There may be no words that raise more controversy in modern dog training than the words “shock collar”.
The reasons for this are endless. To the force free trainer these words evoke emotions of empathy, frustration and rage, and the device is seen as cruel. To the balanced trainer, a shock collar is an must have training tool that will achieve results quickly. To the average pet parent it can be a whirlwind of mixed articles and feelings when they are trying to determine what method will be best for their dog. After nearly 10 years around the dog training arena, I’ve learned to check emotion at the door and approach this subject with caution and facts.
First, let’s talk about what an electronic collar is and what it is used for in dog training.
The first electronic collar was invented in the 1960s as an aid for training hunting dogs. These first generation electronic dog collars could only deliver one level of stimulation to the dog. The first e-collars required the trainer to select the level of correction and this was done by inserting various intensity plugs into the collar before putting the collar on the dog. Each plug had its own intensity level and once the e-collar was on the dog the trainer could not change it. It wasn’t until the release of the second generation collars that the trainer could vary the level of intensity from the hand-held transmitter. With the adaptation of the second collar, dog trainers could now select from one of three levels of intensity – high, medium and low. The disadvantage was that the lowest level of stimulation was unsuitable for simple corrections. The technology of the last decade introduced collars that gave the trainer the ability to select multiple levels of intensity from the transmitter. It was this singular distinctive advancement together with customer education that has led to the universal acceptance of the modern electronic collar. Today, these collars are used for everything from training recall to electronic fencing geared to keep a dog in the yard to curbing barking and so on. Some apartment complexes have even put stipulations in their lease that owners are required to use an electronic collar if their dog’s barking becomes a problem.
As a modern, science based trainer I do not like to think of any dog training method as good or bad. There was a time when I had strong emotions about one method or another but I have learned to empathize with the owner struggle to find something that works when they have a difficult dog. The cold fact is that some methods are effective while others are ineffective and every method comes with pros and cons.
So let’s look at the good.
THE GOOD
The dog does a behavior. You hit the beep which the dog has never heard before. Within seconds you follow it up with a jolt of electricity. In theory, the dog very quickly learns that the beep means a jolt will follow if he does not look to you for instruction. Again, this works theoretically, if all goes according to plan.
To break down the “why” as to how this works in the brain you need to understand how associations are formed to begin with.
To answer those questions look no further than Ivan Pavlov, the founder of Pavlovian psychology. Ivan Pavlov ran a series of experiments in which he fed a dog dinner. Whenever he fed the dog dinner, he rang a bell, and the dog learned to expect food when he heard the bell.
Associations are how all of us learn. We form associations from the time we are born. We learn that red equals stop because of the subconscious association with fire, flame, and hot stoves. We associated the smell of coffee with waking up in the morning. We may learn to associate the smell of a parent’s cologne with love and affection or we may learn to opposite in a home where the upbringing was unpleasant
. Learning based on what we experience in our environment, also known as operant conditioning, is completely natural. What Pavlov did was he took environmental learning and he added a controlled stimuli – the bell.
The dog already knows that food is good. By adding a neutral stimulus the dog had neither positive or negative associations with Pavolv was able to manipulate the dog’s behavior. And thus was born our modern understanding of classical conditioning.
But what happens when we pair a neutral stimulus with an unpleasant result?
Well then we look at the work of another researcher by the name of B.F. Skinner.
Skinner wanted to further build on the basics of classical conditioning by using a series of experiments involving both humans and rats. The most famous of these experiments was called the “Skinner Box”. Skinner showed how a combination of positive punishment and negative reinforcement worked by placing a rat in his Skinner box and then subjecting it to an unpleasant electric current. As the rat moved about the box it would accidentally knock the lever and the electric current would stop. The rats quickly learned to go straight to the lever after a few times of being put in the box to end the shock. The consequence of escaping the electric current ensured that they would repeat the action again and again. In fact Skinner even taught the rats to avoid the electric current by turning on a light just before the electric current came on. The rats soon learned to press the lever when the light came on because they knew that this would stop the electric current before it hit.
These two learned responses are known as Escape Learning and Avoidance Learning.
And this is essentially how and why a shock collar works. The dog is learning – it learns through avoidance.
Punishment is defined as the opposite of reinforcement since it is designed to weaken or eliminate a behavior rather than increase it. It is an aversive event that decreases the behavior that it follows. Like reinforcement, punishment can work either by directly applying an unpleasant stimulus like a shock after a response or by removing a potentially rewarding stimulus, for instance, deducting someone’s pocket money to punish undesirable behavior.
When the dog jumps on a counter, I hit the zap. The dog learns not to jump on the counter. This was achieved through positive punishment.
When the dog runs away from me, I hold down the shock. The dog continues receiving the stimulus until they turn and come toward me and then the electronic stimulus stops. This is achieved through negative reinforcement.
You Don’t Have To Be Present For The Collar To Do Its Job
Electronic collars that work in association with electric fencing are designed to function even when you aren’t around. If the dog gets too close to the boundary in the yard, it will get the initial warning signal. A shock will only be administered if it continues heading towards and past the boundary. Remember, though, a shock collar may keep your dog from leaving the yard, but it will not stop humans or other animals from entering.
They can be used as a positive
The beep function on the collar can also be used as a marker that means “come find the owner for a treat”. When used correctly, with good time, the collars are not just good for positive punishment. They can in fact be used to take the dog out of the moment. They can also be used to deter a dog from a situation that could be life threatening such as rattlesnake avoidance training, recall in potentially dangerous situation (running into the street) etc.
THE BAD
Let’s go back to the rat in the “Skinner box.” Skinner taught the rats to press a lever to get food. However, if no food pellet was delivered immediately after the lever was pressed then after several attempts the rat would stop pressing the lever. The behavior the rat had learned became extinguished.
The downside of using devices in training is that the dog/rat/human being doesn’t necessarily learn to do a behavior. They learn to do a behavior to avoid pain (i.e. avoidance learning). Learning through avoidance will become quickly extinguished and must be continually reinforced. So these collars/fences/devices usually need to be used for the duration of the dog’s life. Your dog learns to live in a suppressive device rather than developing good habits and learning to make healthy, rewarding choices.
THE UGLY
There are many problems with using punishment that have been studied for decades and have shown us that:
-
- Punished behavior is not forgotten, it’s only suppressed – the unwanted behavior returns when punishment is no longer present.
- It causes increased aggression – aggression becomes a way to cope with problems.
- It creates fear that can generalize into undesirable behaviors, e.g., reactivity toward other dogs, cats, people, etc.
- It does not necessarily guide toward desired behavior – reinforcement tells you what to do, punishment only tells you what not to do.
(For further studies on this subject, see studies by Richard Polsky here and here)
Let’s break this down.
Suppressed behavior eventually returns. Remember the dog who lives in a permanent collar?
Suppression causes aggression. This is born out of associations. Many of the associations we make with the world are subconscious. We know that trauma works in a strange way on the brain. A person who smelled coffee a few moments before a traumatic event in their life may forever become ill when they smell coffee. They may not have even been aware they were smelling coffee at the time, but their brain was gathering information. We are born gathering information about the world around us and learning from the moment we take our first breath. When dogs are trained using primarily positive punishment and negative reinforcement we are taking a risk that they may also form negative associations where we never intended.
Suppression generates other problems. If my dog is barking at a school bus full of children outside of the window because he loves children and wants to see them and he is greeted with a painful zap he may subconsciously associate the zap with the children. If this happens to the dog every day at 3 pm when he sees those children getting off the bus he may even learn to fear of hate children. When we think about the ways in which shock collars are most commonly used – bark collars and electronic fences – this can be a risk we have to take into consideration. When your dog wants to run out of the yard to greet another dog and he gets zapped, he may associate the stimulus with leaving the yard or he may associate the stimulus with the other dog that passes the house every day. Or the mailman. Or the neighbor’s cat. Or friends coming over for dinner.
Punishment versus reinforcement. Imagine stepping into a world you do not understand full of beings who do not speak your language. And their only means of communicating with you is through zaps and yells, slaps, and suppression. You might develop some anxiety issues and struggle to feel safe. You would eventually learn to feel your way around but if no one has ever taken the time to show you what they want, you will have learned to survive but you will not thrive. Imagine if every time we see a spider you receive a painful pinch. You will learn to avoid them but you won’t learn to like them. You may even begin to hate them. And you may also build resentment toward the person who is pinching you. Now imagine if every time we see a spider I give you a $100 bill. The results would change completely. Suddenly spiders become exciting, and you may turn you attention to me instead of the spider. Because now we have started to build a relationship. The nice thing about training using positive reinforcement and relationship building skills is that there isn’t a risk. Even if our timing is a little off, it may slow down learning but there is no risk of misplaced associations and aggression or anxiety issues.
And there is one heartbreaking reality that we in the rescue community see all too often as the result of electronic fences. When your dog gets excited and goes into flight or chase mode they may just run right through the fence and not even feel the stimulations. In that moment, the chase of that dog, rabbit, squirrel, or whatever it may be holds their attention. However, when their adrenaline comes down they often can’t get back over the fence and they wander. And a significant number of dogs end up lost and in shelters as a result of this sad reality. And then there is the risk that a predator or a human could enter your yard but your dog cannot get out. This can be dangerous for the dog in the long run.
My Personal Opinion
As a trainer I try to keep my emotions out of the training arena. I run a business called “Force Free Paws” and I’ve considered changing the name at times because I fully understand and have experienced that what is too forceful or too aversive is determined by the dog not by us. I have seen a happy, thriving excited dog come running upon hearing the beep of an electronic collar. I have also seen a dog cower and hide, shaking, when the collar vibrated. I’ve seen a dog walk perfectly fine on a pinch collar and I’ve seen a dog refuse to walk on a regular leash. When my clients come to me for advice about their e-collar training I approach it with the good, the bad, and the ugly. In the end, the most important thing on the table at every dog training session is always the safety of the dog. Mentally, emotionally, physically, and beyond. I am also a trainer who at one time did use electronic collars and I veered away from them after time because I started to see the positives and negatives. In one of my dogs, all of the training that was done on the collar not only disappeared but the behavior returned stronger after I took the collar off of my dog and we ended up having to start training over from scratch. He knew how to avoid a shock. He had never learned how to behave without the collar on. I have since then become a member of the Shock Free Coalition, an organization that works behind the scenes in the dog training industry to provide alternative training solutions and remove the easy access to electronic collars on store shelves. The Shock Free Coalition was involved in Petco’s recent decision to stop selling the devices. I believe that the easy access the public has to these devices has done more damage to dogs and dog training in America than any other tool in the toolbox. My heart breaks for the dogs I have had to see euthanized because of anxiety and fear issues that developed after the use of an electronic collar.
To me, the potential negatives outweigh the positives in most circumstances. As a trainer who specializes in reactivity and aggression I can tell you that in more than half of the cases I am called into there is a history of aversive training that has been used on the dogs, whether that training was done with the use of a pinch collar, shock collar, choke collar, etc. The correlation between positive punishment and aggression is very high.
I will share with you a very sad story. This is not a story about an electronic collar, but it is a story about the downside of using aversive training. In this situation the aversive was something called “bopping” which is essentially a spanking using a lightweight object. I was once brought onto the scene for a very large Great Dane/Mastiff (280 pounds) that had a dangerous aggression and control issue. The dog stood shoulder high next to me. He was by far one of the largest dogs I have ever encountered. The owner was not upfront with me about the dog’s history of training methods used but eventually disclosed to me that the dog had been “spanked” with an empty water bottle for every behavior that was perceived to be “bad”. Once the dog’s history had been disclosed I was able to deduce that the dog was heavily suppressed and potentially very dangerous. A dog who’s personality and behavior is suppressed through aversives is not a well behaved dog, though it may appear that way. It is a time bomb. I leveled with the client that the dog was just that – a time bomb – and that given their refusal to change the training methods, the dogs aggression issues, and the dog’s size that the prognosis for the dog was not good.
Out of both inexperience and compassion I continued working with the client until one day the dog turned on me as I had predicted. The dog bit down on my shoulder. It was an intentional potentially level 4 bite and shake but my clothing was loose and the dog ripped my shirt sleeve off instead of my arm. I was able to get to safety but it took two humans to restrain the dog. I recommended after that that the dog be euthanized. I have never followed up with the client to find out what choice they made – in situations like this I sometimes find it easier not to know.
In the end, I have personally found much more success with positive reinforcement, systematic desensitization and counter conditioning, relationship building skills, and affective dog behavior training (need based training). But while I don’t personally endorse e-collar training I also understand the challenges that can come with owning a difficult dog. My personal recommendation to anyone with questions would be to reach out to a qualified behavior consultant through the PPG, the IAABC, of the APDT. However, should you choose to go the direction of e-collar training I implore you to do so with the assistance of an experienced trainer. The most common issue with these devices falls on owner misuse and the stimulation being used at the wrong time. A good trainer will know the tools and can help avoid any potential mistakes and mishaps that could stall your progress.
Written by Heidi Clem, animal behavior college certified trainer and behavior consultant, AKC evaluator, and member of the Pet Professional Guild, the Shock Free Coalition, and the Association of Professional Dog Trainers.
If you would like to discuss training options and need help and guidance with a dog please reach out Heidi at Dakotah’s Doggy Daycare. We currently offer private sessions, board and training, obedience classes level 1 – 4, reactivity rehab in both private and class settings, along with STAR puppy, CGC, CGC Urban Canine, AKC Community Canine and AKC Trick dog training.
(612) 564-3165
Heidi@dddhs.net