“Rubbing his nose in it only works if the puppy doesn't have anosmia.”
By
Jonathan Rascher
on August 25, 2008
— Rachel.
This one was just too good to not be claimed. (Even if it did make me almost choke to death with laughter.)
Embed Claim
Make a related claim
This claim was inspired by
Similar claims
- 6-22 The toys I didn't get [as a child] left a bigger impression than the ones I did.
- 35-0 Better to have people think you awful and say bad things about you and leave the world a better place than to be praised and have made things worse.
- 42-5 Rachel is a interesting person.
- 24-3 Rachel 's Beginner's Guide to Jyte should say more about tagging and the tag police.
- 14-4 watch out evil jyters, Rachel is coming!
Discussion (3)
In fairness, I don't actually know if this is true, but it seems likely.
I'm almost positive it's true, but not for the reason you might think. All the dog trainers I've ever talked to have emphasized that "rubbing a dog's nose in it" is actually useless. Dogs just aren't wired to learn that way. Reinforcement, positive or negative, only works when it's giving immediately after the dog performs a certain action. You can show a dog a pile of poop on the floor and scold him to you're blue in the face, but it probably won't do anything except confuse him.
Still, it's a freakin' hilarious statement, which is the main reason I claimed it. :)
Ah, that makes sense. I've never studied or done dog training. I did study, at least a little, operant conditioning, but the application is going to vary by species. The being does need to understand the connection between the action and the reward/punishment, and I assume a puppy just can't grasp that once time passes.
If I ever need to try to train a dog... I'll probably learn more or get help, but I'll try to keep that in mind.
I actually did do a tiny smidge of work with one dog to help it behave better, which went well, but it was already housebroken and was based on immediate rewards for good behavior.