Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver  I don't agree with this. First, there have been huge breakthroughs in the use of medications to treat anxiety disorders and the like in animals. It's been recognized that animals can have OCD, and there is tons of observations and discussion at zoos about how to keep animals happy and engaged, because zoo animals often act in neurotic ways. Second, Victoria just had a veterinarian on her show to analyze one dog's extreme separation anxiety with another dog, and the vet talked about how dogs can experience grief and PTSD. Victoria talked about the evil chi described earlier as having experienced rejection and loss. Third, I see so many people saying about Cesar "dogs just need to know what you like and don't like." How is this psychology? Fourth, there is tons and tons and tons of research into animal emotions. Saying there isn't, or that all trainers are straight behaviorists, isn't true.
Finally, human psychology is a whole other ball of wax, greatly complicated by the fact that we are studying our own species, and a whole host of other factors. |
I saw the show in which you are speaking, but I'm against using medications to treat, until other methods have failed, and there was no training attempted, medication was the first choice. Also she didn't give the name of the medication, but said it would take several weeks to have an effect, and this means it was not a typical tranquilizer, but an antidepressant, and again, I don't think these should be given lightly, except as a last resort. The psychology she used was not in her training methods, but just to explain to the client how the dog felt. I think we've known for a long time animals have feeling of loss. Her training methods are strict behaviorism with food as the reward, and enticer, not that I'm against this, it's an easy way of training certain things.
I'm not sure what you mean by this question, "Third, I see so many people saying about Cesar "dogs just need to know what you like and don't like." How is this psychology?" I have never made that statement, and I don't understand what it's in reference to, furthermore, I don't know what you mean by, "How is this psychology?".
You say, " Human psychology is a whole other ball of wax." When you study psychology, you aren't really studying humans; you are studying behavior in general. Freudian and Humanist psychology, of course, are thought to have applied only to humans, but I really like the idea, that some of these things can possibly be applied to animals. The experiments that produced the laws of behavior were made on animals, many different species, and humans as well. So, Behaviorism applies to all organisms. Comparative psychology studies the difference between species, but these differences are not in the rules of behavior, but what works as a reinforcer or cue. I think Cesar's newness is that he found a new reinforcer for dogs; food and praise that has long been thought as the only reinforcers for dogs, and Cesar believes that if you can make a dog be in this certain state of mind, that this would be the reinforcer. So this is really new, to me anyway.