|ARCHMX Asher RL1X RL2X RL3X RL|
we will dance in- the ring without- words
|Barked: Thu Nov 29, '12 6:15am PST |
|It is not just to teach a dog it's name, it is to be sure that in that high distraction environment the dog responds immediately, with a reflexive response.
As with any other classically conditioned response, if you don't keep the pairing (ie, if Pavlav had started ringing his bell without feeding the dogs), the reflexive response fades, especially given the number of times we say our dogs name during the day.
Personally, I ALWAYS want to keep that reflexive response strong. If I am going to create a positive interupter, I truly want it to be positive.
My guess is that is why I DON'T need to say "no" as a cue to interrupt a behavior or as an NRM. Of course, if people ARE using "no" as a positive interupter, they SHOULD be doing something very similar, so I am surprised anyone is surprised, unless, of course, their "no" is not truly a positive interupter and is, instead, a conditioned punisher.
Lobo, Farley, have fun with it. Nothing like being able to say your dog's name in a high distraction area and have that dog's head WHIP around to see what you want.