One of my friends is a professional dog trainer (one of those modern, violent-free, understand-your-dog kind of trainers). She has a new trainee, and for one session with a customer and his dog, she told her, “Don’t touch that dog; it bites sometimes and it already bit me.”
Trainee sees dog, goes down and strokes the dog. My friend says, “Hey, I told you not to do that because he might bite!” Trainee replies, “Oh, I forgot. You’ve got to tell me that more explicitly.”
Which left my friend in a certain WTF mode. After I joked a little about using a whip for learning improvement (on the trainee, of course, never on dogs), I also thought about how such things can be avoided.
For once, it’s always good when the answer to an order is phrased as a full sentence.
Instead of: “Don’t touch the dog” - “Sure” or “yes” (instantly forgotten)
it could be: “Don’t touch the dog” - “Okay, I won’t touch that dog.” (better chance for remembering)
(Same goes if you are unsure what somebody expects from you. Rephrasing the work ahead like, “Let’s see. I should start with A, than do B, and if there’s time, C can be tackled.” makes sure that both sides are talking about the same subject.)
But I also think that in this case, there’s a strong reflex that works against not touching this dog. The trainee obviously loves dogs, and I guess she strokes every dog she meets. There are some numbers around how often you need to do something before an old habit is broken, and they are in the hundreds. So one order against a strong tendency of doing something might not be very effective.
For her own self-protection, the trainee needs to learn to heed warnings and that not all dogs are nice and cuddly. Possibly the best learning effect would have been reached if the dog had bitten the trainee (which it didn’t). As it is, I predict that similar situations will happen again with this trainee…no matter how explicit the order is given.