If you've shopped around for a dog trainer, you've probably noticed they don't all do the same thing. Some use prong collars and "corrections." Others, like me, use rewards and a careful read of a dog's emotions. It can be confusing, and a lot of marketing language muddies the water. So I want to lay out, plainly, the approach I use and why, because you deserve to understand what's happening to your dog and to make an informed choice.
What "positive, science based" actually means
I follow an approach often summarized as LIMA: Least Intrusive, Minimally Aversive. In practice, that means I lean on reward based methods, reinforcing the behaviors we want, removing the payoff for behaviors we don't, and addressing the underlying emotions and environment driving a dog's choices, rather than punishing the dog into compliance. The goal is to teach a dog what to do, not just to suppress what we don't like.
This isn't a soft or permissive style, and it isn't about endless treats with no structure. It's about getting reliable results in the way the evidence says works best and harms least.
What the science says
This isn't just my personal preference. The American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (AVSAB), a group of veterinarians and doctoral level behaviorists, reviewed the research and concluded that reward based methods should be used for all dog training, including serious behavior problems. Their position is direct: aversive tools and techniques, things like shock collars, prong collars, choke chains, and harsh corrections, can damage both a dog's welfare and the bond between dog and owner, and there's no evidence they work better than reward based methods in any context.
Studies have found that dogs trained with aversive methods tend to show more stress related behavior, and over time can become more fearful, less playful, and in some cases more aggressive, with weaker trust in their handler. In other words, the punishment based shortcut often creates new problems while suppressing the old one.
The dominance myth, retired
You've probably heard that you must be the "alpha" and dominate your dog so they don't dominate you. This idea, drawn from outdated and since discredited studies of captive wolves, has been thoroughly walked back by behavior science. AVSAB and others have specifically refuted the notion that dog training should revolve around establishing dominance or pack hierarchy. Most behavior people read as a dog "being dominant", pulling, guarding, jumping, ignoring you, is far better explained by instinct, emotion, excitement, fear, or simply not having been taught yet. Treating a frightened or untrained dog as a rival to be subdued tends to make things worse, not better.
What this looks like for your dog
With a reward based approach, your dog learns because good choices pay off, which makes them eager to participate rather than braced for a correction. We can build real, durable behaviors while keeping your dog confident and your relationship intact. And when we hit something tougher, reactivity, fear, guarding, we address the feeling underneath it instead of just slapping a lid on the symptom, which is what actually produces lasting change.
Why it matters who you hire
Not every trainer works this way, and the label "balanced" often means aversive tools are still on the table. You have every right to ask a trainer directly what methods and equipment they use, and a good one will answer clearly. My commitment is simple: I'll get you results using methods that are humane, evidence based, and kind to the dog you love. That's not a tradeoff. According to the research, it's the most effective path there is.