06/09/2025
I choose to train with positive reinforcement because not only is it more kind to the learner, but also because that is what the science supports.
As a former healthcare professional, I was taught to always turn to recent studies and respected organizations to determine best practices.
So far, study results support that training without aversive tools is not only equally effective, but does not cause increased stress in dogs.
The shared post has a good summary of the study, and a link to it if you would like to read it, but I thought I would include the text from the conclusions section. In case you’re still a normal person who doesn’t read scientific studies… 😜
“Our results indicate that the immediate effects of training with an e-collar give rise to behavioural signs of distress in pet dogs, particularly when used at high settings. Furthermore, whilst best practice as advocated by collar manufacturers mediates the behavioural and physiological indicators of poor welfare detected in the preliminary study, there are still behavioural differences that are consistent with a more negative experience for dogs trained with e-collars, although there was no evidence of physiological disturbance. E-collar training did not result in a substantially superior response to training in comparison to similarly experienced trainers who do not use e-collars to improve recall and control chasing behaviour. Accordingly, it seems that the routine use of e-collars even in accordance with best practice (as suggested by collar manufacturers) presents a risk to the well-being of pet dogs. The scale of this risk would be expected to be increased when practice falls outside of this ideal.”
Long story short, let’s be kind to dogs 🐾
A landmark study that directly addresses this question is:
Cooper, J. J., Cracknell, N., Hardiman, J., Wright, H., & Mills, D. S. (2014). The welfare consequences and efficacy of training pet dogs with remote electronic training collars in comparison to reward based training. PLOS ONE, 9(9), e102722. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0102722
Summary of Key Findings:
Study design: This was a controlled, scientific field study conducted by researchers at the University of Lincoln. It compared three groups:
Dogs trained using e-collars (shock collars) by experienced industry trainers
Dogs trained by the same trainers but without shock
Dogs trained by independent force-free trainers using positive reinforcement only
Trainers were certified and professional, with Group A and B trainers belonging to the Electronic Collar Manufacturers Association (ECMA) and having extensive experience using the devices.
Key results:
There was no significant difference in training efficacy between the groups using shock and those not using it.
Dogs trained with positive reinforcement exhibited fewer signs of stress and anxiety.
The study concluded that the use of shock collars was unnecessary and posed welfare risks without added training benefits.
Salivary cortisol levels, behavioral stress indicators (e.g., yawning, lip licking), and vocalizations were higher in the shock collar group.
Conclusion:
The researchers explicitly stated that the use of e-collars "has negative welfare consequences for some dogs" and "no clear advantage over reward-based training"—thus the use of shock collars is not justified.
So, even if the person operating the collar is a manufacturer-trained professional, this study showed the results were no better than training without shock, and the use of electronic collars resulted in unnecessary stress.
Cindy Ludwig, MA, BS, RN, KPA-CTP, CPDT-KA
Owner, Canine Connection LLC
Voted Best Springfield, Missouri Dog Trainer
