"No Reward Marker" (NRM): les pours & les contres

le NRM (No Reward Marker) les pours et les contres

il y a ceux qui l'utilisent et ceux qui ne l'utilisent pas

et vous ? votre avis ?

tu parle pour un travail au clicker?

C'est quoi?

donc par suite reponse à ta question, je ne l'utilise pas puisque j'ignore ce que c'est.

moi je suis pas calé en clicker mais je crois avoir lu que c'etais le fait de dire au chien qu'il se tromper dans un travail au shaping
mais si il faut c'est pas du tout ca^^
derby explique nous plus clairement peut etre?

dage a écrit:

tu parle pour un travail au clicker?

non en général

je crois que Susan Garret l'utilise alors que Pamela Johnson est contre (si je ne me trompe pas, c'est ce que j'ai compris en anglais)

et j'ai entendu que sur des forums anglo-saxons c'est la 'guerre' entre les pour et les contre

c'est un marqueur d’échec, (le "no reward marker"), pas un "non" marqueur d'interdiction.

mais cela n'est utilisé qu' en shaping ou pas?

est-ce quand, par exemple, on demande un "assis" (pour citer un exemple simple), que le chien se couche, et qu'on lui répond "perdu" ?

oui je pense mais le mot choisi dois avoir une importance ,peut etre utiliser quelques chose de plus neutre?

Oulala moi je n'en suis pas là au niveau technique, j'ignore ... de toute façon Loulou est trop fort, il ne se trompe jamais

dage a écrit:

mais cela n'est utilisé qu' en shaping ou pas?

je ne sais pas

perso, je ne l'utilise pas non plus. je sais pas, j'ai l'impression que c'est superflu, je préfère ignorer également.

dage a écrit:

oui je pense mais le mot choisi dois avoir une importance ,peut etre utiliser quelques chose de plus neutre?

ou un mot -code ou son -code (pschitt pschitt par exemple) toujours le même

Chris25 a écrit:

perso, je ne l'utilise pas non plus. je sais pas, j'ai l'impression que c'est superflu, je préfère ignorer également.

ignorer ne serait-il, indirectement, ou directement d'ailleurs^^, pas une sorte de NRM, marqueur de non-récompense ?


edit : ce serait bien de bien définir ce que c'est, et dans quelle situation, ou circonstance, non ?

Je connais pas!
Perso, j'utilise un "zut" quand mon chien se trompe, mais seulement en obérythmée! mais je ne récompense pas.

Eliko a écrit:

edit : ce serait bien de bien définir ce que c'est, et dans quelle situation, ou circonstance, non ?

http://www.clickertraining.com/node/179

Citation :

"NRMs" No Reward Markers
By Melissa Alexander on 07/01/2003
Filed in - Training Theory

Humans are notoriously verbal creatures. We love to talk, and we do so automatically, even when the person we're talking to doesn't speak our language, can't hear what we're saying, or even when the "person" isn't a person at all.

We're so used to verbal instructions that the ideas of stilling the chatter during early learning and adding the cue after our dogs are offering the behavior seem ridiculous. The clicker, however, we understand. The clicker may not be verbal, per se, but it gives clear, audible feedback that the dog did what we want. It seems only logical then that we need another signal to tell our dogs to try something else when they offer something we don't want.

This signal is called a "No Reward Marker," or NRM. NRMs are intended to be a verbal cue for extinction, not a punisher, so people attempt to say them in the most neutral tone of voice possible. "Uh-uh," said quietly and calmly, is a common NRM. In a training session, the trainer would either click or use the NRM after each repetition to let the dog know whether his behavior was correct or not. Although they sound logical, NRMs are not without problems—and controversy. The biggest problem is that NRMs may not be as neutral as we want them to be. Imagine yourself on a game show...

You know that every right choice will get you closer to the grand prize. After a right choice, a bell sounds. After a wrong choice, a buzzer sounds. How do you feel about that buzzer? Is it neutral? Is it simply telling you "wrong choice," or is it increasing your stress level? Would it be any different if the sound were a beautiful harp chord instead of a buzzer? I doubt it. Now imagine that you weren't given any feedback for wrong choices except the lack of the "right choice" bell. Would you be as frazzled by the puzzle-solving process?

Some dogs will take NRMs neutrally, simply as information offered. Others will view it as a mild punisher. In the short term you might not be able to tell how an individual dog views the NRM. The effects may be clear only over the long-term, as rate of emitted behavior falls off and the dog becomes reluctant to experiment with new behavior.

You may be lucky enough to have a dog that takes NRMs neutrally, but that may not be true of your next dog. Another problem with NRMs is that they're habitual. Once you, as trainer, are in the habit of giving an NRM, you will do so nearly automatically. It can be very, very difficult to break that habit if you need to work with a dog who finds them punishing. NRMs are also habitual for the dogs. They learn to rely on them, expect them. If you get into a situation where you can't give that expected feedback, the dog can become confused and anxious.

Fortunately, NRMs aren't required for training. Though they make sense to us verbal humans, the reality is that you can communicate the same information simply by withholding the click. The click means "You did what I want!" No click, then, means "Try something else." By clicking and reinforcing the choices you like and ignoring and not reinforcing the choices you don't like, you allow positive reinforcement and extinction to work together in a powerful way. Reinforcement makes those behaviors stronger and more likely to occur. Extinction makes the other behaviors weaker and less likely to occur.

The process for training without an NRM is simple. At the beginning of the session, set your criteria—decide exactly what will make you click. Each and every time the dog achieves that criteria, click and reinforce. If the dog offers anything else, including a sub-par version of the goal behavior, simply do nothing but reset for another repetition.

The bottom line is that NRMs, though logical, add an unnecessary level of complexity to training. Keep training simple for you and for your dogs: forego NRMs and stick to basic positive reinforcement and extinction.

https://k9densolutions.com/No_Reward_Marker.html

Citation :

What is a No Reward Marker?

A No Reward Marker is an auditory signal or cue that is paired with removing something the dog values (one example could be to "immediately" mark the undesired response with "no" or "eh-eh" followed by an exaggerated display of removing yourself from the training area and taking all rewards with you) every time the dog gives an incorrect response. This is known as "negative punishment" where the consequence is removing something the dog values. With proper timing the No Reward Marker or identifier should motivate the dog to stop presenting the incorrect behavior and offer the desired one.

It is crucial to understand that dogs do not know there is such a thing as training. They do not understand why we prefer sitting to jumping or why it is so important to us that they stay and not move at certain times.

Anyone who lives with a dog should realize that dogs experience the world differently than we do. They focus on information obtained primarily through their sense of smell and hearing while communicating primarily via body language with some vocalization. By contrast, humans obtain information through visual and auditory sources and communicate verbally with some body language. These communication and perception differences make it difficult for us to teach dogs what we want them to learn. It also means that we sometimes inadvertently teach dogs things we don’t want them to learn.

For example, how many people unknowingly teach their dogs to engage in some unwanted behavior like jumping, barking, nudging or nipping by giving the dog attention at the very moment he engages in that behavior? Even if we say, “No, no, bad dog! Don’t do that!” this is rarely sufficient to extinguish the behavior, and in comparison to being bored and ignored, “No, no, bad dog!” sounds pretty good.

By teaching a clear system of communication to the dog, we can clearly point out the exact behavior we like while clarifying, simplifying and speeding up the learning process. In addition, we reduce the frustration of cross-species communication.

That is why we must clearly and precisely communicate to the dog exactly what he is doing correctly or incorrectly. We must never assume he knows what we want or what is good or bad behavior.

'Suis pô sûre que ça aidera tout le monde...

Perso, je n'utilise pas ou alors je ne le fais pas exprès...

Je n'en vois pas l'intérêt sauf peut-être si le chien travail à distance peut-être... je ne sais pas...

Je trouve que c'est une perte de temps et d'énergie.

Autant se concentrer sur comment faire pour que le chien réussisse et ne pas oublier de le féliciter plutôt que de repérer et vouloir sanctionner la faute.

oui ça fait beaucoup d'anglais d'un coup là

merci, en tout cas

et comme toi :

Citation :

Perso, je n'utilise pas ou alors je ne le fais pas exprès...

J'aimerais que Nantia vienne nous en parler, je crois qu'elle l'utilise
et dans ses cours Susan Garret en parle il me semble

oui c'est bien cette vidéo de Pam que j'avais vu

Derby a écrit:

Susan Garret en parle il me semble

Oui, il me semble aussi qu'elle l'utilise mais pas Emily Larlham qui utilise le "Errorless learning":

CLICK!

Citation :

Errorless Learning versus the use of No Reward Markers

Errorless learning is a type of training that sets humans or animals up with the goal of a 100% success rate while learning. Today, not only zoos, marine parks, and dog trainers use errorless learning, but also teachers of children and people with learning disabilities use it with their pupils instead of trial and error learning.

This type of training was first introduced by Herbert Terrace in 1963 in a discrimination experiment with pigeons. Terrace was trying to find a way to reduce the emotional behavior that interferes with operant behavior when an animal makes an error in discrimination training. He trained pigeons to discriminate between two squares of color. With one group he used errorless learning by creatively setting the pigeons up to succeed in offering the correct behavior right from the start, while with the other group he used trial and error learning. The group of pigeons set up for errorless learning offered an average of 25 incorrect behaviors during the testing period, while the pigeons trained by trial and error offered the incorrect behavior between 2,000 and 5,000 times. His astounding results have paved the way to more precise learning procedures with less unwanted side effects, benefiting a wide variety of learners, from people suffering from Amnesia, bomb sniffing dogs, to performing killer whales.

Errorless learning as opposed to trial and error learning has been scientifically proven with animals and humans to:

*Minimize the number of errors in the training session
*Decrease time spent learning a skill
*Reduce future errors, as they have never been practiced
*Create less frustration, stress, and aggression
*Not inhibit behavior
*Not create a conditioned emotional response associated with punishment to any part of the behavior or task
*Not create a conditioned emotional response associated with punishment to the trainer or the training environment

An example of errorless learning:

Perhaps you have taught your dog to touch a target with his nose, and also step on a target with his paw. After repeating the cue of touching the target with his nose with the target 1 foot from the ground, you then put the target on the ground. Most dogs will be highly likely offer foot targeting as well as nose targeting because of the situational cue of the target being on the ground, unless they have worked on stimulus control for both behaviors. Instead of using a no reward marker or another type of punishment for an incorrect behavior, you can simply set the dog up for success from the start. You could do this by lowering the target gradually, shaping approximations of the final behavior so that nose targeting continues successfully until the object is on the ground, or you could prevent errors by having the dog stand on a stool with his paws to keep them in place when you put the nose target on the floor. Plan and think creatively to create precise, reliable, and highly reinforced behaviors using errorless learning!

Why do dog make errors in training?

Behaviors can deteriorate because of incorrect criteria, timing, and/or reinforcement. Animals naturally vary behavior and so it is impossible to achieve no errors. Regression is also a natural part of learning in all creatures. A context shift can also affect behavior, as dogs do not generalize well. For example, if your dog “knows” sit in the kitchen, your dog might not “know” sit in the yard on the grass, sit while another dog is playing Frisbee next to you, or sit in the dog park. So if the trainer wants stimulus control over the behavior (a reliable behavior in all the situations the trainer asks for it), the behavior must be proofed and reinforced to the degree the trainer wishes in all the scenarios he wishes.

Other reasons that errors may occur are if your animal is over aroused, sick, tired, full, injured, overweight, out of shape, fearful, nervous or stressed. The environment and distractions could also be disrupting your training session. Your reinforcement could be to blame by not being of a high enough value, or too predictable. Reinforcement in scientific terms, increases behavior. So if the behavior is not increasing- it’s not being reinforced.

What do you do when errors start popping up?

When training using errorless learning, a warning sign that your plan needs to be modified is when your animal starts offering too many incorrect behaviors. Instead of punishing the dog by using a no reward marker to give the dog information that he was wrong, modify your training plan to set your dog up for continued success. You can use shaping to reinforce approximations of the desired behavior.

When proofing and adding new criteria, you must lower the level of existing criteria. You can use the environment, props, cues, previous training, as well as reinforcement placement to set your dog up for faster success. If your training plan is not yielding results, stop doing it and think creatively!

If your dog is failing in the middle of a behavior chain, go back and reinforce the behaviors that are faltering to create a stronger chain. All behaviors in behavior chains need to be equally reinforced or the chain could fall apart at its weakest link. The area of a chain that falls apart the fastest, tells you which area is the weakest and needs to be reinforced the most.

For using errorless learning in not just training sessions but also everyday life, you can use these guidelines:

Reinforce- the behaviors your dog is already doing that you find desirable and they will increase.
Train- new behaviors as alternate behaviors to replace the ones you don’t like.
Interrupt- behaviors you find undesirable so they don’t attain a reinforcement history. You can do this by using a previously trained with positive reinforcement recall, attention noise, leave it cue, or asking for a different behavior from your dog to interrupt the undesirable behavior from continuing.
Prevent- your dog from practicing unwanted behaviors by using management.

For information on solving behavioral problems and interrupting undesirable behavior inside and outside of training sessions without using physical or psychological intimidation, read the Progressive Reinforcement Training Manifesto here:
www.dogmantics.com

What is a No Reward Marker?

A No Reward Marker is a trained Secondary Punisher, or in other words a Conditioned Punisher that predicts no reinforcement is to follow. With enough conditioning of a word or sound to be the predictor of no reinforcement, the word itself will create a conditioned emotional response in the animal similar to the disappointment of not being given the reinforcement he was expecting. After conditioning, when this word is used during training, it will cause the animal to be less likely to repeat the behavior he was doing in the future (if conditioned correctly and if the behavior isn’t self reinforcing). Trainers use NRMs to punish, or in other words suppress behavior with the hopes that they will cause the behaviors to be less likely to be repeated in the future. Examples of NRM’s are “no”, “eh-eh”, “oops!”, “wrong”, “sorry” and “try again”.

The problems with using No Reward Markers:

* NRMs can cause frustration, stress and even aggression.
*They can inhibit behaviors you dislike, but also inhibit behaviors you had wanted to keep.
*They can create a conditioned emotional response associated with punishment to a cue or a behavior (known as a poisoned cue) if used often.
*They can create a conditioned emotional response associated with punishment to the trainer and/or the training environment if used often.
*They can give the trainer the idea the dog is to blame rather than a faulty training plan.
*If your dog is over-aroused, stressed, confused, fearful or sick your dog might perform a behavior incorrectly, and punishment will only mask the underlying problem.
*Using NRM’s are positively reinforcing for the trainer- meaning that a trainer might unconsciously start using them more often in training sessions as they give a feeling of instant gratification. Making a trainer less likely to modify the training plan and more likely to punish the dog instead.

Look at the dog in the picture. Imagine the trainer had said “Oops!” the moment the dog sat down in front of her, because the dog sat too slowly.

The next time the trainer asks for the cue the dog could offer an even slower sit, or perhaps offers another learned behavior like a down, or an alternate dog behavior like jumping up, whining, barking or growling. There is the possibility that the dog could offer a faster sit, but what if the dog doesn’t?

Perhaps the dog understands the concept of a NRM but superstitiously responds by acting as if it was the eye contact that was incorrect, perhaps the dog associates the punishment with being too close to the fence, or perhaps that he should not be in front of the trainer. Perhaps it was a combination? Perhaps the trainer does not want the dog to sit ever again, as when the dog had jumped on the trainer the NRM meant to never do that behavior ever again.

Instead of using a NRM, the trainer could reinforce the dog’s fastest sits to build the muscle memory and a reinforcement history of the desired speed of sitting. Instead of having the dog guessing about what he shouldn’t be doing, the trainer could reinforce him for doing what she wants him to be doing, and building a stimulus response association of only the correct behavior. The trainer could set the dog up for success by making him more likely to sit fast by playing tug and getting the dog excited before asking for the cue, not asking for the behavior when the dog has just woken up from a nap and luring the dog into a fast sit with a treat until the dog is sitting at an appropriate speed prior to asking the cue.

Classical Conditioning occurs in your training whether you like it or not.

If you say “down” and your dog sits, and then you say “wrong”, a secondary punisher follows the behavior of a sit. This not only punishes a sit offered in response to the cue “down” but it also causes the behavior of siting to be conditioned with the secondary punisher. This means that the next time you say “sit” your dogs brain might activate the memory of the NRM associated with the behavior in the past, and it could lead to confusion down the line as well as illicit a conditioned emotional response associated with punishment if NRM’s are often used in training.

In the video below Tedd Judd, PHD, Board Certified in Clinical Neuropsychology by the American Board of Professional Psychology, shares a great example of how using trial and error learning as opposed to errorless learning with an Amnesia patient caused the incorrect behavior to be more likely to occur in the future, rather than the desired one:

In the video Tedd Judd gives the example of a patient with Amnesia, in the hospital. The Doctor asks the patient, “Do you remember my name?” The patient says “No” and the doctors replies “Well, take a guess”, and the patient answers “Dr. Smith?”. The doctor then answers, “No, It’s Dr. Judd”. The next morning the Doctor asks the same question. “Do you remember my name?” and the patient replies “No”, and the doctor says “Can you take a guess?”, then the patient replies “Was it Dr. Smith?” Then the doctor replies, “No, it’s Doctor Judd”. Then the next time the doctor goes past the patient the patient says “Oh, hi Dr. Smith!!!” This happened because the patient was remembering their mistake, instead of the appropriate response.

This same scenario can happen with dogs, a dog can remember and build muscle memory for the incorrect response even if a NRM was given. With errorless learning where your goal is to shape successful approximations of the final behavior, the dog will not have the opportunity to think of, learn or practice incorrect responses.

An example of this is using trial and error training with No Reward Markers while teaching a dog to weave through agility poles. During trial and error training the dog could zoom through the poles incorrectly, and you could say “Whoops!”, try again, and then the dog gets it right. Perhaps you do 10 repetitions and the first time the dog was incorrect, then correct, then had 3 more errors, but then was successful the last 5 times. It could seem that your dog has learned from his errors, however there is a higher possibility that the dog will repeat the mistakes he just repeated 4 times in the trial of 10 and than if you did 10 trials using errorless learning where the dog only make a mistake 1 out of 10 times. This is because the dog has practiced doing the error more times.

Using a NRM in the middle of a behavior chain can not only punish the behavior in the chain, but can also punish the behaviors previously done in the chain, and can cause the cue to become poisoned (create a conditioned emotional response associated with punishment to the cue or the behavior).

If you used a NRM for the dog exiting the weave poles in the middle of the poles, instead of completing the weaves correctly, and for some reason you had to use the NRM multiple times in this exact area of the weaves, your dog could start to have a conditioned emotional response associated with punishment when reaching that area of the weave poles that have been continually punished and your dogs behavior could change because of this conditioned response.

As Ted Turner, an internationally renowned Animal Behaviorist and marine mammal trainer says, regarding the use of punishment in training; when you reinforce your dog for something “you are putting money in a reinforcement account. If you put a punishment in there, you drain your savings. If you put too many punishments in there, there will be nothing to draw from.”

In my opinion, it is easier to compete with the environment and distractions and be the most reinforcing option for your dog when you do not use punishers or conditioned punishers, as you have not “drawn from your reinforcement savings”. To condition a behavior as secondary reinforcer (which means the animal will more readily do it without primary reinforcement in the future), stronger conditioning occurs if the behavior is only paired with reinforcement and never punishment, such as a NRM. After many repetitions using errorless learning, the cues and behaviors your dog does should elicit a conditioned appetitive emotional response, in other words the dogs feels a similar feeling when he hears the cue of the behavior and completes the behavior to the feeling of being reinforced.

No one said training with errorless learning is easy. It is much easier to watch an animal and say ‘yes’ when you like what they are doing and ‘no’ when you don’t like what the animal is doing. It is much harder to create a training plan and adjust the plan using creative thinking when things go wrong.

In my opinion only the most talented trainers should implement such a complex method such as No Reward Markers into their training plans, and if the trainer is that talented, then they shouldn’t be making that many errors in the first place to need NRMs.

Citation :

mais pas Emily Larlham

oui Emily comme Pam sont contre le NRM

Citation :

qui utilise le "Errorless learning"

qui veut dire ? (stp)

effectivement Derby je l'utilise, et je trouve ça très bien.
ici j'utilise "oups", dans le même sens que le fait susan garret même si je le faisais avant ses cours.

je vois pas comment le chien peut apprendre des choses précises sans d'ailleurs ... par contre je ne l'utilise qu'en sport canin, dans le quotidien non car en fait je vois pas comment le chien pourrait faire des erreurs dans la vie quotidienne.

par exemple quand tu bosses ton slalom d'agility, que ton chien commence à bien connaitre, s'il se plante à sa 3ème porte, comment en arrivant à la fin et sans avoir de récompense pourrait il savoir que c'est son mouvement à la 3ème porte qui est faux ?
alors que si au moment du faux mouvement tu dis "oups", tilt le chien sait que c'est là que c'est faux, d'ailleurs il sort et recommence tout de suite avec la même énergie et bien souvent sans se trompe.
c'est un marqueur d'erreur mais qui n'engendre aucune baisse d'énergie, aucun flou dans la tête du chien, c'est pas un marqueur de punition !
juste que là c'est faux et qu'il faut recommencer, donc bien différent du "non", aucune association négative.

idem quand tu conduis en agility sur un parcours difficile, si le chien comprend mal ton geste, en disant "oups" le chien reprend avec toi sans aucune perte d'énergie, il fait juste attention au passage raté précédent, et si l'humain fait aussi un effort, normalement ça passe mieux. aucun ridque de voir le chien baisser l'échine, sortir du terrain, ou avoir d'autres comportements de ce type.

le marqueur d'erreur n'est pas du tout vécu comme une punition, c'est juste un indicateur d'erreur sans aucune conotation négative.

Citation :

je vois pas comment le chien peut apprendre des choses précises sans d'ailleurs ... par contre je ne l'utilise qu'en sport canin, dans le quotidien non car en fait je vois pas comment le chien pourrait faire des erreurs dans la vie quotidienne.

bah voilà, je suis d'accord
mais c'est encore une question de vision, je suis d'accord avec toi, alors que d'autres ont la vision que le chien a raté un truc ou fait une "bêtise" ...comme si le chien devait être parfait ....ne jamais rien rater ..

Citation :

c'est un marqueur d'erreur mais qui n'engendre aucune baisse d'énergie, aucun flou dans la tête du chien, c'est pas un marqueur de punition !
juste que là c'est faux et qu'il faut recommencer, donc bien différent du "non", aucune association négative.

OK là je suis d'accord ET dans une sport canin pas dans la vie de tous les jours

Citation :

le marqueur d'erreur n'est pas du tout vécu comme une punition, c'est juste un indicateur d'erreur sans aucune connotation négative.

oui si il est bien entrainé comme tel

merci de tes explications

Ici on ne l'utilise pas, tout simplement je ne connaissais pas, mais je trouve ça tout à fait intéressant de la façon dont Nantia l'utilise !

Comment est-ce que c'est mis en place ?