- Messages
- 7,614
- Reaction score
- 9,257
- Points
- 113
The Most Dog Friendly Community Online
Join and Discover the Best Things to do with your Dog
Exposure/flooding to triggers
- Thread starter Kayak
- Start date
When Dudley was just seven months old we went to a DDay re-enactment on Saunton Sands. There were planes landing on the beach. Maroon with big bangs, smoke bombs, gun noises etc.
He never blinked or acted distressed. This was not deliberate
He has never worried about fireworks, lorries etc. But let someone close a car door down the road and he barks and runs to the door.
He also doesn't like bikes and as they tend to be ridden on the pavements here, a short lead is necessary.
Maybe I flooded him him unntentionally.
He never blinked or acted distressed. This was not deliberate
He has never worried about fireworks, lorries etc. But let someone close a car door down the road and he barks and runs to the door.
He also doesn't like bikes and as they tend to be ridden on the pavements here, a short lead is necessary.
Maybe I flooded him him unntentionally.
- Messages
- 1,791
- Reaction score
- 843
- Points
- 113
.
“Flooding” a dog has a negative rep b/c it is, as Ari-RR said, precisely the act of taking them into circs that are beyond their ability to cope.
Ergo, what U did with Kay & leashed dogs she did not know was *not* flooding; the dogs were leashed, they could not approach her, a trusted person held their leashes, & any interaction or approach was HER choice.
That’s not flooding.
She decided to go closer; she opted in.
Anytime the learner is out of their depth or unable to cope, that’s flooding.
Sufficient DISTANCE from the trigger that the learner is aware, but not reactive, is exposure.
Pairing such safe levels of exposure with happy events [food, play, etc] is either classical conditioning [naive learner] or counter conditioning [learner has a past Hx of bad experiences with said stimulus or setting, & we are COUNTERING their unhappy prior associations].
Pairing exposure with “bad” events is also possible.
Trainers who want to make a dog highly aggressive toward strangers can simply chain the dog to a solid section of fence, & have the stranger approach the dog in a threatening manner, then flee as soon as the dog makes a counter-threat in response.
It’s a simple, highly effective, extremely unethical process.
Pet-dog owners who are completely unaware of the effect of paired associations can inadvertently do the same thing.
- terry
.
“Flooding” a dog has a negative rep b/c it is, as Ari-RR said, precisely the act of taking them into circs that are beyond their ability to cope.
Ergo, what U did with Kay & leashed dogs she did not know was *not* flooding; the dogs were leashed, they could not approach her, a trusted person held their leashes, & any interaction or approach was HER choice.
That’s not flooding.
She decided to go closer; she opted in.Anytime the learner is out of their depth or unable to cope, that’s flooding.
Sufficient DISTANCE from the trigger that the learner is aware, but not reactive, is exposure.
Pairing such safe levels of exposure with happy events [food, play, etc] is either classical conditioning [naive learner] or counter conditioning [learner has a past Hx of bad experiences with said stimulus or setting, & we are COUNTERING their unhappy prior associations].
Pairing exposure with “bad” events is also possible.
Trainers who want to make a dog highly aggressive toward strangers can simply chain the dog to a solid section of fence, & have the stranger approach the dog in a threatening manner, then flee as soon as the dog makes a counter-threat in response.
It’s a simple, highly effective, extremely unethical process.
Pet-dog owners who are completely unaware of the effect of paired associations can inadvertently do the same thing.
- terry
.
