| II. Theory and Terminology | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Terms associated with training seem to be a source of confusion, frustration, and in some cases, incentive for great debate. Ideally, terms can be used to provide a common language, facilitate good communication, and enhance our ability to train animals. We suggest that your primary focus should be on the training you are doing and the response of the animals to the training. With regard to terminology, we will take a very "minimalist" approach here in hopes that the fewer the terms, the smaller the opportunity for confusion. As described above, animal
training has its roots in experimental and comparative psychology.
Within this psychology literature are descriptions of how animals learn:
through habituation, classical conditioning, operant/instrumental
conditioning, and complex learning. The literature also provides
insights into schedules of reinforcement, the roles of positive
reinforcement, negative reinforcement, and punishment in learning and
training. We think it is important here to remind the reader that in the
laboratory, these concepts seem very clear cut and unambiguous. However,
in a more "real world" situation, when watching an animal
learn how to shift into and out of a barn, it is much more difficult to
ascertain which types of learning are involved or whether positive
reinforcement, negative reinforcement or punishment played a role in the
learning of that behavior. In all likelihood, an animal is learning in a
multitude of ways and receiving a combination of reinforcement types.
Many new trainers seem to get bogged down by the terminology. We suggest
trainers focus on understanding the broad concepts, the most important
of which is that training is a process where animals are making
associations. Your job as a trainer is to facilitate the animal making
those associations. Many new trainers tend to focus on too many things
at once (see Pryor, 1984). |
Terminology |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
©2002 Disney