Value of a Decoy

The days of tossing the “new guy” in a bite suit and sending repeated downfield hits are antiquated in nature, and if that is the operating norm for your department, it should cease - immediately. Finding willing participants to take an onslaught of reoccurring bites can be difficult to say the least but you do your unit, and ultimately your K9’s a disservice if just anyone is allowed to participate as a decoy.  The differentiation occurs between an individual that merely takes a controlled bite compared to a helper that has a deeper fundamental understanding as to what the K9 is processing mentally.  Training decoys must be able to utilize their skill-set in real time to adjust accordingly. More so than influence from a handler or intervention from a trainer, during aggression work, the decoy is the one primarily responsible for creating teaching moments in the dog.

The argument thus ensues as to how is someone going to get better if they aren't allowed to catch, or, they are limited in the scope of the exercise?  I would argue that the most critical litmus test that one can measure is their passion for the work.  Without a prospective helper actively seeking out knowledge, experience and opportunity, you ultimately have an individual that catches begrudgingly simply because it is their turn.  The ending result with that type of attitude is someone that is not nearly as invested or interested in making your K9 the optimum animal they are capable of being.  Not only does performance suffer, injuries can and do occur when incompetent decoys work K9’s, to the dogs themselves or to the helpers that have been instructed to catch.                     

Athleticism is a second major component when finding a good training decoy.  Someone who is not only physically fit, but one who is able to mechanically catch dogs without adding extra risk of injury to the Officer or K9. 

Helpers also need to be actors.  They need to possess a certain level of finesse or connectivity that is utilized to reinforce desired biting behavior in the animal.

Decoys that are working dogs should, at least from a fundamental perspective, have a general understanding of what drive the K9 is operating in.  Training decoys need to delve even further into the psyche of the animal, particularly the ones they are working.  Different types of drives have been explored in publications and articles, however, simply reading and identifying the difference between prey and defense on the surface is a must.   We have the ability as a decoy to manipulate innate or genetic drives that are ingrained within the mental make-up of these animals.  We owe it to them to be informed and possess the necessary understanding when trying to influence said drive state.  

It should be incumbent upon the decoy to be proficient in proper targeting and knowing how to trigger dogs to grip various areas on a suit.  Some people are not a fan of a frontal grip on a suit as it puts the K9 in a disadvantage positionally, as they are more prone to being physically controlled by the helper.  I would argue that teaching and training a K9 on a frontal grip is more about being able to effectively manipulate the mental state of the animal rather than the practicality of the positioning itself.  

There can also be in many agencies errors with regard to procurement of K9 bite equipment.  Many departments are held to a strict budget and finding additional money to purchase specific bite suits, scratch pants, sleeves, muzzle, and hidden sleeves can be out of the question.  Ill-fitting suits have been the norm in many K9 units as they are the proverbial “one size fits all.” This is not only an issue for the helpers as flexibility, mobility and agility are all affected.  Training in these types of suits ill prepare K9’s for biting as the only material they are able to obtain is the suit itself.  They are unable to feel the helper through the suit, which, is an important aspect of aggression training.  

With the exception of the procurement of the animals themselves, I would argue that the biggest void in the police K9 world is the lack of quality and competent decoys. I would challenge you to pause before putting just anyone into downfield exercises or specialized bite work as the mental and physical damage done to the K9 may be irreversible.  

Training Theory

Training by accident, or “hoping” an animal learns a given task, is an incorrect and unsustainable way of teaching.  It is imperative that trainers and handlers have a solid foundation and understanding of what motivates animals and ultimately facilitates learning.  Behavior shaping, at its fundamental core, is a relatively simple concept.  Animals learn through experiences, associations, and consequences.  The following article will address the methodology behind two major behavioral learning theories, Classical Conditioning and Operant Conditioning.  

Classical Conditioning – behavior is shaped through associations.  It is the proverbial “Pavlov’s dog” experiment.  A bell (meaningless stimulation) was rung, food (meaningful stimulation) was administered.  As a result of repetitive activity and the association that occurred over time, the bell (originally meaningless stimulation) eventually took the place of the food itself subconsciously in the dog’s mind.  The dog associated the ringing of the bell with predictable/reliable food delivery.  As a result, visible salivation occurred simply upon the activation of the bell without any food being immediately present. It is important to remember that unless food delivery was contemporaneous with the originally meaningless stimulation (bell), learning will not occur.  

The power of association is immense.  Not only is it a powerful tool we can manipulate during training, it can also present itself in a negative connotation as well.  Animals also learn through “experiences” or “self-discovery” events.  Whether positive or negative, they can and will alter the psyche of the animal based on associations that have been made.   

Operant Conditioning – behavior is shaped through consequences.  The theory revolves around the scientific experiments that were conducted by B.F Skinner.  Rats were released inside of a box which contained a lever.  At first, the rats accidentally made contact with the lever, which, released a piece of food.  After repetition, they consciously made the choice to step on lever as the expectation of reward (positive reinforcement) was ingrained.  Skinner also explored the notion of turning pressure off (Negative Reinforcement).  The same box was wired with an uncomfortable level of electricity.  The rats initially scurried around haphazardly and unintentionally turned off the electricity by touching the lever.  Association was soon made, at which point, they rapidly moved towards lever with the purpose of turning off pressure.  

The basis of operant conditioning is rooted in the form of reinforcers/punishers. The theory behind the method of training is captured in a four-quadrant graph.  Positive reinforcement.  Negative reinforcement.  Positive Punishment.  Negative Punishment.  What is important to grasp is that “positive” and “negative” do not mean “good” and “bad”. The meaning behind the terminology is simply to “add” or to “take away”.  Reinforcers are events that increase the likelihood of the behavior reoccurring.  Punishers are events that decrease the likelihood of the behavior reoccurring.  That concept is incredibly important as the application behind the compulsion/motivators is commonly misunderstood.  

Positive Reinforcement – “Something good is added” – Whatever the scope of the exercise entails, behavior that is desired is marked and reward is provided.  Think of an obedience or bite session.  Something of value and desire (food, ball, bite suit) is utilized as a reward when desirable behavior is exhibited.  

Negative Reinforcement – “Pressure is released” – The cessation of pressure whether it be a pinch collar or E-collar.  When the animal executes whatever task/command that had been issued.  The pressure that already been applied, is released.  

Positive Punishment – “Correction/compulsion is introduced” – Pressure is added to thwart the undesirable behavior.  The goal of adding positive punishment is to extinguish behavior, thus decreasing the likelihood of it occurring again.

Negative Punishment – “Access to something desirable is delayed/taken away” – Whether withholding food/ball reward until positioning is correct, or, delaying bite until dog executes command correctly, preventing the animal from obtaining something desirable is a powerful motivator.  

What is profoundly interesting is how addition and subtraction of reward/pressure are inherently linked together.  For instance, in order for Negative Reinforcement to occur, Positive Punishment must have been administered.  In order for there to be a cessation of pressure, pressure must already be present. In the same manner, for Negative Punishment to have value, Positive Reinforcement must be present. Withholding of an object of value must mean that something desirable is in fact, available.  

Behavior is not only learned, it can be shaped through the above-mentioned theories.  It is incumbent upon the trainer and/or handler to ensure the application is correct and timely.  

Drive State

Much has been published about different types of drives that animals, specifically working dogs operate in.  However, I would argue that with the exception of the most educated trainers or most discerning decoys, many drive states are simply misunderstood, and ultimately lumped into ambiguous categories.  What is lost in translation most of the time is the biological significance of the underlying drive state.  Without further ado, let us look at the major categories of drive states that we as trainers/decoys manipulate, and what they accomplish.

Drives in and of themselves are urges/desires that when triggered, cause a dog to act.  They are innate and ingrained in the dog’s genetic composition and can be manipulated by humans to accomplish certain things.  Drives in dogs can be elevated or intensified via frustration or pain stimulation methods, however, every animal has a base line in which they operate. 

Before delving into drive categories, let us examine the topic of triggers. Every drive needs a trigger to initiate the underlying drive state.  With the trigger activating the mental state, the drive action is engaged.  All of this rapid mental locomotion would be null and void without an end goal in sight.  High/Low stimulus thresholds are examined when looking at what it takes to trigger a dog into the desired drive state.  If someone says a particular K9 has a “low stimulus threshold for prey” they are merely advising that the dog is easily/rapidly triggered into the manipulated drive.  While that is telling, the examination does not stop there.  Given the fact that a K9 is rapidly triggered into prey does not necessarily mean they in fact have a “high prey drive”.  How a dog maintains and operates within the given drive state is just as important as the trigger threshold and overall quality of the drive state itself.  Is the animal’s existence in said state prone to exhaustion/disinterest prematurely? Or are they able to maintain and navigate through an extended training session without essentially losing interest. 

Prey Drive - This is a lust-oriented drive state with the ultimate goal of obtaining sustenance for the animal.  Think of how an object of prey moves when being chased/hunted. Fast/erratic/unpredictable movement of prey object (in this case a rabbit) triggers prey drive in the hunter (in this case a dog).  The ultimate goal of the dog is to chase, pounce, grip, and shake to death the prey object with the final goal being consumption thus satiation.  Genetically triggered prey object (rabbit) is traded for human substituted object (suit/sleeve) that triggers dog into same mental drive state.  We can then work dogs for aggression work in prey drive via the supplemented prey object and proper association.  

Moving on, we will focus on movements that decoys employ when attempting to trigger dog into an elevated prey drive state.  Further, we will examine common reactions that are seen from the helper’s perspective when the dog is worked in the desired drive.  

Decoys typically move in a rapid motion, laterally, to trigger dog into prey. Prey is always escaping.  Eye contact may or may not be utilized from a connectivity standpoint, however, constant menacing visual connectivity is often associated with defensive posturing.   Helpers can also experiment with elevation posture changes as they are certain to be perceived differently depending on each individual animal. Fleeting movement in general, may be done in conjunction with visually present bite equipment.  Equipment, that has been conditioned through proper association, that has come to mean something valuable to the animal.  This drive state, as mentioned above, can be elevated/intensified via frustration/pain stimulation methods. Finally, the reaction that would be expected on behalf of the animal is one of elevated motion/intensity. Forward movement as to engage and ultimately grip presented item.  Auditory response from the dog is typically a higher pitch barking that exudes excitement. It is important to remember that unlike defense drive which we will explore below, prey drive is a state that can be exhausted.     

Defense drive - The proverbial “fight or flight” mental drive state.  The animal in this case has been confronted with a threat, one that is real, or one that is perceived.  The trigger stimulus for the drive is worry.  The reaction from the dog is posturing, visually, auditory or a combination of both to make the threat retreat.  Or, an act of violence is perpetrated on behalf of the dog. Finally, the goal of the animal is self-preservation.  It is important to note that defensive drive characteristics can be displayed over multiple areas.  Self-preservation is the first to come to mind.  This is the animal that associates a threat posed by another animal, or human, and reacts according to their genetic composition to either confront and attack or retreat from the threat.  Animals can also operate in a defensive drive state over an object of interest (grounded equipment), pack member, or claimed territory.  When attempting to get a dog into a defensive state of mind, approach from the decoy is a menacing, direct, linear, head-on approach.  It is imperative that an experienced/talented helper is one that is manipulating the animal defensively as working in this drive state is a double-edged sword.  Too much pressure imposed on the animal may cause avoidance behavior, which, is beyond the intent of the exercise.   From a helper’s perspective, a deep guttural bark is accompanied by a visible display of frontal teeth.  Hair on the hackles/back of neck are raised as to make the dog appear larger then they truly are.  This is a drive state that dogs, particularly police dogs, need to be able to operate in without retreat.  

While trainers/helpers need to see that a police dog not only possesses a suitable defensive drive state, they must be able to exist in said drive state without displaying avoidance/displacement behavior.  As eluded to above, this drive state is not prone to exhaustion.  

A simple internet search on “drives in animals” would reveal categories that consist of a plethora of “identifiable” drive states that animals utilize subconsciously. However, I believe that prey and defense are the two most pertinent ones, particularly to working dogs.  Trainers/helpers must be intimately familiar with them as they are often the ones most manipulated for the task at hand.