Alternatives
to Breaking Parrots: Reducing Aggression and Fear through Learning
© S.G. Friedman. All Rights Reserved
S.G.
Friedman, Ph.D.
StopPDD
Virtual Conference 2002; PsittaScene
There is
irony in the practice of using force to reduce aggression and fear in companion
parrots. Chances are human force was involved in producing the aggressive and
fearful behaviors in the first place, at least from the bird’s point of view.
It reminds me of the equally ironic practice of slapping a child for hitting a
sibling. While I can’t be sure where these pervasive practices come from in our
culture, I’m sure I know some of the reasons why they persist: First, force is
a familiar strategy to many of us, having ourselves been forced to do things
throughout our lives. It is our cultural legacy passed down from one generation
to the next and often takes the form of seemingly benevolent reasoning such as
“this hurts me more than it hurts you" or “a little pain for a lot of
gain." Second, force works in the short run, some of the time. This short
run and occasional effectiveness intermittently reinforces the user which makes
it very likely that force will be used more often in the future. It is not
uncommon to see such a chain of events result in a teacher or caretaker who
unwittingly grows to rely on force to the exclusion of non-forceful, effective
strategies.
Still,
we’ve come a long way. Many cowboys would rather hang up their saddles than
break their horses; puppies are often crate-trained rather than housebroken
with physical punishment; and, instead of breaking our children’s spirits or
their bad habits we set them up to succeed and catch them being good. With the
recent reduction of force where horses, dogs and children are concerned, what
explains the recent acceptance of force by some to manage aggressive and
fearful parrots?
Defining
Force
Before
answering the question posed above I turned to Webster’s New World Dictionary
to check my use of the word force. Force is defined as, "The use of
physical power to overcome or restrain a person; physical coercion…coercion is
to compel submission or obedience by the use of superior power, intimidation,
threats, etc." Interestingly, one antonym for force is persuasion.
Webster’s definition of the word break is surprisingly relevant, as well:
"…to tame or make obedient with or as with force; to force one’s way
through obstacles or resistance…" An antonym for break is to mend.
Sometimes Webster is so on the mark it’s scary.
People who advocate using force to
decrease aggression and fear are captured well by Webster’s definitions. They
force struggling, biting, screaming birds out of their cages, sometimes by
grabbing one leg, and restrain the birds by wrapping them in towels or swinging
them off their hands until they submit to being handled. This is absolutely
analogous to the old horse breaking practices of hobbling horses’ feet, slickering
or sacking them out, and tying heavy bags of flour to their backs.
The birds so treated are frequently
passed around in foreign venues from one stranger’s hand to another. Learned
helplessness (discussed further below) and sheer physical exhaustion is often
confused by trusting clients as their bird’s willingness to be touched and
held. The effects of this treatment are most often short lasting and the birds
subjected to this procedure typically return to their fearful and aggressive
behaviors within a few hours or days. Remarkably, physical harm is sufficiently
probable with this strategy that one such practitioner does not work without
the presence of a veterinarian (Parrot Chronicles, Nov-Dec. 2002, at
www.parrotchronicles.com/novdec2002/birdwhisperer.htm ).
Far from a new or breakthrough strategy,
the procedure of reducing unwanted behavior by physically preventing an animal
from making a response has been well studied by behavior scientists (e.g. Page
& Hall, 1953; Baum, 1966; Staub, 1968;Morgenstern 1973; Yule, et.al, 1974;
Morris, et.al, 1983; and, James,1986). The general term for this procedure is
response blocking. With aggressive birds the response blocked by physical
restraint is typically biting. When used specifically to reduce extreme fear
this procedure is called flooding. With flooding the subject is presented with
the highly feared object or situation which is not removed until the fear
diminishes. The response that is prevented in this case is escape.
Most
behavior scientists, teachers, and therapists agree response blocking of
aggression or fear can not properly be called teaching. The outcome of teaching
is learning and the process of learning new behaviors involves the learner’s
choice to behave in a certain way to access certain outcomes or not. Our job as
effective teachers is to arrange the environment and the outcomes in such a way
that our birds choose to do what we want them to do. Response blocking and
flooding eliminate the element of choice entirely from the behavior-change process;
and, although some behaviors may be reduced no new behaviors are learned. The
bird pulled out of his cage has not been taught to step up when requested and
the caretaker who pulled him out of his cage has not been taught how to teach
his/her bird to step up. For the same effort and less hardship, we could be
teaching.
The
Behaviors of Aggression and Fear
We as
parrot caretakers sometimes find ourselves squinting to read and interpret the
subtle and not so subtle meanings of our birds’ observable behavior. The
behaviors of aggression and fear are overlapping and range from relatively mild
(avoidance of hands) to extreme (severe biting). Fear itself can also be
understood as a continuum from mild anxiety and agitation (darting eyes,
crouching bodies and fanned tails) to extreme, seemingly irrational panic
(shrieking, falling onto their backs, flailing feet). These are often the
behaviors observed by parrot caretakers who find themselves desperately seeking
help for their parrot and themselves. And these caretakers are quite correct in
assessing these behaviors as evidence of a crisis situation.
As is the
case with all behavior, two processes are at work where aggression and fear are
concerned, biology and learning. It is a bird’s biology that produces the
innate behaviors associated with fear such as rapid heart rate and increased
blood pressure; however, experience is the best teacher of what to be fearful
of in captivity. Of course it is also a parrot’s biology, most notably in the
form of powerful beaks, which accounts for their effectiveness as aggressors
but it is critical to understand that serious biting is not a species-typical
defense reaction in parrots. Given the choice among freezing, fleeing and
fighting, a wild parrot’s first defense is to flee. It should be no surprise
then, that aggression in parrots is often the predictable result of what we the
caretakers do and the conditions we provide in captivity. There is no question
that biting is an adaptation which results from pushing our birds too far, too
fast or too forcefully. The good news is that learned behaviors can be
unlearned and replaced with more appropriate behaviors -- but only to the
extent that we can effectively teach them. Any limitation and all the
responsibility is ours as teachers. Still, you can count on your parrot’s
extraordinary ability to learn, that is, to change based on the experiences you
provide.
Back to
the Question
What then,
explains the increase in the use of force to manage aggressive or fearful
parrots? I believe there are three explanations and it is worth noting that not
one of them has to do with a desire to cause harm by the practitioners or their
clients: They are (1) understandable desperation to the point of absolute
despair felt by the caretakers of aggressive and fearful birds; (2)
practitioners’ and caretakers’ lack of knowledge about the negative
side-effects of forceful strategies; and (3) practitioners’ and caretakers’
lack of knowledge and skill with effective non-forceful strategies to replace
their parrot’s fear with confident, adaptive behaviors.
Unbeknownst
to many companion parrot caretakers and practitioners alike, the natural
science of behavior has, in the course of the last 6 decades, produced a highly
effective teaching technology called applied behavior analysis (ABA) of which
operant conditioning is a part. Positive reinforcement is the premier method of
this teaching technology as it can be applied in endlessly creative ways and is
so effective as to make the use of force obsolete. Additionally, the science of
behavior has also revealed the predictable and detrimental consequences of many
aversive strategies for changing behavior including response blocking.
In my
opinion, one of the greatest failures of behavior science in general has been
the failure of behavior scientists to effectively disseminate their information
to those who need it most, the teachers, parents and caretakers. Nowadays, with
our unlimited ability to exchange information with one another the
responsibility to know and apply these fundamental principles of learning and
behavior is shared among all of us. At the same time, we need to abandon
debilitating practices and scrutinize unvalidated claims.
The Risks
of Response Blocking
Response
blocking is called flooding for a reason: When it doesn’t work the animal sinks
rather than swims. When it does work, flooding results in a rapid reduction in
fearful behavior; however it is just as likely to result in overwhelming
stress, anxiety, and lasting generalized aversion to the people present during
the flooding episode and elements in the environment at large. Flooding can
result in such intense resistance that physical harm can occur to the birds and
people. Additionally, there is considerable research that shows the long term
detrimental effects of repeated exposure to uncontrollable aversive events with
both animals and people (Mazur, 2002), as is the case with repeated flooding.
Learned helplessness is one such dire outcome. Learned helplessness is the
expectation that one's behavior has little or no effect on the environment.
This expectation results from repeated exposure to uncontrollable aversive
events without opportunity to escape. Research has shown that animals subjected
to this condition often suffer a loss of motivation and do not even try to
affect their environment even when they can. They give up easily and show
significant deficits in learning and performance. Emotional problems are
frequently observed as well, for example, rats developed ulcers; cats ate less;
humans suffered increased blood pressure; and monkeys became ill (Maier and
Seligman, 1976).
Another
worry is the recent practice of demonstrating flooding on birds at bird club
meetings. Aside from the blatant disrespect shown the already fearful animal by
flooding it in such a casual setting, research suggests that short duration
flooding sessions, as is the case at many bird club demonstrations, can
increase fears (Staub, 1968; Yule, et.al., 1974) and very likely increases
associated aggression as well . This may account for the frequently reported
short-term effects of these demonstrations with birds.
I and many other behaviorists (e.g.
Burch and Bailey, 1999; Morgenstern, 1973; Martin, 2002), experienced bird
trainers (Biro, 2002; Martin, 2002, Morrow, 2002) and bird caretakers believe
that this procedure is not a humane method of dealing with aggression or fear,
especially in light of the many validated positive alternatives. To better
assess the ethics of this procedure, I challenge readers to think truly for one
minute about your greatest fear: Is it snakes? Spiders or rock ledges? The dark
when you are alone, bridges or tight spaces? Now, imagine being grabbed by your
leg, wrapped tightly in a sheet and restrained in the presence of this feared
stimulus or condition with no control and no possibility of escape. For some of
you, if restrained long enough, this feeling of sweat-breaking, breath-robbing
panic will extinguish. Now, answer this: Is the effectiveness of a technique
really the only criterion for selecting best practices with our companion
parrots in light of gradual, positive alternatives?
The
Science of Alternatives
There are
many alternative strategies to response blocking and flooding. Systematic
desensitization is one highly effective and commonly used technique for
reducing fears. With systematic desensitization, the bird is slowly presented
with tolerable amounts or durations of the feared object or condition. The bird
is never allowed to experience a high level of fear. When the bird shows
comfort behaviors at one level on the fear hierarchy (such as preening or
shaking tail feathers) the bird is rewarded with praise or other reinforcers
and the feared object is moved closer to the bird or the bird moved closer to
the feared condition. This gradual process is continued until the bird shows no
fear whatsoever when presented with the feared object or situation. Done
perceptively, systematic desensitization can be relatively quick and remarkably
successful. It is a joyful process to see fear melt away to be replaced with
resilience and confidence!
Another
strategy for reducing fear is called targeting. With targeting the bird is
taught through positive reinforcement to touch a designated object or part of
an object such as the end of a chop stick. Once the bird has mastered targeting
you can facilitate your bird moving out of his cage by following the target
stick. You can also target the bird to move closer and closer to someone’s hand
where he can be rewarded for increasing the duration of hand perching. Few
strategies are more thrilling than shaping a bird to your hand gently by
rewarding small steps toward the final destination. Targeting allows you to
keep the rate of reinforcement high which more quickly establishes you the
caretaker as a reinforcer, as well! See
http://community-2.webtv.net/Lincomacaws/Tgt/ for a more complete explanation
of targeting.
Differential
reinforcement of alternative behaviors is a highly effective approach for
reducing aggressive behavior. Paired with a careful reading of your birds’ body
language to avoid those bites, differential reinforcement consists of rewarding
the behaviors you want to see more while at the same time ignoring those
unwanted behaviors. In this way, problem behaviors are decreased using positive
reinforcement not punishment! For example, biting can be replaced with a
vocalization to signal to you that your bird feels uncomfortable with what you
are doing; lunging can be replaced with picking up a foot toy; and, charging
can be replaced with going to a designated perch. I highly recommend Karen
Pryor’s book, Don't Shoot the Dog: The New Art of Teaching and Training -
Revised Edition, (1999), Bantam Publishers, available at
www.clickertraining.com, and Steve Martin’s website at www.naturalencounters.com
for more information about teaching with positive reinforcement.
Teaching
plans should always begin with the least intrusive, most positive methods
available to us not only because they are highly effective but also because
they are, simply, more humane. Because we can. In the great majority of cases,
building trusting relationships gradually through the skilled application of
positive reinforcement will get you to your goals with no risk of distress or
harm. By teaching adaptive, desirable behaviors to your bird you will replace
aggression and fear with competence and confidence. With each new behavior
learned, teaching the next behavior will happen faster and more easily, as your
bird learns to learn from you. Your bird’s trust will grow in proportion to
your skill as a teacher. Aversive procedures like response blocking threaten
this outcome for you and your bird. The goal is to empower not overpower your
bird.
In Closing
Over 60
years ago, B.F. Skinner coined the term operant conditioning to convey a type
of learning with which individuals have power to “operate" on their
environment to produce or avoid particular outcomes. He used this concept in
contrast to classical or Pavlovian conditioning which focuses on behaviors that
are not choice-driven but automatic like salivating, eye blinks and goose
bumps. His observations that all animals are active participants in learning
and their behavior is the result of intelligent choices based on outcomes have
stood the test of time and scientific inquiry. They are perhaps the most
fundamental and important discoveries of the science of behavior, applicable to
improving the lives of all creatures.
Response
blocking and flooding have no place in our work with companion parrots because
force is the one strategy which renders animals absolutely and indisputably
choiceless. Such lack of control over ones environment has been shown to be
associated with short term effects and long term learned helplessness. No new
behaviors are learned because in fact none are taught.
Far from the breakthrough strategy
response blocking or flooding is sometimes touted to be, the use of force and
restraint to gain a parrot’s submissiveness is nothing short of parrot
breaking. The use of this strategy is, sadly, an example of the prophetic
phrase, “when everything old is new again." Those who use these strategies
appear to be ignorant of both the dire side effects of response blocking and
the highly effective, well validated alternative teaching strategies which make
use of positive reinforcement. Although no harm may be intended by
practitioners or their clients, the risk of harm is very real and totally
unnecessary. This is ignorance our humanity cannot afford. Be neither drawn in
by promises of quick fixes nor dazzled by showmanship; do not steal what is a
bird’s to give. As so plainly stated by Burch and Bailey (1999) in reference to
dogs, “We owe it to them to treat them the same way we’d like to be
treated." Do we owe our birds any less?
Author’s note: I want to thank all the
members of The Companion Bird Behavior email list at www.parrottalk.com for
providing such an excellent sounding board for debate, refinement and
understanding of these issues, in the best interest of our companion birds.
References
Baum, M.
(1966). Rapid extinction of an avoidance response following a period of
response prevention in the avoidance apparatus. Psychological Reports,18,
59-64.
Biro, C.
(2002) Personal communication.
Burch, M.R
& Bailey, J.S. (1999). How dogs learn. Howell Book House:Macmillan.
James,
J.E. (1986). Review of the relative efficacy of imaginal and in vivo flooding
in the treatment of clinical fear. Behavioral Psychotherapy, 14, 183-191.
Maier, S.
F., & Seligman, M. E. P. (1976). Learned Helplessness: Theory and evidence.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 105, 3-46.
Martin, S.
A. (November, 2002). Personal communication.
Mazur, J.
E. (2002). Leaning and Behavior. Prentice Hall.
Morgenstern,
K. P. (1973). Implosive therapy and flooding procedures: A critical review.
Psychological Bulletin, 79, 318-334.
Morris, R.
J., & Kratochwill, T. R. (1983). Treating children’s fears and phobias: A
behavioral approach. New York:Pergamon Press.
Morrow, L.
Personal communication.
Page,
H.A., & Hall, J. F. (1953). Experimental extinction as a function of the
prevention of a response. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology,
46, 33-34.
Staub, E. (1968). Duration of stimulus-exposure as determinant of the efficacy of flooding procedures in the elimination of fear. Behavior Research and Therapy, 6, 131-132