Bokt.nl

Citaat:

Je houdt je target (ik zou een zachte target gebruiken zoals een poolnoodle).een paar mm voor haar knie, zodat als ze beweegt ze er wel tegen moet komen. Dat is het click moment.
Zodra ze doorheeft dat er iets met het been moet, en ze gaan experimenteren weet je dat ze op de juiste weg zijn en kun je het een mm of cm bij cm moeilijker maken.

Citaat:

On another group, we were discussing if bits are always aversive. The conversation eventually got onto poisoned cues and this was my answer in the discussion:
"I teach cues with a target, then transfer them to a voice cue, then transfer them to rein cues. They are pretty positive proof by then (i.e. have a strong reinforcement history). It's what I do with the tools as life goes on that determines how positive they stay.
Technically, you can only poison a cue which was taught positively and then used in a way which was aversive and so becomes poisoned. If we use an aversive cue in the first place, it cannot then be poisoned because it wasn't initially appetitive.
Looking at it from an emotional systems perspective, it means that my cues are associated with SEEKING, PLAY and CARE, right through to the rein cue. To poison them, the systems of RAGE, FEAR and PANIC will need to be engaged and they will then also become associated with the cues and cause conflict or even break down of the behaviour.
This is why you need to be really careful how you use tools which have been taught positively. To get back to the bit question in the original post, I know it is entirely possible for a bit to be experienced as positive if introduced well with reward-based training. However, this is one tool which is easily poisoned as many people do not know how to use a bit well and it can easily become aversive. In my view, the fault does not lie with the tool but the hands that hold it. I am not the first person to say that!"
It's easy to see this with tack that is aversive by design...bits, headcollars, side-pulls, bitless bridles. What is less easily understood is that you can also poison appetitive tack, such as targets and mats. This happens when it all becomes too much about the food and the horse gets frustrated when expected rewards don't happen, such as when you are asking for more before they get the reward. It happens most when you teach stationary behaviours, such as standing on a mat, and follow a click/one treat, click/one treat, click/one treat model. The horse moves from a positive SEEKING mode into a frustrated SEEKING mode as RAGE kicks in.
If you are unaware that this is happening and continue to train in this way with all that tension, you can easily poison positive cues as the horse sees them and then, again, gets into this frustrated mode. I've done it myself and we have videos and studies on how to retrain everything so that you can reintroduce those cues with calm. This is why we emphasise relaxation over everything else and encourage people to stop treating and move on in behaviours as quickly as possible.
What's your experience of poisoned cues? (Remember, it needs to have been trained positively in the first place and then become aversive in some way). It can happen unwittingly, for example, when a saddle which was well-fitted becomes painful in some way as the horse has changed shape or his way of going. Or girths can easily get poisoned too. Any more examples?