Cat Forum / General Topics / August 2005
Kitten in the kitchen
|
|
Thread rating:  |
kate - 17 Aug 2005 12:05 GMT Hi All,
I am looking for some advice. Angus, my gorgeous 5m.o. burmese baby boy is allowed everywhere in my house *except* for the kitchen benches. This is for both hygiene and safety reasons - he has no sense of fire safety and has walked across the lit stove and a few days ago I caught him gazing with rapt attention into a boiling pot of rice. I have tried removing him with a stern "NO", squirting him with water, squirting with water and vinegar, removing him, stern "NO" and little smack on the haunch. I have also tried distracting him with a toy or game after removing him (leaving a gap so he doesn't see it as a reward). When he really wants to get on the bench he won't get involved in even his favourite games. He will repeatedly get on the bench 5-6 times even after being disciplined each time. Occasionally he will not jump up if I catch him about to and say "NO" a few times but usually he just ignores me. Tonight I tried a timeout, shutting him in the bathroom for one minute after about the 5th time we had gone throught the "NO"-smack-distract routine and he was responding to the vinegar spray by turning around and crouching with his face in the corner (presumably acting on the 'if I can't see her she can't see me' principle. Very cute but frustrating.
My questions are, do I persist with the timeout? Should I combine it with something else? Try a completely different tack?
I don't want my little fellow getting hurt and the structure of my house is such that I can't block his access to the kitchen.
Thanks Kate
Darryl - 17 Aug 2005 12:54 GMT Try mouse traps placed upside down on the bench, they should scare him when they pop up when he steps on them, also packing tape placed sticky side up might help,cats don't like having something stuck to their feet.
Darryl
>My questions are, do I persist with the timeout? Should I combine it >with something else? Try a completely different tack? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Thanks >Kate Beth - 17 Aug 2005 13:35 GMT > Try mouse traps placed upside down on the bench, they should scare him > when [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >>Thanks >>Kate I agree on the packing tape idea. My cat goes through phases where she likes to investigate new things. Right now she is obsessed with my printer cart and before that it was a flimsy, put-it-together-yourself book case. I put tape all over the top of it. But the little thing actually sidestepped most of it in the little half inch spots between the tape and stepped on it a little bit. She didn't like it, but did it anyway. But it was effective for a while. I also tried the time out approach a couple days ago when she kept waking me up by knocking things down and after she broke the head off of a precious moments figuring at 3 am I put her in the bathroom for about half an hour while I tried to fix it. When I opened the door she was asleep on the bath mat but got up and came out. She climbed into bed with me and slept on my chest the rest of the night, as usual. I don't think it's bad to do a time out. My cat has been sequestered to my bedroom on occasion, like when I have company for dinner because she loves to lay on the table and nothing has broken her of it. So when there is food on it she sees it as her right to jump up and look around. So she's used to laying on my bed and watching TV for a while and it doesn't bother her. Now, as bad as this last suggestion will sound, it has worked for my cat. I have a gas stove and she likes to jump up on the counter and nothing stopped her fascination for a while. One day when I had turned the stove on she jumped up on the counter and started pawing at the burner that wasn't on. That freaked me out so I picked her up and held her so that her paws were tucked in and just held her so she was right against me but close enough to the pot to feel it was warm. I didn't have to get her close at all so she could feel it and she started backing away and tucked her chin under my arm. It only took one time. Now she will lay beside the stove but she never touches any of the burners. I've even had things cooking before and the set up is such that there is about 5 inches of space between the range and the wall and then on the other side is about 2 feet of counter space between the sink and the range. She will jump up and actually walk around the stove to go lay down but doesn't even look at the pans. If nothing else works, show your kitty why you don't want it up there. So far, that's the only thing mine religiously stays away from. I know it sounds mean, but it's not like I dangled her over the pot. Just held her tight to me and moved so she could feel it and told her no several times when we were close to it. She jumped down afterwards and went to go play. It's worth a shot if it means keeping her safe.
Beth
Steph - 17 Aug 2005 19:52 GMT There are many products that you can get for this from the vet or pet store as well. I don't know the names of them - sorry but I have seem them advertised. There are basically two different things. Basically what it is like a can that has a sensor on it (some have another piece that you place at the other end of the bench). When kitty goes through and sets off the sensor there is either a burst of air, smell, or sound depending on which kind you got. I know that it sounds very confusing but it really does work. I'm sure that if you went to the pet store or vet and asked, they'd know what I was talking about.
M.C. Mullen - 17 Aug 2005 12:55 GMT : My questions are, do I persist with the timeout? Should I combine it : with something else? Try a completely different tack? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] : Thanks : Kate I let my cats help in the kitchen. When they get older they get bored anyway. Plus I do a bit more cleaning in there since I have cats. Let him experience the heat himself - it works. Take it easy!
carola
TheAmazingPuppyWizard@Mail.Com - 17 Aug 2005 21:36 GMT HOWEDY Kate,
> Hi All, > > I am looking for some advice. Ain't that sumpthin... You're asking kat abusers cowards liars and active acute long term incurable MENTAL CASES for training advice THEY AIN'T GOT or they WOULDN'T HAVE THE SAME PROBLEMS, would they, Kate.
> Angus, my gorgeous 5m.o. burmese baby boy is allowed > everywhere in my house *except* for the kitchen benches. NO PROBLEMO. You can TRAIN your kat JUST LIKE HOWE The Amazing Puppy Wizard teaches HIS 100% CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual Students ALL OVER The WHOWEL WILD WORLD HOWE to train their dogs kats kids and SP-HOWESES NEARLY INSTANTLY and FOR FREE, to boot.
Your newfHOWEND pals will tell you to KILLFILE The Amazing Puppy Wizard on accHOWENT of HE'S IDENTIFIED EXXXPOSED and DISCREDITED them as lying kat abusing mental cases.
> This is for both hygiene and safety reasons - he has no > sense of fire safety and has walked across the lit stove > and a few days ago I caught him gazing with rapt attention > into a boiling pot of rice. Could be a tasty combination.
> I have tried removing him with a stern "NO", Oh? That'll teach the kat to FEAR and MISTRUST YOU.
> squirting him with water, squirting with water and > vinegar, removing him, stern "NO" and little smack > on the haunch. Well, THAT EXXXPLAINS HOWE COME you're postin here abHOWETS.
> I have also tried distracting him with a toy or game after > removing him (leaving a gap so he doesn't see it as a reward). You mean you REWARD bad behaviors with bribery...
> When he really wants to get on the bench he won't get > involved in even his favourite games. He will repeatedly > get on the bench 5-6 times even after being disciplined > each time. Your kat is playin you like a fiddle. LUCKY THING you're askin EXXXPERTS for ADVICE for the SAME SAME SAME SAME PROBLEMS they got and CAN'T TRAIN, kate.
> Occasionally he will not jump up if I catch him about > to and say "NO" a few times but usually he just ignores > me. Your kat thinks you're a PSYCHOPATH.
> Tonight I tried a timeout, BWEEEEEEEEEEAAHAHAHHAHAAA!!!
> shutting him in the bathroom for one minute after about > the 5th time we had gone throught the "NO"-smack-distract > routine and he was responding to the vinegar spray by turning > around and crouching with his face in the corner (presumably > acting on the 'if I can't see her she can't see me' principle. Well, you're in EXXXCELLENT company.
> Very cute but frustrating. "CUTE"?
> My questions are, do I persist with the timeout? DECENT PEOPLE DO NOT POST HERE abHOWETS.
> Should I combine it with something else? Yeah. You should COMBINE PUNISHMENT with UNCONDITIONAL LOVE TRUST and RESPECT and when you FIGGER HOWET HOWE to DO THAT, you just tell The Amazing Puppy Wizard so HE can PASS IT ON so the ANIMAL LOVERS you're asking for ADVICE won't FEEL EMBARRASSED abHOWET NOT HURTING and INTIMIDATING critters to train them, kate.
> Try a completely different tack? SHAAAZZZAAAMMM???
> I don't want my little fellow getting hurt So you'll HURT and INTIMIDATE HIM for HIS OWN GOOD.
> and the structure of my house is such that I can't > block his access to the kitchen. BWEEEEEEEEEAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAA!!!
> Thanks THANK YOU!
> Kate Just INSERT KAT wherever you see DOG CHILD or SP-HOWES and you got the same same:
ALL Temperament and Behavior Problems And 90% Of DIS-EASE Are CAUSED BY MISHANDLING. THAT'S GOOD! THAT MEANS We can CURE ALL Temperament And Behavior Problems And 90% Of DIS-EASE NEARLY INSTANTLY Simply By DOING EXXXACTLY, PRECISELY, OPPOSITE Of HOWE We've Been TAUGHT By UNIVERSITY TRAINED Behaviorists
HOWEDY People!
ALL Temperament and Behavior Problems Are CAUSED BY MISHANDLING.
"...all the highest nervous activity, as it manifests itself in the conditional reflex, consists of a continual change of these three fundamental processes -- excitation, inhibition and disinhibition." Ivan P. Pavlov
THAT'S GOOD!
"It is NO WONDER that the marked changes in deviant behavior of children can be achieved through brief, simple educative routines with their mothers which modify the mother's social behaviors shaping the child (Whaler, 1966). Some clinics have reported ELIMINATION ofthe need for child THERAPY through changing the clinical emphasis from clinical to parental HANDLING of the child (Szrynski 1965).
A large number of cases improved sufficiently after preliminary contact with parents that NO treatment of children was required, and almost ALL cases SHOWE a remarkably shortened period for therapy. Quite severe cases of anorexia nervosa have been treated in own to five months by simply REPLACING the parents temporarily with EFFUSIVELY LOVING SUBSTITUTES (Groen, 1966)."
"Despite Skinner's clear denunciation of "negative reinforcement" (1958) NEARLY EVERY LEARNING THEORY model involves the USE OF PUNISHMENT. Of curse, Skinner has never to my knowledge, demonstrated HOWE we escape the phenomenon that an expected reward not received is experienced as a punishment and can produce extensive and persistent aggression (Azrin et al, 1966)."
THAT MEANS we can CURE ALL Temperament And Behavior Problems NEARLY INSTANTLY simply by DOING EXXXACTLY, PRECISELY, OPPOSITE of HOWE we've been TAUGHT TO MISHANDLE and ABUSE HOWER dogs by the UNIVERSITY TRAINED behaviorists and PROFESSIONAL PET CARE SPECIALISTS who MAKE THEIR LIVING off of PERPETUATING their SHEER IDIOCY and IGNOING the works of Drs. Sam Corson, Dra. Mary Cover Jones, Breland & Breland, and other notable psychologists IGNORED and OVERLOOKED by the ABUSERS who TEACH US to lock HOWER dogs in boxes, bribe, choke, intimidate, and IGNORE HOWER dog's, children's and SP-HOWESES cries of FEAR and NEED and WITHHOLD attention, affection, so called "rewards" and UNCONDITIONAL LOVE TRUST and RESPECT.
Pavlov Told Us So 100 Years Ago. Sam Corson, Pavlov's Last Student Demonstrated At UofOH Oxford, That Rehabilitation Of Hyperactive Dogs Can Easily And Readily Be Done Using TLC. Tender Loving Care Is At The Root Of The Scientific Management Of Doggys. <{) ; ~ ) >
WE CANNOT CONTINUE TO BLAME THE DOG OR ITS BREED:
ALL Critters Only Respond In PREDICTABLE INNATE NORMAL NATURAL INSTINCTIVE REFLEXIVE Ways; To Situations And Circumstances Of Their Environment Which We Create For Them.
You GET The Critter You TRAINED
A DOG Is A Dog; As A KAT Is A KAT; As A BIRDY Is A BIRDY; As A CHILD IS A CHILD; As A SP-HOWES Is a SP-HOWES.
The Amazing Puppy Wizard has MUCH CASE HISTORY and PEER REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC DATA to PROVE these "FAR FETCHED" claims. HOWEver, for today's puporses, this will be all that's necessary:
Here's your FREE copy of The Amazing Puppy Wizard's FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?G34D2527A
Just ASK The Amazing Puppy Wizard if you need any additional FREE heelp. There's NO arbritrary INFORMATION in your FREE copy of The Amazing Puppy Wizard's FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual so study it well and do and follow ALL the EXXXERCISES AS INSTRUCTED... it's a PRECISE SCIENCE or it COULDN'T GET 100% CONSISTENT NEARLY INSTANT SUCCESS for all handlers and all dogs in all fields or utilities and behaviors all over the Whole Wild World <{) ; ~ ) >
ALL Critters Only Respond In PREDICTABLE INNATE NORMAL NATURAL INSTINCTIVE REFLEXIVE Ways; To Situations And Circumstances Of Their Environment Which We Create For Them.
You GET The Critter You TRAINED
A DOG Is A Dog; As A KAT Is A KAT; As A BIRDY Is A BIRDY; As A CHILD IS A CHILD; As A SP-HOWES Is a SP-HOWES.
In The Problem Animal Behavior BUSINESS FAILURE MEANS DEATH. SAME SAME SAME SAME, For The Problem Child Behavior BUSINESS.
Damn The Descartean War of "Nature Vs Nurture." We Teach By HOWER Words And Actions And GET BACK What We TAUGHT.
ALL Behavior Problems Are CAUSED BY MISHANDLING
Jer 21 And unto this people thou shalt say, Thus saith the LORD; Behold, I set before you The Way Of Life, And The Way Of Death.
2Ki 19:6 And Isaiah said unto them, Thus shall ye say to your master, Thus saith the LORD, Be not afraid of the words which thou hast heard, with which the servants of the king of Assyria have blasphemed me.
The Puppy Prophet <{); ~ ) >
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:41:01 -0500 From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D." <drv...@mindspring.com> Subject: "time-out"
Dan, my own firm hatred of punishment has recently been intensified by meeting The Puppy Wizard, Jerry Howe, whose work with dogs is marvelous.
There is a literature on harms caused by time out, and perhaps you'd like to look at http://www.dogydoright.com George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.
"As Sam Corson (Pavlov's last student) demonstrated for nearly 50 years at Ohio University (Oxford, O.) there is no treatment more useful for dogs than tender loving care."
George von Hilsheimer, Ph. D., F. R. S. H., Diplomate, Academy of Behavioral Medicine
From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D." <drv...@mindspring.com To: <d...@arcane-computing.com Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 5:38 PM Subject: Doggy advice
Scott, Jerry Howe forwarded me the letter below. I'm glad that you referred negatively to Jerry's habit of CAPITALIZING and HOWEING everything.
I personally hate this habit of his. I think it is his way of diluting his authority - IME he is a very modest fellow. However, contrary to your sneer, he is very competent at living with dogs.
I thought I'd list a series of actions which I found on the list, folk asking advice on what to do about dogs doing this and that, for example:
whining, humping, hunching, pacing, self mutilation - paw licking, side sucking, spinning, prolonged barking, barking at shadows, overstimulated barking, fighting, bullying other dogs, compulsive digging, compulsive scratching, compulsive chewing, frantic behavior, chasing light, chasing shadow, stealing food, digging in garbage can, loosing house (toilet) training. inappropriate fearfulness aggression.
The thing that is fascinating to me, as an ethologist who graduated from college 50 years ago and has spent all of the intervening time working with animals (including the human animal), is that you never see any of these behaviors in wild dingoes, jackals, coyotes or wolves, you don't even see these behaviors in hyenas (who aren't dog related).
You see these behaviors in human managed animals, especially animals who live with neurotic hysterical humans.
As Sam Corson (Pavlov's last student) demonstrated for nearly 50 years at Ohio University (Oxford, O.) there is no treatment more useful for dogs than tender loving care.
George von Hilsheimer, Ph. D., F. R. S. H., Diplomate, Academy of Behavioral Medicine
> So why is that a problem? "The IMBECILITY of some of the claims for operant technique simply take the breath away. Lovas et al (1966) report a standard contingent reward/punishment procedure developing imitative speech in two severly disturbed non verbal schizophrenic boys. After twenty- six days the boys are reported to have been learning new words with alacrity. HOWEver, when REWARDS were moved to a delayed contingency the behavior and learning immediately deteriorated."
From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D." <drv...@mindspring.com>
To: <pdd-aspy...@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 9:31 AM Subject: How does diagnosis shape treatment?
How does diagnosis shape treatment?
Nearly every week I have a visit from Jerry Howe, who publicizes himself as The Puppy Wizard. Jerry is a master at behavioral modification of dogs.
His fundamental bedrock is the work Pavlov's last student, the late Sam Corson, Ph.D., did at the U of Ohio (at Oxford,O).
Sam always pointed out if the dog stopped working for you in the lab, Pavlov and he always took the dog away from the lab, and put him in a loving home and gave him TLC for a couple of months, and then started, very carefully, over again.
Jerry believes that reward and constraint focused training is immoral. I've watched him in one short session calm impossible dogs, just about to be murdered (oops "put to sleep") because of their "incorrigibly" violent behavior.
Sam was one of the first people to apply amphetamine to hyperactivity (he searched the Middle West for hyperactive dogs); but he never lost sight of the fundamental reality that a dog is not a human, but does respond, doggily, to dog love.
You might be surprised to go to B. F. Skinner's "Cumulative Record" and read the essay by Breland and Breland, "The Misbehavior of Organisms".
Animals cannot be successfully trained unless the trainer attends to the evolutionary history, the individual's developmental history, and the environmental niche of the animal being trained.
Yep, right there in Skinner's last and summary book. Even with behavior mod, you must know the animal.
<snip>
Dogs or little boys, you have to know the individual history, and the nature of he disorder.
Dr. Von
PS if you are interested in dogs, then take a look at Jerry's work.
Dr. George VonHilsheimer writes in
"Is there a SCIENCE of BEHAVIOR?":
"Valette 1966 is a complete trivialization of scientific findings. It overstates the case for reinforcement theory. No careful researcher would contend that operant techniques CAN ANY THING MORE than modify SHORT TERM BEHAVIOR in a highly controlled and limited environment with a large number of skillful experimenters.
Certainly the most elaborate studies have shown that the withdrawal or temprary inefficiency of the reward system is immediately followed by CESSATION of the programmed behavior.
In fortunate contrast to this depressing paper is the research reported by Whelan (1966) who makes the simple but profHOWEND caveat that "It is only through CORRECT, EFFICIENT APPLICATION (of operant principles) that children's behavor can be changed to the extent that they can subsequently contribute to the REAL WORLD in which they live." "
"The Methods, Principles, And Philosophy Of Behavior Never Change, Or They'd Not Be Scientific And Could Not Obtain Consistent, Reliable, Fast, Effective Results For All Handler's And All Dogs, ALL OVER THE WHOLE WILD WORLD, NEARLY INSTANTLY, As Taught In Your FREE Copy Of The Puppy Wizard's FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual," The Puppy Wizard. <{} ; ~ ) >
Dr. Von continues:
"Whelan illustrates the simple nature or the learning process by referring to Ferster's engaging study of two three year old chimpanzees taught mathematics through simple procedures. Whelan carries this EVIDENCE a step futher by pointing HOWET it's applicability to disturbed children."
You Get The Critter You Trained
A Dog Is A Dog As A Kat Is A Kat As A Birdie Is A Birdie As A Child Is A Child As A SP-HOWES Is a SP-HOWES.
ALL Critters Only Respond In PREDICTABLE INNATE NORMAL NATURAL INSTINCTIVE REFLEXIVE Ways To Situations And Circumstances Of Their Environment Which We Create For Them.
Damn The Descartean War of "Nature Vs Nurture." We Teach By HOWER Words And Actions And GET BACK What We TAUGHT.
In The Problem Animal Behavior BUSINESS FAILURE MEANS DEATH. SAME SAME, For The Problem Child Behavior BUSINESS.
Dr. Von continues:
"If chimpanzees CAN LEARN mathematics through step by step learning AT THEIR OWN PACE, reinforced primarily by CORRECT ANSWERS rather than with "fruit loops and rasins", we can assume that even developmentally RETARDED or CONfHOWENDED children CAN LEARN as well.
Moreover, Whelan makes the EXXXTREMELY important point that while most teachers assume that learning takes place verbally, primarily it is a non verbal process..
Unfortunately Whelan limits himself to the problem that "teachers must not only modify or remove specific deviant behaviors, but must also develop socially acceptable behavior patterns in the classroom and classroom conditioned goals, NOT LEARNING.
Other researchers have emphasized the importance of adult behaviors in conditioning classroom behavior. An EXXXCELLENT review of this research showd that tantrum behavior, excessive crawling and dependency, isolated play, passivity, spelling failure, and other problem behaviors can be managed by altering habitual adult responses to children (Harris, Wolf and Baer, 1964) .
Such RESEARCH holds GREATER PROMISE in that alteration of the conditioning social environment seems to provide more STABLE and LASTING CHANGES than "M and M's". Moreover, a great deal of work has been done developing EFFECTIVE techniques of behavior modificaton through the conditioning social environment of peers (Hartup, 1964). These directions would seem more PRODUCTIVE than a simple minded trainslation of the Skinner cage to the classroom.
Skinner (1963) pointed HOWET that operant techniques can "be utilized fully ONLY IF we REDEFINE the GOALS of education and the CONDITIONS in the educational environment under which those goals may be reached... (through) a DIFFERENT KIND of educational research which is much more closely concerned with the immediate dimensions of the student's behavior than with gross changes such as IMPROVED PERFORMANCES."
UNFORTUNATELY, neither Skinner nor ANY OTHER learning theorist has provided us with a working model of a school or research enterprise based on systemic and thorough-going APPLICATION of LEARNING PRINCIPLES.
Skinner (1948, 1953) approaches a definition of the philosophical issues involved, and provides an utopian model of a school, but generally psychologists seem STUCK at a level of MANAGEMENT of an aggressively disturbing child in the classroom, through peer approval, or the aplication of accelerating CONsequences in the classroom, or scientifically S-HOWENDING tactics like "TIME HOWET" (which we used to know more simply as "sendin the kid to the cloakroom").
Hobbs (op. cit.) claims that the classroom is a natural environement for the child. Thelen (1965) contends that "classroom practices are UNnatural, UNreasonable, and 'against NATURE.' "This would seem the central issue for the philosophy of education. Mere trivial application of research findings to an institution essentially unchanged from Sumerian academies (Kramer, 1962) will NOT create useful teaching for human beings.
It seems relevant to ask EXXXACTLY WHAT do we know abHOWT the learning situation in which HOWER children find themselves, and why, in the light of HOWER knowledge, do we do any of the things that schools do?"
We know that there is little agreement among adults as to what it is they are SUPPOSED to be DOING, what something to do could be that MIGHT be EFFECTVE, and what it IS that other people who have authority over children ought to be doing (Mc- Eachern and Taylor, 1967). Wherefor the child's CONfusiHOWEN?
It is NO WONDER that the marked changes in deviant behavior of children can be achieved through brief, simple educative routines with their mothers which modify the mother's social behaviors shaping the child (Whaler, 1966). Some clinics have reported ELIMINATION ofthe need for child THERAPY through changing the clinical emphasis from clinical to parental HANDLING of the child (Szrynski 1965).
A large number of cases improved sufficiently after preliminary contact with parents that NO treatment of children was required, and almost ALL cases SHOWE a remarkably shortened period for therapy. Quite severe cases of anorexia nervosa have been treated in own to five months by simply REPLACING the parents temporarily with EFFUSIVELY LOVING SUBSTITUTES (Groen, 1966).
Probably the most absurd figure in Amaerican mass media is the TEACHER (Gerbner, 1966). HOWE can we EXXXPECT children to LEARN responsible P-HOWER from models of IMPOTENCE? We KNOW that LEARNING a complex ritualized social role, is facilitated by observation of an INTELLIGIBLE MODEL much more effectively than by trial and error with REINFORCEMENT.
Roles which are relatively arbitrary and senseless are the most difficult to learn (Luchins, 1966). Do we make ANY EFFORT as teachers to CORRECT the massive impact of media?
HOWE can the ARBITRARINESS and SENSELESSNESS of IMPOTENT ADULT MODELS be redeemed by anything short of RELEVANCE and COMMITMENT?
As an engaging final comment on the PROFESSION let me mention the little study by Dittman et al (1965) tha when 15 psychotherapists and 9 professional dancers evaluated facial and bodily expressons for effect the dancers were much MOORE accurate. Need we say MOORE abHOWET the training of therapists?
THE OPERANT FALLACY
Programs utilizing the "contingencies of reinforcement model" proposed by Skinner (1963) ar no more well established in research than the various dynamic therapists. Research in four areas : 1) direct evaluation of programmed systems for elarning; 2) reinforcement; 3) cognitive dissonance; and 4) motivation, MOST SURELY DEMOLISH the claims of operant programers.
The 190 studies annotated by Schramm (1964) when inspected display NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES in SUCCESS among approaches and modifications. Programmed instruction is no worse than conventional instruction, and takes less time, but time reductions in conventional instruction has frequently been shown possible without detrimental effects. If you draw your controls cagily you can always show the superiority of your PET technique.
Moore and Smit (1964) compared variations on programmed materials, machines, texts, written responses, merely reading, free response, multiple choice, and iving or not giving the students results. There were NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES despite Skinner's insistence on the importance of the CONTINGENCY of REINFORCEMENT. Carpenter and Greenhill (1963) could find NO DIFFERENCE in RESULTS even after eliminating the self-pacing feature by presenting the materials by TV or Video.
Krumboltz and Kiesler (1965) reported that a two month follow up test showed NO DIFFERENCE between students given a variety of reinforcement schedules. Mayo and Longo (1966) report that naval and marine trainees saved 30% of time in learning electronics fundamentals through a programed course witrh superior scores on one measure but not on another, and with no follow-up reported.
The same authors reported a reductionj from 26 HOWERS to 19 HOWERS in instruction time through the use of program with NO DIFFERENCE in test scores, except that as longer blocks of materiallearned through programmed means were tesed the scores DECREASED.
When the control instruction is manipulated an entirely DIFFERENT picture emerges Jacobs and Kulkarni (1966) assignedstudents in three different schools to classes with standard programmed material giving immediate knowledge of results to classes without results and to classes with the order of sections of the program inverted.
In two schools the groups without knowledge of results and the groups with inverted material SCORED HIGHER. In one school there was NO DIFFERENCE. So much for THEORY. Reid and Taylor (1965) presented a linear program on paper-making to 60 paid undergrads with a 12 week follow up test. The group which merely read learned the same material in 154 minutes to 243 minutes for the group given responses- a REVERSAL of the usual BIASED RESULTS based on POOR CON-TROLLS. There were no differences on post tests.
Spagnoli (1965) reports on a study exposing the control and programed group to the same material in a concentrated effort over a limited period of time. There were NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES.
Sassenrath and Garverick (1965) gave 4 matched groups of 120 students four procedures: 1) looking up the wrong answers, 2) having questions discussed by the instructors, 3) checking answers from correct ones on the board, and 4) no feedback. The discussion method proved best.
Finally, in studying means of training men to perform a 72 action prcedure on Nike-Hercules equipment, Cox and Boren (1965) demonstrated that the time required to learn the procedure to critterion was NO DIFFERENT when the actions were organized into seven operant spans and taught in reverse order, in natural order, or without grouping into operant spans at all.
IT IS CLEAR that as comparisons became more sophisticated programed instruction and other operant teaching techniquesreveal tehemselves as simply another prestigiHOWES FAD--somewhat better than conventional instruction in saving time, but certainly not providing a better or better organized or more independently useful GRASP of KNOWLEDGE.
The IMBECILITY of some of the claims for operant technique simply take the breath away. Lovas et al (1966) report a standard contingent reward/punishment procedure developing imitative speech in two severly disturbed non verbal schizophrenic boys. After twenty- six days the boys are reported to have been learning new words with alacrity. HOWEver, when REWARDS were moved to a delayed contingency the behavoir and learning immediately deteriorated.
Despite this, and despite the fact that there was no evidence of cognitive association with the words, the authors leap to the conclusion that the fact that the boys improved in the acquisition of Norwegian words WITHOUT REWARDS while still being given English words WITH REWARDS suggest hat the children may be able to acquire new behaviors on their own.
The need for this study escapes one, particularly in view of the very well established fact that schizophrenics condition quite readily (Mednick, 1958)
One can see the "SCIENTIFIC" PRECISION by which the authors drop contingent reinforcements thus PROVING that the parrot behavior was indeed caused by the schedule and NOT by some other mystical force.
The use of Norwegian to demonstrate learning that could not even remotely be related to previous history is a grotesquery too bizarre to be credited. Who could possibly doubt that this useless and probably damaging trained seal routine depended on the psychologist's antics?
What on earth led them to believe that a schizophrenic needs even more other-focused responsiveness?
Lovaas et al (1965) reported three programs carried out on five year old autistic twins conditioining them to "social behavior" and to eliminate pathologial behaviors such as self-stimulation and tantrums.
Affectionate and other social behaviors toward adults increaseed after adults had been associated with shock reduction. The routine for this treatment brings immediate relief to mind Sawrey and Wesz (1956) routine for producing ulcers in monkeys.
I suppose it is USELESS to speculate on the source of SO CALLED THERAPISTS willingness to experiment on human beings with procedures for which there is sound experimentally established WARNINGS. If the "double blind" theory of the origin of schizophrenia (Bateson, 1956) is at all valid, HOWE DEVASTATING the experience must ULTIMATELY BE.
Do Lovaas et al REALLY BELIEVE the schizophrenic has no cognitive processes and DOES NOT KNOW WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SHOCK? Greger (1965) criticized this study on the basis that trainsfer CANNOT be generalized.
That issue can be answered by experience, and, of curse, the "social" behavior of these children deteriorates as soon as the psychologists LOOSE INTEREST.
The IMPORTANT ISSUE for a SCIENCE OF BEHAVIOR is why not attempt those things which are KNOWN to WORK at least in some cases if only for control puporses.
Kanner (1954) reports that 13 classically autistic children improved enough to go to school without "anything that is regarded as good psychotherapy or as psychotherapy at all..."
Autistic children have been known to become permenantely social by deinstitutionalization, BY REMOVAL from the parents, BY RADICAL CHANGES in other environments, and by MASSIVE DOSAGE of TOUCHING, HOLDING, FONDLING LOVE DESPITE THE REJECTION OF THE CHILD.
My case, Larry, (vonHilsheimer, 1965b), demonstrates a recovery by using the mother as an autistic boy's teacher in an open millieu. It is curiHOWES that the operant technicians provide as few, and as UNIMAGINITAVE controls for thier "research" as the Freudians.
REWARD / PUNISHMENT
Despite Skinner's clear denunciation of "negative reinforcement" (1958) NEARLY EVERY LEARNING THEORY model involves the USE OF PUNISHMENT. Of curse, Skinner has never to my knowledge, demonstrated HOWE we escape the phenomenon that an expected reward not received is experienced as a punishment and can produce extensive and persistent aggression (Azrin et al, 1966).
MIMICRY, PLAY, EXPLORATION AND THE NEED FOR DATA
Complex activities are LEARNED MORE QUICKLY through OBSERVATION (copying, if you will) than by trial and error with reinforcemet (Luchins,). Observers of subjects making a first trial of a multiple choice bolt head maze made fewer errors than the practiced subjects in the second run, while subjects who have been shocked for error on a first trial made more errors than either (Rosenbaum & Hewitt, 1966). Students will modify their beliefs more when rewarded for the way in which they carried out arguing for a disagreeable position (role reward), than when rewarded for the content of the argument (Wallace, 1966).
===================
INTRO TO WITS' END DOG TRAINING MANUAL George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D. F.R.S.H.
Several years ago one of my old students telephoned to me and asked me what I knew about Doggie Do Right, a device to cause your neighbor's dog to stop barking.
I had not heard of the device, nor its inventor, Jerry Howe, but I telephoned, read his website, and told my graduate that I thought the device was worth a trial - indeed I shut up the dogs in my neighborhood by turning on Jerry's supersonic device.
After all we all know that dogs respond to whistles humans cannot hear, so why not respond to "attaboy" sounds which humans cannot hear.
My student lived far from my Florida homestead, so he tried it on the three incredibly savage, hyperactive and noisy dogs who lived behind a tall fence just 3 feet back of his bedroom.
Hot rats! The device worked,
Andy got his sleep and I didn't think much of the matter again.
A few months ago I had new neighbors on each side of my house, four of them, all with noisy unshuttupable dogs. Argh!
So I foned Andrew in Virgina, received the intelligence that his neighbors dogs were still quiet, and then I foned Jerry Howe, the inventor of Doggie Do Right, who came to visit me.
Merlin walked into my office.
Jerry is a slender fellow with a belly button lenghth grey beard tapering down his chest. I liked him immediately, and I applied his instrument to the neighborhood again which again became silent.
It occured to me that if this ultrasonic field worked with dogs that we ought at least to ask the question, what happens to humans in range of the device???
I asked Jerry to give me a list of customers and began inquiring among them. One thing became immediately evident. The Doggie Do Right not only shuts up your neighbors' dogs, it calms and modifies your husband's behavior.
Holey Moley, Captain Marvel, this device has major potential.
In the meantime Jerry gave me a copy of his Wits End Dog Training Manual. I was delighted. He also introduced me to the world of professional dog trainers some of whom even have Ph.D.s in psychology.
This was not such a delight as it appeared that none of these luminaries had actually read Skinner, Lazarus or other fountains of wisdom in psychology. Indeed, it seemed as though they knew very little about the laws of behavior at all!
Punishment and confrontation seemed to be their major stock in trade.
Well, if you go to my website, www.drbiofeedback.com you can read of the career of Sam Corson, I.P. Pavlov's last student.
Sam demonstrated that rehabilitation of hyperactive dogs can easily and readily be done using TLC, tender loving care is at the root of the scientific management of doggies.
Pavlov told us so 100 years ago.
So what are these degreed morons doing punishing dogs, and shouting "NO" into their doggie faces? If you pick up B.F.Skinner's last book, CUMULATIVE RECORD, included in it is an essay by Keller Breland and Maryann Breland entitled THE MISBEHAVIOR OF ORGANISMS.
Skinner deliberately included his students' chapter to emphasize that you cannot manage the behavior of animals unless you take into consideration 1. the animal's evolutionary niche (who is the animal?); 2. the animal's personal history (who is the animal?) and 3, the instinctive repetoire of the animal (who is the animal?) and 4. the personality of the animal (who is the animal?).
The Brelands moved far from the white rat. "Thirty-eight species, totaling over 6,000 individual animals, have been conditioned, and we have dared to tackle such unlikely subjects as reindeer, cockatoos, raccoons, porpoises, and whales."
Jerry Howe spends most of his times with dogs, but he has learned Pavlov's lesson well. Dogs are individuals, they are individual DOGS, and they respond most directly and immediately to love and tender loving care.
Read with pleasure, and then go love your dog.
George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H. Who's Who Honoree since 1983
From: TooCool (larrym...@hotmail.com)
The Puppy Wizard's Wits End Training Method
I have studied canine behavior and dog training for years. I have a huge library that covers every system of training.
The Puppy Wizard's (Jerry Howe's) Wits' End Training Method is by far the most scientific, the most advanced, the kindest, the quickest and the most effective training method yet discovered.
It is not an assortment of training tips and tricks; it is a logically consistent system. Every behavior problem and every obedience skill is treated in the same logically consistent manner.
Please study his manual carefully. Please endeavor to understand the basis of his system and please follow his directions exactly. His manual is a masterpiece. It is dense with theory, with explanation, with detailed descriptions about why behavior problems occur and how their solution should be approached.
One should not pick and choose from among his methods based upon what you personally like or dislike. His is not a bag of tricks but a complete and integrated system for not only training a dog but for raising a loving companion.
When I once said to Jerry that his system creates for you the dog of your dreams, his response was that it produces for your dog the owner of his dreams.
You see, Jerry has discovered that if you are gentle with your dog then he will be gentle with you, if you praise your dog every time he looks at you, then you will become the center of your dogs world, if you use Jerry's sound distraction with praise, then it takes just minutes-sometimes merely seconds-to train your dog to not misbehave (even in your absence) (Just 15 seconds this morning to train my 10 week old puppy to lie quietly and let me clip his nails).
Using Jerry's scientific method (sound distraction / praise / alteration / variation) it takes just minutes to train you dog to respond to your commands.
What a pleasure it was for me to see my 6 week old puppy running as fast has his wobbly little legs would carry him in response to my recall command-and he comes running every time I call no matter where we are or what he is doing.
At ten weeks old now, my puppy never strains upon his leash thanks to Jerry's hot & cold exercises and his Family Pack Leadership exercises.
Jerry has discovered that if you scold your dog, if you scream at him, if you intimidate him, if you hurt him, if you force him then his natural response is to oppose you.
Is Jerry a nut?
It doesn't make any difference to me whether he is or not. It is a logical fallacy to judge a person's ideas based upon their personality. As far as dogs are concerned, Jerry wears his heart upon his sleeve. It touches him deeply when he hears of trainers forcing, intimidating, scolding or hurting dogs.
More than that, he knows that force is not effective and that it will certainly lead to behavior problems; sometime problems so severe that people put their dogs down because of those problems.
I believe that it is natural for humans to want to control their dog by force. Jerry knows this too. We have all been at our wits' end, haven't we?
Dogs have a natural tendency to mimic. In scientific literature it is referred to allelomimetic behavior. Dogs respond in like kind to force; they respond in like kind to praise.
Don't bribe your dog with treats; give him what he wants most-your kind attention. Give him your praise. You will be astonished at how your dog 's anxiety will dissipate and how their behavior problems will dissipate along with their anxiety.
Treat Jerry Howe's (The Puppy Wizard) Wits' End Training Method as a scientific principle just as you would the law of gravity and you will have astounding success.
Dog behavior is just as scientific as is gravity.
If you follow Jerry's puppy rules you will get a sweet little Magwai; if you don't you will surely get a little gremlin (anyone see The Gremlins?). --Larry
Instrumental / Classical / Operant / Conditioning CC / OC / IC / -P +P / +R -R / S R / R S It's ALL The SAME SAME SAME SAME <{); ~ ) >
George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.
From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D." <drv...@mindspring.com> Subject: The Amazing Jerry's take on psychobabble Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 12:13:44 -0400
You might improve the learning of folk who actually live with and train dogs to do useful things if you excluded everyone who uses psychobabble from your lists.
I recommend to all of you who wish to taste the flavor of sensible animal behaviorists to read THE MISBEHAVIOR OF ORGANISMS, Breland and Breland.
This married pair of psychologists began the long trail of highly trained animals who are symbolized by Shamu eating a mackrel from a girl's hand instead of eating the much more tasty pretty girl who is exactly the size of the natural food of killer whales, seals. Yum!
The essay, by the way, is a chapter in B.F. Skinner's summing up book, CUMULATIVE RECORD. They include a sentence which more or less says, "unless you understand the personal history of the particular animal, and the history of this animal's species and group, the developmental history of the animal, you cannot effectively train the animal.
Pigs root and hen's scratch, if you try to train hens without scratching or pigs without scratching or pigeons without pecking, you aren't going to have much success.
A conditional reflex is one which is learned, the original primitive reflex occurs no matter what the history of the animal, and is hard wired. If you train the animal to respond, say by ringing a bell immediately before turning on a bright light, then you've taught the animal and made his native reflex of pupil constriction conditional upon the ringing of a bell.
Thorndyke added some terminology to this kind of training and insisted that when you train the animal to make gross motor responses that this learning is "instrumental", the animal takes action and uses an instrument.
The Russian word translated as "conditional" in all other contexts was mistranslated by Pavlov's American translator, Horsley Gannt, as "conditioned" and so American psychology went haring after phantasmagora.
The major theorists for the development of the language of operant conditioning are Edward Thorndike, John Watson, and B. F. Skinner. Their approach to behaviorism played a major role in the development of American psychology.
They proposed that learning is the result of the application of consequences; that is, learners begin to connect certain responses with certain stimuli. This connection causes the probability of the response to change (i.e., learning occurs.)
Thorndike labeled this type of learning instrumental. Using consequences, he taught kittens to manipulate a latch (e.g., an instrument). Skinner renamed instrumental as "operant" because in this learning, one is "operating" on, and is influenced by, the environment. Where classical conditioning illustrates S-->R learning, operant conditioning is often viewed as R-->S learning since it is the consequence that follows the response that influences whether the response is likely or unlikely to occur again.
It is through operant conditioning that voluntary responses are learned.
One should note that Russian Psychology did very well without the operant language, and only pettifogging university professors ought to worry about what kind of label we attach to the learning. Pfui!
Even Skinner understood this!
And please note if you saw the original movie, THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE, you saw a Chinese psychologist who was based on Andrew Salter, CONDITIONED REFLEX THERAPY.
Alas, Salter didn't have a Ph.D., but he basically rescued us from the long Freudian nightmare and returned psychotherapy to a scientific basis. Alas, the 2nd movie didn't even cite Salter as a source. "...all the highest nervous activity, as it manifests itself in the conditional reflex, consists of a continual change of these three fundamental processes -- excitation, inhibition and disinhibition." Ivan P. Pavlov
George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.
What's important is, "does Shamu reliably eat the fish and not the pretty girl?"
George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. -Arthur Schopenhauer
"Thank you for fighting the fine fight-- even tho it's a hopeless task, in this system of things. As long as man is ruling man, there will be animals (and humans!) abused and neglected. :-( Your student," Juanita.
"If you've got them by the balls their hearts and minds will follow," John Wayne.
The Amazing Puppy Wizard. <{} ; ~ ) >
Michael Rhino - 18 Aug 2005 01:33 GMT Lately my cat has developed a bad habit. When she hears the refrigerator door open, she comes running and gets in the way. I don't want to slam the door on her, but it is extra work to push her out of the way.
Newbie - 18 Aug 2005 05:04 GMT : Lately my cat has developed a bad habit. When she hears the refrigerator : door open, she comes running and gets in the way. I don't want to slam : the door on her, but it is extra work to push her out of the way. It may be just a new curiosity. Once she has seen it a few times, she may move on to other attractions. :)
Wayne Boatwright - 18 Aug 2005 05:49 GMT >: Lately my cat has developed a bad habit. When she hears the refrigerator >: door open, she comes running and gets in the way. I don't want to slam >: the door on her, but it is extra work to push her out of the way. > > It may be just a new curiosity. Once she has seen it a few times, she > may move on to other attractions. :) And it may take a while... At different times, two of our rescue kittens became fascinated with the refrigerator and would try to get inside every time we opened the door. Our fridge has a self-closing door but it's gentle, so we just let it close of its own accord and it would gradually "squeeze" them out. Eventually they grew tired of it, but this was over a period of months.
 Signature Wayne Boatwright *¿* ____________________________________________
Give me a smart idiot over a stupid genius any day. Sam Goldwyn, 1882-1974
--- avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 0533-3, 08/17/2005 Tested on: 8/17/2005 9:45:14 PM avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software. http://www.avast.com
TheAmazingPussyWizard@HushMail.Com - 18 Aug 2005 22:25 GMT HOWEDY wayne,
> >: Lately my cat has developed a bad habit. SURPRISE SURPRISE?
> >: When she hears the refrigerator door open, she comes > >: running and gets in the way. SHAAAZZZAAAMMM? Hey? Do you think you can teach The Amazing Pussy Wizard that trick?
> >: I don't want to slam the door on her, Of curse not. Your kat would probably bit you for that.
> >: but it is extra work to push her out of the way. NO PROBLEMO. You can TRAIN her not to do that in just a couple of minutes of EZ GENTLE NON PHYSICAL CONDITIONING <{); ~ ) >
> > It may be just a new curiosity. Yeah, he's curiHOWES abHOWET breakfast someMOORE.
> > Once she has seen it a few times, she > > may move on to other attractions. :) Yeah. Hey? Have you seen the tooth faerie today?
> And it may take a while... It'll take till HEEL FREEZES OVER.
> At different times, two of our rescue kittens > became fascinated with the refrigerator and would > try to get inside every time we opened the door. Naaah?
> Our fridge has a self-closing door but it's gentle, > so we just let it close of its own accord and it would > gradually "squeeze" them out. Eventually they grew tired > of it, but this was over a period of months. BWEEEEEEEEEEEEAAHAHAHAHHAHAAA!!!
GOOD LUCK!
Hey? Had you NOTICED NO WON ELSE GOT ANY SUGGESTIONS?
> -- > Wayne Boatwright *¿* > ____________________________________________ > > Give me a smart idiot over a stupid genius any day. > Sam Goldwyn, 1882-1974 Hey? You seen Sam today?
Oh lookey! Here comes Sam and the tooth faerie:0700
Subject: Re: Kitten in the kitchen HOWEDY Kate,
kate wrote:
> Hi All,
> I am looking for some advice. Ain't that sumpthin... You're asking kat abusers cowards liars and active acute long term incurable MENTAL CASES for training advice THEY AIN'T GOT or they WOULDN'T HAVE THE SAME PROBLEMS, would they, Kate.
> Angus, my gorgeous 5m.o. burmese baby boy is allowed > everywhere in my house *except* for the kitchen benches. NO PROBLEMO. You can TRAIN your kat JUST LIKE HOWE The Amazing Puppy Wizard teaches HIS 100% CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual Students ALL OVER The WHOWEL WILD WORLD HOWE to train their dogs kats kids and SP-HOWESES NEARLY INSTANTLY and FOR FREE, to boot.
Your newfHOWEND pals will tell you to KILLFILE The Amazing Puppy Wizard on accHOWENT of HE'S IDENTIFIED EXXXPOSED and DISCREDITED them as lying kat abusing mental cases.
> This is for both hygiene and safety reasons - he has no > sense of fire safety and has walked across the lit stove > and a few days ago I caught him gazing with rapt attention > into a boiling pot of rice. Could be a tasty combination.
> I have tried removing him with a stern "NO", Oh? That'll teach the kat to FEAR and MISTRUST YOU.
> squirting him with water, squirting with water and > vinegar, removing him, stern "NO" and little smack > on the haunch. Well, THAT EXXXPLAINS HOWE COME you're postin here abHOWETS.
> I have also tried distracting him with a toy or game after > removing him (leaving a gap so he doesn't see it as a reward). You mean you REWARD bad behaviors with bribery...
> When he really wants to get on the bench he won't get > involved in even his favourite games. He will repeatedly > get on the bench 5-6 times even after being disciplined > each time. Your kat is playin you like a fiddle. LUCKY THING you're askin EXXXPERTS for ADVICE for the SAME SAME SAME SAME PROBLEMS they got and CAN'T TRAIN, kate.
> Occasionally he will not jump up if I catch him about > to and say "NO" a few times but usually he just ignores > me. Your kat thinks you're a PSYCHOPATH.
> Tonight I tried a timeout, BWEEEEEEEEEEAAHAHAHHAHAAA!!!
> shutting him in the bathroom for one minute after about > the 5th time we had gone throught the "NO"-smack-distract > routine and he was responding to the vinegar spray by turning > around and crouching with his face in the corner (presumably > acting on the 'if I can't see her she can't see me' principle. Well, you're in EXXXCELLENT company.
> Very cute but frustrating. "CUTE"?
> My questions are, do I persist with the timeout? DECENT PEOPLE DO NOT POST HERE abHOWETS.
> Should I combine it with something else? Yeah. You should COMBINE PUNISHMENT with UNCONDITIONAL LOVE TRUST and RESPECT and when you FIGGER HOWET HOWE to DO THAT, you just tell The Amazing Puppy Wizard so HE can PASS IT ON so the ANIMAL LOVERS you're asking for ADVICE won't FEEL EMBARRASSED abHOWET NOT HURTING and INTIMIDATING critters to train them, kate.
> Try a completely different tack? SHAAAZZZAAAMMM???
> I don't want my little fellow getting hurt So you'll HURT and INTIMIDATE HIM for HIS OWN GOOD.
> and the structure of my house is such that I can't > block his access to the kitchen. BWEEEEEEEEEAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAA!!!
> Thanks THANK YOU!
> Kate Just INSERT KAT wherever you see DOG CHILD or SP-HOWES and you got the same same:
ALL Temperament and Behavior Problems And 90% Of DIS-EASE Are CAUSED BY MISHANDLING. THAT'S GOOD! THAT MEANS We can CURE ALL Temperament And Behavior Problems And 90% Of DIS-EASE NEARLY INSTANTLY Simply By DOING EXXXACTLY, PRECISELY, OPPOSITE Of HOWE We've Been TAUGHT By UNIVERSITY TRAINED Behaviorists
HOWEDY People!
ALL Temperament and Behavior Problems Are CAUSED BY MISHANDLING.
"...all the highest nervous activity, as it manifests itself in the conditional reflex, consists of a continual change of these three fundamental processes -- excitation, inhibition and disinhibition." Ivan P. Pavlov
THAT'S GOOD!
"It is NO WONDER that the marked changes in deviant behavior of children can be achieved through brief, simple educative routines with their mothers which modify the mother's social behaviors shaping the child (Whaler, 1966). Some clinics have reported ELIMINATION ofthe need for child THERAPY through changing the clinical emphasis from clinical to parental HANDLING of the child (Szrynski 1965).
A large number of cases improved sufficiently after preliminary contact with parents that NO treatment of children was required, and almost ALL cases SHOWE a remarkably shortened period for therapy. Quite severe cases of anorexia nervosa have been treated in own to five months by simply REPLACING the parents temporarily with EFFUSIVELY LOVING SUBSTITUTES (Groen, 1966)."
"Despite Skinner's clear denunciation of "negative reinforcement" (1958) NEARLY EVERY LEARNING THEORY model involves the USE OF PUNISHMENT. Of curse, Skinner has never to my knowledge, demonstrated HOWE we escape the phenomenon that an expected reward not received is experienced as a punishment and can produce extensive and persistent aggression (Azrin et al, 1966)."
THAT MEANS we can CURE ALL Temperament And Behavior Problems NEARLY INSTANTLY simply by DOING EXXXACTLY, PRECISELY, OPPOSITE of HOWE we've been TAUGHT TO MISHANDLE and ABUSE HOWER dogs by the UNIVERSITY TRAINED behaviorists and PROFESSIONAL PET CARE SPECIALISTS who MAKE THEIR LIVING off of PERPETUATING their SHEER IDIOCY and IGNOING the works of Drs. Sam Corson, Dra. Mary Cover Jones, Breland & Breland, and other notable psychologists IGNORED and OVERLOOKED by the ABUSERS who TEACH US to lock HOWER dogs in boxes, bribe, choke, intimidate, and IGNORE HOWER dog's, children's and SP-HOWESES cries of FEAR and NEED and WITHHOLD attention, affection, so called "rewards" and UNCONDITIONAL LOVE TRUST and RESPECT.
Pavlov Told Us So 100 Years Ago. Sam Corson, Pavlov's Last Student Demonstrated At UofOH Oxford, That Rehabilitation Of Hyperactive Dogs Can Easily And Readily Be Done Using TLC. Tender Loving Care Is At The Root Of The Scientific Management Of Doggys. <{) ; ~ ) >
WE CANNOT CONTINUE TO BLAME THE DOG OR ITS BREED
ALL Critters Only Respond In PREDICTABLE INNATE NORMAL NATURAL INSTINCTIVE REFLEXIVE Ways; To Situations And Circumstances Of Their Environment Which We Create For Them.
You GET The Critter You TRAINED
A DOG Is A Dog; As A KAT Is A KAT; As A BIRDY Is A BIRDY; As A CHILD IS A CHILD; As A SP-HOWES Is a SP-HOWES.
The Amazing Puppy Wizard has MUCH CASE HISTORY and PEER REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC DATA to PROVE these "FAR FETCHED" claims. HOWEver, for today's puporses, this will be all that's necessary:
Here's your FREE copy of The Amazing Puppy Wizard's FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?G34D2527A
Just ASK The Amazing Puppy Wizard if you need any additional FREE heelp. There's NO arbritrary INFORMATION in your FREE copy of The Amazing Puppy Wizard's FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual so study it well and do and follow ALL the EXXXERCISES AS INSTRUCTED... it's a PRECISE SCIENCE or it COULDN'T GET 100% CONSISTENT NEARLY INSTANT SUCCESS for all handlers and all dogs in all fields or utilities and behaviors all over the Whole Wild World <{) ; ~ ) >
ALL Critters Only Respond In PREDICTABLE INNATE NORMAL NATURAL INSTINCTIVE REFLEXIVE Ways; To Situations And Circumstances Of Their Environment Which We Create For Them.
You GET The Critter You TRAINED
A DOG Is A Dog; As A KAT Is A KAT; As A BIRDY Is A BIRDY; As A CHILD IS A CHILD; As A SP-HOWES Is a SP-HOWES.
In The Problem Animal Behavior BUSINESS FAILURE MEANS DEATH. SAME SAME SAME SAME, For The Problem Child Behavior BUSINESS.
Damn The Descartean War of "Nature Vs Nurture." We Teach By HOWER Words And Actions And GET BACK What We TAUGHT.
ALL Behavior Problems Are CAUSED BY MISHANDLING
Jer 21 And unto this people thou shalt say, Thus saith the LORD; Behold, I set before you The Way Of Life, And The Way Of Death.
2Ki 19:6 And Isaiah said unto them, Thus shall ye say to your master, Thus saith the LORD, Be not afraid of the words which thou hast heard, with which the servants of the king of Assyria have blasphemed me.
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not so send peace, but a sword.
"For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
"And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. - Matthew 10:34-36.
The Puppy Prophet <{); ~ ) >
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:41:01 -0500 From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D." <drv...@mindspring.com> Subject: "time-out"
Dan, my own firm hatred of punishment has recently been intensified by meeting The Puppy Wizard, Jerry Howe, whose work with dogs is marvelous.
There is a literature on harms caused by time out, and perhaps you'd like to look at http://www.dogydoright.com George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.
"As Sam Corson (Pavlov's last student) demonstrated for nearly 50 years at Ohio University (Oxford, O.) there is no treatment more useful for dogs than tender loving care."
George von Hilsheimer, Ph. D., F. R. S. H., Diplomate, Academy of Behavioral Medicine
From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D." <drv...@mindspring.com To: <d...@arcane-computing.com Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 5:38 PM Subject: Doggy advice
Scott, Jerry Howe forwarded me the letter below. I'm glad that you referred negatively to Jerry's habit of CAPITALIZING and HOWEING everything.
I personally hate this habit of his. I think it is his way of diluting his authority - IME he is a very modest fellow. However, contrary to your sneer, he is very competent at living with dogs.
I thought I'd list a series of actions which I found on the list, folk asking advice on what to do about dogs doing this and that, for example:
whining, humping, hunching, pacing, self mutilation - paw licking, side sucking, spinning, prolonged barking, barking at shadows, overstimulated barking, fighting, bullying other dogs, compulsive digging, compulsive scratching, compulsive chewing, frantic behavior, chasing light, chasing shadow, stealing food, digging in garbage can, loosing house (toilet) training. inappropriate fearfulness aggression.
The thing that is fascinating to me, as an ethologist who graduated from college 50 years ago and has spent all of the intervening time working with animals (including the human animal), is that you never see any of these behaviors in wild dingoes, jackals, coyotes or wolves, you don't even see these behaviors in hyenas (who aren't dog related).
You see these behaviors in human managed animals, especially animals who live with neurotic hysterical humans.
As Sam Corson (Pavlov's last student) demonstrated for nearly 50 years at Ohio University (Oxford, O.) there is no treatment more useful for dogs than tender loving care.
George von Hilsheimer, Ph. D., F. R. S. H., Diplomate, Academy of Behavioral Medicine
> So why is that a problem? "The IMBECILITY of some of the claims for operant technique simply take the breath away. Lovas et al (1966) report a standard contingent reward/punishment procedure developing imitative speech in two severly disturbed non verbal schizophrenic boys. After twenty- six days the boys are reported to have been learning new words with alacrity. HOWEver, when REWARDS were moved to a delayed contingency the behavior and learning immediately deteriorated."
From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D." <drv...@mindspring.com>
To: <pdd-aspy...@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 9:31 AM Subject: How does diagnosis shape treatment?
How does diagnosis shape treatment?
Nearly every week I have a visit from Jerry Howe, who publicizes himself as The Puppy Wizard. Jerry is a master at behavioral modification of dogs.
His fundamental bedrock is the work Pavlov's last student, the late Sam Corson, Ph.D., did at the U of Ohio (at Oxford,O).
Sam always pointed out if the dog stopped working for you in the lab, Pavlov and he always took the dog away from the lab, and put him in a loving home and gave him TLC for a couple of months, and then started, very carefully, over again.
Jerry believes that reward and constraint focused training is immoral. I've watched him in one short session calm impossible dogs, just about to be murdered (oops "put to sleep") because of their "incorrigibly" violent behavior.
Sam was one of the first people to apply amphetamine to hyperactivity (he searched the Middle West for hyperactive dogs); but he never lost sight of the fundamental reality that a dog is not a human, but does respond, doggily, to dog love.
You might be surprised to go to B. F. Skinner's "Cumulative Record" and read the essay by Breland and Breland, "The Misbehavior of Organisms".
Animals cannot be successfully trained unless the trainer attends to the evolutionary history, the individual's developmental history, and the environmental niche of the animal being trained.
Yep, right there in Skinner's last and summary book. Even with behavior mod, you must know the animal.
<snip>
Dogs or little boys, you have to know the individual history, and the nature of he disorder.
Dr. Von
PS if you are interested in dogs, then take a look at Jerry's work.
Dr. George VonHilsheimer writes in "Is there a SCIENCE of BEHAVIOR?":
"Valette 1966 is a complete trivialization of scientific findings. It overstates the case for reinforcement theory. No careful researcher would contend that operant techniques CAN ANY THING MORE than modify SHORT TERM BEHAVIOR in a highly controlled and limited environment with a large number of skillful experimenters.
Certainly the most elaborate studies have shown that the withdrawal or temprary inefficiency of the reward system is immediately followed by CESSATION of the programmed behavior.
In fortunate contrast to this depressing paper is the research reported by Whelan (1966) who makes the simple but profHOWEND caveat that "It is only through CORRECT, EFFICIENT APPLICATION (of operant principles) that children's behavor can be changed to the extent that they can subsequently contribute to the REAL WORLD in which they live." "
"The Methods, Principles, And Philosophy Of Behavior Never Change, Or They'd Not Be Scientific And Could Not Obtain Consistent, Reliable, Fast, Effective Results For All Handler's And All Dogs, ALL OVER THE WHOLE WILD WORLD, NEARLY INSTANTLY, As Taught In Your FREE Copy Of The Puppy Wizard's FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual," The Puppy Wizard. <{} ; ~ ) >
Dr. Von continues:
"Whelan illustrates the simple nature or the learning process by referring to Ferster's engaging study of two three year old chimpanzees taught mathematics through simple procedures. Whelan carries this EVIDENCE a step futher by pointing HOWET it's applicability to disturbed children."
You Get The Critter You Trained
A Dog Is A Dog As A Kat Is A Kat As A Birdie Is A Birdie As A Child Is A Child As A SP-HOWES Is a SP-HOWES.
ALL Critters Only Respond In PREDICTABLE INNATE NORMAL NATURAL INSTINCTIVE REFLEXIVE Ways To Situations And Circumstances Of Their Environment Which We Create For Them.
Damn The Descartean War of "Nature Vs Nurture." We Teach By HOWER Words And Actions And GET BACK What We TAUGHT.
In The Problem Animal Behavior BUSINESS FAILURE MEANS DEATH. SAME SAME, For The Problem Child Behavior BUSINESS.
Dr. Von continues:
"If chimpanzees CAN LEARN mathematics through step by step learning AT THEIR OWN PACE, reinforced primarily by CORRECT ANSWERS rather than with "fruit loops and rasins", we can assume that even developmentally RETARDED or CONfHOWENDED children CAN LEARN as well.
Moreover, Whelan makes the EXXXTREMELY important point that while most teachers assume that learning takes place verbally, primarily it is a non verbal process..
Unfortunately Whelan limits himself to the problem that "teachers must not only modify or remove specific deviant behaviors, but must also develop socially acceptable behavior patterns in the classroom and classroom conditioned goals, NOT LEARNING.
Other researchers have emphasized the importance of adult behaviors in conditioning classroom behavior. An EXXXCELLENT review of this research showd that tantrum behavior, excessive crawling and dependency, isolated play, passivity, spelling failure, and other problem behaviors can be managed by altering habitual adult responses to children (Harris, Wolf and Baer, 1964) .
Such RESEARCH holds GREATER PROMISE in that alteration of the conditioning social environment seems to provide more STABLE and LASTING CHANGES than "M and M's". Moreover, a great deal of work has been done developing EFFECTIVE techniques of behavior modificaton through the conditioning social environment of peers (Hartup, 1964). These directions would seem more PRODUCTIVE than a simple minded trainslation of the Skinner cage to the classroom.
Skinner (1963) pointed HOWET that operant techniques can "be utilized fully ONLY IF we REDEFINE the GOALS of education and the CONDITIONS in the educational environment under which those goals may be reached... (through) a DIFFERENT KIND of educational research which is much more closely concerned with the immediate dimensions of the student's behavior than with gross changes such as IMPROVED PERFORMANCES."
UNFORTUNATELY, neither Skinner nor ANY OTHER learning theorist has provided us with a working model of a school or research enterprise based on systemic and thorough-going APPLICATION of LEARNING PRINCIPLES.
Skinner (1948, 1953) approaches a definition of the philosophical issues involved, and provides an utopian model of a school, but generally psychologists seem STUCK at a level of MANAGEMENT of an aggressively disturbing child in the classroom, through peer approval, or the aplication of accelerating CONsequences in the classroom, or scientifically S-HOWENDING tactics like "TIME HOWET" (which we used to know more simply as "sendin the kid to the cloakroom").
Hobbs (op. cit.) claims that the classroom is a natural environement for the child. Thelen (1965) contends that "classroom practices are UNnatural, UNreasonable, and 'against NATURE.' "This would seem the central issue for the philosophy of education. Mere trivial application of research findings to an institution essentially unchanged from Sumerian academies (Kramer, 1962) will NOT create useful teaching for human beings.
It seems relevant to ask EXXXACTLY WHAT do we know abHOWT the learning situation in which HOWER children find themselves, and why, in the light of HOWER knowledge, do we do any of the things that schools do?"
We know that there is little agreement among adults as to what it is they are SUPPOSED to be DOING, what something to do could be that MIGHT be EFFECTVE, and what it IS that other people who have authority over children ought to be doing (Mc- Eachern and Taylor, 1967). Wherefor the child's CONfusiHOWEN?
It is NO WONDER that the marked changes in deviant behavior of children can be achieved through brief, simple educative routines with their mothers which modify the mother's social behaviors shaping the child (Whaler, 1966). Some clinics have reported ELIMINATION ofthe need for child THERAPY through changing the clinical emphasis from clinical to parental HANDLING of the child (Szrynski 1965).
A large number of cases improved sufficiently after preliminary contact with parents that NO treatment of children was required, and almost ALL cases SHOWE a remarkably shortened period for therapy. Quite severe cases of anorexia nervosa have been treated in own to five months by simply REPLACING the parents temporarily with EFFUSIVELY LOVING SUBSTITUTES (Groen, 1966).
Probably the most absurd figure in Amaerican mass media is the TEACHER (Gerbner, 1966). HOWE can we EXXXPECT children to LEARN responsible P-HOWER from models of IMPOTENCE? We KNOW that LEARNING a complex ritualized social role, is facilitated by observation of an INTELLIGIBLE MODEL much more effectively than by trial and error with REINFORCEMENT.
Roles which are relatively arbitrary and senseless are the most difficult to learn (Luchins, 1966). Do we make ANY EFFORT as teachers to CORRECT the massive impact of media?
HOWE can the ARBITRARINESS and SENSELESSNESS of IMPOTENT ADULT MODELS be redeemed by anything short of RELEVANCE and COMMITMENT?
As an engaging final comment on the PROFESSION let me mention the little study by Dittman et al (1965) tha when 15 psychotherapists and 9 professional dancers evaluated facial and bodily expressons for effect the dancers were much MOORE accurate. Need we say MOORE abHOWET the training of therapists?
THE OPERANT FALLACY
Programs utilizing the "contingencies of reinforcement model" proposed by Skinner (1963) ar no more well established in research than the various dynamic therapists. Research in four areas : 1) direct evaluation of programmed systems for elarning; 2) reinforcement; 3) cognitive dissonance; and 4) motivation, MOST SURELY DEMOLISH the claims of operant programers.
The 190 studies annotated by Schramm (1964) when inspected display NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES in SUCCESS among approaches and modifications. Programmed instruction is no worse than conventional instruction, and takes less time, but time reductions in conventional instruction has frequently been shown possible without detrimental effects. If you draw your controls cagily you can always show the superiority of your PET technique.
Moore and Smit (1964) compared variations on programmed materials, machines, texts, written responses, merely reading, free response, multiple choice, and iving or not giving the students results. There were NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES despite Skinner's insistence on the importance of the CONTINGENCY of REINFORCEMENT. Carpenter and Greenhill (1963) could find NO DIFFERENCE in RESULTS even after eliminating the self-pacing feature by presenting the materials by TV or Video.
Krumboltz and Kiesler (1965) reported that a two month follow up test showed NO DIFFERENCE between students given a variety of reinforcement schedules. Mayo and Longo (1966) report that naval and marine trainees saved 30% of time in learning electronics fundamentals through a programed course witrh superior scores on one measure but not on another, and with no follow-up reported.
The same authors reported a reductionj from 26 HOWERS to 19 HOWERS in instruction time through the use of program with NO DIFFERENCE in test scores, except that as longer blocks of materiallearned through programmed means were tesed the scores DECREASED.
When the control instruction is manipulated an entirely DIFFERENT picture emerges Jacobs and Kulkarni (1966) assignedstudents in three different schools to classes with standard programmed material giving immediate knowledge of results to classes without results and to classes with the order of sections of the program inverted.
In two schools the groups without knowledge of results and the groups with inverted material SCORED HIGHER. In one school there was NO DIFFERENCE. So much for THEORY. Reid and Taylor (1965) presented a linear program on paper-making to 60 paid undergrads with a 12 week follow up test. The group which merely read learned the same material in 154 minutes to 243 minutes for the group given responses- a REVERSAL of the usual BIASED RESULTS based on POOR CON-TROLLS. There were no differences on post tests.
Spagnoli (1965) reports on a study exposing the control and programed group to the same material in a concentrated effort over a limited period of time. There were NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES.
Sassenrath and Garverick (1965) gave 4 matched groups of 120 students four procedures: 1) looking up the wrong answers, 2) having questions discussed by the instructors, 3) checking answers from correct ones on the board, and 4) no feedback. The discussion method proved best.
Finally, in studying means of training men to perform a 72 action prcedure on Nike-Hercules equipment, Cox and Boren (1965) demonstrated that the time required to learn the procedure to critterion was NO DIFFERENT when the actions were organized into seven operant spans and taught in reverse order, in natural order, or without grouping into operant spans at all.
IT IS CLEAR that as comparisons became more sophisticated programed instruction and other operant teaching techniquesreveal tehemselves as simply another prestigiHOWES FAD--somewhat better than conventional instruction in saving time, but certainly not providing a better or better organized or more independently useful GRASP of KNOWLEDGE.
The IMBECILITY of some of the claims for operant technique simply take the breath away. Lovas et al (1966) report a standard contingent reward/punishment procedure developing imitative speech in two severly disturbed non verbal schizophrenic boys. After twenty- six days the boys are reported to have been learning new words with alacrity. HOWEver, when REWARDS were moved to a delayed contingency the behavoir and learning immediately deteriorated.
Despite this, and despite the fact that there was no evidence of cognitive association with the words, the authors leap to the conclusion that the fact that the boys improved in the acquisition of Norwegian words WITHOUT REWARDS while still being given English words WITH REWARDS suggest hat the children may be able to acquire new behaviors on their own.
The need for this study escapes one, particularly in view of the very well established fact that schizophrenics condition quite readily (Mednick, 1958)
One can see the "SCIENTIFIC" PRECISION by which the authors drop contingent reinforcements thus PROVING that the parrot behavior was indeed caused by the schedule and NOT by some other mystical force.
The use of Norwegian to demonstrate learning that could not even remotely be related to previous history is a grotesquery too bizarre to be credited. Who could possibly doubt that this useless and probably damaging trained seal routine depended on the psychologist's antics?
What on earth led them to believe that a schizophrenic needs even more other-focused responsiveness?
Lovaas et al (1965) reported three programs carried out on five year old autistic twins conditioining them to "social behavior" and to eliminate pathologial behaviors such as self-stimulation and tantrums.
Affectionate and other social behaviors toward adults increaseed after adults had been associated with shock reduction. The routine for this treatment brings immediate relief to mind Sawrey and Wesz (1956) routine for producing ulcers in monkeys.
I suppose it is USELESS to speculate on the source of SO CALLED THERAPISTS willingness to experiment on human beings with procedures for which there is sound experimentally established WARNINGS. If the "double blind" theory of the origin of schizophrenia (Bateson, 1956) is at all valid, HOWE DEVASTATING the experience must ULTIMATELY BE.
Do Lovaas et al REALLY BELIEVE the schizophrenic has no cognitive processes and DOES NOT KNOW WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SHOCK? Greger (1965) criticized this study on the basis that trainsfer CANNOT be generalized.
That issue can be answered by experience, and, of curse, the "social" behavior of these children deteriorates as soon as the psychologists LOOSE INTEREST.
The IMPORTANT ISSUE for a SCIENCE OF BEHAVIOR is why not attempt those things which are KNOWN to WORK at least in some cases if only for control puporses.
Kanner (1954) reports that 13 classically autistic children improved enough to go to school without "anything that is regarded as good psychotherapy or as psychotherapy at all..."
Autistic children have been known to become permenantely social by deinstitutionalization, BY REMOVAL from the parents, BY RADICAL CHANGES in other environments, and by MASSIVE DOSAGE of TOUCHING, HOLDING, FONDLING LOVE DESPITE THE REJECTION OF THE CHILD.
My case, Larry, (vonHilsheimer, 1965b), demonstrates a recovery by using the mother as an autistic boy's teacher in an open millieu. It is curiHOWES that the operant technicians provide as few, and as UNIMAGINITAVE controls for thier "research" as the Freudians.
REWARD / PUNISHMENT
Despite Skinner's clear denunciation of "negative reinforcement" (1958) NEARLY EVERY LEARNING THEORY model involves the USE OF PUNISHMENT. Of curse, Skinner has never to my knowledge, demonstrated HOWE we escape the phenomenon that an expected reward not received is experienced as a punishment and can produce extensive and persistent aggression (Azrin et al, 1966).
MIMICRY, PLAY, EXPLORATION AND THE NEED FOR DATA
Complex activities are LEARNED MORE QUICKLY through OBSERVATION (copying, if you will) than by trial and error with reinforcemet (Luchins,). Observers of subjects making a first trial of a multiple choice bolt head maze made fewer errors than the practiced subjects in the second run, while subjects who have been shocked for error on a first trial made more errors than either (Rosenbaum & Hewitt, 1966). Students will modify their beliefs more when rewarded for the way in which they carried out arguing for a disagreeable position (role reward), than when rewarded for the content of the argument (Wallace, 1966).
================== INTRO TO WITS' END DOG TRAINING MANUAL George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D. F.R.S.H.
Several years ago one of my old students telephoned to me and asked me what I knew about Doggie Do Right, a device to cause your neighbor's dog to stop barking.
I had not heard of the device, nor its inventor, Jerry Howe, but I telephoned, read his website, and told my graduate that I thought the device was worth a trial - indeed I shut up the dogs in my neighborhood by turning on Jerry's supersonic device.
After all we all know that dogs respond to whistles humans cannot hear, so why not respond to "attaboy" sounds which humans cannot hear.
My student lived far from my Florida homestead, so he tried it on the three incredibly savage, hyperactive and noisy dogs who lived behind a tall fence just 3 feet back of his bedroom.
Hot rats! The device worked,
Andy got his sleep and I didn't think much of the matter again.
A few months ago I had new neighbors on each side of my house, four of them, all with noisy unshuttupable dogs. Argh!
So I foned Andrew in Virgina, received the intelligence that his neighbors dogs were still quiet, and then I foned Jerry Howe, the inventor of Doggie Do Right, who came to visit me.
Merlin walked into my office.
Jerry is a slender fellow with a belly button lenghth grey beard tapering down his chest. I liked him immediately, and I applied his instrument to the neighborhood again which again became silent.
It occured to me that if this ultrasonic field worked with dogs that we ought at least to ask the question, what happens to humans in range of the device???
I asked Jerry to give me a list of customers and began inquiring among them. One thing became immediately evident. The Doggie Do Right not only shuts up your neighbors' dogs, it calms and modifies your husband's behavior.
Holey Moley, Captain Marvel, this device has major potential.
In the meantime Jerry gave me a copy of his Wits End Dog Training Manual. I was delighted. He also introduced me to the world of professional dog trainers some of whom even have Ph.D.s in psychology.
This was not such a delight as it appeared that none of these luminaries had actually read Skinner, Lazarus or other fountains of wisdom in psychology. Indeed, it seemed as though they knew very little about the laws of behavior at all!
Punishment and confrontation seemed to be their major stock in trade.
Well, if you go to my website, www.drbiofeedback.com you can read of the career of Sam Corson, I.P. Pavlov's last student.
Sam demonstrated that rehabilitation of hyperactive dogs can easily and readily be done using TLC, tender loving care is at the root of the scientific management of doggies.
Pavlov told us so 100 years ago.
So what are these degreed morons doing punishing dogs, and shouting "NO" into their doggie faces? If you pick up B.F.Skinner's last book, CUMULATIVE RECORD, included in it is an essay by Keller Breland and Maryann Breland entitled THE MISBEHAVIOR OF ORGANISMS.
Skinner deliberately included his students' chapter to emphasize that you cannot manage the behavior of animals unless you take into consideration 1. the animal's evolutionary niche (who is the animal?); 2. the animal's personal history (who is the animal?) and 3, the instinctive repetoire of the animal (who is the animal?) and 4. the personality of the animal (who is the animal?).
The Brelands moved far from the white rat. "Thirty-eight species, totaling over 6,000 individual animals, have been conditioned, and we have dared to tackle such unlikely subjects as reindeer, cockatoos, raccoons, porpoises, and whales."
Jerry Howe spends most of his times with dogs, but he has learned Pavlov's lesson well. Dogs are individuals, they are individual DOGS, and they respond most directly and immediately to love and tender loving care.
Read with pleasure, and then go love your dog.
George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H. Who's Who Honoree since 1983
From: TooCool (larrym...@hotmail.com)
The Puppy Wizard's Wits End Training Method
I have studied canine behavior and dog training for years. I have a huge library that covers every system of training.
The Puppy Wizard's (Jerry Howe's) Wits' End Training Method is by far the most scientific, the most advanced, the kindest, the quickest and the most effective training method yet discovered.
It is not an assortment of training tips and tricks; it is a logically consistent system. Every behavior problem and every obedience skill is treated in the same logically consistent manner.
Please study his manual carefully. Please endeavor to understand the basis of his system and please follow his directions exactly. His manual is a masterpiece. It is dense with theory, with explanation, with detailed descriptions about why behavior problems occur and how their solution should be approached.
One should not pick and choose from among his methods based upon what you personally like or dislike. His is not a bag of tricks but a complete and integrated system for not only training a dog but for raising a loving companion.
When I once said to Jerry that his system creates for you the dog of your dreams, his response was that it produces for your dog the owner of his dreams.
You see, Jerry has discovered that if you are gentle with your dog then he will be gentle with you, if you praise your dog every time he looks at you, then you will become the center of your dogs world, if you use Jerry's sound distraction with praise, then it takes just minutes-sometimes merely seconds-to train your dog to not misbehave (even in your absence) (Just 15 seconds this morning to train my 10 week old puppy to lie quietly and let me clip his nails).
Using Jerry's scientific method (sound distraction / praise / alteration / variation) it takes just minutes to train your dog to respond to your commands.
What a pleasure it was for me to see my 6 week old puppy running as fast has his wobbly little legs would carry him in response to my recall command-and he comes running every time I call no matter where we are or what he is doing.
At ten weeks old now, my puppy never strains upon his leash thanks to Jerry's hot & cold exercises and his Family Pack Leadership exercises.
Jerry has discovered that if you scold your dog, if you scream at him, if you intimidate him, if you hurt him, if you force him then his natural response is to oppose you.
Is Jerry a nut?
It doesn't make any difference to me whether he is or not. It is a logical fallacy to judge a person's ideas based upon their personality. As far as dogs are concerned, Jerry wears his heart upon his sleeve. It touches him deeply when he hears of trainers forcing, intimidating, scolding or hurting dogs.
More than that, he knows that force is not effective and that it will certainly lead to behavior problems; sometime problems so severe that people put their dogs down because of those problems.
I believe that it is natural for humans to want to control their dog by force. Jerry knows this too. We have all been at our wits' end, haven't we?
Dogs have a natural tendency to mimic. In scientific literature it is referred to allelomimetic behavior. Dogs respond in like kind to force; they respond in like kind to praise.
Don't bribe your dog with treats; give him what he wants most-your kind attention. Give him your praise. You will be astonished at how your dog 's anxiety will dissipate and how their behavior problems will dissipate along with their anxiety.
Treat Jerry Howe's (The Puppy Wizard) Wits' End Training Method as a scientific principle just as you would the law of gravity and you will have astounding success.
Dog behavior is just as scientific as is gravity.
If you follow Jerry's puppy rules you will get a sweet little Magwai; if you don't you will surely get a little gremlin (anyone see The Gremlins?). --Larry
Instrumental / Classical / Operant / Conditioning CC / OC / IC / -P +P / +R -R / S R / R S It's ALL The SAME SAME SAME SAME <{); ~ ) >
George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.
From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D." <drv...@mindspring.com> Subject: The Amazing Jerry's take on psychobabble Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 12:13:44 -0400
You might improve the learning of folk who actually live with and train dogs to do useful things if you excluded everyone who uses psychobabble from your lists.
I recommend to all of you who wish to taste the flavor of sensible animal behaviorists to read THE MISBEHAVIOR OF ORGANISMS, Breland and Breland.
This married pair of psychologists began the long trail of highly trained animals who are symbolized by Shamu eating a mackrel from a girl's hand instead of eating the much more tasty pretty girl who is exactly the size of the natural food of killer whales, seals. Yum!
The essay, by the way, is a chapter in B.F. Skinner's summing up book, CUMULATIVE RECORD. They include a sentence which more or less says, "unless you understand the personal history of the particular animal, and the history of this animal's species and group, the developmental history of the animal, you cannot effectively train the animal.
Pigs root and hen's scratch, if you try to train hens without scratching or pigs without scratching or pigeons without pecking, you aren't going to have much success.
A conditional reflex is one which is learned, the original primitive reflex occurs no matter what the history of the animal, and is hard wired. If you train the animal to respond, say by ringing a bell immediately before turning on a bright light, then you've taught the animal and made his native reflex of pupil constriction conditional upon the ringing of a bell.
Thorndyke added some terminology to this kind of training and insisted that when you train the animal to make gross motor responses that this learning is "instrumental", the animal takes action and uses an instrument.
The Russian word translated as "conditional" in all other contexts was mistranslated by Pavlov's American translator, Horsley Gannt, as "conditioned" and so American psychology went haring after phantasmagora.
The major theorists for the development of the language of operant conditioning are Edward Thorndike, John Watson, and B. F. Skinner. Their approach to behaviorism played a major role in the development of American psychology.
They proposed that learning is the result of the application of consequences; that is, learners begin to connect certain responses with certain stimuli. This connection causes the probability of the response to change (i.e., learning occurs.)
Thorndike labeled this type of learning instrumental. Using consequences, he taught kittens to manipulate a latch (e.g., an instrument). Skinner renamed instrumental as "operant" because in this learning, one is "operating" on, and is influenced by, the environment. Where classical conditioning illustrates S-->R learning, operant conditioning is often viewed as R-->S learning since it is the consequence that follows the response that influences whether the response is likely or unlikely to occur again.
It is through operant conditioning that voluntary responses are learned.
One should note that Russian Psychology did very well without the operant language, and only pettifogging university professors ought to worry about what kind of label we attach to the learning. Pfui!
Even Skinner understood this!
And please note if you saw the original movie, THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE, you saw a Chinese psychologist who was based on Andrew Salter, CONDITIONED REFLEX THERAPY.
Alas, Salter didn't have a Ph.D., but he basically rescued us from the long Freudian nightmare and returned psychotherapy to a scientific basis. Alas, the 2nd movie didn't even cite Salter as a source. "...all the highest nervous activity, as it manifests itself in the conditional reflex, consists of a continual change of these three fundamental processes -- excitation, inhibition and disinhibition." Ivan P. Pavlov
George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.
What's important is, "does Shamu reliably eat the fish and not the pretty girl?"
George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.
Death Producing Ulcers: "Emotional Influences On Health & Behavior" Dr. George Von Hilsheimer
Emotional Influences On Behavior
Illness is directly related to depression and lack of adjustment, particularly to a new environment (Parens, McConville & Kaplan, 1966).
A WIDE RANGE of PSYCHOSOMATIC or CORTICOVISCERAL DIS-EASES was surveyed by Wittkower (1965) to demonstrate the enormous importance of emotional factors in general health.
Interview findings of emotional material (recently experienced hopelessness) pryor to biological examinations correctly identified 11 out of 19 with cervical cancer, and 25 of 32 who were cancer free even though psychological tests failed to discriminate these groups (Schmale & Iker, 1966)
150 lung cancer patients showed significantly constricted expression of emotions. The had fewer childhood behavior problems, and lower neuroticism score than their cancer free controls. Heavy cigarette smokers who DO NOT INHALE are more apt to have LUNG CANCER. They, too, show LOWER neuroticism scores. Among heavy cigarette smokers poor emotional expression is as highly related to cancer as urban residence and is more important than a chronic cough or an air polluted environment (Kissen, 1966).
A ten year observation of all the women who developed cancer in an isolated pupulation of 2,550 showed that &n
|
|