Turning your back on a dog is a calming signal to help relax a stressed dog. Even walking away from a puppy who is biting is not punishing them. They just learn the games stops with certain behaviors, so they eventually stop doing them.
As others have already stated, doing nothing/ignoring/walking away/turning your back is taking away your attention (negative punishment) so speaking strictly in terms of operant conditioning, you are punishing the dog, because you are doing something that will eventually decrease the likelihood of that behavior from occurring again.
Top Barks, what I was referring to was the statement, "The fact is, most people that share their lives with dogs do not want to punish them, however they do want a mannerly dog. There are humane and effective alternatives to punishment." When I read "alternatives to punishment," I understand it as meaning that one doesn't ever need to punish in any form in order to proof a behavior. However since Tallulah posted the following statement, "punishment and aversive mean delivering a harsh "correction". No attempt is made at categorizing the examples into formal learning theory," my issue with it is made void.
Of course you want the dog to succeed as much as possible when teaching a behavior, but dogs do fail when first learning a behavior or when they haven't been proofed to a higher level of obedience and all failure is met with some form of punishment. I have yet to see any form of training session, even with achievable rewards and high amounts of reinforcement, that does not punish the dog in some way (speaking in terms of operant conditioning), unless the dog learns the behavior on the first attempt and performs that behavior flawlessly every single time no matter the distance/distraction/duration, etc, which in reality would never happen.
I agree, aversives can seriously damage the trust between a dog and its owner, but any good trainer is going to know when it is appropriate to use an aversive and at what intensity the aversive needs to be given the situation and more importantly given the temperament and mental stability of the dog. The issue is mainly the fault of the trainer who doesn't understand what and when something is appropriate, not necessarily the method. There are pitfalls to any method of training, even reward based training, though the damage it can do to a dog is FAR less than that of methods that employ positive punishment. I do agree with all the reasons against using aversive tactics as listed in the article, but again, the majority of these consequences are dependent on the intensity of the aversive and most importantly on the temperament of the dog.
Some pitfalls that possibly apply to strictly positive reinforcement methods...
-Using positive reinforcement only teaches what a dog should do, it doesn't teach what not do. When a dog learns that there are no consequences for its actions it's more likely to be distracted by other reinforcers in the its environment, like other dogs, bunnies, etc, which is probably why so many dog owners have issues with teaching their dogs reliable recall no matter the distraction. 'So I get a head scratch and great food if I come back... so what? I can get that later when I do decide to come back, but in the meantime I'll chase this rabbit.' Realistically, for most dogs, satisfying prey drive is far more rewarding than satisfying their food or social drives no matter how much you jackpot the latter.
- Also requires perfect timing and consistency. With marker training you have to get the timing perfect or else you end up marking and reinforcing the wrong behaviors. I do marker training with my own dogs as it is the best way to teach behaviors, but have noticed that many people think clickers to be magic buttons.
-Some people end up conditioning the dog to focus more on the treat reward than the reward of a dog/owner relationship. So many times at obedience schools/trials you see dogs who only focus on the treat hidden in the hand or the pocket. Personally I hate dogs who walk at a heel with their heads held awkwardly, because they're focusing more on the treat than where they're walking. Who or what is the dog really working for?
As I've said before, most of the pitfalls of any training method is dependent on the competency of the trainer and the application of the method.
Tallulah, thank you for including that last bit that was left off this article as it was mainly the usage of terms in relation to operant conditioning that I have issues with. As for your pup, are you sure that you marked the correct behavior? Correcting the dog isn't going do help it any if the dog doesn't know what you want in the first place, because as the list correctly points out, aversives don't teach the dog what to do. Start from square one and reteach the exact behavior you want.
Elaine, completely agree with your comment that there are certain situations (of life/death/or certain bodily harm) that necessitate firm corrections.
