Clicker training humans

Clicker training has been used for training humans for quite a long time. It’s known as TAGteaching.

This morning I read an article about using clicker training for behaviour modification in kids, prompted by the debut of a tv show about it (the show is called Train Your Baby Like A Dog). The article author thinks it’s immoral, without providing much (or any..) justification. Here’s the article: Train Your Baby Like a Dog review – dehumanising and indefensible

What do you think? Do you use positive reinforcement to modify the behaviour of the humans in your life?
 

HAH

Moderator
Location
Devon, UK
Yes, entirely. I’ve become a lot more +R in my daily interactions - OH and I just watched the programme and can see a lot of parallels (good and bad) with children we know well. I didn’t think the clicker really featured much after being used to demonstrate the principle of mark & reward. I do believe the concept of ‘reward the behaviour you want’ works with many situations - but our higher levels of cognition (and - crucially - language skills) do mean we can ask more in terms of empathy, patience, understanding etc. as children grow in their cognitive abilities.
 

Lisa

Moderator
Location
Alberta, Canada
Now that I’ve read the article....

There are lots of ways to parent, and not every method is going to work with every child. Positive reinforcement is obviously great. But I’m not sure a clicker is called for, unless the child is too young to understand words.
 

Candy

Biscuit Tin Guardian
Yet again!:computerrage: To carry on, I think I have brought my dogs up very much in the way I was brought up.It wasn't with clicker training as such, but it was totally to do with rewarding good behavior and training what was wanted rather than punishing what wasn't. It seems to have worked with me ( I'm quite well behaved really) and my dogs have always been lovely.
 
I think the article is quite inflammatory, as it's now doubt meant to be, compared with the actual programme being relatively benign, though have to confess didn't watch the last 15 mins which I'll catch up with soon.
The concepts are perfectly sound, reward good behaviour, distract the bad... yes the clicker didn't play a huge part, but I think she said it was only used as an introduction and was soon swapped for praise. After the hype, I thought it was a little boring really, we've had years of super nanny, who I think from memory uses a mix of positive reinforcement and also punishment (naught step, removal of toys).
not sure how much application this would have with a 7 or 8 year old, though.
 
I just wish someone would teach a lot of children how to behave. Some parents think that everyone else should be entertaining their kids.
Using positive teaching methods should be used whatever creature it is, be it human or animal.
We need to change the wording.
I'm not training my dogs, I have no intention of ever doing public displays of anything with them. I teach them how I want them to behave to get along with their own kind and the humans they live with.
 

Joy

Location
East Sussex
I watched the first episode of 'Train your baby like a dog' yesterday evening (largely because of all the controversy surrounding it) and really couldn't see why people were so upset. The children weren't being clicker trained - the programme was all about meeting children's needs and building relationships between parent and child. The programme could have been called 'Bringing up children with kindness and attention' but I suppose that wouldn't have gathered so many viewers!

The baby was cuddled and comforted every time she cried. The parents of the toddler were told to pack away all the things he was grabbing which they didn't want him to have (because they were dangerous or valuable). They were also taught to look for early signs of a tantrum and to recognise that one developed because they didn't respond to his first attempts to gain interaction with them. I couldn't believe this family were having a second baby within weeks when they hadn't sorted out a happy life with their first. It amused me when Jo-Rosie said that she wouldn't recommend people got a second puppy until they had sorted out problems with their first!
 

Beanwood

Administrator
Lovely comments @Joy :). I watched programme last night (missed the beginning..) but to my uneducated eye, all I saw was a baby feeling safe in a bath, and able to sleep at night, loads of support and empathy for the parents. The clicker in my mind was just an aid to help the baby feel comfortable that something nice was going to happen, for sure this would be replaced by language and discussion once cognition developed to that level. Lots of things were also addressed, diet, environment etc...I really don't understand the problem. Regarding supernanny, I recollect a lot of "withdrawing" stuff, and sitting on the bottom step with the bloody woman staring at them! :rofl: But that was OK? Would it have been OK if she was called "super dog trainer" instead???
 
I could only stand 15 minutes of this then turned it off, disappointed in Jo Rosie going down this route. First couple in Bath didn't have a clue and the second lady just got into bad habits with her baby, no routine. My routine will my four was dinner, bath, snuggle up in bed, story, night night. When they were independant readers it was the same routine but they read to us whilst we snuggled in bed. I thankfully never had any issues with bedtime or sleep. She didn't add anything new. Routine and rewarding good behaviour, clear boundaries and consistency. In my day we used star reward charts not clickers or dogs. The only saving grace was seeing Nando in the background :heart::inlove::heart:xx
 
Apparently, so I've read, she didn't want to use the clicker at all, and it was the production team that wanted it included. I know they used it with their own first baby when it was still non-verbal, but I don't know how extensively.
I didn't watch it, because it's really not my bag, but I do see the value in questioning and adapting things we have done for a long time in order to find a wider range of options, and sometimes better ways. Relatively recently, I read an article describing how adults who were given a star chart found it an overwhelmingly punishing experience. It's food for thought, if nothing else.

We know that using a clicker can be really useful for some sports (Rachael already mentioned TAGTeach) to build precision. I'm not sure if precision is entirely necessary in young children, however :D

I've seen some interesting debate on the ethics of JRH practicing psychology on children, since she's not qualified to do so. Even with the qualified child psychologist(s) present, I can understand the point. But, as I said, I didn't watch it (and even if I had, I wouldn't have the full story because of the editing process) and obviously those people who are qualified were happy with the ethical implications.
 
Top