Theory: Evidence-based Dog Training

Evidence-based dog training means evaluating the likelihood of a claim about dog behavior critically. This involves carefully examining the available evidence, such as scientific research and studies, before accepting or rejecting a claim. It emphasizes the importance of using objective and reliable information to inform training methods and decisions, rather than relying on personal opinions or anecdotal evidence. By critically evaluating claims, trainers can make more informed choices and ensure that their training methods are based on reliable evidence and proven effectiveness.

Evidence-based dog training means that we learn what makes a source of information reliable and only gather our information from the most reliable sources available. This approach ensures that the training methods and techniques used are based on scientific evidence and proven to be effective. It emphasizes the importance of using reliable sources such as research studies, reputable experts, and professional organizations in order to make informed decisions about dog training. By relying on credible information, we can provide the best possible training for dogs.

It is totally OK if you are not comfortable reading scientific research. But then don't pretend you do as this opens the school to ridicule.

In order to act in an evidence-based way, it is important to acknowledge when you do not have an answer to a question. Instead of providing a false or uncertain answer, it is best to inform the client that their point or question is interesting and that you will conduct further research to provide them with an accurate response. This approach demonstrates honesty, integrity, and a commitment to providing reliable information based on evidence rather than making assumptions or guesses.

The answer explains that the OhMyDog method does not exist. Instead, they have ethical, commercial, and methodological guidelines that they follow. They believe that having a fixed trademarked method would discourage them from adapting to new evidence and best practices. Therefore, they rely on well-established guidelines and research to ensure reliability and efficiency.

The following are false because:
- Scientists say: What a scientist says is neither here nor there. That doesn't lend any merit to a claim.
- Science/Research says: Science/research does not have a definitive position on anything. It is a method to get as close to reality as possible
- It is scientifically proven that: Nothing is definitively scientifically proven. e.v.e.r. The best we can get to is that an overwhelming weight of evidence backs up a particular claim

Evidence-based dog training means that we acquire the ability to identify misleading or false information and recognize warning signs that indicate a claim may not be credible. Additionally, even if there are several indicators of potential misinformation, we still consider the client's reported positive outcomes resulting from the intervention as significant evidence.

Evidence-based means that we provide transparent reasoning behind our advice and interventions. We do not rely on the authority of being a professional to gain trust from clients, but instead, we back up our conclusions with facts and evidence. This approach ensures that clients are informed and can trust the advice they receive.

The incorrect statement is "It makes us sound like scientists, which is central to our marketing strategy." This statement suggests that sounding like scientists is the main focus of OhMyDog's marketing strategy, which is not true. The importance of evidence-based practice at OhMyDog lies in protecting clients from inefficient interventions and providing reliable information, not in sounding like scientists.

The correct answer is a list of information sources, sorted in order of how reliable the information they provide is likely to be. This means that the pyramid of evidence is a hierarchy of sources, with the most reliable sources at the top and the least reliable sources at the bottom. This helps individuals prioritize and evaluate the credibility of different sources when seeking information.

CAM stands for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. It refers to a diverse set of healthcare practices, products, and therapies that are not considered part of conventional medicine. Complementary medicine is used alongside conventional medicine, while alternative medicine is used instead of conventional medicine. CAM includes practices such as acupuncture, herbal medicine, chiropractic, naturopathy, and homeopathy. These approaches are often used to promote wellness, prevent and treat diseases, and enhance overall well-being. CAM is becoming increasingly popular as people seek more holistic and natural approaches to healthcare.

The phrase "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" suggests that when someone makes a claim that is highly unusual or extraordinary, they need to provide evidence that is equally extraordinary in order to support their claim. Ordinary evidence may not be sufficient to convince others of the truth of the extraordinary claim. This principle emphasizes the need for strong and compelling evidence when making extraordinary assertions.

A logical fallacy refers to an error in our reasoning process that causes us to arrive at incorrect or invalid conclusions. It occurs when there is a flaw in the logical structure of an argument or when irrelevant information is used to support a claim. Logical fallacies can be unintentional mistakes or deliberate manipulations used to deceive or persuade others. By understanding and identifying logical fallacies, we can improve our critical thinking skills and avoid being misled by faulty reasoning.

"We believe that..." is based on the False Balance fallacy. There aren't necessarily always two sides to a story any more than there are necessarily five or six sides. Reality isn't open to opinion or debate. The only 'side' worth weighing up on hot topic issues, is the one enjoying the heaviest weight of evidence.

A cognitive bias refers to a misleading psychological assumption or an unconscious mental shortcut that can lead us to incorrect conclusions. It is a deviation from rationality or objective judgment, often influenced by factors such as personal experiences, emotions, or social influences. These biases can affect our decision-making process and lead to errors in judgment or reasoning.

It might be more polite and socially acceptable, but it is not a virtue. It won't lead you to the right conclusions.

not-available-via-ai

The given answer is incorrect because it does not explain why post hoc ergo procter hoc is a logical fallacy. Post hoc ergo procter hoc is a fallacy because it assumes that just because one event happened before another, the first event caused the second event. This is misleading because there could be other factors or causes that contributed to the outcome, and simply assuming causation based on temporal sequence is flawed reasoning. The incorrect answer provided does not address this aspect of the fallacy.

A sharp bullshit detector recognizes that our judgment and assumptions as humans are influenced by logical fallacies and cognitive biases. Logical fallacies are errors in reasoning that can lead to false conclusions, while cognitive biases are inherent biases in our thinking processes that can distort our perception of reality. By being aware of these flaws, a sharp bullshit detector can help us identify and reject false or misleading information. Strong opinions, although they can sometimes be influenced by logical fallacies and cognitive biases, are not explicitly mentioned as factors in the given explanation.

The terms "Natural," "Chemical," and "Energy" are considered bullshit red flags in jargon. These words are often used in a vague or misleading manner, lacking specific meaning or context. They can be used to make claims sound more impressive or scientific without providing any real substance. This is a red flag because it suggests that the speaker may be using these terms to manipulate or deceive the audience.

The given answer correctly identifies the claims that are pseudoscientific or disputable. The claims that organic food lends demonstrable and significant health benefits, raw food carries no health risk and has significant health benefits, gluten carries significant health risks, and genetically modified food carries significant health risks are all disputable and lack scientific consensus. These claims are often based on personal beliefs or anecdotal evidence rather than rigorous scientific research.

The topics considered CAM in this question are Homeopathy, Reiki, Chiropractics, Most over the counter herbs (except for Valerian- and St John's Wart-based herbs, among others), Tellington Touch massages, Anti-vaccination movement, and Osteopathy. These practices are considered complementary and alternative medicine because they are not widely accepted or supported by scientific evidence. They may rely on anecdotal evidence or personal beliefs rather than rigorous scientific scrutiny.