1.2 The Goals of Animal Training
Animals have constantly been used in assistance for humans in work, play or for the satisfaction of human curiosity. For thousands of years animals have been allured and utilized by mankind. Whether in Ancient Egypt or Rome animals have performed jobs necessary for daily life e.g. torture and execution of enemies, guarding households, and source of power. Certainly not passing the acceptable ethical standards these days. (McGreevy and Boakes, 2007 :2)
When conditioning animal’s responses the animal trainer uses reinforcement or punishment. There are various ways of training but most trainers use the principles of behavior analysis and operant conditioning.(McGreevy and Boakes, 2007 :3)
However training of animals is most apparent in the domain of hunting and herding. Numerous animals are used in services e.g. dogs, capuchin monkeys and horses. These animals do not enter the field of service before they have undergone training in order to make use of their sensory and social skills. (McGreevy and Boakes, 2007: 2)
Merely by changing the frequencies of certain behaviors conducted by an animal humans are able to benefit from the multiple tasks that other species are capable of performing. By teaching to respond with a specific response under specific conditions many have found new assistance and help from service animals. Whether it is ethically appropriate to use animals in such a manner is still unresolved.
1.3 Ethics of Animal use in Training
The common use of animals by psychologists is under critical ethical consideration. Animal research and use in psychology is based on the assumption that the brains of all vertebrate share substantial commonalities of structure and function. (Caroll & Overmier, 2001 :4) Thus causing the primary ethical concern about whether it is ethically sound to use animals in research and dominion.
There are quite a few philosophical arguments on behalf of the ethical status of animals. The Genesis offers a biblical argument on the status of animals. Stating that ‘man’ is given authorative ‘dominon’ over animals. The dualism argument that inaugurated due to René Descartes proposes that the animal is different, not having a soul and less divine creation of God. (Caroll & Overmier, 2001 :4) If the animal is so different to a human then how can psychology generalize its research knowledge for mans benefit?
Humans have so far managed to remove the animal from its natural environment to another one in which humans use the animal for the improvement of human life thus animals have been made use for centuries and onwards.
2.0 The Power of Positive Reinforcement in Successful Training
Once again Thorndike’s “law of effect” truly defines the concept of reinforcement. According to which some consequences determine whether a certain behavior will continue to exist. Consequences produced by the environment are classified into three types 1. neutral- consequences that do not increase nor decrease further frequency of behaviour 2. reinforcement-increase further frequency the the behaviour 3.punishment- consequences decrease further frequency of the behaviour. Skinner found that reinforcement rather than punishment was more preferable in the control of behaviour. According to Skinner reinforcement was the most significant function since organisms dislike punishment on their behaviour. (O’Donohue, 2001 :90)
2.0.1 Additional Tools for Successful Training
In animal training undesired behavior is eliminated. This may be done through many repetitions of punishment until it is completely eliminated. There are two types of punishments used the positive punishment, when something negative is presented. Negative Punishment, in the case that something positive is taken away. Punishment used in animal training should be maximally effective with minimal amount of discomfort and harmful side effects. (Martin and Pear, 1983 :199)
There are numerous factors affecting on the effectiveness of punishment. To start off in order to decrease an undesirable response some alternative desirable response should be introduced or increased. (Martin and Pear, 1983 :200)
When maximizing desirable alternative behavior to occur when attempting punishment the first step is to minimize the causes of the punished behavior. It is important to identify the stimulus control of the punished behavior. Secondly it is important to identify existing reinforcers for the undesirable behavior. To be effective punishing stimulus should be intense. Timing of the punishment must be exact and precise. It must correspond with the behavior for it to have effect on the animal. (Martin and Pear, 1983 :201) The animal must make the connection between the punishment and the wrong behavior.
Extinction shares the same principle with positive reinforcement. If in a given situation an animal emits a previously reinforced response and the response is not followed by the usual reinforcing consequence then that animal is less likely to repeat the same behavior when encountering a similar situation. (Martin and Pear, 1983 :43)
So in other words if a response has been increased in frequency through the use of positive reinforcement then completely ceasing to reinforce the response will cause it to decrease in frequency. Generally it could be stated that if the environment ignores a behavior that particular behavior will extinct. Extinction is used in decreasing certain unwanted behavior. This is used when modifying behavior for the wanted responses to emerge during animal training. As an example when training horses they are rewarded with food given to them from the hand. This may later result in the horse biting hands as it has acquired enough knowledge to comprehend that food is consumed from the hand. If the trainer, in order to get rid of the horse biting, takes the hands away from horses reach i.e. in the pockets, and not give reward (food) to the horse then the horse will be less likely to try bite the hands further again. To make extinction even further effective positive reinforcement should be combined with it. Thus after the horse has stopped trying to bite the trainers hands the horse may receive praise such as a pat on the neck.
2.1 Communication and concrete rewards in training
In every community of species animals maintain contact with its members. As human beings we communicate through verbalization and are apt to expect similar type of communication between animals. (Scott,1958 :189)
Animal language research is the modeling of human language in animals. There have been successful attempts to teach language or language-like behavior to some non-primate species. Teaching sign language to a chimpanzee proved to be successful in the case of Washoe by Gardner & Gardner (1969). This wild female chimpanzee as a participant showed increasing frequencies in new acquired signs during 16 months of observations. There are ethical implications behind this research. Since chimpanzees were able to talk then in this case should not human rights also be applied to apes? (Herman et al 1984:pp). The implication of intelligence from acquiring language like behavior is still controversial. It can be seen as increase of skill of operant conditioning responses in order to gain a reward. Similar results were gained from teaching bottle-nosed dolphins symbolic language. (Fouts and Mills, 1997:pp)
In animal training one of the major problems encountered between the trainer and the trainee is the language barrier. However even in the case of humans it is not necessary for the individual to have understanding on why he/she is reinforced. However linguistic abilities will speed up the process of learning. Principle of reinforcement has been shown to work effectively with animals that cannot talk. (Martin and Pear, 1983 :25) Language is a powerful adaptation but it is always not a power for good.
2.2 Learning through Reinforcement Requires Information Processing
The common explanations of animal behavior provided by classical and operant conditioning do not provide sufficient evidence for more advanced metal processes in animals. In the case of dressage horses, talking parrots, performing dolphins and sheep-herding dogs the mere ability to learn does not lead to any form of comprehension. It is through the discovery of anomalies which has made way for new assessments of the mental capacities of many animals. The first one to discover such phenomenon was E.C. Tolman the term often referred to is known as ‘cognitive maps’. (Estes, 1975:pp)
This form of latent learning was at display during his experimentation with rats. Rats were observed to display higher form of processing by formulated behavior based on previous unrelated experiences. This type of use of cognitive maps may be incorporated in future practices of animal training. (Gould and Gould, 1994 :65)
2.2.1Reinforcement and species specific behavior
Unfortunately not all reinforcements are controlled by the trainer. When training animals it is important to pay attention to what kind of animal you are dealing with. Evolutionary continuity affect the animal’s internal environment. Certain behaviors the animal will learn faster based on the species and its species specific instincts.
Due to the nature of human introspection we often tend to assess the cognitive components of animal behavior. Sometimes what seems clever may actually be completely innate from the animal. Certain behavior can seem to be learned and acquired from external conditioning has often proved to be instinctive behavior. Certain behaviors are acquired automatically through an innate mind map.
Innate behavioral responses do not cease higher form of thought. It could be assumed that animals are capable of weighing on which innate behavioral unit to bring forward in a particular situation. The relationship between instinct and insight is not always ‘or’, at least in the case of human animals. Innate elements of behavior are evidence for the notion that higher cognitive processing is not necessary. (Gould and Gould, 1994 :4)
2.2.2 Animal Intelligence in Relation to Reinforcement
Evolutionary continuity does not just apply to our closest relatives, the great apes. All animals on this planet are our relatives to a greater or a lesser degree. Human and animal minds and behavior are both similar and dissimilar.
Behaviorism is flexible and adaptive and therefore deserves to be considered a form of reasoning in animals. Associative learning can be considered as reasoning in a broad sense. It is reasoning in the similar way as the ability to adapt behavior to solve problems in the world. Associative learning is simple and mechanical enough that in some species its mechanism in the brain is fairly well understood. (Wynne, 2004 :7)
For many years animal psychology studied animal intelligence using experiments to uncover simple processes. Using classical and operant conditioning. Believing that these processes account for the complex abilities of humans. It had a strong combination of reductionist philosophy and behaviorist methodology. Especially B.F. Skinners radical behaviorism was as the topic of interest. However after the immense success in cognitive psychology during the 1950’s led to the reassessment of research methodology. Hence forward researchers began to seek for evidence of comparable human mental processes in other species. This was in a way a return to conventional Darwin’s approach.
Radical behaviourism is greatly dependent on evolutionary biology explaining which limitations and abilities an organisms body has, and which it finds as primary reinforcements. The mechanism of an organism interacting with its environment and learning through this are called contingencies of reinforcement. Contingency can be termed as a dependency, an “if then” relationship. Radical behaviorism focuses on the interaction between the environment and an organism. The environment provides stimuli affecting the chances of response. (O’Donohue, 2001 :57)
Animal cognition uses similar techniques of comparative psychology and experimental analysis of behavior i.e. mazes &Skinners boxes. Skinners experiments were mostly conducted on pigeons and rats. It is important to make a distinction on why behaviorists chose to conduct research with infrahuman organisms. Nonhuman animal participants are more convenient, cheap and ethically permissible to use. Although Skinner regarded his animals as a convenient devising for further study of human behavior his results are more applicable to other animals. Thus are made use of in animal training specifically. Skinner’s methodologies are accompanied by observations of animals in their natural environment. (O’Donohue, 2001 :74)
The different areas of animal cognition following human cognitive psychology are: attention, categorization, memory, spatial cognition tool and weapon use, reasoning and problem solving, language, consciousness, emotion and math.
For many animals proper navigation is a very critical capacity. Research by Brown & Cook (2006) focused on landmark and beacon use by ants and bees, encoding of the environment with pigeons and the capability of frats to represent spatial patterns in mazes.
A known example of tool use by animals is found in Köehler’s study. In which apes showed systematic use of tools in receiving food. Chimpanzees would get food with the use of a stick as a spear. This has been considered as the first evidence of systematic use of weapons in species other than humans. Many range of species are capable of solving a range of problems arguably involving abstract reasoning. (Scott, 1958 :153)
2.2.3.Relation between training method and animal intelligence
Certain animals have shown capability of distinguishing between different amounts of rudimentary counting. A known example of this are the Elberfeld horses.
E.Clarapède, one of the many researchers fascinated by this spectacular event, described the phenomena as one of the most sensational events ever to occur in the psychological world. In Elberfeld Germany during the early 1900s horses were performing mathematical wonders of the animal world. (Elberfeld Horses. (n.d.)) “Kluge Hans”(Clever Hans) had learned to count skittles, by striking with his hoof, as many times as there were skittles. Hans had lessons in spelling and had also been introduced to concepts of color along with musical theory. Later onward the horse began performing mathematical marvels. This type of publicity by Hans got scientists involved in investigating animal intelligence. (Gould and Gould, 1994 :1)
In the beginning Hans and his calculations were accompanied with his owner von Osten. Many researchers tried to understand the phenomena of Hans calculating. After von Ostens death Hans was passed on to Karl Krall. Karl Krall continued the work of von Osten. His aim was to dis-prove critics unconscious signaling theory. The horses were able to do fundamental mathematical operations of subtraction, addition, multiplication and division. The horses had the ability to answer to questions, which even the inquirer did not know the answer to. Disproving Pfungst’s theory on “unconscious signaling”. Krall was of the opinion that the mere ability in executing arithmetical performances is not a test for intelligence. His use of arithmetic was only as a means of reaching the understanding of the horse. All of this had shifted the world of science, challenging Darwinian concepts. Scientists and researchers were unable to come to any clear conclusions. (1913, Can Horses Think?)
3.Conclusion
With the rapid acceleration of human brain enlargement it comes as no surprise that humans are treated as somewhat of a special creation. Non-human animals are seen as lower form of life governed fully by their instincts and drives. For centuries these lower forms life have been used to enhance human daily life. Our training has produced numerous animals capable of performing what seem as necessary tasks for embellishment of lives and imagination. Through time with enhancement of human psychology. Cognitive processes shed new light on the way behavior was interpreted. Leading to the search for comparable human mental processes in other species. Research results showed various promising results on behalf of non-human animals and their higher cognitive abilities. Creating an even more prominent scene over ethical rights of animals.
Thus making it all the more critical for conventional animal training methods to be under new evaluation. Such a shift in the world of science challenged all conventional norms of the way society looked at humans and other species.
As it comes to animal training so far we have established that the most powerful use of reinforcement is positive reinforcement. When training with animals it is important to induce as little harm and discomfort as possible. Minimizing pain not only shows successful results in training it also offers the safety of not violating ethical standards.
Positive reinforcement allows for the animal to be more comfortable with the trainee. In addition when using positive reinforcement with other tools in animal training such as extinction learning occurs all the more faster. With new aquired knowledge on behalf of animal intelligence, and commonalities between human and other species brains should we not eliminate most forms of aversive stimuli used in training. Animals are capable of performing higher form of processing. The method used by Tolman could be put to use in animal training as well. Could learning not be inhibited through this type of formation of appropriate behavior by the animal.
What if the trainer is associated as positive reinforcement. Not in any sense reducing the role of the trainer to a requested reward. On the contrary highlighting the key role of the trainer. The trainer accumulates positive feeling in the trainee. From playing, nurturing to rewarding. So that whenever dealing with the animal the trainers presence is enough reinforcement to a certain extent. This would further enhance similar results of insight. The trainee will try to formulate new behavior and learn through insight in order to please the trainer. Bringing about animal intelligence.
Modern animal training need not be about whistles and rewards. It can come down to the integral relationship between the trainer and trainee.
Bibliography
A.Nevin, J., Tota, M. E., Torquato, R. D., Shull, A. L., & , .(1990). Alternative reinforcement increases resistance to change: Pavlovian or operant contingencies? Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 53, 359-379.
Caroll, M.E., & Overmier, J.B. (Eds.). (2001). Animal Research and Human Health: Advancing Human Welfare Through Behavioral Science. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Cotton, Julie (1995). The Theory of Learning: An Introduction. London: Kogan Page.
Elberfeld Horses. (n.d.). Encyclopedia of Occultism and Parapsychology. Retrieved April 16, 2009, from Answers.com Web site:
Estes, William.K. (Ed.). (1975). Handbook of Learning Cognitive Processes Volume 2: Conditioning and Behavior Theory. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Fouts, R., & Mills, S.T. (1997). What Chimpanzees Have Taught Me About Who We Are. New York: William Morrow and Company.
O'Donohue, W., & Ferguson, K. (2001). The Psychology of B.F. Skinner.Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Gould, J.L., & Gould, C.G. (1994). The Animal Mind. New York: Scientific American Library.
Modgil, S., & Modgil, C. (Eds.). (1987). B.F. Skinner Consensus and Controversy. New York: Falmer Press.
Goodall, Jane (1986). Chimpanzees of Gombe: Patterns of Behavior. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Hiby, E.F., Rooney, N.J., & Bradshaw, J.W.S. (2004). Dog training methods: their use, effectiveness and interaction with behavior and welfare. Animal Welfare. 13, 63-69.
Martin, G., & Pear, J. (1983). Behavior Modification: What it is and how to do it. 2nd ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
McGreevy, P., & Boakes, R.A. (2007). Carrots and Sticks: Principles of Animal Training. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pryor, Karen (1999). Don’t Shoot the Dog: The New Art of Teaching and Training. New York: Bantam Books.
Schneck, S. B. (12.11.2003). An animal trainer\'s introduction to operant and classical conditioning. Retrieved 02.01.2009, from Web site:
Scott J.P. (1958). Animal Behaviour Chicago:The University of Chicago Press
Thorndike, E.L., & Bruce, D. (2000). Animal Intelligence. 2nd ed. London: Transaction Publishers.
Wynne, C.D.L. (2004). Do animals think? New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Journals
A.Nevin, J., Tota, M. E., Torquato, R. D., Shull, A. L., & , .(1990). Alternative reinforcement increases resistance to change: Pavlovian or operant contingencies? Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 53, 359-379.
Unknown reporter (1913) Can Horses Think? Learned commission says “perhaps”: Report on the Elberfeld Trained Animals that Can Extract Cube Roots and do Other Mathematical Marvels is Favorable to the Belief that they Really do Think The New York Times
Web sites
Elberfeld Horses. (n.d.). Encyclopedia of Occultism and Parapsychology. Retrieved April 16, 2009, from Answers.com Web site:
Hiby, E.F., Rooney, N.J., & Bradshaw, J.W.S. (2004). Dog training methods: their use, effectiveness and interaction with behavior and welfare. Animal Welfare. 13, 63-69.
(Hiby et al. 2004)
Schneck, S. B. (12.11.2003). An animal trainer\'s introduction to operant and classical conditioning. Retrieved 02.01.2009, from Web site:
