Friday, March 05, 2010

Habituation and Extinction at the End of a Leash



Here's another Cesar Millan episode to complement yesterday's offering.

The dog in question here is a Korean Jindo, which is a spitz-type hunting and guard dog.

You will note that the owner and rescuer is a pretty experienced person who seems to have had a lot of success settling, calming, training and rehoming damaged dogs.

Jonbee is the first dog he cannot tame. In trying to help Jonbee, he has already seen two other professional trainers, one of whom recommended putting the dog down, and the other who got himself chewed up.

Jonbee's would-be rescuer is clear: If Cesar Millan cannot fix this dog, he is going to have to be put down.

As you can see in the video, when Jonbee is touched towards the back, he explodes in a savage rage.



Millan remains calm as the dog tries to bite him. He always keeps the leash up, but he is not participating in the craziness at the other end of the leash.

If Jonbee wants to go nuts, that is his choice.

Jonbee explodes again and again trying to bite Millan, before finally relaxing and rolling over on his side, physically and emotionally spent.

What happened?

To reiterate a point made yesterday: No animal can sustain a temper tantrum or a fight forever.

A dog that explodes like this is a bit like a massive thunder storm -- it will blow itself out if it continues unabated. In fact, that is exactly what has happened here.

Why is Cesar Millan doing what he is doing, and why does it work?

The simple answer is that he is de-sensitizing the dog to touch, while at the same time removing the reward that the dog has gotten in the past from attacking anyone who touched it.

Strip it away, and what you have are two fundamental tools that can be used to rehabilitate a problem dog:

  1. Habituation and;

  2. Extinction.

Habituation is a type of non-associative learning. Simply put, it means the dog gets used to something to the point it no longer produces any kind of reaction at all.

Face the phobia. Stand in the river of life for so long that you no longer feel wet.

We have all become habituated to something irritating at one time or another.

If you move next door to an airport, for example, the airplane noise will drive you crazy for a few days, but after two weeks you will have stopped hearing it at all. Only when you are on the telephone will you be reminded that the airplanes are still there.

What Millan is doing with Jonbee is giving the dog the stimulus that sets it off (simply touching him) but he makes sure his response it as flat as possible so that the dog will eventually become nonreactive to it.

Constant stimulus that does not harm or reward is eventually treated by the body as "white noise."

Factory workers do not hear the factory, and oil refinery workers do not smell the chemicals.

If Jonbee gets neither reward nor punishment from being touched, and is touched often enough, he will eventually not pay the slightest mind.

Extinction is also going on in this film clip. While Jonbee is getting habituated to being touched, his violent outburst is also finding no reward.

Again, what is key here is that Millan is as flat, calm, and passive as a man can be while being attacked by a 40-pound dog hell-bent on ripping his throat out.

What happens in the end?

Three things: 1) Jonbee is exhausted and can no longer sustain the attack; 2) Jonbee is starting to get habituated to being touched (i.e. he is beginning to learn that touching is not a big deal or a threat), and; 3) Jonbee is starting to realize that the behavior that got him a reward in the past (i.e. no one touching him) no longer works now.



Watch the clip, above (part 2 of the same episode).

Notice that Jonbee, like Shadow (the dog shown in yesterday's post) is lying calm and exhausted on his side. He is breathing fine, his tongue is pink, and the leash is loose.

This is what a dog or small child looks like after it has blown off all its emotional and physical energy in a screaming and violent temper tantrum.

What Cesar Millan calls "negative energy" I simply call tension, anxiety and hyperactivity.

Whatever you call it, Millan wants people to get rid of it, and to be emotionally neutral and dispassionate.

In short, he wants them to be a little more like a Skinnerian operant conditioning machine.

And how does it all work out?

Great!

By the the end, Cesar and the dog's owner can actually play bongos on Jonbee's side and back, and he loves it. Perfect!

Jonbee has, very quickly, become habituated to touch, and just as quickly he has allowed his violent outbursts to self-extinguish.

Why has Jonbee reformed so quickly?

Simple: He was not happy with his own response to the situation, but he was trapped in a cycle and did not know how to get out of it.

Terrified of being touched (especially within the confines of the house), he reacted out of fear, which made humans scared to touch him, which increased the tension, which further escalated the situation, and made the dog even more reactive and phobic.

Millan simply showed Jonbee a new way, and he did it by pairing habituation of touch with extinction of biting which no longer resulted in any kind of reward or reaction (thanks to excellent leash work on the part of Millan).

Getting Jonbee back together was a process, not an event. A relatively quick process, but not an instant miracle.

For example, watch the second clip and notice how Jonbee has his tail tucked in hard at 3:30. He is not yet comfortable, and he is still scared of this new way of doing business. He is trying to work through her fears, but .....

Looks at the owner too. He is also not yet comfortable.

Both of these actors are still remembering their old parts, even if Cesar has them both dressing up and reading for different roles.

And what happens in the end?

Trust.

Trust and then love.

Of all the dogs in all the world, Jonbee has found a home right here!

My favorite line towards the end is a simple declarative sentence by the owner:

"Dog's aren't throw away."


YES!

But how many dogs like Jonbee have been thrown away? Millions.

Most dogs will do well under ANY training system that supplies exercise, consistent well-timed signals, and love.

But some dogs, like Jonbee, need more than that; they need someone who understands habituation, extinction, and pack dynamics. They need someone who has more tools and techniques up their sleeve than a mail order clicker and a cheese ball.

Yes, those are core tools in ANY dog training kit, but they are not the full kit.

And that is why you call Cesar Millan; because he knows a few things that the people down at PETCO do not. He know how to rehabilitate difficult dogs. And he is not too timid to do it.

Millan does not cluck and wring his hands. He is not confused. He does not think a dog thrashing at the end of a leash is a dog being choked. No aggression is shown to this dog; there is only the dog boxing with the wind, unable to connect, making the choices that, in the end, leave it exhausted and ready to try something else.

Millan uses habituation and extinction all the time to deal with fearful and phobic dogs, but it always seems to confuses the click-and-treat crowd who are a bit unclear as to how habituation, extinction and physical exhaustion can work together. What? You mean there might be something more than click and treat?

Yes. There might be.... Those are good tools. Those are core tools. But they are not the tools for this job.
.

16 comments:

Anton said...

The thing that Cesar Milan has done at least from my perspective, growing up with watching dutch tv dog trainers, is show how its about the handler of the dog. For me that realisation was paramount on my start as a dog owner. And although I've studied a lot of other trainers and their ideas, very few manage to communicate this so efficiently as he can. Watching or reading his work always makes me think about how I am handling my dog. And what I am doing right and what I can improve upon. And this realisation, the handler is the tool is fantastic, as it applies to all things in life. Relationships, work etc. It's so easy to forget when we are confronted with a million things to consume everyday. That magical device that some fruit company will tell you you need in your life.

I wish they would change the style of filming as it is always moving, not really doing a good job of documenting things but more trying to make a dramatic story. Which understandable as it is meant to be consumed as entertainment to sell advertising first, educate perhaps 2nd.

Chester's Mom said...

Pat,

Thank you SO much for finally putting some logic into the Cesar is God -vs- Cesar is a dog abuser arguments.... Cesar is a very skilled man at what he does. He reads the dogs expertly and reacts correctly. I wish I had 1/5th the patience he does. Obviously you will never convert the whisperers but maybe you will open the eyes of some of the folks on the fence.

Beth P

ayk said...

Just a few corrections that can be easily verified online:

1. Jonbee is a male, not a female.

2. Jonbee was not kept by the family after the show but given up to Second Chance at Love Rescue. He is still posted with them.

There are a couple other things that was wrong with the information that was provided or implied during the show. Things beyond the normal exaggeration of a tv show.

Pai said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
PBurns said...

THANKS for the gender correction -- change made.

Jonbee stayed with this rescuer for nearly two years before the couple's mother-in-law moved in, and the dynamic of the house changed quite a bit, and there was another biting incident. I am told Jonbee was "rehomed with a solid dog person who had lots of experience and more property that allows Jonbee a more outdoor life." In fact JonBee found a most excellent home with Cheri Lucas, who is the first of only three people ever trained directly be Cesar Millan. Jonbee was not only NOT euthanized -- he has his own home page at >> http://www.secondchancelove.org/images/jon-beePopup.html where he is described as "an obedient, loving and happy boy."

The couple who first took in Jonbee from the street, the Lincoln's, write of their interaction with Cesar that: "We have never seen, in over twelve years of rescue work, a more courageous, dedicated, loving and gited trainer (psychologist) than Cesar."

And yes I have the letter, so I guess I know the story from the horse's mouth. Not a bad story either!

Patrick

Jacob said...

I have begun to notice something as I read the comments on this blog over the last couple of days. Some of the commenters seem to think if you decide to use negative stimulus, you must only ever use negative stimulus, if you decide to use positive stimulus you can only ever use positive. Where does this come from? How does this make sense. I understand that if you want to train in a purely positive manner you can't use punishment, but how does not being purely positive result in being purely negative. I can't believe every one of them is a troll, or an idiot, or lacks the basic reasoning to see that it is not a dichotomy, but I don't see any other option for the complete lack of reason. Even just giving a leash pop when the dog doesn't walk correctly, with no click for good behavior, no treats, no targets has built in rewards. Dogs like to walk, they love it. If they do it correctly they get to do it. Sorry for the rant but I felt compelled to point it out.
Jake

PBurns said...

BINGO Jake, you get it.

The short answer is that people operate witin frames: If the facts do not support the frame, most people toss out the facts. (read George Lakoff on frames for more about this concept).

In most cases, the frame becomes like a religion, immune to logic and fact. And often there are frames in opposition, as there are in politics. Your frame becomes how you see yourself, not only how you see the world. A frame says "I am this" and (just as importantly) "I am not that." Think about breeds as frames, dog registries as frames, and training methods as frames. Each is a religion of sorts, and each says "I am this and I am not that, because the other is wrong or worse and I am better."

Pragmaticists tend to work without frames or with very loose ones that can be shifted to accomodate new information.

A balanced trainer is generally a pragmatict who looks at each dog and problem solves with the eye to getting it done with as little coercion as possible. But yes, a leash pop would probably be in the bounds of acceptable. So too might a push on a dog's butt to get it to sit down, a tap etc. Of course so too is food, a pat on the head, a run, a walk, a ball toss, etc. Every dog is motivated differently, and in variety is strength and flexability.

P

Amanda S said...

Patrick, if what you say is true, why do the Second Chance organisation have Jon Bee listed as one of their available dogs?

Karen Carroll said...

I love Cesar Millan, he is what dog training needs today. He is a master at combining the right correction or positive re-enforcer for the bad - good behavior. And emphasizing physical activity as a major part of a dog's needs.

I remember reading this a while back:

If your dog it too fat, YOU BOTH need more exercise.

PBurns said...

Amanda, why don't you click around on that site and answer the question yourself? For instance, look at the page on dogs are NOT up for adoption because of problems that have not been ameliorated ... and then look at the name of the web site. What is the purpose of this place and what does Cheri Lucas do, and who did she learn it from? Now, what have you learned?

P.

Anonymous said...

Thank you so much for this series of posts on working with dogs and especially on working with dangerous or damaged dogs. I feel all Lola Heatherton ("I want to bear your children".) (No offence to your real-life dependents and the rest of your household, of course.) As far as new dog training techniques, they're about as new as new scientificified seduction techniques.

Perhaps for your next trick you could discuss people who "rehabilitate" dogs that are just fine. You know, the folks who go to all kinds of trouble to socialize perfectly normal, although perhaps a bit unsettled, animals they image to be abuse-victim rescue dogs. Why some people have a frame in which any dog the ends up homeless, including overweight spoiled-rotten owner-surrenders, is a PST sufferer who needs months of click-and-treat habitation to simply be in the living room with people is beyond me.

How many dogs have suffered the needless stress of being subjected to PP reinforcement for problems they don't have? The poor creatures must feel like tomboy girls who are constantly being "helped" and told that things are dangerous and otherwise jacked with every time they try to have fun. (Unless they're priss dogs, who enjoy the attention and pampering - and we know what a lovely personality type that dynamic creates, unless we're counting Jean Harlow's fictional malingerer in "Dinner at Eight.".)

If the Cesar Millan is the anti-Christ people wanted to be creative, why don't they accuse you or expunging all the post from anti people who had actually read your posts and made cogent arguments. I mean, it looks like everyone who's popped up in the comments can't read or won't think and they just reinforce the stereotypes you allude to. It would seem a bit too pat... if I didn't meet these people every day.

Amanda S said...

Patrick,

I did look at the website before. I understand that Jon Bee has a home with Second Chance until a suitable permanent home is found for him. I also found that the web page that you mentioned is mainly there for potential adopters but also, I presume, for potential donors to Second Chance to get a feel for the work they are doing.

You wrote that:
In fact JonBee found a most excellent home with Cheri Lucas, who is the first of only three people ever trained directly be Cesar Millan. Jonbee was not only NOT euthanized -- he has his own home page at >> http://www.secondchancelove.org/images/jon-beePopup.html where he is described as "an obedient, loving and happy boy."


I think your statements imply that Jon Bee has a permanent home and that the web page is just for fun.

Otherwise I just want to affirm that I'm happy that this dog and, indeed any dog, has a second chance.

Mailey E. McLaughlin, M.Ed. said...

Some of the commenters seem to think if you decide to use negative stimulus, you must only ever use negative stimulus, if you decide to use positive stimulus you can only ever use positive. Where does this come from? How does this make sense.

It is an overreaction to the idea of abuse or harm. Those folks cannot fathom that there are two sides to the coin, that those of us who use P+ and R- also use a lot of R+ (in fact, mostly R+).

They wrongly assume that the average person CANNOT be trusted to impart information via calm corrections to a dog, so they should never be exposed to the tools that help do it. They believe that since corrections and corrective tools CAN BE misused, they ALWAYs ARE misused.

The Romans would say, "Abusus non tollit usum." All tools have their place with some dogs.

The trick is knowing the right way to use them, and being able to understand why they work.

PBurns said...

Here's a three questions -- genuine questions:

1. Are most pure clicker trainers women? Is so, why so?

2. Are the people who react so extremely from the idea of simple and moderated aversives (such as proper use of a choke chain, or a light nose tap) people who are over-reacting because of their own poor parenting (including physical abuse)?

3. Who is the "pure aversive trainer" that the pure positive seem to think is out there? I have never met such a person, never seen a book by such a person, or even heard rumor of such a person. Does this person even exist? Aren't even the "aversive" trainers 90 percent positive?

P

ayk said...

With regards to Jonbee's availability, I will share that on 2/2009, Jonbee's availability was cross-posted and was even listed on petfinder.com by SCLR for a while.

As for whether he became a sanctuary dog since that time, that will kept forever by Ms. Lucas, I can't say. All I know is that listing back then on the SCLR website is the same then as it is now.

PBurns said...

Jonbee became a solid citizen, got adopted, had a wonderful life, and died of old age.

Here's the video of the old man as love bug.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FnJQoy7_RQ