Electronic training devices: Discussion on the pros and cons of their use in dogs as a basis for the position statement of the European Society of Veterinary Clinical Ethology

Abstract

Electronic training devices: discussion on the pros and cons of their use in dogs as a basis for the position statement of the European Society of Veterinary Clinical Ethology (ESVCE). Article type: Review Article.

Efficacy of Dog Training With and Without Remote Electronic Collars vs. a Focus on Positive Reinforcement

“…It is noteworthy that there was little difference in latency to sit between the three groups on the first day of training, as dogs in all three groups had a reliable response to the “Sit” command before training, but longer latencies in the E-collar and Control 1 group become apparent as training progressed. These findings are consistent with the reported public perception that E-collars have lower success rates than reward-based training for recall and chase problems ( 25 ), and concerns regarding efficacy of training programs involving potentially aversive stimuli raised by Hiby et al ( 3 ), Rooney and Cowan ( 4 ), Fernandes et al ( 5 ), Ziv ( 6 ), and Masson et al ( 7 , 35 ).…”

“…Given the better target behavior response parameters associated with a rewardfocused training programme, and the finding that the use of an E-collar did not create a greater deterrent for disobedience; we conclude that an E-collar is unnecessary for effective recall training. Given the additional potential risks to the animal's well-being associated with use of an E-collar (7,25,31,38,39), we conclude that dog training with these devices causes unnecessary suffering, due to the increased risk of a dog's wellbeing is compromised through their use, without good evidence of improved outcomes.…”

“…Where dog training involves aversive or noxious stimuli, this can lead to punishment if dogs do not behave as desired (1,2). A growing understanding of the application of learning theory to dog welfare has led many training organizations, welfare charities and academics to advocate what they consider to be more humane methods, with a greater focus on the use and timing of rewards (3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9).…”

Response: Commentary: Remote Electronic Training Aids; Efficacy at Deterring Predatory Behavior in Dogs and Implications for Training and Policy

“…Dale et al ( 4 , 5 ) who investigated avoidance of a stuffed kiwi model, whilst supporting the potential to reduce kiwi predation in off lead dogs, do not present any data on its effectiveness in the field , whereas Christiansen et al ( 6 , 7 ) despite finding long term efficacy in deterring approach to sheep in dogs using e-collars, do not recommend the use of e-collars in dog training due to the challenges of consistently pairing the aversive with the target stimulus/behavior. This theme is taken up in Masson et al's ( 8 ) review, who recognized the potential efficacy of high intensity electric signals, but countered with concerns regarding dog's long and short term welfare and the dangers of unintended associations due to poor timing by operators [see also ( 9 – 11 )]. An important study in this respect is the work of Schalke et al ( 12 ) who investigated the impact of inconsistent application of training approach in controlled conditions, whereby beagles were exposed to the electric stimulus on approaching a stuffed toy.…”

“…Whilst good timing was most effective and caused small rises in salivary corticosteroids, poor or random timing leads to poor training outcomes and elevated corticosteroids. The difficulty in ensuring consistent timing will be more challenging under field conditions with owners whose experience and competence in dog training will be variable, than conditions encountered under controlled training situations, and hence the risks of poor dog welfare and ineffective training elevated particularly where more intense signals are imposed ( 6 , 8 , 13 ).…”