![]()
IRC Chat Log, January 24, 1999
| Jonathan | Hi, folks! Thanks for joining in tonight for another chat. Who here has read the book "Don't Shoot the Dog" by Karen Pryor? (y/n)
| Eloquence | Yes
| Tranzpupy, Venus | 1/2
| _Stile_, Paolo, IntriKate, Simon_UK, NLPSGI, Uranus, Tangram, NLP_D00D, FullStop, doRonRon, KingAmra | No | Jonathan | This chat will not be a "book report!" I do want to touch on a number of topics & issues she raised though! Because I think its a reasonably widely held understanding that what she's written is perhaps the closest thing to using NLP with Animals in training --- and she writes about animal training in a way that is aimed also at helping us to learn how to train people better! So let's start there. And if you want to know more than people discuss here -- I encourage people to support her work and buy/read her book.
| Jonathan | OK -- Karen's sections in the book -- as a quickie outline: | REINFORCEMENT: Better Than Rewards SHAPING: Developing Super Performance STIMULUS CONTROL: Cooperation Without Coercion UNTRAINING: Using Reinforcement NLPSGI | Hey, this is Husband Stuff!
| Jonathan | Bigtime! And Wife Stuff, too!
| Tranzpupy | Or boyfriend stuff... Or BOSS stuff!
| NLP_D00D | Or TEACHER stuff!
| Jonathan | Oh boy, I know why you all came here! You think I'm going to start talking about SEX! LOL!
| Finter | ...coughing...
| doRonRon | Sex as reinforcement? Hmmm...
| Eloquence | Sex is too sloooww...
| NLPSGI | NO, NO, go on, we are sorry... Let's get back to animal training.
| NLP_D00D | Animal Training? Like "doggie hypnosis"?
| Jonathan | Yeah, Doggie Hypnosis! OK. There seem to be a whole lot of folks into NLP who've done some dog training. Joe Riggio, who has two chats on this website, trained dogs for years...
| NLPSGI | Including Richard Bandler!
| Eloquence | There are only a few lines that are really important in her [Karen's] book.
| Jonathan | Quentin! What did you learn of value from Karen?
| Eloquence | Sex and reinforcement. Reinforcement requires INSTANT response. Anything positive must be reinforced instantly. How prepared are you, those who wish to train their husbands.
| NLPSGI | Eloquently said.
| Jonathan | And why does "Reinforcement only with Positive means" work better than both positive & negative Reinforcement?
| Eloquence | Saves one decision. Therefore it can be unconsciously acted on.
| NLPSGI | According to her, should negative also be immediately responded to?
| Eloquence | Not as I recall. Leap in with a small reward at every positive. Not sex, a hint of sex.
| NLPSGI | Hmmmm, so ignore negative and reinforce positive.
| Eloquence | Yep. Less justification gets built into the relationship.
| Jonathan | She pretty much ignores negative reinforcement; she's more interested in Timing of reinforcement, size of reinforcement, and schedules of reinforcement.
| Tranzpupy | Just ignoring the negative works pretty well with human people...
| Finter | So if someone is upset, ignoring them is better than comforting them?
| Eloquence | No.
| Venus | That would be awful, Finter.
| Eloquence | Pick anything about what they are doing that is positive.
| Simon_UK | But what if they are convinced that their "good" action is not good? Are you then reinforcing the negative?
| Venus | Simon, can you give an example?
| Simon_UK | Let's say that someone has low self-esteem. They perform a task well and you compliment. They however feel that the task was not worthy of your compliment. Thus we have a paradox.
| NLPSGI | Ah, that is when you go with the facts. Don't start with their behavior; show them the Positive results, the real things they can not argue with -- the bottom line stuff -- then pace back to them.
| Eloquence | Compliments are too slow. SMILE.
| NLPSGI | So true, and easily argued by anyone, self-esteem or not. Chunk size is important when complimenting.
| Jonathan | LOL Eloquence! Smile INSIDE & OUT.
| Venus | Don't you think a compliment needs to be sincere? And, can you give an example, Kathleen?
| NLPSGI | Yes. For example, if someone does a good job, and you tell them but they argue [the compliment], then show them the results: what did it accomplish? Increased sales? Or pile gone, things filed... whatever is physically different that you can demonstrate.
| Venus | Oh, ok -- that's a good idea
| Jonathan | Cool. Let them make the choice afterwards.
| NLPSGI | Then pace back to them.
| Venus | What does that mean in this example, Kathleen?
| NLPSGI | External reference, then internal reference! So how does it feel to see that pile gone?
| Venus | Oh, good!!!
| Eloquence | Nice.
| Simon_UK | And this may be accomplished in the informal environment of the workplace?
| NLPSGI | Absolutely, Simon.
| Jonathan | If that's after they've done the desired behavior, then -- that may be getting into what Pryor calls "shaping."
| Venus | Shaping -- is that getting them to do more of the same?
| Jonathan | Unless it's something they've been doing regularly but inconsistently. Let me be clearer! Reinforcing is about adjusting ongoing behaviors. Shaping is about creating new ones. Let's talk about it from an animal-training point of view and find out what it tells us!
| Jonathan | I can distill Ms. Pryor's comments on Shaping to be based on Targeting, Mimicry, & Modeling. Targeting is about building a behavior with piecemeal elements... that string together bit by bit.
| Venus | Like chaining states?
| Jonathan | Yes, yes, yes! Venus gets the 1st Chocolate Bunny for the night!!! Great leap!
| Venus | YAY! I finally got 1!!! :-)
| NLPSGI | Wooo hooo!
| Jonathan | Mimicry is something some animals do easily & well, so if you demonstrate, they follow.
| Simon_UK | But does the mimicry show signs of "pacing"?
| Jonathan | Yes, Simon, or more like Leading, so that they themselves pace you into learning what it is you want them to learn!
| Venus | Does that ever really happen Jonathan?
| Jonathan | Never, Venus, I'm sure its just a hopeful fantasy. *Wink!*
| Venus | LOL!
| Jonathan | And Modeling (according to Ms. Pryor's material, not a reference to 'NLP modeling') is pushing the subject through something. Like, handing your husband the garbage can and pushing him down the driveway.
| Eloquence | Targeting would be smiling every time he went NEAR the garbage can.
| Jonathan | Laura definitely didn't do that to me last night. No way, Jose. She didn't say "get off the computer and take the garbage out." She definitely didn't do that.
| Venus | Hahaha! That's good to know!
| Jonathan | Quentin -- you read the book too -- what did you learn from her discussion of shaping?
| Eloquence | Smile when approaching man at computer.
| Venus | So is this stuff best when its *nonverbal*?
| Jonathan | Yes -- she mentioned 10 high-level rules for shaping -- (and categorized the 'short cuts' to shaping as the above 3)
| Eloquence | Very specific steps. Reinforce any behaviour that comes close to what you want. To teach a chicken to dance, give a small reward if it stands on one leg. Keep is small and within the half second rule. We don't want thinking here.
| Jonathan | Yes indeed! I had some friends over a while back and Laura (who was our dog's primary trainer though I was involved) used many of Pryor's techniques to demonstrate something. She shaped a totally new behavior in under 5 minutes in front of the group. Quick & fun!
| Simon_UK | Thus establishing a chain of "foody" anchors?
| Jonathan | Yes, perhaps Simon -- One of the rules of thumb was, minimize the size of the reward -- and slowly make the reinforcement less easy to acquire.
| Eloquence | Right on Simon, Absolutely. No sex in supermarkets.
| Venus | LOL!
| FullStop | So just one doggie treat instead of 10?
| Jonathan | Here's an example with food -- tiny sliced hotdogs! Laura had a spot (a penny or bottletop) on the ground. You don't need to use food -- you can use a "clicker" too -- which is like auditory reinforcement. So she puts the spot on the ground -- and Zoe got the hotdog when she touched her nose to the spot. The 2nd time, she hit the spot faster. The 3rd time it was instant, but Laura was already on to building the next step. She put the spot elsewhere. Zoe went for it elsewhere and didn't get anything, but rapidly went back to the 1st place and then looked. Didn't get anything, then went to the new place and did. By the 3rd round, she was touching both spots. And she built a totally new sequence of behavioral choices that led to the reward.
| | |||||