Learning Effect

4.1.1 Learning Effect of the Training Methods

The learning effect of each training method was calculated, in order to compare the effectiveness of the training methods. The research resulted in high learning effect for pinch collar and electronic training collar, on the other hand quitting signal showed a low learning effect. The reasons and implications of this result will be discussed in chapter 5.

The result of the calculation of the learning effect of each method showed that the electronic training collar had learning effect on the majority of the dogs (N=39/42). However, one dog in Hannover was not able to be tested for learning effect of the electronic training collar since it did not reliably quit the behavior after the administration of the method.

4 dogs were able to be tested for the learning effect of the quitting signal since the other 38 dogs did not reliably quit the behavior after the instruction of the signal. All in all, the signal

Similar to the electronic training collar, the pinch collar had learning effect on 32 of 42 dogs, which also includes the majority of the dogs.

Comparing the learning effects of the training methods with one another rendered the following results:

4.1.1.1 Electronic Training Collar vs. Pinch Collar: Compared with the electronic training collar, pinch collar appeared to have lower learning effect on the dogs. However, this difference was not found to be significant (paired sample t-test, p =0.16).

4.1.1.2 Electronic Training Collar vs. Quitting Signal: The learning effect of the electronic training collar was significantly higher than the learning effect of the quitting signal (paired sample t-test, p <0.01*).

4.1.1.3 Pinch Collar vs. Quitting Signal: A significant difference for learning effect between the pinch collar and the quitting signal was found (t-test, p <0.01*).

Table 4.1: Learning effects of training methods on dogs

Yes (frequency of

the dogs)

No (frequency of

the dogs)

not evaluated (frequency of

the dogs)

Electronic training collar 92,9% 4,8% 2,4%

Pinch collar 76,2% 23,8% 0%

Quitting signal 7,1% 2,4% 90,5%

4.1.2 Comparison of the groups

Group differences were observed in learning effect of the pinch collar, as well as, of the quitting signal.

4.1.2.1 Electronic Training Collar: No significant difference was found in comparison of learning effect of the electronic training collar between Hannover and Muenster. 19 of 20 subjects reliably abandoned the behavior after getting the correction in Hannover and therefore 19 dogs were able to be tested for the learning effect of the method. In Muenster, however, all dogs could be tested for the learning effect since all of them reliably quitted the behavior after getting the correction. As a result, electronic training collar had learning effect on 18 dogs out of 20 subjects in Hannover, while the same method showed learning effect in all dogs from Muenster.

Table 4.2: Comparison of the learning effect of the electronic training collar between groups

Yes

(frequency of the dogs)

No

(frequency of the dogs)

not evaluated (frequency of the

dogs)

Muenster 100% 0% 0%

Hannover 90% 5% 5%

4.1.2.2 Pinch Collar: The method showed learning effect in 13 of 20 subjects in Hannover. In Muenster, however, the learning effect of the pinch collar was higher than the one in Hannover, which involved 19 of 22 subjects. As a result, comparison of the groups showed a tendency towards significance for the pinch collar (Kruskal-Wallis, p=0.109).

Table 4.3: Comparison of the learning effect of the pinch collar between groups

4.1.2.3 Quitting Signal: Considering the learning effect of quitting signal, significant difference was found between cities (Kruskal-Wallis, p <0.05**).

None of the dogs in Muenster could be tested for the learning effect of the quitting signal since none of them reliably abandoned the behavior after the signal had been instructed.

In Hannover, however, 4 out of 20 dogs reliably quitted the behavior after getting the signal and thus, could be tested for the learning effect of the method. As a result, the method showed a learning effect in 3 out of 4 dogs in Hannover.

Table 4.4: Comparison of the learning effect of the quitting signal between groups

Yes

4.1.3 Comparison of the subgroups

Considering learning effect of the training methods, no significant difference was found between subgroups².

4.1.3.1 Electronic Training Collar:

Subgroup A: The method showed no learning effect in 1 of 8 dogs, which belonged to Hannover group.

Subgroup B: The method showed no learning effect in 1 of 7 dogs, which belonged to Hannover group.

Subgroup C: The method showed learning effect in all dogs (N=5).

Subgroup D: The method showed learning effect in all dogs (N=7).

Subgroup E: The method showed learning effect in all dogs (N=8).

Subgroup F: The method showed learning effect in all dogs (N=7).

4.1.3.2 Pinch Collar:

Subgroup A: The method showed no learning effect in 1 of 8 dogs, which belonged to Muenster group.

Subgroup B: The method showed learning effect in 4 of 7 dogs. The 2 of 4 dogs, in which the method had no learning effect belonged to H-group, while the other 1 dog was from Muenster group.

Subgroup C: The method showed no learning effect in 1 of 5 dogs, which belonged to Muenster group.

Subgroup D: The method showed no learning effect in 1 of 7 dogs, which belonged to Hannover group.

Subgroup E: The method showed no learning effect in 2 of 8 dogs, which belonged to Hannover group.

Subgroup F: The method showed no learning effect in 3 of 7 dogs, which belonged to Hannover group.

4.1.3.3 Quitting Signal

Only 4 dogs belonged to Hannover group (from the subgroups A, B, C and E) could be tested for learning effect of the quitting signal since only these 4 dogs abandoned the behavior after the signal had been instructed. As a result the method showed learning effect in 3 out of 4 dogs, which belonged to groups A, C and E.