Quote:
Originally Posted by mommadog1  The device is not for punishment so you aren't punishing the dogs that are not barking. It is a training tool which does not hurt them in any way. So while you are teaching the "offender" it's not ok to bark (for no reason) the other ones are also learning what is not acceptable. |
Anything that reduces the probability of a response (barking) is a punisher, and anything that increases the probability of a response is a reinforcer. All behavior is constantly being reinforced and punished, without us being aware of it. If you "give" or add something, it's said to be "positive", it you take something away, it's said to be "negative." The words punisher and reinforcer have no "value" other than the results they suggest. In the case of the barking repeller, it would be considered a positive punishment, because you are giving something that reduces a behavior. I think this is probably an aversive training technique meaning that the stimulus they receive is unpleasant. This does not mean it shouldn't be used, we often receive unpleasant stimulus in our environment to modify behavior. I think the Repeller is no more noxious than all the barking, and from the results I've seen, Joey seems happier and less agitated. I think cutting down on both our agitation seems worth it. If it caused him "pain" I wouldn't want to use it, but I think it just causes a noxious sound. What I'm suggesting is that we should not be afraid to use the term punishment, and appropriate punishment is part of training.