Dog Whisperer | Dog Spelled Forward

Whitewashing the Whisperer

By Eric Goebelbecker | Published: March 25, 2010

It’s not often that someone uses terminology from behavioral science to describe what Cesar Millan, “The Dog Whisperer,” does on his television show. This is no surprise since Millan himself has no interest in doing so and is content with redefining words as he goes along. However, someone recently brought a blog post to my attention that actually does discuss one of Cesar Millan’s cases and attempts to place his techniques into a behavioral science context. Unfortunately the post seems to be more of an attempt to whitewash what is going on rather than provide an accurate description.

Here’s the first clip “Terrierman” refers to in his post:

(I encourage you to read his post and watch both clips.)

Terrierman refers to Cesar’s handling of JonBee as “habituation” and “extinction.” I don’t disagree with his definitions for the terms (well a little, actually), but I find his application of them confusing at best.

As he states, habituation is non-associative learning. The subject learns through repeated that a stimulus means nothing and stops responding to it. If you poke around the net you’ll see several examples: the feel of clothing on one’s body, the presence of another, non-threatening, species, a new ring tone on someone else’s phone.

The second link highlights an important point about habituation. It’s a very important adaptation because it helps organisms focus on what is important by filtering out unimportant stimuli. This where the “non-associative” part becomes critical – if the stimulus isn’t related to anything, than the response gradually declines until it is gone. This is not, as Terrierman describes, “facing the fear.” This is no longer reacting to something that is meaningless. One might be initially startled or surprised by an unexpected stimulus (such as the prairie dog’s reactions to humans in the second link.) But “facing the fear” implies a bit more than a simple lack of association.

So let’s look at what is going on in the video. During the intro we initially see a very happy looking dog, at one point lying on his back and being massaged by Scott and Patrice and clearly enjoying it. We do see Jonbee growling at the camera from behind a baby gate, but whether or not that represents the actual problem is not clear. The problem, we are told by Scott is “he won’t submit to me in the house.”

“we’re in the house, no matter what we’re doing, if he’s down and I try to turn him over — he’ll attack me.”

Wow. This needs to be addressed immediately, by any means necessary! (Sigh.)

Right off the bat, there’s an association here. Outside, any and all handling is fine. Inside it is not. I suspect that the association is even more specific than the location: the muzzle, Scott’s posture, and his actions actions prior to trying to roll Jonbee over, are likely part of what makes Jonbee react so violently. When Cesar first handles Jonbee inside we see him start to visibly stiffen and his ears go flat. Soon after, Cesar actually points out an association for us: “The muzzle created this. Notice?”

So how exactly is habituation useful here? It isn’t. This is not a situation that calls for habituation at all. It calls for counter-conditioning and desensitization. (If you don’t like my article try here, here and here.) The association Jonbee has with being handled in this particular context needs to be changed. As you might be able to tell from the links, this can take some time. Whether or not a dog needs to be euthanized right away for refusing to be flipped on his back in the living room is a decision you need to make for yourself…

Extinction is when a behavior decreases in frequency due to a lack of reinforcement. Most people tend to use extinction to refer to a behavior disappearing completely, but that’s rarely the case. Terrierman opines that Jonbee’s violent behaviors during the episode cease because Cesar doesn’t reinforce them. This assertion attempts to diminish, if not outright conceal, what is actually going on.

Before Cesar attempts to roll Jonbee the first time, he fits Jonbee with a makeshift choker fashioned from a leash, an addition to the chain choker that Jonbee was already wearing. During the entire time, and then later when he shows Scott how to handle Jonbee, he keeps both leashes high and tight. Is he choking Jonbee? No. But the leashes are clearly an aversive stimulus and when Jonbee struggles and tries to pull away, they do tighten and become less comfortable, perhaps even starting to apply pressure to the back of the head and neck.

This is called negative reinforcement: the application of a negative consequence until a behavior stops. There also undoubtedly a bit of positive punishment — the application of a negative consequence when a behavior does occur — going on during the conflagration too.

Habituation and extinction are an incomplete, to be charitable, explanation of what happened with Jonbee. Rather than simply habituating Jonbee to touch and teaching him that fighting for control is a waste of energy, Cesar did do what he set out to do. He got Jonbee to submit to being handled inside by continuously administering aversive stimulus with two chokers. Jonbee became exhausted and gave up.

Uh. Mission accomplished, I guess.

Posted in Dog Whisperer | 18 Comments

Dog Whisperer Commentary: Chihuahuas From Hell 3

By Eric Goebelbecker | Published: February 2, 2010

Peanut is "balanced"

Peanut is initially introduced as a chihuahua that “controls the household,” but then the rest of the lead-in focuses on how he “hates” Shelly’s brother-in-law, Mike. We see Peanut growling and snapping as Mike tries to touch Peanut, over and over again. (Sigh) We also see Peanut barking, growling, and whining…well, take a look for yourself.

Doesn’t it make you wish there was someone dog savvy enough on the set to figure out that shoving a camera in Peanut’s face was upsetting him?

Cesar Millan doesn’t like the way Mike looks at Peanut. (Maybe he’s a cameraman.) He feels that it reflects a lack of trust that Peanut can pick up on. While I think he’s making much ado about not very much in this particular case, it is an interesting point – especially coming from him. Our actions, both intentional and unintentional, do influence how dogs act. If only Cesar was a little more circumspect about his own actions.

Cesar Millan starts a segway into a lecture on “animal sense” and then gets up to approach Peanut and Shelly. Watch what happens.

Wow. What was going on for those first 10 seconds?

Cesar seemed pretty troubled with the chihuahua’s reaction when he approached and, quite predictably, refused to back down. On one level I can see his point – demonstrating to Peanut that displaying an aggressive behavior makes strangers go away can certainly increase the likelihood that he will display these behaviors. But does that mean that it was necessary to wade in and try to grab collar or do that obnoxious little finger poke thing? No, he could have simply stood his ground and then backed off when Peanut stopped.

This isn’t a subtle point. There is a difference between not rewarding unwanted aggressive behavior and punishing it. Both can, when done correctly, reduce or eliminate the unwanted behavior. But one of them risks escalating the aggression and/or creating even more undesirable associations. What starts as a dislike of strangers can quickly turn into a fear that strangers will try to poke you in the neck. No amount of experience, skill, timing, or Nielsen ratings makes one immune from this risk.

There’s a real head-scratcher at around 10 seconds into the video: “There you go.” He was trying to force the little chihuahu to retreat behind the cushions? Really? What exactly was that supposed to accomplish?

Cesar Millan then teaches Shelly how to correct Peanut for growling. “Physical touch” is a very nice euphemism (I guess one could say that Mike Tyson used to be a champion at physically touching people) but sugar-coating aside, he is teaching Shelly how to poke Peanut in the neck when he growls until he stops. Correcting a growl is never a good idea.

A growl is a warning. You might not like the warning, but that’s what it is. Punishing a warning does not fix the underlying problem. It masks it. Similar to Millan’s correcting Amalie for guarding a toy, correcting Peanut for growling doesn’t address the underlying problem. What’s to say that he won’t eventually skip the growl when he feels threatened and just go right to biting?

Take a look at the photo I used at the top and then at approximately 1:10 into the second video. Tight lips, stare, Peanut just looks tense. Are the corrections really changing his emotional response? I don’t think so.

Desensitizing Peanut to approaching people would consist of a few simple exercises involving finding out the specific trigger (Is it just men? Did Cesar take any time to find out?) and then using something he likes (probably food, at least at first) to gradually change his emotional response when they approach. This could be done by having the people approach slowly and stop well before Peanut reacts aggressively but when he is still aware that they are near. This is call sub-threshold. While Peanut is in this state, he is fed. Over time the distance that the people can approach will shorten. This is the same process described in the Baby Girl commentary.

Cesar’s really batting a thousand in this one, telling Shelly that it’s not enough to be calm around Peanut, she needs to be calm and assertive. I thought Shelly was actually on to something and deserved some praise for not panicking when Peanut is behaving aggressively.

Overall, Chihuahuas from Hell continues to be an example of why so many dog professionals dislike this show.

Posted in Dog Whisperer | 10 Comments

Dog Whisperer Commentary: Chihuahuas From Hell 2

By Eric Goebelbecker | Published: January 26, 2010

Amalie is displeased

Kids and dogs are serious business. In a previous post about dog bites and children on Dog Star Daily, I analyze some information about dogs and children. Between 60 and 70% of the 1 million bites per year are to children, and many, if not most of them are related to guarding something – food, toys or territory. So let’s see how Cesar handles one of these problems.

Skipping Bandit

For those of you playing the home version, I am skipping a dog. If the segment with Nunu was pointless, then the one that followed, Bandit, was like moving Jay Leno to 10:00PM.

Amalie and the Baby

Amalie is the third Chihuahua from Hell. Amalie’s family consists of Kim, Lance, Harley (a 100+ pound mastiff), Amalie (a 7 pound chihuahua), and Mason, Kim and Lance’s new baby. In the opening we see Amalie snapping at and chasing Harley around. The producers think this is impressive. I think Harley is just a really patient and wonderful dog.

The problem is, of course, between Amalie and Mason. It seems that once Mason became mobile, Amalie started to growl and snap at Mason. We see a frankly scary scene (photo above was captured from it) where Amalie seems to be guarding either a toy or her bed from Mason. Only Amalie’s self-control saves Mason from a bite. (Kim seems to think her poorly timed correction has something to do with it. No. Sorry.)

So what does Cesar do? Please note that in the video Cesar is using what was previously introduced as Amalie’s favorite toy.

“Cesar demonstrated that even babies can become pack leaders.” I’m just going to come out and say it: I think that just might be the most idiotic thing I have ever heard on television. And yes, I grew up watching TV in the ’70s.

Cesar explains to Lance and Kim that if he interrupts Amalie as she starts to focus and/or react to Mason that her “brain will never escalate to something higher than that.”

One of two things is happening here: either Cesar had already conditioned his “snap” as a punisher, maybe with a smack or a leash jerk or it is simply acting as an interrupter. Either way, what happens when he leaves? Are they supposed to continue doing this? Will she just stop reacting to Mason?

Let’s say Cesar is right, and interrupting a dog before she snaps or growls will eventually stop her from doing so permanently. How many times, and under how many different circumstances, must you do this before the threat of her biting Mason goes away completely? Would you like to bet the safety of a child on that number?

Wouldn’t it be better to address the underlying cause?

Based on the very brief footage we were shown (I wish I could share more) my guess is that Amalie guards her bed and possibly the entire sofa from both the Mason and Harley. She also guards her toys from Mason. I would consider:

The baby just can’t play with Amalie’s toys. Put her toys away and take them out only when the baby is napping or at least not able to get where they are.
Train a give so you can safely get things away from her.
Work on some other exercises for guarding.
Train a leave-it as a safety cue to head off troubles.
Limit Amalie’s access to the sofa. She can only come on it when invited.
Stop letting Amalie terrorize Harley. It’s not fair to him.
Work on creating happy, fun, safe, and rewarding, experiences for Amalie while Mason is around.

Last, take a good look at Amalie toward the end of the video. Does she look happy? Heck, does she even look comfortable? Yet again, Cesar’s solution is not a calm dog — it’s a shut down and quite possibly terrified dog.

Posted in Dog Whisperer | 16 Comments

Dog Whisperer Commentary: Chihuahuas From Hell 1

By Eric Goebelbecker | Published: January 18, 2010

Nunu is not happy.

Well, I finally came across an episode that I just plain don’t like.

One of the “rules” I established for these commentaries is that I would accept what is shown on the show at face value. One of my frequent problems with what I see is not just what is happening, but why the producers (and at least implicitly Cesar Millan) decided to show it to us. I understand that drama sells and this drives at lot of the content, but after 5 1/2 years they must be aware that many people take the show very seriously and literally hang on Cesar’s every word and action.

This issue hit me full in the face when I saw “Chihuahuas from Hell.” But instead of wondering why a specific scene escaped the “cutting room floor,” I found myself wondering what the point of the much of the episode was. Other than a celebration of Millan’s macho posturing, I really couldn’t figure it out.

“Chihuahuas from Hell” starts with a retrospective of earlier chihuahua “cases” that Cesar has handled before introducing us to “El Diablo,” the most aggressive chihuahua yet! (Said with much gravitas and that scary electronic bass line that NGC loves so much.) I found the epiosde puzzling on a few levels. One of them is that a frequent defense of Cesar is that he has changed and become “more positive” over the years. If that’s the case, why are we seeing, in December of 2009 (that’s when I TIVOd it), a show with clips that date back to his first episode?

In addition to being puzzled by much of this episode, I have to confess I found it more than a little annoying — both the producer and Cesar Millan(as evidenced by his initial reaction to “El Diablo”) seem to think that aggressive chihuahuas are entertaining, even worthy of a bluesy “bad to the bone” montage. As a matter of fact,recent research indicates that chihuahuas is one of the more common breeds to bite, and the researchers theorized that the fact that people tend to take it less seriously may be one of the reasons why. (The show even mentions this at the beginning, but Cesar still finds the description of Diablo’s behavior amusing, and isn’t that montage kinda funny?)

Rather than tackle the entire episode at once, I’m going to break it down over a couple of posts. For one thing, there’s about two minutes of film toward the beginning that I could spend pages ranting about.

Nunu is a chihuahu that was rescued by Tina at the vet’s office where she worked. From her description, Nunu was always aggressive and bit people from the very beginning. We see Nunu’s case for a grand total of 1 minute, 25 seconds.

The first question that came to mind when it was over (well…after “That’s it?”) was what exactly was the point of that?

First, take a look at the photo above. Would you grab that chihuahu? Look at his eyes. Look at how stiff he seems. Let’s see what happened. (Note that the even the guy who does the warning graphics knew that this was dangerous.)

Honestly, where do I start? Why did Cesar Millan need to handle the dog? Here’s a hint about how I feel about that question: if your method of dealing with aggression involves getting bit, or even a moderately low chance of getting bit, there’s something wrong.

The original episode is not available on Hulu or National Geographic’s site, so I don’t know how long Millan held Nunu there. I guess, based on Cesar’s comment about “winning” (sigh), that we are supposed to think that it was until Nunu gave in. Let’s see what happened afterwards.

How does Nunu look to you? What do you think of Cesar’s explanation? “He is invited to live in your kingdom.” Does Nunu look like he feels like a welcome guest? Do you believe that after what sounds like years of aggressive behavior, one submission pin fixed it all? If it did, would you want that to be the basis for your relationship with your dog?

In case you missed Tina’s reaction:

“The most important thing I learned from Cesar is that I have to be more dominant with my dog rather than letting my dog dominate me in everything that I do in my life.”

It’s difficult for me to describe what I think should have been done differently. Under what circumstances (other than being forcibly pinned to someone’s leg) did Nunu growl and bite? Was it always when he was near Tina, or all the time? He may have been guarding her or the sofa, which one was it? Was there a resource guarding component and a handling issue or just one or the other? Without more information it’s hard to come up with specific recommendations. It all ties back to what was the point of that?

The answer, by the way, is the drama. That was the point. It’s a reality show.

More chihuahuas next week!

Posted in Dog Whisperer | 27 Comments

Dog Whisperer Commentary: Baby Girl

By Eric Goebelbecker | Published: December 14, 2009

Before getting into the second Dog Whisperer commentary, I’d like to respond to a couple of comments from the first.

I read that if I want to prove Cesar wrong I should film myself working with dogs that have the same problems. Passing over the obvious logistical and production issues, my real answer is this: I don’t have anything to prove. I’m not the one questioning behavioral science. I’m watching the show, providing commentary, and explaining what many other trainers would do in these situations. (In addition to pointing out the things I do like.) Filming me working dogs would make it small-time trainer from Jersey vs. big-time Hollywood trainer.

If you doubt the methods I propose, feel free to do your own research. But keep in mind, watching more of the reality show with a dog trainer in it isn’t really research. And please, tell me where I am wrong in the comments. Unlike some, I am willing to publicly confront criticism and learn from it.

There was another criticism, one that made me literally laugh out loud. A week or so after the first commentary, I came across a blog with the standard “trainers who condemn Cesar are close-minded and should consider his methods more closely” complaint. I commented, explaining that I had considered his methods and provided a link to the commentary. Part of his response to my comment were words to the effect that it was strange that I spent so much time scrutinizing the show. (I wish I hadn’t lost the link, if you’re reading this, please put it in the comments.)

Isn’t that priceless? We should consider Cesar’s methods…but not spend too much time actually looking at them. Too sciencey I guess.

Two more housekeeping bits:

Rather than go with the latest show, I am going to stick to relatively recent shows that can be watched on nationalgeographic.com Hopefully they will stay live long enough that most people can watch the show when they read the post. The Cesar Millan “channel” is here. I can’t embed the videos. They offer the code, but the embeds do not work.

Also, I’m still tweaking the format. Trying to follow the flow of the show is very difficult. The last post is 2834 words, edited down from over 6000. In addition to taking a long time to write, most people just won’t read that much. I’m going to try to take a “big picture” view this time. I may leave things out. If you feel that I left something important out, please leave a comment.

“Baby Girl” is another episode that only covers a single dog. I selected it because it deals with fearfulness, an area where Cesar takes a lot of heat from his critics. Baby Girl (BG) is a doberman mix that Suzie brought home from a rescue. From the very first day BG displayed extreme fear for any new sights or sounds. She would refuse to enter the kitchen if a cabinet door was open or a drawer was ajar. Suzie lives near Disneyland, and the nightly (?) fireworks are always traumatic for BG. While it was not stated explicitly, I’d wager that travel outside of the home was equally stressful for BG.

Unfortunately, this is not an uncommon situation for rescue dogs. Fearfulness can have a few causes, but one of the more common is a lack of socialization during early puppyhood. This socialization is so critical that the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior has issued a position statement explaining that they consider lack of socialization more of threat to dogs than infectious disease. As you might imagine, many unwanted and stray dogs do not get the socialization they need as puppies.

Another important factor is genetics. Extreme sensitivity can manifest from birth, especially in certain breeds such as some herding breeds and the “sighthounds,” including greyhounds. As we’ll see, Baby Girl seems to have some greyhound in her.

For some great information on how to live with and train fearful dogs, check out fearfuldogs.com.

During the initial interview Suzie mentions another fearful dog that Cesar handled in an earlier show. I haven’t seen this episode. In the flashback we see a “virtual reality” rig which includes a treadmill and a lot of loud noise. More on this in a bit.

There is no discussion of any methods that Suzie has tried before and no mention of a vet visit to check for physiological problems.

Cesar decides that he can best address BG’s needs back at his compound, so he takes her there. The first step is to introduce her to some of the dogs on the compound or, as Cesar says.

…let’s see what the pack feels about it, you know, what energy they feel she is.

Sigh. We’re back in the mysterious energy zone.

In case it wasn’t obvious enough last time, I’m not into the woo. Lots of dog people are. Many of my friends and people I have learned from are, but I’m just not a woo person. Sorry.

Cesar starts out with BG in an adjacent area (which is a good idea). BG seems much more interested in (and overwhelmed by) her new surroundings than the other dogs. She seems to be looking for an escape route at one point.

When she is first let in with the other dogs, she moves around a lot and is clearly trying to avoid being surrounded by the other dogs. As he is shifting and dodging, her tail comes up from between her legs, maybe because of the motion, maybe because she is so focused on her surrounding that those muscles actually relax. Cesar sees this and says “Look at the tail, verry happy!” (Here is a clip, at least until it is taken down. I feel that 57 seconds falls under fair use.)

Sigh. Dog Body Language 101: never just look at one body part. Her tail may have come out from between her legs, but she is actively avoiding the other dogs!

When one dog tries to mount her, she issues a very well controlled and appropriate correction. The other dogs give her some distance, in what I feel is a great display of control. Cesar says: …obviously her energy is not good.”

I don’t want to overdo the “sigh” thing, but sigh.

Cesar waits a few days to get her integrated in the “pack.” This is a good thing. While many trainers that do a board-and-train probably don’t have the luxury of time that Cesar has, letting a fearful dog get acclimated to a new environment is a good idea.

But I can’t say that about the next part of BG’s “treatment.” Cesar takes her to a treadmill that is installed in a trailer and surrounded by a big screen and what seems to be a pretty impressive sound system. He has prepared tapes of things that BG is afraid of, along with a tape of Suzie to “calm her.” He uses this to force her to walk the treadmill while “dealing with” the things that she fears. On the treadmill her head is down low, her posture is low and her tail alternates between low and tucked against her abdomen. She looks miserable, even when Cesar plays the recording of Suzie.

This is called flooding. Flooding is a technique where a subject is forced to face his fears until he loses the fearful response. For example, if you are afraid if spiders or snakes, I could lock you in a room full of them and not let you out until you no longer seem afraid. This is, needless to say, a controversial technique. Some say it doesn’t work, others (including me) say that while it may work, it’s not humane and that there are better alternatives.

One of the better methods, which I may as well discuss here, are counter-conditioning and desensitization.

Desensitization gradually reduces the intensity of a response to an undesirable (to the subject) stimulus. This is done by gradually exposing the subject to low levels of the stimulus. For example, since BG is afraid of balloons, she could be exposed to them at a distance until she no longer responds, and then the distance could be shortened.

This process is almost always paired with counter conditioning, which is an application of classical or pavlovian conditioning. BG already has an association – balloons and fear. This association could be gradually changed, or countered, by pairing the desensitization with something good, such as very yummy treats.

When implementing these methods one also needs to be aware of the threshold model. When individuals react to stimuli that elicit intense fear (or aggression, BTW) there is a threshold beyond which learning is severely (if not completely) impaired. Where this threshold is varies from dog to dog, and that’s really where there is no substitute for experience when it comes to implementing behavior modification.

Of course if you lack the knowledge, experience doesn’t really matter.

These concepts are firmly rooted in behavioral science and apply to many different species. Poke around the Internet or your neighborhood library for more information on them. For further information on how they relate to dogs, check out How Dogs Learn (which has a short section on it) and/or Excel-Erated Learning (which has much more information.)

Counter-conditioning and Desensitization (CC & DS) are very simple concepts that can be very difficult to implement. For one thing, it usually takes a very, very long time. This leads to people giving up. It’s easy to screw up, by either proceeding too slowly or crossing the threshold too often, which leads to no results and again, people giving up. It also leads to crappy TV, because let’s face it, the interesting bits only happen when you can see exactly what you should not: an intense response.

Back at the “virtual reality trailer,” Cesar introduces new sounds and BG is startled every time. Eventually Cesar has some assistants bring in a large string of balloons. BG is so startled she falls off the treadmill. Cesar puts her back on and is shown saying:

“If I do baby steps, I’m just going to make her more and more fearful.”

Sigh. Cesar obviously disagrees with CC & DS. He doesn’t bother to explain the logic behind this assertion at all. It has the sound and feel of common sense, unfortunately that’s not enough to make it right.

I don’t have much more to say about the treadmill. It is revisited several times during the episode. Whether it works or not, I think it is too stressful and arguably inhumane.

When we cut away to the next commercial break, we see Baby Girl happily running alongside Cesar. She does seem to trust him and like him.

Next, Cesar takes BG to a greyhound rescue. This is a really nice idea. She very quickly warms up to the greyhounds, and seems to enjoy running and playing with them. Dogs of similar breeds do tend to play the same way. It makes sense: greyhounds are literally bred to run and chase so running and chasing each other would tend to come naturally.

Cesar tends to take a “whole dog” approach to his behavior programs, and this little slice of greyhound life is a part of that. I like this “whole dog” view of Cesar’s a lot. It’s just some of the connections he makes that concern me.

For the next month or so, Cesar takes BG everywhere with him. We see them walking and we see her on a behavior consult with him. While some of my colleagues might disagree, I have to say I think this may not be a bad idea. While the consult, with the other dog displaying aggressive behavior toward BG, looks very risky and is a bad example, getting BG out and about after being confined to Suzie’s house might just be a big part of what she needs. There is, of course, a risk of her getting over threshold too often, but I can see some merit in exposing her to natural situations on a regular basis, in a controlled and safe fashion.

Cesar has an interesting solution to the tucked tail issue.

Interesting. Does the mind follow the body in this case? It’s not necessarily a harmful thing, but I would feel funny suggesting it. Cesar speaks very definitively about it, as if he knows that this works.

Half way into the show, we find that Baby Girl has not been eating and has lost weight throughout her stay. At first it’s not clear when this started, but later on we find that BG has always been an unenthusiastic eater. Cesar puts a lot of effort into getting her to eat, including consulting a vet (finally!) and trying a variety of foods. He shows some great flexibility and a willingness to adjust his normally rigid rules to work with BG. At the end of the episode Suzie shows him how she handles it. The drama portrayed within this subplot seems a little contrived to me – I find it hard to believe that in the 92 days that Baby Girl stayed at Cesar’s he never spoke to Suzie about her reluctance to eat.

Cesar takes Baby Girl to a pool next. She cannot tuck her tail while under water. Cesar thinks this can help with the fear. No, I’m not kidding.

This is taking shaping the mind with the body a bit too far. Also, as he effectively forces her into the pool, he reads small changes in tail carriage tail as significant changes in state of mind, even while she struggles against being pulled into the pool!

And what exactly does “the brain in a forward state” mean?

Cesar is ready to return BG to Suzie now. We see her playing outside, and clearly she is a different dog. However, there is a thunderstorm and BG has a severe reaction.

Thunderphobia can be a very serious issue. At a seminar I attended given by veterinary behaviorist Dr. Nicholas Dodman, fear of thunder storms rated it’s own hour long presentation. There is also some peer-reviewed literature on the topic.

Some of the recommendations I found in a quick search are:

Desensitization to storm sounds. This is considered very difficult.
Create a “safe haven” for your dog during storms. Try to diminish the sound and view of lightning there and create a positive association with this place.
Medication. See you vet, I will not recommend, or even list, any medicine here.
Jackets, such as the ThunderShirt. (I have had some success with this with one of my dogs.)

At the seminar, Dr. Dodman specifically called out flooding as risky and not recommended for thunderphobia and other fear problems.

Cesar finally does return Baby Girl home, and we see a 7 month follow up. Baby Girl is very much improved, and there’s really little doubt that Cesar helped her. (I still don’t think she looks at all happy on treadmill though.)

I can’t say whether or not the treadmill helped or hindered Baby Girl’s progress. But I will say this again: it’s not something I would use. I feel that the socialization Cesar provided by taking her with him around the city, and the time she spent with other dogs helped her a lot.

Here’s a thought: is it possible that the “virtual reality trailer” was just included to keep the show interesting? The real work, 90+ days of socialization, was probably pretty boring and would not have made good TV.

So that’s the second commentary, and it’s still over 2500 words. I left quite a bit out, but I think it is a pretty good description of what happened.

What do you think? Please leave a comment below!

Also posted in Training Theory, Videos | 31 Comments

The Dog Whisperer Commentary: Bella

By Eric Goebelbecker | Published: November 22, 2009

My first Dog Whisperer commentary is on “Bella”, from season 8. (Episode 9 according to Hulu.) This episode was first shown in August of 2009. It is the newest complete episode on Hulu, so I am starting with that. In order to avoid charges of “taking things out of context” (another frequent Cesar Millan defense,) I will only provide commentary on complete episodes.

Here is a link to the episode. It appears that NGC has disabled embedding, even though they offer the code to do it.

This episode only covers one dog, which is a pretty good starting point. We see Cesar work in depth (relatively speaking) on one case.

Bella is a 4 1/2 year old American Bulldog. She belongs to Nate, a rehabilitated alcoholic who adopted Bella during a pretty chaotic time in his life. It appears that during Nate’s time partying she was teased and maybe even abused.

Bella displays very serious food guarding. Footage is shown of Nate trying to get to her bowl and she reacts very aggressively. She also displays very serious aggression toward other dogs when walking on leash.

After showing us (very dramatically) Bella’s issues, we see an interview between Nate and Cesar. Cesar immediately gloms onto the Bella’s terrible behavior on leash:

“I think that’s the first thing you have to learn. If you can’t walk a dog, you can’t tell her anything.”

Um. Why? For Cesar, walking the dog seems to be some sort of ritual for establishing dominance over the dog. We’ve coexisted with dogs for at least 10,000 years according to most anthropologists. When did we start walking them on leash? 100 years ago? Maybe 200? How did people handle them before that?

Nate also says that he feels guilty about the current situation with Bella. Cesar seems dismayed by Nate’s admission:

The more you live in that…guilt…or whatever other energy, the more weak you appear to her. So if you are soft energy, she have to take the dominant position.”

So here we are, about 8 minutes into 45 minutes of TV, and already in a struggle for dominance with Bella. This is my fundamental problem with Cesar. All of our dealings with our dogs are phrased in terms of a battle for control. It shapes everything he does, as we see in this episode.

Nate’s behavior toward Bella displays a lot of stress. He shouts a lot. He struggles for control over the leash. His body language has a lot of “big” movements that undoubtedly contribute to Bella’s behavior. In this way, his stress is visible to Bella and most likely makes things worse. But why “weak?” Why must it be positioned as an opening for Bella to “take over?” Is she hoping to get him to change his will? Relinquish the remote control? Finally let her drive the car?

Next, Cesar “evaluates” Bella by approaching her where she is tied up in the yard. His reading of her body language is pretty good, but it is a terrible situation and sets Bella to become stressed and fail. Being tied up is very stressful for most dogs, and having a strange person (not to mention a camera crew) approach her only makes things worse. Evaluating her in this circumstance is not going to provide Cesar with any useful information.

Bella reacts with barking and lunging so, of course, Cesar declares that he is going to “defeat” her psychologically. Here again, we are in a struggle. We’re not trying address her aggressive issues or help her deal with her problem. We are in a battle of wills!

After a short time Bella stops reacting to Cesar and lies down. This is great! Bella is able to adjust to Cesar very rapidly. Cesar’s technique, standing still and not reacting to her, is effective and helps her with settling down, although the idea that this is a “defeat” for Bella is anthropomorphic. Even though I would never put a dog in this particular position, if I somehow got there I would take her ability to relax so quickly as a good sign.

Cesar then says something that completely baffles me. Dogs with short noses like American Bulldogs don’t “really” use their noses. What?? He tries an experiment with some vanilla scented spray to get her to “use her nose.” This is an interesting idea – attempting to redirect her attention with a strong scent, but I find his assertion about brachycephalic breeds bewildering. While their short noses make their sense of smell weaker than other breeds, it still dominates their perception of the world and they use their noses just as much as any other dog.

After some more experimenting, Cesar decides the Bella is too stressed and calls it quits. Excellent. Cesar makes the right call. Bella does appear to be very stressed and pushing her any more would have accomplished nothing good.

I would have handled our first meeting very differently. Cesar explicitly mentions that he did not want Nate there so he could “send her into a different emotional state.” (Whatever…) I would have wanted him him there. He is part of the package, and how Bella reacts when he is not there really isn’t the point. I also wouldn’t have made my first approach with her tied to a tree. It would have been either in her house or outside, with Nate holding her leash (loosely) in either scenario.

Back on the show, Cesar jumps from saying that Bella is too stressed to immediately throwing her into an even more stressful situation. He has Nate do a couple of “walk-bys” with Bella on leash to see how she reacts to another dog. Why? If she’s too stressed, she’s too stressed. I would have called it a day.

However, when Cesar sees Bella straining at the end of her leash on a prong collar, he decides to remove it. Good call! While I dislike a choker, in this situation it is a far better call than a prong. The pinching of the prong, as Cesar says, is probably contributing to, if not triggering, Bella’s violent reaction to other dogs while on leash.

Cesar places an improvised choker high on her neck and walks Bella past the other dog with the leash very, very, tight. He corrects her if she looks at the other dog. He points out that she is now “calm.” To me she looks very stressed and almost afraid to move. “Calm” and “still” are not the same thing. Her tail is tucked, she is licking her lips, and she tries to steal a few nervous looks at other dog. I would have used a flat collar or a head halter and a lot more distance for this exercise. I would not have used corrections for looking around. I want a calm dog, not a stiff robot.

Cesar takes Bella to a “ranch” that is run by one of his students. He puts a muzzle on her and has her on a long lead. He lets her roam with a group of dogs. This is risky, but not necessarily a bad idea. Bella is much more relaxed than she is on leash, which is not a surprise – many dogs that display aggressive behavior on leash are perfectly fine off leash.

However, a dog scratching at the ground gets Bella’s attention and she lunges toward him. Cesar immediately grabs Bella, pushes her into a sit, and then pushes her to the ground and pins her. When she relaxes, he lets her up. Grabbing Bella and pulling her away from the other dog is a risky move. Not because Cesar might get bit – she’s wearing a muzzle, remember – but because it runs the risk of creating yet another negative association with being near other dogs. Approach another dog, get manhandled by a human. Likewise with pinning her to ground. Pinning her to ground may have “put her into another emotional state” as Cesar would say, but what did she learn from it? What was taught in that situation?

What Cesar tried to do, teach Bella that it’s OK to be near other dogs, is a viable strategy for helping her, but I would have done weeks, maybe months, of foundation work beforehand. I would have done some desensitization to both the muzzle (to reduce the stress of wearing it) and to other dogs, starting from a distance. I would have trained Bella to respond to her name and basic obedience commands, even in the face of distractions. I would have included Nate in the exercises because, as I said above, he’s part of the package and how she acts with him and his ability to what I would have been hired to address. I know I can handle dogs, it’s Nate that needs help.

Cesar then removes the muzzle and has Bella on leash in front of other dogs while they are in their pens. This takes setting Bella up to fail to an entirely new level, as she now has at least a half dozen opportunities to engage in fence fighting. She takes advantage of one of the opportunities. This exercise is completely pointless and places unnecessary stress on her.

After a while, Bella stops fence fighting. It’s not clear how much time has passed. Either she finally gave up, or something happened that we missed. Cesar drops the lead and lets her explore while the dogs behind the fences are barking. She starts to sniff the perimeter. Cesar says he likes that she is “using her nose”…but he doesn’t like it because it makes the other dogs nervous. Good point…but I guess stopping her isn’t an option? Cesar approaches Bella with a hand up while she is sniffing a dog and his pen. She walks up to him with her tail wagging. She looks at him and then looks away. Cesar smacks her on the side of her head.

Cesar explains that she looked at another dog and “gave him an energy that I didn’t agree with.” (Whatever…) Cesar then waited for her to be distracted (his words) before hitting her to “catch her by surprise” and then “followed through with the energy.” (How many whatevers are too many for one paragraph?)

If you are having problems following that, you are not alone. I’m not sure what Cesar is talking about when he refers to energy. Sometimes it seems like an abstraction. Sometimes it seems like more of the new age-y woo-woo bullshit that TV and the Internet is full of.

I can say that the smack was far too removed from anything Cesar accused Bella of doing wrong to be considered a valid correction.

Sometime after the smack, the dogs become quiet. Cesar then takes credit for the dogs getting tired of barking.

I don’t see the point of this exercise and can’t really tell you what I would do different. I just wouldn’t do it.

Next, Cesar does some work with Bella on her food guarding.

We briefly see Cesar exercising Bella on a treadmill to burn off some energy. Then, he gets her agitated by pointing a scrub brush on a stick at her. And then he kicks her.

Sorry, watching this stuff gets to me. Let me explain.

Cesar presents Bella with a bowl of food, and then uses a scrub brush on a 4 foot pole to get between her and the food. Cesar seems to be saying that by using the brush as both a shield and a taunt, baiting Bella into attacking it, and then refusing to back away he is demonstrating to her that aggression won’t work. The kick was to deliberately set her off and then prove to her that he won’t back down.

In other words this is a battle and if Cesar can win, Bella will stop guarding her food.

Before I go any further, let’s hear a word from our sponsor, real behavioral science. Food aggression is a manifestation of “resource guarding.” It is a “hard wired” behavior that dogs and wolves share. Many dogs never display it. Some display it in only very specific circumstances. For others, it is always apparent. It is not learned, and the fact that Nate mentions early in the show that Bella drew blood over a piece of dropped shrimp when she was a very small puppy reinforces that.

Punishment is not the way to go with this behavior. With food guarding, hand-feeding is sometimes an option. It’s also good to train a “give” command, starting out with low value items and working your way up to very valuable items. I would also train a release and use it to tell Bella when it is OK to approach the food bowl. It’s a tough problem to deal with and I don’t want to make an already too-long post longer.

Cesar gives up on the scrub brush and moves to a “vibration” e-collar. He goes through great lengths to demonstrate how mild it is. I see electrodes, but I am going to take his word for it that it only vibrates. When he places it on Bella and triggers it, she jumps off the bowl and looks cowed and miserable.

Even if the collar is not shocking her, it’s obvious that Bella finds the collar very aversive. Cesar has “fixed” the issue by finding a punishment that is severe enough to override the resource guarding. I don’t trust this as a “fix.” I believe that there is a very high risk for unintended consequences, and I am not sure that someday Bella won’t find something valuable enough to guard again. I also dislike punishing a dog this severely. As I said above, there are more humane alternatives.

The show gives us a update on progress. According to the narrator, Cesar has worked with Bella for a total of two hours. Two hours to “fix” leash aggression and food guarding is insane. The video shows Bella reacting violently to another dog on leash with the prong as compared to off leash. Apples and oranges.

Cesar brings Nate back. He arranges some walk bys with a large number of dogs. He has fit Bella with a Gentle Leader head harness, which I like a lot as a solution! Bella responds very well to the head collar. However, after a minute or two I see Cesar coaching Nate on jerking the leash to pull Bella away from another dog. This is dangerous with a Gentle Leader, and I have never seen an experienced trainer recommend leash corrections with a head collar. By jerking a dog’s neck very violently there is a real risk of injury. Again, with some foundation work Nate could instead call Bella’s name and reward her for responding.

Otherwise, I like the “walk by” drills for working on her leash aggression. The process does seem completely rushed, but it is most likely for the camera. Cesar’s coaching of Nate is very good. Cesar is great at praising people. If he was more willing to tell dogs what to do, he would be a lot easier to watch. I liked the positive finish with a side-by-side walk of the dogs.

We return to the food guarding and a utterly pointless seven minute standoff with the scrub brush. After the seven minutes Bella gives up and it is presented as some kind of victory. To my mind, Bella deserves the credit for figuring out how silly the whole thing was.

Cesar returns to the e-collar, and uses it in conjunction with the scrub brush. Bella again reacts very fearfully to the collar and moves away from the bowl. She looks very unhappy. Cesar then pets her with the brush to show her that it’s OK. (Whatever….) He then demonstrates that she will leave the bowl when the brush approaches.

As I said above, whether the collar is actually shocking her or not, Bella obviously finds the collar to be extremely aversive. It’s not clear that there will be no side effects to this form of punishment.

Six and a half weeks later we see that Nate has been working with Cesar’s student on Bella’s training. Bella seems to be doing fine, but there is a big difference. Bella is now responding to cues: “take it,” “off.” and a “go to place.” Cesar did not train these cues; at no point did he discuss the idea of training a dog to do something rather than punishing her until she stops doing something. It looks to me like Cesar’s student is a bit of a better trainer than he is.

This episode was a mixed bag for me. While Cesar frequently teeters on the edge of showing a great understanding of both dogs and their people, he almost always falls back to an adversarial model and a heavy reliance on punishment. He is adept at reading dogs, but fills his readings with anthropomorphic motives and jumps to very bold conclusions about what is going on. His explanations for what he is doing are almost always completely baffling.

Also posted in Training Theory, Training Tips, Videos | 24 Comments

The Cesar Millan Commentaries

By Eric Goebelbecker | Published: November 22, 2009

I have been very critical of Cesar Millan here, on Dog Star Daily, on twitter, and in comments on other blogs. To be clear, I don’t like his methods and I find his explanations for what he is doing frequently baffling and sometimes infuriating.

One of the frequent rebuttals to anyone criticizing Cesar is that we must not watch the show. I have decided to take this particular criticsm head on and not only watch the show, but provide commentaries.

Having just finished the first commentary, I’ll say up front this is not easy. Sometimes the show provides the viewer with an idea of elapsed time, other times I am not sure if we are looking at “real time” or not. Cesar frequently does not explain exactly what he is trying to accomplish, which makes giving him a fair evaluation difficult. And yes, I want to be fair. Just making fun of him (as easy as it can be at times) won’t help anyone.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again (and again) The Dog Whisperer is not a how-to show. It’s a reality show. Each case is framed as a drama, and the cinematography, music, and direction is cleared aimed for maximum tension. Good, safe, and effective dog training just ain’t like that in real life. (Sorry.) Early on, the producers and Cesar seemed to be pretty clear on that. But lately; not so much. When I go to the show’s home page I see links to his books, magazine and other products that sort of muddy the issue.

I am going to assume that what I see on the screen is what happened. Sometimes I think this will work in Cesar’s favor. Other times it may not, because sometimes what I see and hear just doesn’t make any damn sense. But, that will be the rule: what Cesar and his producers put on the screen is what happened.

Whether you are a Cesar fan or not, I think you will get something out of these commentaries. Either way, I hope you read and comment. The first one will be online later today.

Posted in Dog Whisperer | 6 Comments

Cesar Millan and Veterinary Behaviorists

By Eric Goebelbecker | Published: February 9, 2009

I’m not a fan of Cesar Millan and his techniques. His handling of dogs is very heavy handed and his constant chatter about being the pack leader and energy flow is a bewildering mix of outdated dominance theory and new age woo that makes watching Larry King seem informative. Many dog trainers feel obligated to pay homage to his remarkable handling skills, but based on how the show is edited, how can you tell? How many takes were dragged to the trash during editing? How much time did he spend off camera with the dog? Others commend him for conveying the idea that dogs need exercise and stimulation, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

I try to not dwell on the Dog Whisperer too much. When he first received a lot of attention I was pretty upset, but I eventually came to grips with the fact that getting myself wound up over someone who is more a creation of directors and editors than anything else is unproductive. When people ask me about his techniques or seem to be using them, I explain what I have been taught about dog training and animal behavior and move on.

Today I received a link to a news article about the Cesar Millan, or to be more exact about what the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (AVSAB) has to say about him, that I think is worth sharing.

Here’s an excerpt:

The American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (AVSAB) issued a new position paper aimed at countering some of the pervasive influence of his show, which airs on the National Geographic Channel, and of Millan’s training approach, which is based on what the position statement calls outdated dominance theory.

Take a look. Judge for yourself.

Posted in Dog Whisperer | Leave a comment

The Dog Whisperer

By Eric Goebelbecker | Published: January 21, 2008

I’m frequently asked about Cesar Millan, National Geographic Channel’s ironically-named Dog Whisperer. I can’t really say that I am a fan.

This article about Dr. Ian Dunbar, an icon in the dog training world, has an interesting sidebar comparing Dr. Dunbar and Mr. Millan. The article has a lot of information about Dr. Dunbar himself, and is worth a read for anyone interested in how dogs really learn and should be taught.

Also posted in News | Comments closed