpha roll when it nips, tightening a collar around a dog's neck and cutting off its air supply until it submits, or using an electronic collar to stop a dog from barking are more severe.
Punishment is frequently a first-line or an early-use tool by both the general public and traditional dog trainers. While punishment can be very effective in some specific contexts depending on the individual animal, it can be associated with many serious adverse effects. (Refer to p. xx: Adverse Effects of Punishment). These adverse effects can put the safety of the pet and the person administering the punishment at risk. Because of these safety risks, people recommending these techniques are taking a liability risk. Thus, just as anti-cancer drugs can be highly effective in treating specific diseases in individuals but can cause serious side-effects in those same individuals or when used inappropriately, punishment is fraught with difficulties.
The adverse effects of punishment and the difficulties in administering punishment effectively have been well documented,1 especially in the early 1960s when such experiments were still allowed. For instance, if the punishment is not strong enough, the animal may habituate or get used to it, so that the owner needs to escalate the intensity.2,3 On the other hand, when the punishment is more intense, it can cause physical injury. For instance, electronic anti-bark collars can cause burn marks on dogs. Choke chains can damage the trachea, increase intraocular pressure in dogs thus potentially worsening or contributing to glaucoma in susceptible breeds,4 cause sudden collapse from non-cardiogenic pulmonary edema (water in the lungs) due to temporary upper airway obstruction, and cause nerve damage. 5 The risk of damage is greater when the choke chain sits high on the dog's neck.
Even when punishment seems mild, in order to be effective it often must elicit a strong fear response, and in such cases, the fear response can generalize to things that sound or look similar to the punishment. Punishment has also been shown to elicit aggressive behavior in many species of animals.6 Thus, using punishment can put the person administering it or any person near the animal at risk of being bitten or attacked.
Punishment can suppress aggressive and fearful behavior when used effectively, but it may not change the underlying cause of the behavior. For instance, if the animal behaves aggressively due to fear, then the use of force to stop the fearful reactions will make the animal more fearful while at the same time suppressing or masking the outward signs of fear; (e.g., a threat display/growling). As a result, if the animal faces a situation where it is extremely fearful, it may suddenly act with heightened aggression and with fewer warning signs. In other words, it may now attack more aggressively or with no warning, making it much more dangerous.
Perhaps one of the most compelling reasons to use punishment sparingly is that punishment fails to address the fact that the bad behavior is occurring because it has somehow been reinforced—either intentionally or unintentionally. That is, owners tend to punish bad behaviors some of the time while inadvertently rewarding these same behaviors at other times. In this way, they accidentally set their pets up to receive punishment repeatedly by sometimes unintentionally rewarding the bad behavior, which is how the behavior was learned in the first place. This inconsistency is confusing to the animal and can cause frustration or anxiety. Punishment also fails to tell the animal what it should be performing instead. Without an alternative appropriate behavior the animal may have no option but to perform the undesired behavior. A more appropriate approach to problem solving is to determine what is reinforcing the undesirable behavior, remove that reward, and reinforce an alternate desirable behavior instead. For instance, dogs jump to greet people in order to get their attention. Owners usually provide attention by talking or yelling, pushing them down, or otherwise touching them. A better solution would be to remove attention by standing silently and completely still and then to immediately reward with attention or treats once the dogs sits. This learning-based approach leads to a better understanding of our pets and consequently to a better human-pet relationship.
The standard of care for veterinarians specializing in behavior is that punishment is not to be used as a first-line or early-use treatment for behavior problems. Consequently, the AVSAB urges that veterinarians in general practice follow suit. Additionally punishment should only be used when animal owners are made aware of the possible adverse effects. The Association recommends that owners working with trainers who use punishment as a form of behavior modification in animals choose only those trainers who, without prompting:
..[if !supportLists]-->1) ..[endif]-->Can and do articulate the most serious adverse effects associated with punishment
..[if !supportLists]-->2) ..[endif]-->Are capable of judging when these adverse effects are occurring over the short and/or long term
..[if !supportLists]-->3) ..[endif]-->Can explain how they would attempt to reverse any adverse effects if or when they occur.
References
Hutchinson RR. 1977. By-products of aversive control. In: W.K. Honig and J.E.R. Staddon (Eds.) Handbook of Operant Behavior (pp 415-431). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Azrin NH. 1960. Effects of punishment intensity during variable-interval reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav 3: 123-142.
Azrin NH, Holz WC, Hake DR. 1963. Fixed-ratio punishment. J Exp Anal Behav 6: 141-148.
Pauli AM, Bentley E, Diehl, AK, Miller PE. 2006. Effects of the application of neck pressure by a collar or harness on intraocular pressure in dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 42(3):207-211.
Drobatz KJ. Saunders HM, Pugh CR, Hendricks JC. 1995. Noncardiogenic pulmonary edema in dogs and cats: 26 cases (1987-1993). J Am Vet Med Assoc 206: 1732-1736.
Azrin NH, Rubin HB, Hutchinson RR. 1968 Biting attack by rats in response to aversive shock. J Exp Anal Behav 11: 633-639.
Further Reading
Burch M, Bailey J. 1999. How Dogs Learn. Howell Book House
Reid P. 2007. Learning in Dogs. In: Jensen P (Ed.) The Behavioural Biology of Dogs (pp 120-144). Cambridge, MA: CABI International.
..[if !supportLists]-->3. ..[endif]-->Yin SY. 2004. How to Behave So Your Dog Behaves. Neptune City. TFH Publications.
AVSAB's position is that punishment1 (e.g. choke chains, pinch collars, and electronic collars) should not be used as a first-line or early-use treatment for behavior problems. This is due to the potential adverse effects which include but are not limited to: inhibition of learning, increased fear-related and aggressive behaviors, and injury to animals and people interacting with animals.2 AVSAB recommends that training should focus on reinforcing desired behaviors, removing the reinforcer for inappropriate behaviors, and addressing
the emotional state and environmental conditions driving the undesirable behavior. This approach promotes a better understanding of the pet's behavior and better awareness of how humans may have inadvertently contributed
to the development of the undesirable behavior. Punishment should only be used when the above approach has failed despite an adequate effort as part of a larger training or behavior modification program that incorporates
reinforcement of appropriate behaviors and works to change the underlying cause of the problem behavior. AVSAB recognizes that both positive reinforcement
and punishment require significant skill, effort, and awareness on the owner's part. Both must be applied as the animal is performing the target behavior or within one second of the behavior to be most effective. Additionally,
both work best when applied every time the behavior occurs so that the animal is not inadvertently rewarded for undesirable behavior during the modification process. If punishment is added to a modification plan, it should only be used if the owner has first demonstrated
reasonable ability and consistency at rewarding appropriate behaviors and removing the reward for bad behavior. If punishment is suggested as part of a complete behavior modification
plan, owners should not begin using it until they have ensured that the person helping them is able to articulate the major adverse effects of punishment, judge when these effects are occurring over the short term and long term, and can explain how they will reverse the adverse effects if they occur.1For the scientific definition of punishment refer to p. 2 of Guidelines on the Use of Punishment for Dealing with Behavior Problems in Animals2 Refer to Adverse Effects of Punishment on
p. 3 of Guidelines on the Use of Punishment for Dealing with Behavior Problems in Animals
Punishment, or the use of aversives, force, coercion, or physical corrections in order to change an animal's behavior (For actual scientific terminology, refer to p. xxx: Definition), is commonly used by the general pet owner and by many dog trainers. Some punishments are seemingly innocuous, such as squirting a cat with water when it jumps on a counter or shouting "no" when your pet misbehaves. Other punishments, such as jerking a choke chain or pinch collar to stop a dog from pulling, throwing a dog down on its back in an alpha roll when it nips, tightening a collar around a dog's neck and cutting off its air supply until it submits, or using an electronic collar to stop a dog from barking are more severe.
Punishment is frequently a first-line or an early-use tool by both the general public and traditional dog trainers. While punishment can be very effective in some specific contexts depending on the individual animal, it can be associated with many serious adverse effects. (Refer to p. xx: Adverse Effects of Punishment). These adverse effects can put the safety of the pet and the person administering the punishment at risk. Because of these safety risks, people recommending these techniques are taking a liability risk. Thus, just as anti-cancer drugs can be highly effective in treating specific diseases in individuals but can cause serious side-effects in those same individuals or when used inappropriately, punishment is fraught with difficulties.
The adverse effects of punishment and the difficulties in administering punishment effectively have been well documented,1 especially in the early 1960s when such experiments were still allowed. For instance, if the punishment is not strong enough, the animal may habituate or get used to it, so that the owner needs to escalate the intensity.2,3 On the other hand, when the punishment is more intense, it can cause physical injury. For instance, electronic anti-bark collars can cause burn marks on dogs. Choke chains can damage the trachea, increase intraocular pressure in dogs thus potentially worsening or contributing to glaucoma in susceptible breeds,4 cause sudden collapse from non-cardiogenic pulmonary edema (water in the lungs) due to temporary upper airway obstruction, and cause nerve damage. 5 The risk of damage is greater when the choke chain sits high on the dog's neck.
Even when punishment seems mild, in order to be effective it often must elicit a strong fear response, and in such cases, the fear response can generalize to things that sound or look similar to the punishment. Punishment has also been shown to elicit aggressive behavior in many species of animals.6 Thus, using punishment can put the person administering it or any person near the animal at risk of being bitten or attacked.
Punishment can suppress aggressive and fearful behavior when used effectively, but it may not change the underlying cause of the behavior. For instance, if the animal behaves aggressively due to fear, then the use of force to stop the fearful reactions will make the animal more fearful while at the same time suppressing or masking the outward signs of fear; (e.g., a threat display/growling). As a result, if the animal faces a situation where it is extremely fearful, it may suddenly act with heightened aggression and with fewer warning signs. In other words, it may now attack more aggressively or with no warning, making it much more dangerous.
Perhaps one of the most compelling reasons to use punishment sparingly is that punishment fails to address the fact that the bad behavior is occurring because it has somehow been reinforced—either intentionally or unintentionally. That is, owners tend to punish bad behaviors some of the time while inadvertently rewarding these same behaviors at other times. In this way, they accidentally set their pets up to receive punishment repeatedly by sometimes unintentionally rewarding the bad behavior, which is how the behavior was learned in the first place. This inconsistency is confusing to the animal and can cause frustration or anxiety. Punishment also fails to tell the animal what it should be performing instead. Without an alternative appropriate behavior the animal may have no option but to perform the undesired behavior. A more appropriate approach to problem solving is to determine what is reinforcing the undesirable behavior, remove that reward, and reinforce an alternate desirable behavior instead. For instance, dogs jump to greet people in order to get their attention. Owners usually provide attention by talking or yelling, pushing them down, or otherwise touching them. A better solution would be to remove attention by standing silently and completely still and then to immediately reward with attention or treats once the dogs sits. This learning-based approach leads to a better understanding of our pets and consequently to a better human-pet relationship.
The standard of care for veterinarians specializing in behavior is that punishment is not to be used as a first-line or early-use treatment for behavior problems. Consequently, the AVSAB urges that veterinarians in general practice follow suit. Additionally punishment should only be used when animal owners are made aware of the possible adverse effects. The Association recommends that owners working with trainers who use punishment as a form of behavior modification in animals choose only those trainers who, without prompting:
..[if !supportLists]-->1) ..[endif]-->Can and do articulate the most serious adverse effects associated with punishment
..[if !supportLists]-->2) ..[endif]-->Are capable of judging when these adverse effects are occurring over the short and/or long term
..[if !supportLists]-->3) ..[endif]-->Can explain how they would attempt to reverse any adverse effects if or when they occur.
References
Hutchinson RR. 1977. By-products of aversive control. In: W.K. Honig and J.E.R. Staddon (Eds.) Handbook of Operant Behavior (pp 415-431). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Azrin NH. 1960. Effects of punishment intensity during variable-interval reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav 3: 123-142.
Azrin NH, Holz WC, Hake DR. 1963. Fixed-ratio punishment. J Exp Anal Behav 6: 141-148.
Pauli AM, Bentley E, Diehl, AK, Miller PE. 2006. Effects of the application of neck pressure by a collar or harness on intraocular pressure in dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 42(3):207-211.
Drobatz KJ. Saunders HM, Pugh CR, Hendricks JC. 1995. Noncardiogenic pulmonary edema in dogs and cats: 26 cases (1987-1993). J Am Vet Med Assoc 206: 1732-1736.
Azrin NH, Rubin HB, Hutchinson RR. 1968 Biting attack by rats in response to aversive shock. J Exp Anal Behav 11: 633-639.
Further Reading
Burch M, Bailey J. 1999. How Dogs Learn. Howell Book House
Reid P. 2007. Learning in Dogs. In: Jensen P (Ed.) The Behavioural Biology of Dogs (pp 120-144). Cambridge, MA: CABI International.
..[if !supportLists]-->3. ..[endif]-->Yin SY. 2004. How to Behave So Your Dog Behaves. Neptune City. TFH Publications.