Tag: Negative Reinforcement

Posted on

The 5 Freedoms

How often do we hear people say they use aversive stimuli (pressure/release) because horses use it between themselves? Well yes they do but it is a threat behaviour – they give fair warning too – ears back, a slight shift in weight before a kick. Horses know these signals and can get out of the way. We don’t have ears that move or tails that swish but we can use our larger brains to find a way to communicate that doesn’t involve threats and escalating pressure. It isn’t easy which is why many don’t even try or go back to using aversive stimuli even when they have learned how the horse perceives these aversives.

If we use negative reinforcement and most of us do in some form then we need to be mindful of the fact and make sure we release effectively.
Personally I don’t like to hit my horse with the clip on the end of the rope – which is advocated by some genres of horsemanship, but I do ride traditionally trained horses and so use conventional aids – negative reinforcement, leg on – leg off etc.
It is the understanding of how classical and operant conditioning works that is useful for us, to enable us to choose wisely and ethically.

What I learned at the recent Thinking Horsemans weekend was that we have a duty of care and only we can decide what we are happy to do with our horses, but it is important to be able to read the horses body language – and their emotional state before any training can begin and assess it as we progress.

It was interesting that one speaker suggested that round penning was punishment based – yes horses send other horses away but that is as a punishment, so why do we then think it good to send horses away on a circle so they can be persuaded to follow us?

I love that most reward based training starts with the horse at liberty – giving the horse a choice. I missed the second day but there was a talk about autonomy – with a scale where reinforcement and punishment was at one end of the scale and autonomy at the other end. If a horse is on line it has no choice but to stay (unless like Benny they learn to use their size to leave). Leaving tells us a lot about our relationship.

The 5 Freedoms of welfare can be used to assess whether our training is ethical.

1. Freedom from hunger and thirst. Don’t train when the animal is hungry or thirsty, they will not concentrate and may mug you if you are using positive reinforcement with food rewards.

2. Freedom from discomfort. Check that the horse has all their needs met – environmental (is it a safe area to train in) as well as physical e.g back, teeth,feet and tack are comfortable.

3. Freedom from pain – don’t add aversive stimuli if this will cause pain to the animal – e.g hitting the horse with a whip or line to insist on a behaviour. Don’t use positive punishment unless in an absolute emergency where the horse is inadequately trained.

4. Freedom to behave normally, don’t insist on a horse looking straight ahead if there are distractions – it is normal behaviour to orient towards any possible scary stimulus in the environment.

5. Freedom from fear and distress, are you sure your training doesn’t cause a fear response? Sending a horse out in a round pen uses the fear response and is punishment. Using aversive stimuli to drive the horse forward initiates the flight response, e.g traditional lunging, and natural horsemanship circling.

I am sure you can all think of other examples.

Posted on

Terminology

An interesting note on Facebook about the terms people use to describe some horse training techniques. Some describe the release in pressure/release or the retreat in approach and retreat as a reward, this makes it more acceptable but is not correct. The release follows the addition of an aversive stimulus and is at the best relief but not a reward, it is negative reinforcement in that something the horse finds aversive is removed.

I must remember to use the correct terminology as well. Some groups on Facebook get very upset when I say that what they do is negative reinforcement, some admit they use it but don’t think positive reinforcement works for horses.

Personally I think we can use all quadrants of operant conditioning in training but keep the negative reinforcement as a safety measure, or use non-escalating pressure (e.g tension on a lead rope with no increase in pressure – just waiting until the horse relaxes or moves forward). Also the positive punishment can be used in extreme circumstances if it averts a dangerous situation.

Posted on

Animal Learning Theory

Animal Learning Theory

Animal learning theory is fascinating, I have read a lot about it but never really understood the different components. It is not a training method but can be used to construct or deconstruct a method.

Max Easey did a course for a group of us in West Sussex and we all went home with lots to mull over!

Classical Conditioning is learning through association, e.g. a horse will associate the sound of his owners car with the possible arrival of food. Or the wag of a finger can mean if he doesn’t do something an aversive will follow.

Counter – conditioning is presenting something they like at the same time as presenting a mildly fearful stimulus or in an environment they find mildly aversive.g treats and a scary object. It is also called perception modification. The food is only presented once they relax.

Operant Conditioning is learning by consequences:-

Positive Reinforcement – add something he likes as a consequence of performing a behaviour to increase the likelihood that he will repeat it under the same conditions.

Positive Punishment – add something he doesn’t like as the behaviour is happening to decrease/discourage a behaviour.

Negative Reinforcement – add and then take away something he doesn’t like as the behaviour is happening increase the likelihood that he will repeat it under the same conditions.

Negative Punishment – take away something or deny access to something he likes to reduce/discourage a behaviour.

All have pro’s and con’s, negative reinforcement e.g pressure/release has consequences for our relationship with the animal if we apply an aversive.

Positive punishment is also detrimental if we are associated with the aversive as we add something he doesn’t like e.g. a whip if he finds that aversive. A whip can be used as a target and not be aversive. Can cause fear which may lead to aggression or depression.

Negative reinforcement – where you put pressure on the animal as an aversive then take it away when he performs the behaviour harms the relationship if the animal looks on you as all or part of the aversive element.
An example would be back up – we ask for a back by making it uncomfortable for him to go forward – the degree of pressure used depends on where on the motivation scale the stimulus is in relationship to other motivations, so may need to be escalated. This is aversive otherwise the animal would not move, on the slightest move back the pressure is released to gain relief from the aversive. So eventually a wag of a finger makes him go back – this is so he avoids the aversive element. Likewise the draw towards you works because he considers you aversive so when you go back he feels relief when you remove yourself if you are the aversive.
Negative reinforcement can cause resentment and aggression.

This is not what I want with my horse so will be exploring positive reinforcement and negative punishment. So I reward the tries and behaviours I want and ignore and withhold the rewards for unwanted behaviour.

Timing is crucial with every motivator, as the animal needs to know immediately the consequence of his actions. All motivators (even positive reinforcement and negative punishment) can cause frustration if the animal doesn’t get what he wants.

Some mild steady pressure can guide him to the solution but it is better for him to investigate and find the answer for himself or use a target.

There will be times when in a extreme situation negative reinforcement/positive punishment may be needed for safety.

I will add more as I explore the bridge and target training with the horses.