Positive Reinforcement

[Sussexbythesea]

But isn't (according to what I have read so far) hitting a horse with a whip (adding stimulus) positive reinforcement?

Perhaps it would be better to say nice reinforcement and nasty reinforcement? It better describes the horses response to the stimulus - add carrot - positive and nice, add whip positive and nasty

Must go and do some reading...

 

[guesstimation]

Its no wonder so many horses get so confused! I find wording things in the correct manner difficult as people use different terminology or the same terminology for different things it does get very confusing

 

[fburton]

I think that the constant misconception abou negative reinforcement is damaging, as trainers are somehow seen as brutal or unkind because they use it, and to some horses, who constantly being rewarded take full advantage of the situation and become pushy and demanding, when their kindly owner/trainer, who doesn't like or use negative reinforcement, attempts the impossible.

Negative reinforcement (nearly always "pressure and release") isn't necessarily damaging, but it can be if misused.

Positive reinforcement/reward (giving the horse something it likes, not just removing something it doesn't like) certainly isn't foolproof, and it can be misused too.

Punishment[*] (giving the horse something it doesn't like in order to reduce or stop a behaviour) isn't necessarily damaging, but it can be if misused.

All have their uses, and all are natural.

Any of these can be misused and cause harm - as a result of poor timing, inconsistent or unfair application, or (in the case of NR and punishment) giving "the thing the horse doesn't like" too strongly or in an otherwise excessive way.

However... the potential to do harm through misuse isn't the same in all three: punishment is the most dangerous by far (and therefore should be used sparingly), positive reinforcement/reward is the least risky (because it doesn't employ aversives at all), and negative reinforcement is rather more risky than reward.

Risk: punishment > 'pressure and release' > reward

Practically speaking, we really can't do without some 'pressure and release' and if one had to choose one method from the three above, 'pressure and release' is the obvious one to make the most progress. But that doesn't mean we have to limit ourselves. Indeed, it would be foolish to do so. Why not make liberal use of reward (even targeted reward) if we are skilled enough to do so to be effective and not cause harm? Neither should (or can) we rule out punishment, although we can (and should) work to use it less and less.


[*]Ok, so there's positive punishment (as above) and negative punishment (taking away something the horse likes to reduce/stop a behaviour) but the latter is infrequently used in training.

 

[Sussexbythesea]

I find food reward works really well with my horse - it took about 10 minutes to get him to stand on a pedestal using a packet of polos and a stick to tap his legs. Trouble is I couldn't keep him off it once he realised he would get a treat.

Same as bowing - he now spends a disproportionate time with his head between his legs waiting for food

 

[fburton]

But isn't (according to what I have read so far) hitting a horse with a whip (adding stimulus) positive reinforcement?

Perhaps it would be better to say nice reinforcement and nasty reinforcement? It better describes the horses response to the stimulus - add carrot - positive and nice, add whip positive and nasty

Must go and do some reading...

Here's a (hopefully!) easy way to break it down...

Reinforcement means making a behaviour more likely. You reinforce behaviours that you would like the horse to do. You've got that bit already.

Something else though... reinforcement is also about telling the horse "Yes, that's what I want you to do".

Ok, next step... Positive means adding something. Negative means taking something away. I think you had already gathered that bit too.

So let's think how to make a behaviour that you want more likely by telling the horse "Yes, that's what I want you to do".

Basically there are two ways.

First, by adding something. You could give the horse a carrot when the horse does something you want. The carrot is a reward; it tells the horse "Yes, that's what I want you to do - well done!". Clearly that's adding something that wasn't there before - so we call it "positive reinforcement".

Alternatively, we can take something away. If we take something nice, like a carrot, away the horse isn't going to appreciate it much! That would be more of a "No!" than a "Yes!". But we can take something unpleasant away instead. Note that it doesn't have to be really unpleasant. It can be pretty mildly unpleasant, maybe just a niggling discomfort. That could be some leg pressure, or 'tickling' with a whip. What the horse appreciates, and makes him more likely to behave in a certain way in future, is the fact that you remove the slightly unpleasant thing when the horse does what you want. The pressure motivates the horse to do something, and the removal of that pressure tells the horse "Yes, that's what I wanted you to do". That is "negative reinforcement".

Hope that makes things clearer!

 

[fburton]

I find food reward works really well with my horse - it took about 10 minutes to get him to stand on a pedestal using a packet of polos and a stick to tap his legs. Trouble is I couldn't keep him off it once he realised he would get a treat.

Same as bowing - he now spends a disproportionate time with his head between his legs waiting for food

For some things, food rewards work really well. Not only is it an effective way to establish a behaviour (maybe even too effective!), it can put the horse in a good frame of mind - fearless, willing, motivated. This is especially useful where fear is one of things that is getting in the way of training, e.g. as it often is in trailer loading.

Whether or not one believes that putting horses on pedestals is time well spent, it would be interesting to see how people would go about training this using only pressure and release. I have no doubt it is possible, but if I had to pick the method to achieve the result in the shortest time, I would definitely choose food rewards!

 

[Dry Rot]

You cannot train a panicking horse, so you wouldn't cause that situation in the first instance.

Pale Ride, you are the one person I find myself agreeing with on this thread -- without reservation! We speak the same language.

I am not sure I understand what others are talking about -- and not totally convinced they do either!

 

[amandap]

I am not sure I understand what others are talking about -- and not totally convinced they do either!

Lol, I do understand what I wrote but whether I understand enough theory and am able to explain what I mean clearly is of course another matter.

 

[Sussexbythesea]

Thanks fburton that explains it nicely.

The pedestal thing was a bit of a distraction when he was off games due to an injury so I was doing some fun in-hand work completely of my own made up method

He is so food orientated I always joke I could teach him to cartwheel for a carrot!

 

[nikkimariet]

Positive Reinforcement is the basis of all the training I do I rarely need to use negative .
Right from when I start with them I vioce train them that good boy or good girl means they have have it right , I also use the pat( or stroke ) on the neck usually with the inside hand , a period of hard work will be rewarded with a the pat or stroking and a period of free walk with the voice .
So when young if use the leg and they respond I stop the "aid " say good boy that's positive reinforcement in my book.

This.

 

[Kelpie]

I am not sure I understand what others are talking about -- and not totally convinced they do either!

erm, I'm not quite sure who that was directed at?

Anyway, I think fburton has already given quite a good definition of positive and negative reinforcement.

I know it might sound like splitting hairs to worry about getting the definition right, but the way I see it, being able to verbalise what you are doing, and why you are doing it, is important because without this ability I am not sure you would truely understand in enough detail what you are doing. Getting the definition right is then of course part of that process. I do, though, entirely appreciate that it's not everyone's cup of tea to deliberate over the meaning of particular words and phrases - to each there own, eh?

 

[Dry Rot]

erm, I'm not quite sure who that was directed at?

Anyway, I think fburton has already given quite a good definition of positive and negative reinforcement.

I know it might sound like splitting hairs to worry about getting the definition right, but the way I see it, being able to verbalise what you are doing, and why you are doing it, is important because without this ability I am not sure you would truely understand in enough detail what you are doing. Getting the definition right is then of course part of that process. I do, though, entirely appreciate that it's not everyone's cup of tea to deliberate over the meaning of particular words and phrases - to each there own, eh?

I breath and have a reasonably efficient digestive system. I don't need to explain what it does to myself or anyone else. It just does it! My remarks were directed at the thread generally. Sorry if you took it personally.

Hopefully, the alternative thread will be better suited to those who just do it.

 

[Booboos]

I breath and have a reasonably efficient digestive system. I don't need to explain what it does to myself or anyone else. It just does it! My remarks were directed at the thread generally. Sorry if you took it personally.

Hopefully, the alternative thread will be better suited to those who just do it.

Your remark suggesting that other people do not understand what they are talking about sounded a bit rude to me too.

BTW if you manage to train horses using your autonomic nervous system you are truly a miraculous trainer! Not to mention that while you cdo not need to explain how your digestive and respiratory systems work, you would expect a doctor to be able to before she intervened in any way in their functioning!