Latency

Latency to respond decreased across all three training phases, supporting the hypothesis that Josie would demonstrate learning through positive reinforcement shaping. The largest decrease in latency occurred during the Pick Up phase, where average latency decreased from 101.4 seconds on Day 1 to 2.4 seconds on Day 3. Similar improvements were observed during the Drop phase, with average latency decreasing from 26.3 seconds to 0 seconds. Although the Toy in Bin phase remained the most difficult task, latency still decreased significantly from 102.1 seconds on Day 6 to 78.2 seconds on Day 10. These findings suggest that repeated exposure to the training task and reinforcement of correct behaviors improved Josie’s ability to complete the requested behaviors more efficiently over time. Reward-based training methods have been shown to effectively improve learning and training performance in dogs, supporting the results observed in this study (Castro et al., 2021). Additionally, response latency has been widely used as a measure of behavioral performance and learning in canine cognition studies (Starling et al., 2014).

Task Completion

Task completion success generally increased throughout training and further supports the hypothesis that learning occurred. Success rates increased from 50% to 100% during the Pick Up phase and from 80% to 100% during the Drop phase. While the Toy in Bin phase had lower overall success rates, performance still improved compared to the beginning of the phase. The lower success rates observed during the Toy in Bin phase likely reflect the increased complexity of the task, as Josie was required to combine several previously learned behaviors into a single behavioral sequence. Research has shown that canine learning performance is influenced by task complexity and previous training experience, with more complex behaviors often requiring additional training sessions to achieve mastery (Bognár et al., 2023; Stevens et al., 2021). Although the final behavior was not consistently mastered, the observed improvements suggest continued learning throughout the study.

Engagement

Engagement duration remained relatively consistent throughout the training period, indicating that Josie maintained interest in the training sessions. Average engagement ranged from 14.0 to 17.6 minutes across training phases. The highest engagement levels were observed during the Toy in Bin phase, which was also the most challenging task. This may indicate that more time and effort were required to perform the behavior successfully. Despite occasional distractions, Josie generally remained motivated to participate in the training sessions and complete the requested tasks. Previous research has suggested that positive reinforcement training can improve both learning outcomes and willingness to participate in training activities, helping maintain motivation during repeated training sessions (Castro et al., 2021). The continued engagement observed in this study is consistent with those findings.

Limitations 

Several limitations should be considered when interpreting the results of this study. First, only one dog was used, limiting the ability to generalize the findings to dogs with different breeds, ages, personalities, and training histories. Second, the study was conducted over a relatively short period of ten days. Additional training sessions may have resulted in greater improvements, particularly during the Toy in Bin phase where complete mastery of the behavior was not achieved. Third, environmental distractions occasionally influenced performance. Household distractions, including interactions with a resident cat and periods of reduced attention, likely affected latency, engagement duration, and task completion success during some training sessions. Finally, because this study focused on a single training objective, the results may not fully represent how dogs learn other types of behaviors. Future studies involving additional dogs and longer training periods would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the effectiveness of positive reinforcement shaping (Stevens et al., 2021; Bognár et al., 2023).