Getting to Yes: Clicker Training for Improved Horsemanship

by Sharon Foley

This expertly written book combines principles from clicker training with traditional horsemanship and classical dressage to improve handling and performance. Step-by-step clicker training basics are presented in easy-to-follow lessons with numerous instructional photographs that will benefit both the novice and more advanced rider in enhancing practical skills, timing, ground manners, and riding. Training and handling problems are broken down into hands-on, trainable exercises to correct behavior and riding issues with lasting results.

303 pages, Paperback

First published August 1, 2007

About the author

Sharon Foley is a lifelong student, instructor, and trainer dedicated to positive reinforcement-based training practices. Drawing from 20 years of experience with some of the best teachers in the world in the areas of clicker training, horsemanship, and classical dressage, she has developed a unique teaching style and training methodology. She currently lives in East Tennessee with her husband, where she continues her work training, teaching, and writing.

Reviews

[Kate · Rating 2 out of 5]

What Sharon Foley tries to do in Getting To Yes is to present clicker training (and positive reinforcement with food rewards) in a way that is not "scary" to conventional trainers and riders. The way she does this is by avoiding a lot of the scientific terminology or explanations that you find in other books about clicker training and most dog training books. She instead uses a lot of vague terminology with shifting meanings ("feel", "energy", etc.) that generally gives the book a very "woo"-y rather than science-based feel. Perhaps that is the better way to approach it in order to convert people who have been coming from more traditional methods, but I think that it takes away from the real benefit of clicker training and other ways of applying behavior science to training: clarity.

Yes, to have a really good understanding of applied behavior science (including clicker training), you have to learn terminology that seems overwhelming at first. Yet the same is true of any other training method. The same is true of riding and horsemanship in general. The real benefit of applying behavior science is that you are not just breaking down behaviors for the horse, but also mentally breaking things down in your own mind so that the trainer has a better understanding of how their horse is learning a new behavior. A big part of the way that this is taught is by using clearly defined and concrete terminology. "Feel" and "life energy" and terms like that just don't provide that level of clarity.

A lot of the training methods in this book are also negative reinforcement with a click and treat tacked on at the end. This is really not discussed much. I'm not one of those people who believes that negative reinforcement is inherently bad, but I think it is important to understand the difference between teaching with negative reinforcement (and adding a positive reinforcer at the end, as an additional reinforcer) and purely positive reinforcement. If your goal is LIMA (least intrusive, minimally aversive) training--which it ought to be if you're interested in clicker training--this should make you pause and think, "Is there a way I can do this with JUST positive reinforcement and avoid the need to apply pressure (necessary for negative reinforcement) all together?" For groundwork especially, the answer is usually "yes." I think when you're not really differentiating for people when you're using -R and when you're using +R, you're not going to get people who are new to this type of training asking those kinds of questions because they don't know to ask them. They don't have a good understanding of the difference. This is already a huge point of confusion among conventional trainers who don't have a good grasp of operant conditioning. This book unfortunately does not provide any clarity to that confusion.

That said, it may be a good introduction for people who are turned off or intimidated by scientific terminology.

[Christie Bogle]

My very difficult horse could really use clicker training. I've seen what it does for dogs, but I'd love to see it used on my horse.