HOWEDY t. stewart,

T. Stewart wrote:
I have been a long-time lurker on this newsgroup.

Then you KNOW only LIARS DOG ABUSERS COWARDS and
ACTIVE ACUTE CHRONIC LONG TERM INCURABLE MENTAL
CASES post here abHOWETS. DON'T YOU, t. stewart.

My husband and I are trying to adopt a pointer puppy

Don't pull that "ADOPT" bullshit, the PET ADOPTION
BUSINESS has been EXXXPOSED as a SCAM by lying dog
abusing punk thug coward MENTAL CASES who PROFIT
from HURTING and INTIMIDATING and MURDERING dogs
and LYIN abHOWET it.

and we have tried and hopefully found a responsible breeder.

That so? You mean based on the guidelines set by
YOUR PUNK THUG COWARD MENTAL CASE PALS, t. stewart.

We decided on a pointer after going to a local dog
show and talking to many different handlers and owners
about their dogs.

They go to dog shows to SELL their livestock, t..

Some discouraged us from their breeds because of
exercise requirements and their need for "work."

THEM'S THE MENTAL CASES, t. stewart.

BWEEEEEEEEEEEEAAHAHAHHAHAAA!!!

THEM'S THE MENTAL CASES WHO CAUSED BREED SPECIFIC
LEGISLATION, t. stewart.

We have heeded this advice and not chosen those breeds.

BWEEEEEEEEEEAAHHAHHAAHAAA!!!

You're a guillible IDIOT, t. stewart.

We found the breeder we've tried to adopt our puppy
from a referral from the secretary of the Pointer Club
of Canada (she liked our very comprehensive letter of
introduction)

BWEEEEEEEEEAAHAHAHAHHAHAAAA!!!

and by discussing various issues to do with the adoption

THAT'S A RACKET, you simpleton.

(plus earning the approval from the breeder through an
interview process).

BWEEEEEEEEEAAHAHAHAHHAHAAAA!!!

Ask your REPUTABLE ETHICKAL BREEDER if it's O.K. for
you to use a shock fence choke or pronged spiked pinch
choke collar crates and bribery to train your dog and
you'll know HOWE COME they're so SELECTIVE... they ONLY
SELL TO DOG ABUSING MENTAL CASES, like yourself, t. stewart.

The first breeding that we reserved ended up being a false
pregnancy; the mother was lactating and showed all signs of
being pregnant. No puppy for us there. The second breeding,
the mother had a very hard labour. Five of the eight puppies
ended up dying and the mother died three days later.

BWEEEEEEEEEEEAHAHAHAHHAHAAA!!!

Well, they're EXXXPERIENCED NHOWE, AIN'T THEY.

The breeder wanted to keep the puppies for a bit longer

Scott & Fuller SEZ SIX WEEKS IS IDEAL to place a new pup.

(and extra 4-5 weeks).

THAT'S INSANE.

My husband and I took this as a "sign" to wait and not to rush in.

You're dealin with IDIOCY.

We took the next year to fix up the yard and prepare
for a new puppy

BWEEEEEEEEEEEAAHAHAHHAHAHAAA!!!

"Water seeks it's own level," eh t. stewart???

(plus the city is installing a sewer
system and everything is a mess right now).

RIGHT.

We had our name down for the next litter to be born in the
fall (take home in the late fall). However, there were
problems with the impregnation; we just found out that the
mother did not take so still no puppies.

Could be your ETHICKAL BREEDER is breedin UP to IMPROVE her lines?

The breeder has two puppies left from earlier in the year,

You mean poor quality pups SHE COULDN'T SELL, t. stewart.

which are ready to go now.

BWEEEEEEEEEEEAAHAHAHHAHAAA!!!

My husband's sister has a dog that after years of
trying to get the dog to be O.K. with him, still
runs out of the room when my husband enters it.

Well, that sez much abHOWET the family your DH comes from...
think WATER SEEKS ITS OWN LEVEL, t. stewart.

Roxy is perfectly fine if my husband is throwing a stick or
playing outside; we've accepted this fact and just keep being
nice and let her work on it in her own time.

You gonna let the DOG do the trainin, eh t. stewart?

My husband is slightly worried that because these pointer
puppies will be 12 weeks on August 20, that they may have
the same reaction to him.

Ask your ETHICKAL BREEDER if she EVER heard of Scott & Fuller.

The breeder is 12 hours away by car so it's not
possible to see the two puppies ahead of time to
check them out. .

You're a SLOW LEARNER, ain't you.

Our question for the collective brain is:

BWEEEEEEEEEEAAHAHAHHHAAAA!!!

how important is it for the new owners (us)
to see the two puppies and choose them?

FIGGER IT HOWET, t. stewar. You got a INCOMPETENT
BLOWHARD for a breeder and THEY GOT STUCK with 2
pups THEY COULDN'T SELL and they're GONNA GIVE YOU
the WON they DON'T THINK THEY CAN GET RID OF anyHOWE.

BWEEEEEEEEEEEEAAHAHAHAHAAA!!!

You gonna TRUST THEM like their mom dog TRUSTED
them to get them puppies HOWETA her pryor to
POISONING her system, t. stewart?

Your ETHICKAL BREEDERS DIDN'T WANT TO SPEND THE
DOUGH ON A CASEAREAN when the mom dog first showed
signs of BEIN IN CRISIS.

HOWE COME ALL HER PUPS DIED, t. stewart?

SUMPTHIN STINKS with your ETHICKAL BREEDER.

Is it ok if the breeder chooses a puppy for us?

NO WONDER YOU BEEN READIN THIS FORUM FOR A LONG TIME.

How important is the generally accepted 8 weeks old timeline?

You freakin simpleton! The GENERALLY ACCEPTED 8 WEEK OLD TIMELINE
was ESTABLISHED by the Department of Agriculture for SHIPPIN PUPS
not PLACING THEM IN THEIR NEW HOWESES.

Your ETHICKAL BREEDERS CONfHOWENDED THAT with Scott & Fuller's
SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH sayin pups BELONG in their new HOWESES at
SIX WEEKS for BEST RESULTS.

The EXXXPERTS you RELY on are FRAUDS LIARS DOG ABUSERS and COWARDS.

Thanks,

You're welcome!

Tara and Brett

ALL Temperament and Behavior Problems
And 90% Of DIS-EASE
Are CAUSED BY MISHANDLING.
THAT'S GOOD!
THAT MEANS We can CURE ALL
Temperament And Behavior Problems
And 90% Of DIS-EASE
NEARLY INSTANTLY
Simply By DOING EXXXACTLY, PRECISELY, OPPOSITE
Of HOWE We've Been TAUGHT
By UNIVERSITY TRAINED Behaviorists

HOWEDY People!

ALL Temperament and Behavior Problems Are CAUSED BY MISHANDLING.

"...all the highest nervous activity, as it manifests
itself in the conditional reflex, consists of a continual
change of these three fundamental processes -- excitation,
inhibition and disinhibition." Ivan P. Pavlov

THAT'S GOOD!

"It is NO WONDER that the marked changes in
deviant behavior of children can be achieved
through brief, simple educative routines with
their mothers which modify the mother's social
behaviors shaping the child (Whaler, 1966). Some
clinics have reported ELIMINATION ofthe need for
child THERAPY through changing the clinical emphasis
from clinical to parental HANDLING of the child
(Szrynski 1965).

A large number of cases improved sufficiently after
preliminary contact with parents that NO treatment
of children was required, and almost ALL cases
SHOWE a remarkably shortened period for therapy.
Quite severe cases of anorexia nervosa have been
treated in own to five months by simply REPLACING
the parents temporarily with EFFUSIVELY LOVING
SUBSTITUTES (Groen, 1966)."

"Despite Skinner's clear denunciation of "negative
reinforcement" (1958) NEARLY EVERY LEARNING
THEORY model involves the USE OF PUNISHMENT.
Of curse, Skinner has never to my knowledge,
demonstrated HOWE we escape the phenomenon
that an expected reward not received is experienced
as a punishment and can produce extensive and
persistent aggression (Azrin et al, 1966)."

THAT MEANS we can CURE ALL Temperament And Behavior
Problems NEARLY INSTANTLY simply by DOING EXXXACTLY,
PRECISELY, OPPOSITE of HOWE we've been TAUGHT TO
MISHANDLE and ABUSE HOWER dogs by the UNIVERSITY
TRAINED behaviorists and PROFESSIONAL PET CARE
SPECIALISTS who MAKE THEIR LIVING off of PERPETUATING
their SHEER IDIOCY and IGNOING the works of Drs. Sam
Corson, Dra. Mary Cover Jones, Breland & Breland, and
other notable psychologists IGNORED and OVERLOOKED by
the ABUSERS who TEACH US to lock HOWER dogs in boxes,
bribe, choke, intimidate, and IGNORE HOWER dog's,
children's and SP-HOWESES cries of FEAR and NEED and
WITHHOLD attention, affection, so called "rewards"
and UNCONDITIONAL LOVE TRUST and RESPECT.

Pavlov Told Us So 100 Years Ago. Sam Corson, Pavlov's Last
Student Demonstrated At UofOH Oxford, That Rehabilitation
Of Hyperactive Dogs Can Easily And Readily Be Done Using TLC.
Tender Loving Care Is At The Root Of The Scientific Management
Of Doggys. {) ; ~ )

WE CANNOT CONTINUE TO BLAME THE DOG OR ITS BREED:

ALL Critters Only Respond In
PREDICTABLE INNATE NORMAL NATURAL
INSTINCTIVE REFLEXIVE Ways;
To Situations And Circumstances Of Their Environment
Which We Create For Them.

You GET The Critter You TRAINED

A DOG Is A Dog;
As A KAT Is A KAT;
As A BIRDY Is A BIRDY;
As A CHILD IS A CHILD;
As A SP-HOWES Is a SP-HOWES.

The Amazing Puppy Wizard has MUCH CASE HISTORY and PEER
REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC DATA to PROVE these "FAR FETCHED"
claims. HOWEver, for today's puporses, this will be all
that's necessary:

Here's your FREE copy of The Amazing Puppy
Wizard's FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training
Method Manual:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?G34D2527A

Just ASK The Amazing Puppy Wizard if you
need any additional FREE heelp. There's NO
arbritrary INFORMATION in your FREE copy
of The Amazing Puppy Wizard's FREE WWW
Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual so
study it well and do and follow ALL the
EXXXERCISES AS INSTRUCTED... it's a
PRECISE SCIENCE or it COULDN'T GET 100%
CONSISTENT NEARLY INSTANT SUCCESS for all
handlers and all dogs in all fields or
utilities and behaviors all over the Whole
Wild World {) ; ~ )

ALL Critters Only Respond In
PREDICTABLE INNATE NORMAL NATURAL
INSTINCTIVE REFLEXIVE Ways;
To Situations And Circumstances Of Their Environment
Which We Create For Them.

You GET The Critter You TRAINED

A DOG Is A Dog;
As A KAT Is A KAT;
As A BIRDY Is A BIRDY;
As A CHILD IS A CHILD;
As A SP-HOWES Is a SP-HOWES.

In The Problem Animal Behavior BUSINESS
FAILURE MEANS DEATH.
SAME SAME SAME SAME,
For The Problem Child Behavior BUSINESS.

Damn The Descartean War of "Nature Vs Nurture."
We Teach By HOWER Words And Actions
And GET BACK What We TAUGHT.

ALL Behavior Problems Are CAUSED BY MISHANDLING

Jer 21 And unto this people thou shalt say,
Thus saith the LORD; Behold, I set before
you The Way Of Life, And The Way Of Death.

2Ki 19:6 And Isaiah said unto them, Thus
shall ye say to your master, Thus saith
the LORD, Be not afraid of the words which
thou hast heard, with which the servants of
the king of Assyria have blasphemed me.

The Puppy Prophet {); ~ )

Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:41:01 -0500
From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D."

Subject: "time-out"

Dan, my own firm hatred of punishment has
recently been intensified by meeting The
Puppy Wizard, Jerry Howe, whose work with
dogs is marvelous.

There is a literature on harms caused by time
out, and perhaps you'd like to look at
http://www.dogydoright.com
George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.

"As Sam Corson (Pavlov's last student) demonstrated for
nearly 50 years at Ohio University (Oxford, O.) there
is no treatment more useful for dogs than tender loving
care."

George von Hilsheimer, Ph. D., F. R. S. H., Diplomate,
Academy of Behavioral Medicine

From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D."
To:
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 5:38 PM
Subject: Doggy advice

Scott, Jerry Howe forwarded me the letter below.
I'm glad that you referred negatively to Jerry's
habit of CAPITALIZING and HOWEING everything.

I personally hate this habit of his. I think it is his
way of diluting his authority - IME he is a very modest
fellow. However, contrary to your sneer, he is very
competent at living with dogs.

I thought I'd list a series of actions which I found
on the list, folk asking advice on what to do about
dogs doing this and that, for example:

whining,
humping, hunching,
pacing,
self mutilation - paw licking, side sucking,
spinning,
prolonged barking, barking at shadows,
overstimulated barking,
fighting, bullying other dogs,
compulsive digging,
compulsive scratching,
compulsive chewing,
frantic behavior,
chasing light, chasing shadow,
stealing food,
digging in garbage can,
loosing house (toilet) training.
inappropriate fearfulness
aggression.

The thing that is fascinating to me, as an ethologist who
graduated from college 50 years ago and has spent all of
the intervening time working with animals (including the
human animal), is that you never see any of these behaviors
in wild dingoes, jackals, coyotes or wolves, you don't even
see these behaviors in hyenas (who aren't dog related).

You see these behaviors in human managed animals, especially
animals who live with neurotic hysterical humans.

As Sam Corson (Pavlov's last student) demonstrated for
nearly 50 years at Ohio University (Oxford, O.) there
is no treatment more useful for dogs than tender loving
care.

George von Hilsheimer, Ph. D., F. R. S. H., Diplomate,
Academy of Behavioral Medicine

So why is that a problem?

"The IMBECILITY of some of the claims for operant
technique simply take the breath away. Lovas et al
(1966) report a standard contingent reward/punishment
procedure developing imitative speech in two severly
disturbed non verbal schizophrenic boys. After twenty-
six days the boys are reported to have been learning
new words with alacrity. HOWEver, when REWARDS
were moved to a delayed contingency the behavior and
learning immediately deteriorated."

From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D."


To:
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 9:31 AM
Subject: How does diagnosis shape treatment?

How does diagnosis shape treatment?

Nearly every week I have a visit from Jerry Howe, who
publicizes himself as The Puppy Wizard. Jerry is a
master at behavioral modification of dogs.

His fundamental bedrock is the work Pavlov's last student,
the late Sam Corson, Ph.D., did at the U of Ohio (at Oxford,O).

Sam always pointed out if the dog stopped working for
you in the lab, Pavlov and he always took the dog away
from the lab, and put him in a loving home and gave him
TLC for a couple of months, and then started, very carefully,
over again.

Jerry believes that reward and constraint focused training
is immoral. I've watched him in one short session calm
impossible dogs, just about to be murdered (oops "put to
sleep") because of their "incorrigibly" violent behavior.

Sam was one of the first people to apply amphetamine to
hyperactivity (he searched the Middle West for hyperactive
dogs); but he never lost sight of the fundamental reality that
a dog is not a human, but does respond, doggily, to dog love.

You might be surprised to go to B. F. Skinner's "Cumulative
Record" and read the essay by Breland and Breland, "The
Misbehavior of Organisms".

Animals cannot be successfully trained unless the trainer
attends to the evolutionary history, the individual's
developmental history, and the environmental niche of
the animal being trained.

Yep, right there in Skinner's last and summary book.
Even with behavior mod, you must know the animal.

snip

Dogs or little boys, you have to know the individual
history, and the nature of he disorder.

Dr. Von

PS if you are interested in dogs, then take
a look at Jerry's work.

Dr. George VonHilsheimer writes in

"Is there a SCIENCE of BEHAVIOR?":

"Valette 1966 is a complete trivialization of
scientific findings. It overstates the case for
reinforcement theory. No careful researcher
would contend that operant techniques CAN ANY
THING MORE than modify SHORT TERM BEHAVIOR in
a highly controlled and limited environment
with a large number of skillful experimenters.

Certainly the most elaborate studies have shown
that the withdrawal or temprary inefficiency of
the reward system is immediately followed by
CESSATION of the programmed behavior.

In fortunate contrast to this depressing paper
is the research reported by Whelan (1966) who
makes the simple but profHOWEND caveat that
"It is only through CORRECT, EFFICIENT APPLICATION
(of operant principles) that children's behavor can
be changed to the extent that they can subsequently
contribute to the REAL WORLD in which they live." "

"The Methods, Principles, And Philosophy Of Behavior
Never Change,
Or They'd Not Be Scientific And Could Not Obtain
Consistent, Reliable, Fast, Effective Results
For All Handler's And All Dogs,
ALL OVER THE WHOLE WILD WORLD,
NEARLY INSTANTLY,
As Taught In Your FREE Copy Of The Puppy Wizard's
FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual,"
The Puppy Wizard. {} ; ~ )

Dr. Von continues:

"Whelan illustrates the simple nature or the
learning process by referring to Ferster's
engaging study of two three year old
chimpanzees taught mathematics through
simple procedures. Whelan carries this
EVIDENCE a step futher by pointing HOWET
it's applicability to disturbed children."

You Get The Critter You Trained

A Dog Is A Dog
As A Kat Is A Kat
As A Birdie Is A Birdie
As A Child Is A Child
As A SP-HOWES Is a SP-HOWES.

ALL Critters Only Respond In
PREDICTABLE INNATE NORMAL NATURAL INSTINCTIVE
REFLEXIVE Ways
To Situations And Circumstances Of Their Environment
Which We Create For Them.

Damn The Descartean War of
"Nature Vs Nurture."
We Teach By HOWER Words And Actions
And GET BACK What We TAUGHT.

In The Problem Animal Behavior BUSINESS
FAILURE MEANS DEATH.
SAME SAME,
For The Problem Child Behavior BUSINESS.

Dr. Von continues:

"If chimpanzees CAN LEARN mathematics through step
by step learning AT THEIR OWN PACE, reinforced
primarily by CORRECT ANSWERS rather than with
"fruit loops and rasins", we can assume that even
developmentally RETARDED or CONfHOWENDED children
CAN LEARN as well.

Moreover, Whelan makes the EXXXTREMELY important
point that while most teachers assume that learning
takes place verbally, primarily it is a non verbal
process..

Unfortunately Whelan limits himself to the problem
that "teachers must not only modify or remove specific
deviant behaviors, but must also develop socially
acceptable behavior patterns in the classroom and
classroom conditioned goals, NOT LEARNING.

Other researchers have emphasized the importance
of adult behaviors in conditioning classroom behavior.
An EXXXCELLENT review of this research showd that
tantrum behavior, excessive crawling and dependency,
isolated play, passivity, spelling failure, and other
problem behaviors can be managed by altering habitual
adult responses to children (Harris, Wolf and Baer, 1964) .

Such RESEARCH holds GREATER PROMISE in that alteration
of the conditioning social environment seems to provide
more STABLE and LASTING CHANGES than "M and M's". Moreover,
a great deal of work has been done developing EFFECTIVE
techniques of behavior modificaton through the conditioning
social environment of peers (Hartup, 1964). These directions
would seem more PRODUCTIVE than a simple minded trainslation
of the Skinner cage to the classroom.

Skinner (1963) pointed HOWET that operant techniques
can "be utilized fully ONLY IF we REDEFINE the GOALS
of education and the CONDITIONS in the educational
environment under which those goals may be reached...
(through) a DIFFERENT KIND of educational research
which is much more closely concerned with the immediate
dimensions of the student's behavior than with gross
changes such as IMPROVED PERFORMANCES."

UNFORTUNATELY, neither Skinner nor ANY OTHER
learning theorist has provided us with a working
model of a school or research enterprise based
on systemic and thorough-going APPLICATION of
LEARNING PRINCIPLES.

Skinner (1948, 1953) approaches a definition of the
philosophical issues involved, and provides an utopian
model of a school, but generally psychologists seem
STUCK at a level of MANAGEMENT of an aggressively
disturbing child in the classroom, through peer approval,
or the aplication of accelerating CONsequences in the
classroom, or scientifically S-HOWENDING tactics like
"TIME HOWET" (which we used to know more simply
as "sendin the kid to the cloakroom").

Hobbs (op. cit.) claims that the classroom is a
natural environement for the child. Thelen (1965)
contends that "classroom practices are UNnatural,
UNreasonable, and 'against NATURE.' "This would
seem the central issue for the philosophy of education.
Mere trivial application of research findings to an
institution essentially unchanged from Sumerian academies
(Kramer, 1962) will NOT create useful teaching for
human beings.

It seems relevant to ask EXXXACTLY WHAT do we
know abHOWT the learning situation in which HOWER
children find themselves, and why, in the light of HOWER
knowledge, do we do any of the things that schools do?"

We know that there is little agreement among adults
as to what it is they are SUPPOSED to be DOING,
what something to do could be that MIGHT be
EFFECTVE, and what it IS that other people who
have authority over children ought to be doing (Mc-
Eachern and Taylor, 1967). Wherefor the child's
CONfusiHOWEN?

It is NO WONDER that the marked changes in
deviant behavior of children can be achieved
through brief, simple educative routines with
their mothers which modify the mother's social
behaviors shaping the child (Whaler, 1966). Some
clinics have reported ELIMINATION ofthe need for
child THERAPY through changing the clinical emphasis
from clinical to parental HANDLING of the child
(Szrynski 1965).

A large number of cases improved sufficiently after
preliminary contact with parents that NO treatment
of children was required, and almost ALL cases
SHOWE a remarkably shortened period for therapy.
Quite severe cases of anorexia nervosa have been
treated in own to five months by simply REPLACING
the parents temporarily with EFFUSIVELY LOVING
SUBSTITUTES (Groen, 1966).

Probably the most absurd figure in Amaerican mass
media is the TEACHER (Gerbner, 1966). HOWE can
we EXXXPECT children to LEARN responsible P-HOWER
from models of IMPOTENCE? We KNOW that LEARNING
a complex ritualized social role, is facilitated
by observation of an INTELLIGIBLE MODEL much more
effectively than by trial and error with REINFORCEMENT.

Roles which are relatively arbitrary and senseless are
the most difficult to learn (Luchins, 1966). Do we make
ANY EFFORT as teachers to CORRECT the massive impact of
media?

HOWE can the ARBITRARINESS and SENSELESSNESS
of IMPOTENT ADULT MODELS be redeemed by anything
short of RELEVANCE and COMMITMENT?

As an engaging final comment on the PROFESSION
let me mention the little study by Dittman et al (1965)
tha when 15 psychotherapists and 9 professional dancers
evaluated facial and bodily expressons for effect the
dancers were much MOORE accurate. Need we say MOORE
abHOWET the training of therapists?

THE OPERANT FALLACY

Programs utilizing the "contingencies of reinforcement
model" proposed by Skinner (1963) ar no more well
established in research than the various dynamic
therapists. Research in four areas : 1) direct evaluation
of programmed systems for elarning; 2) reinforcement;
3) cognitive dissonance; and 4) motivation, MOST SURELY
DEMOLISH the claims of operant programers.

The 190 studies annotated by Schramm (1964) when
inspected display NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES
in SUCCESS among approaches and modifications.
Programmed instruction is no worse than conventional
instruction, and takes less time, but time reductions in
conventional instruction has frequently been shown
possible without detrimental effects. If you draw your
controls cagily you can always show the superiority of
your PET technique.

Moore and Smit (1964) compared variations on
programmed materials, machines, texts, written
responses, merely reading, free response, multiple
choice, and iving or not giving the students results.
There were NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES despite
Skinner's insistence on the importance of the
CONTINGENCY of REINFORCEMENT. Carpenter
and Greenhill (1963) could find NO DIFFERENCE
in RESULTS even after eliminating the self-pacing
feature by presenting the materials by TV or Video.

Krumboltz and Kiesler (1965) reported that a two month
follow up test showed NO DIFFERENCE between students
given a variety of reinforcement schedules. Mayo and
Longo (1966) report that naval and marine trainees
saved 30% of time in learning electronics fundamentals
through a programed course witrh superior scores on one
measure but not on another, and with no follow-up reported.

The same authors reported a reductionj from 26 HOWERS
to 19 HOWERS in instruction time through the use of
program with NO DIFFERENCE in test scores, except
that as longer blocks of materiallearned through
programmed means were tesed the scores DECREASED.

When the control instruction is manipulated an entirely
DIFFERENT picture emerges Jacobs and Kulkarni (1966)
assignedstudents in three different schools to classes
with standard programmed material giving immediate
knowledge of results to classes without results and to
classes with the order of sections of the program inverted.

In two schools the groups without knowledge of results
and the groups with inverted material SCORED HIGHER.
In one school there was NO DIFFERENCE. So much for
THEORY. Reid and Taylor (1965) presented a linear
program on paper-making to 60 paid undergrads with
a 12 week follow up test. The group which merely
read learned the same material in 154 minutes to
243 minutes for the group given responses- a
REVERSAL of the usual BIASED RESULTS based
on POOR CON-TROLLS. There were no differences
on post tests.

Spagnoli (1965) reports on a study exposing the control
and programed group to the same material in a concentrated
effort over a limited period of time. There were NO
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES.

Sassenrath and Garverick (1965) gave 4 matched
groups of 120 students four procedures: 1) looking
up the wrong answers, 2) having questions discussed
by the instructors, 3) checking answers from correct
ones on the board, and 4) no feedback. The discussion
method proved best.

Finally, in studying means of training men to perform
a 72 action prcedure on Nike-Hercules equipment,
Cox and Boren (1965) demonstrated that the time
required to learn the procedure to critterion was NO
DIFFERENT when the actions were organized into
seven operant spans and taught in reverse order, in
natural order, or without grouping into operant spans
at all.

IT IS CLEAR that as comparisons became more
sophisticated programed instruction and other
operant teaching techniquesreveal tehemselves
as simply another prestigiHOWES FAD--somewhat
better than conventional instruction in saving time,
but certainly not providing a better or better organized
or more independently useful GRASP of KNOWLEDGE.

The IMBECILITY of some of the claims for operant
technique simply take the breath away. Lovas et al
(1966) report a standard contingent reward/punishment
procedure developing imitative speech in two severly
disturbed non verbal schizophrenic boys. After twenty-
six days the boys are reported to have been learning
new words with alacrity. HOWEver, when REWARDS were
moved to a delayed contingency the behavoir and learning
immediately deteriorated.

Despite this, and despite the fact that there was no
evidence of cognitive association with the words, the
authors leap to the conclusion that the fact that the
boys improved in the acquisition of Norwegian words
WITHOUT REWARDS while still being given English
words WITH REWARDS suggest hat the children may
be able to acquire new behaviors on their own.

The need for this study escapes one, particularly in
view of the very well established fact that schizophrenics
condition quite readily (Mednick, 1958)

One can see the "SCIENTIFIC" PRECISION by which the
authors drop contingent reinforcements thus PROVING
that the parrot behavior was indeed caused by the
schedule and NOT by some other mystical force.

The use of Norwegian to demonstrate learning that
could not even remotely be related to previous history
is a grotesquery too bizarre to be credited. Who could
possibly doubt that this useless and probably damaging
trained seal routine depended on the psychologist's antics?

What on earth led them to believe that a schizophrenic
needs even more other-focused responsiveness?

Lovaas et al (1965) reported three programs carried
out on five year old autistic twins conditioining them
to "social behavior" and to eliminate pathologial
behaviors such as self-stimulation and tantrums.

Affectionate and other social behaviors toward
adults increaseed after adults had been associated
with shock reduction. The routine for this treatment
brings immediate relief to mind Sawrey and Wesz
(1956) routine for producing ulcers in monkeys.

I suppose it is USELESS to speculate on the source
of SO CALLED THERAPISTS willingness to experiment
on human beings with procedures for which there is
sound experimentally established WARNINGS. If the
"double blind" theory of the origin of schizophrenia
(Bateson, 1956) is at all valid, HOWE DEVASTATING
the experience must ULTIMATELY BE.

Do Lovaas et al REALLY BELIEVE the schizophrenic
has no cognitive processes and DOES NOT KNOW
WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SHOCK? Greger
(1965) criticized this study on the basis that
trainsfer CANNOT be generalized.

That issue can be answered by experience, and,
of curse, the "social" behavior of these children
deteriorates as soon as the psychologists LOOSE INTEREST.

The IMPORTANT ISSUE for a SCIENCE OF BEHAVIOR
is why not attempt those things which are KNOWN to
WORK at least in some cases if only for control puporses.

Kanner (1954) reports that 13 classically autistic
children improved enough to go to school without
"anything that is regarded as good psychotherapy or
as psychotherapy at all..."

Autistic children have been known to become
permenantely social by deinstitutionalization,
BY REMOVAL from the parents, BY RADICAL CHANGES
in other environments, and by MASSIVE DOSAGE of
TOUCHING, HOLDING, FONDLING LOVE DESPITE THE
REJECTION OF THE CHILD.

My case, Larry, (vonHilsheimer, 1965b), demonstrates
a recovery by using the mother as an autistic boy's
teacher in an open millieu. It is curiHOWES that the
operant technicians provide as few, and as UNIMAGINITAVE
controls for thier "research" as the Freudians.

REWARD / PUNISHMENT

Despite Skinner's clear denunciation of "negative
reinforcement" (1958) NEARLY EVERY LEARNING
THEORY model involves the USE OF PUNISHMENT.
Of curse, Skinner has never to my knowledge,
demonstrated HOWE we escape the phenomenon
that an expected reward not received is experienced
as a punishment and can produce extensive and
persistent aggression (Azrin et al, 1966).

MIMICRY, PLAY, EXPLORATION AND
THE NEED FOR DATA

Complex activities are LEARNED MORE QUICKLY
through OBSERVATION (copying, if you will) than
by trial and error with reinforcemet (Luchins,).
Observers of subjects making a first trial of a multiple
choice bolt head maze made fewer errors than the
practiced subjects in the second run, while subjects
who have been shocked for error on a first trial made
more errors than either (Rosenbaum & Hewitt, 1966).
Students will modify their beliefs more when rewarded
for the way in which they carried out arguing for a
disagreeable position (role reward), than when rewarded
for the content of the argument (Wallace, 1966).

===================

INTRO TO WITS' END DOG TRAINING MANUAL
George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D. F.R.S.H.

Several years ago one of my old students telephoned
to me and asked me what I knew about Doggie Do
Right, a device to cause your neighbor's dog to stop
barking.

I had not heard of the device, nor its inventor, Jerry
Howe, but I telephoned, read his website, and told
my graduate that I thought the device was worth a
trial - indeed I shut up the dogs in my neighborhood
by turning on Jerry's supersonic device.

After all we all know that dogs respond to whistles
humans cannot hear, so why not respond to "attaboy"
sounds which humans cannot hear.

My student lived far from my Florida homestead, so
he tried it on the three incredibly savage, hyperactive
and noisy dogs who lived behind a tall fence just 3 feet
back of his bedroom.

Hot rats! The device worked,

Andy got his sleep and I didn't think much of the
matter again.

A few months ago I had new neighbors on each
side of my house, four of them, all with noisy
unshuttupable dogs. Argh!

So I foned Andrew in Virgina, received the intelligence
that his neighbors dogs were still quiet, and then I foned
Jerry Howe, the inventor of Doggie Do Right, who came
to visit me.

Merlin walked into my office.

Jerry is a slender fellow with a belly button lenghth grey
beard tapering down his chest. I liked him immediately,
and I applied his instrument to the neighborhood again
which again became silent.

It occured to me that if this ultrasonic field worked with
dogs that we ought at least to ask the question, what
happens to humans in range of the device???

I asked Jerry to give me a list of customers and began
inquiring among them. One thing became immediately
evident. The Doggie Do Right not only shuts up your
neighbors' dogs, it calms and modifies your husband's behavior.

Holey Moley, Captain Marvel, this device has major potential.

In the meantime Jerry gave me a copy of his Wits End
Dog Training Manual. I was delighted. He also introduced
me to the world of professional dog trainers some of whom
even have Ph.D.s in psychology.

This was not such a delight as it appeared that none
of these luminaries had actually read Skinner, Lazarus
or other fountains of wisdom in psychology. Indeed, it
seemed as though they knew very little about the laws
of behavior at all!

Punishment and confrontation seemed to be their
major stock in trade.

Well, if you go to my website, www.drbiofeedback.com
you can read of the career of Sam Corson, I.P. Pavlov's
last student.

Sam demonstrated that rehabilitation of hyperactive
dogs can easily and readily be done using TLC, tender
loving care is at the root of the scientific management
of doggies.

Pavlov told us so 100 years ago.

So what are these degreed morons doing punishing
dogs, and shouting "NO" into their doggie faces? If
you pick up B.F.Skinner's last book, CUMULATIVE
RECORD, included in it is an essay by Keller Breland
and Maryann Breland entitled THE MISBEHAVIOR OF ORGANISMS.

Skinner deliberately included his students' chapter
to emphasize that you cannot manage the behavior
of animals unless you take into consideration 1. the
animal's evolutionary niche (who is the animal?);
2. the animal's personal history (who is the animal?)
and 3, the instinctive repetoire of the animal (who is
the animal?) and 4. the personality of the animal (who
is the animal?).

The Brelands moved far from the white rat. "Thirty-eight
species, totaling over 6,000 individual animals, have been
conditioned, and we have dared to tackle such unlikely
subjects as reindeer, cockatoos, raccoons, porpoises,
and whales."

Jerry Howe spends most of his times with dogs, but
he has learned Pavlov's lesson well. Dogs are individuals,
they are individual DOGS, and they respond most directly
and immediately to love and tender loving care.

Read with pleasure, and then go love your dog.

George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.
Who's Who Honoree since 1983

From: TooCool )

The Puppy Wizard's Wits End Training Method

I have studied canine behavior and dog training for
years. I have a huge library that covers every system
of training.

The Puppy Wizard's (Jerry Howe's) Wits' End Training
Method is by far the most scientific, the most advanced,
the kindest, the quickest and the most effective training
method yet discovered.

It is not an assortment of training tips and tricks; it is
a logically consistent system. Every behavior problem
and every obedience skill is treated in the same logically
consistent manner.

Please study his manual carefully. Please endeavor to
understand the basis of his system and please follow
his directions exactly. His manual is a masterpiece.
It is dense with theory, with explanation, with detailed
descriptions about why behavior problems occur and
how their solution should be approached.

One should not pick and choose from among his methods
based upon what you personally like or dislike. His is
not a bag of tricks but a complete and integrated system
for not only training a dog but for raising a loving
companion.

When I once said to Jerry that his system creates for
you the dog of your dreams, his response was that it
produces for your dog the owner of his dreams.

You see, Jerry has discovered that if you are gentle
with your dog then he will be gentle with you, if you
praise your dog every time he looks at you, then you
will become the center of your dogs world, if you use
Jerry's sound distraction with praise, then it takes
just minutes-sometimes merely seconds-to train your
dog to not misbehave (even in your absence) (Just 15
seconds this morning to train my 10 week old puppy to
lie quietly and let me clip his nails).

Using Jerry's scientific method (sound distraction /
praise / alteration / variation) it takes just minutes to
train you dog to respond to your commands.

What a pleasure it was for me to see my 6 week old
puppy running as fast has his wobbly little legs would
carry him in response to my recall command-and he
comes running every time I call no matter where we are
or what he is doing.

At ten weeks old now, my puppy never strains upon
his leash thanks to Jerry's hot & cold exercises and
his Family Pack Leadership exercises.

Jerry has discovered that if you scold your dog, if you
scream at him, if you intimidate him, if you hurt him,
if you force him then his natural response is to oppose
you.

Is Jerry a nut?

It doesn't make any difference to me whether he is or not.
It is a logical fallacy to judge a person's ideas based upon
their personality. As far as dogs are concerned, Jerry
wears his heart upon his sleeve. It touches him deeply
when he hears of trainers forcing, intimidating, scolding
or hurting dogs.

More than that, he knows that force is not effective
and that it will certainly lead to behavior problems;
sometime problems so severe that people put their
dogs down because of those problems.

I believe that it is natural for humans to want to control
their dog by force. Jerry knows this too. We have all been
at our wits' end, haven't we?

Dogs have a natural tendency to mimic. In scientific
literature it is referred to allelomimetic behavior. Dogs
respond in like kind to force; they respond in like kind
to praise.

Don't bribe your dog with treats; give him what he
wants most-your kind attention. Give him your praise.
You will be astonished at how your dog 's anxiety will
dissipate and how their behavior problems will dissipate
along with their anxiety.

Treat Jerry Howe's (The Puppy Wizard) Wits' End
Training Method as a scientific principle just as you
would the law of gravity and you will have astounding
success.

Dog behavior is just as scientific as is gravity.

If you follow Jerry's puppy rules you will get a sweet little
Magwai; if you don't you will surely get a little gremlin
(anyone see The Gremlins?). --Larry

Instrumental / Classical / Operant / Conditioning
CC / OC / IC / -P +P / +R -R / S R / R S
It's ALL The SAME SAME SAME SAME
{); ~ )

George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.

From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D."
Subject: The Amazing Jerry's take on psychobabble
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 12:13:44 -0400

You might improve the learning of folk who actually
live with and train dogs to do useful things if you
excluded everyone who uses psychobabble from your lists.

I recommend to all of you who wish to taste the flavor
of sensible animal behaviorists to read THE MISBEHAVIOR
OF ORGANISMS, Breland and Breland.

This married pair of psychologists began the long trail
of highly trained animals who are symbolized by Shamu
eating a mackrel from a girl's hand instead of eating
the much more tasty pretty girl who is exactly the size
of the natural food of killer whales, seals. Yum!

The essay, by the way, is a chapter in B.F. Skinner's
summing up book, CUMULATIVE RECORD. They include a
sentence which more or less says, "unless you understand
the personal history of the particular animal, and the
history of this animal's species and group, the developmental
history of the animal, you cannot effectively train the animal.

Pigs root and hen's scratch, if you try to train hens without
scratching or pigs without scratching or pigeons without pecking,
you aren't going to have much success.

A conditional reflex is one which is learned, the original
primitive reflex occurs no matter what the history of the
animal, and is hard wired. If you train the animal to respond,
say by ringing a bell immediately before turning on a bright
light, then you've taught the animal and made his native reflex
of pupil constriction conditional upon the ringing of a bell.

Thorndyke added some terminology to this kind of training
and insisted that when you train the animal to make gross
motor responses that this learning is "instrumental", the
animal takes action and uses an instrument.

The Russian word translated as "conditional" in all other
contexts was mistranslated by Pavlov's American translator,
Horsley Gannt, as "conditioned" and so American psychology
went haring after phantasmagora.

The major theorists for the development of the language of
operant conditioning are Edward Thorndike, John Watson, and
B. F. Skinner. Their approach to behaviorism played a major
role in the development of American psychology.

They proposed that learning is the result of the application
of consequences; that is, learners begin to connect certain
responses with certain stimuli. This connection causes the
probability of the response to change (i.e., learning occurs.)

Thorndike labeled this type of learning instrumental. Using
consequences, he taught kittens to manipulate a latch (e.g.,
an instrument). Skinner renamed instrumental as "operant"
because in this learning, one is "operating" on, and is
influenced by, the environment. Where classical conditioning
illustrates S--R learning, operant conditioning is often
viewed as R--S learning since it is the consequence that
follows the response that influences whether the response
is likely or unlikely to occur again.

It is through operant conditioning that
voluntary responses are learned.

One should note that Russian Psychology did very well
without the operant language, and only pettifogging
university professors ought to worry about what kind
of label we attach to the learning. Pfui!

Even Skinner understood this!

And please note if you saw the original movie, THE
MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE, you saw a Chinese psychologist
who was based on Andrew Salter, CONDITIONED REFLEX
THERAPY.

Alas, Salter didn't have a Ph.D., but he basically rescued
us from the long Freudian nightmare and returned psychotherapy
to a scientific basis. Alas, the 2nd movie didn't even cite
Salter as a source. "...all the highest nervous activity, as
it manifests itself in the conditional reflex, consists of a
continual change of these three fundamental processes --
excitation, inhibition and disinhibition." Ivan P. Pavlov

George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.

What's important is, "does Shamu reliably eat
the fish and not the pretty girl?"

George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.

All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
-Arthur Schopenhauer

"Thank you for fighting the fine fight--
even tho it's a hopeless task,
in this system of things.
As long as man is ruling man,
there will be animals (and humans!)
abused and neglected. :-(
Your student," Juanita.

"If you've got them by the balls their hearts
and minds will follow,"
John Wayne.

The Amazing Puppy Wizard. {} ; ~ )