Nie zabierze was dziecko ktoś charakterystycznymi grze nie razem puentuje and injury than mechanical devices, such as choke chains. Opponents cite the risks of physical and psychological trauma associated with incorrect or abusive use. one study laboratory-bred Beagles were divided into three groups. Group A received electric shock when the dogs touched the prey Group H received a shock when they did not obey a previously trained recall command during hunting. Dogs group R received the electric shock arbitrarily, i.e. the shock was administered unpredictably and out of context. Group A did not show a significant rise salivary cortisol levels, while group R and group H did show a significant rise. This led to the conclusion that animals which were able to clearly associate the electric stimulus with their action, i.e. touching the prey, and consequently were able to predict and control the stressor, did not show considerable or persistent stress indicators, while animals that were not able to control the situation to avoid the shock did show significant stress. 2004 a study was published that was based on the observation of a variety of breeds trained for protection work using shock collars, which showed that although electronically trained dogs can excel as guard dogs, their behavior toward humans and work circumstances changed, often indicating heightened uncertainty and reactivity. Lindsay says of this study, Schilder and der Borg have published a report of disturbing findings regarding the short-term and term effects of shock used the context of working dogs that is destined to become a source of significant controversy The absence of reduced drive or behavioral suppression with respect to critical activities associated with shock makes one skeptical about the lasting adverse effects the authors claim to document. Although they offer no substantive evidence of trauma or harm to dogs, they provide loads of speculation, anecdotes, insinuations of gender and educational inadequacies, and derogatory comments regarding the motivation and competence of IPO trainers its place. Based on the principles of social learning, model-rival training uses a model, or a rival for attention, to demonstrate the desired behaviour. The method was used by Pepperberg to train Alex the African Grey Parrot to label a large number of objects. McKinley and Young undertook a pilot study on the applicability of a modified version of the model-rival method to the training of domestic dogs, noting that the dog's origins as a member of large and complex social groups promote observational learning. The model-rival training involved interaction between the trainer, the dog, and a person acting as a model-rival, that is, a model for desired behaviour and a rival for the trainer's attention. view of the dog, a dialogue concerning a particular toy commenced between the trainer and the model-rival. The trainer praised or scolded the model-rival depending on whether the model-rival had named the toy correctly. It was found that the performance times for completion of the task were similar for dogs trained with either operant conditioning or the model rival method. addition, the total training time required for task completion was comparable for both methods. A Hungarian dog training group called Népszigeti Kutyaiskola use a variation of model-rival training which they describe as the Method. The mirror method philosophy is that dogs instinctively learn by following the example of others their social sphere. Core to the program is including the dog all aspects of the owner's life and positive reinforcement of copying behaviors. method dog training relies on using a dog's natural instincts and inclinations rather than working against them. The concepts of pack and dominance relation to dog training originated the 1940s and were popularized by the Monks of New Skete the 1970s. The model is based on a theory that dogs are wolves and since wolves live hierarchical packs where alpha male rules over everyone then humans must dominate dogs order to modify their behavior. However, recent studies have shown that wolves the wild actually live nuclear families where the father and mother are considered the pack leaders, and their offspring's status depends on their birth order which does not involve fighting to attain a higher rank, because the young wolves naturally follow their parents' lead. Animal behaviorists assert that using dominance to modify a behavior can suppress the behavior without addressing the underlying cause of the problem. It can exacerbate the problem and increase the dog's fear, anxiety, and aggression. Dogs that are subjected to repeated threats react with aggression not because they are trying to be dominant, but because they feel threatened and afraid. Researchers have described several reasons why the dominance model is a poor choice for dog training. First, a relationship based on dominance is established to gain priority access to scarce resources, not to impose particular behaviors on the less dominant animal, the dominance model is irrelevant for most of the behaviors that people want from their dogs, such as coming when called or walking calmly on a leash. Second dominance-submission relationships, once established, are constantly tested and must be regularly reinforced. Thus people, particularly children and the elderly, not be able to retain their rank and are at risk of being injured if they attempt to do Third, dominant individuals gain priority access to resources, but only while they are present, establishing dominance over a dog does not guarantee its behavior when the dominant individual is distant or absent. Derived from the theories of symbolic interactionism, relationship based training exploits the patterns