Why I Say No to Shock, Prong, and Chain Collars

Shock, prong and chain training collars. These tools are part of the heated debate and division in the dog training community. Some support their universal use. Some believe they have application in certain contexts. Some campaign for the US to join other countries and ban them.

As a positive-reinforcement, reward-based dog trainer, I am against their use in nearly all cases.

Why?

The Short Answer

I don’t want dogs to do things (or not do things) because they’re avoiding something unpleasant.

The Long Answer

Shock, prong and electronic collars are classified as aversive pieces of equipment. That is, equipment that causes “strong dislike or disinclination.”

The traditional use of all these tools requires they cause the dog some level of discomfort in order to work. This is how prong collars are designed. The dog pulls on the leash which tightens the prong, and because he doesn’t like the discomfort in his neck, he backs off the leash to avoid the discomfort. If the dog doesn’t find the prong uncomfortable, he won’t change his behavior in order to stop or avoid that discomfort. The discomfort is essential.

So what’s the big deal with discomfort? So what? Why is that a deal-breaker for me?

Inhibited Learning

We know that aversive techniques increase distress in the dog and that distress lowers his ability to learn. If I’m trying to teach a dog, I want him as receptive to learning as possible; my techniques shouldn’t sabotage my primary goal.

Increased Aggression

We know that aversive techniques often create or increase aggression. Not many families are eager to share their homes and lives with an aggressive dog; it’s a stressful situation for dog and the humans and can feel very isolating. In my opinion, as a professional dog trainer, I should be doing everything possible to help families avoid aggression, not teach techniques that make aggression more likely.

Unplanned Associations

We know that dogs are constantly learning via association: “this thing that makes me feel good, let’s do it again; this thing makes me feel bad, let’s not do it again.” The tricky thing about associations is they’re formed broadly.

Consider the prong collar example, although the dog might find the pain uncomfortable enough to avoid pulling, that discomfort and dislike isn’t associated with only the pulling. It’s also associated, indiscriminately, with anything else in the environment.

The same thing happens with humans. I recently discovered that one of my family members doesn’t like eating off of paper plates. During her teen years, we had a sudden death in the family that required us to stay with extended family out of town. As we were all rather preoccupied during our time there, a lot of our meals were eaten off of….you guessed it, paper plates. No one was intentionally associating the turmoil of that time with paper plates, but that’s the connection her brain made. And now that it’s been made, she avoids paper plates because of how they make her feel.

This is one of the biggest reasons I personally avoid aversives in training: I do not want to risk the dog accidentally forming a bad association with something I didn’t intend because I used an aversive.

Science aside, I believe this debate ultimately comes down to philosophy: either you’re okay changing behavior via discomfort or you’re not.

Personally, I’m not.