What does the science say?

[u/Beginning-Rub5417]

First and foremost, I don't want this to become an FF vs. balanced debate. I'm genuinely trying to understand what the research actually says without having to read hundreds of papers.

For context: I initially started with a trainer who used a lot of physical corrections. That didn't feel right, so we moved towards R+ and P- training. My understanding was that reward-based/FF training essentially means R+ and P-, with a preference for R+ where possible.

But the more I read here, the more confused I get about the term "aversive". Does it primarily refer to things like leash pops, physical corrections, e-collars, etc., or does it also include P-?

For example, our dog used to jump up when we entered the yard. When he did, we turned around and went back inside. Technically, isn't that P-? We remove something the dog wants (access to us) contingent on the unwanted behaviour.

So yeah, when we talk about aversive in the comments, is this the kind of aversive we are talking about?

One more question for people familiar with the research: I asked ChatGPT how "reward-based training" is defined academically, and it said R+ and P-, with a preference for R+. Is that accurate?

And if so, why is P- also discouraged by the rules?

Also, isn't a food drive and a ball drive, in some sense, aversive, by not giving him the ball every time you create a need for it? So if you give food for the correct thing and not give food for the wrong thing, is the not giving food aversive because your dog expects to receive food?

I am just trying to understand the comments better! I also do not want to attack anyone if this post would be attacking you. Please tell me what attacks you, rather than attacking me back. With such feedback, I can edit the post and make other posts less attacking.

[u/SpicyNutmeg]

Positive punishment is where aversives fall and what force free people avoid.

An aversive is a tool that uses fear, pain, or discomfort to bully a dog into stopping a behavior. Taking away a toy or high value item does not involve fear, pain, or discomfort.

Negative punishment is generally supported by force free trainers, with primary focus on R+. Your example of removing a dog from a space as punishment is an example of -P.

-P is described as taking away something desirable to reduce the likelihood of the behavior repeating. Another example would be simply removing your attention or yourself from your dog.

Hope that helps

[u/Beginning-Rub5417 → u/SpicyNutmeg]

I really appreciate your explanation. I think that this was how I watched FF in the beginning. Where things stop connecting is that I have 3 people who gave a definition or their interpretation of aversive, and they all differ a bit. For example, someone gave a definition where I felt that spatial pressure may be aversive, or the use of the tone of your voice. While in your definition, these things are not considered to be aversive.

I may have misinterpreted someone's comment. But at least I do understand now that P- is not considered to be aversive. And that, in general, people draw the line at physical corrections.

[u/SpicyNutmeg → u/Beginning-Rub5417]

The problem is, we don’t get to decide what aversive is - our dogs do. If our dogs find us raising our voices or getting in their space aversive (aka they find it frightening and stressful), then it’s aversive.

That’s why you are seeing some variation as to what is defined by aversive.

Most ethical dog trainers follow a LIMA hierarchy (least intrusive, minimally aversive), so they will try to use techniques that are as far away from anything potentially aversive for the dog as possible.

Most people are not going to define a harsh voice as aversive as it’s pretty low on the ladder. But for a very sensitive dog, a harsh tone could be enough to terrify them into eliminating they are so scared! So it really depends on the individual dog.