I could philosophize about this topic for hours – the concept of „no” in animal training is one of my absolute favorite subjects. It is so much more than simply the non-execution of a behavior. A „no” is information. Communication. And a valuable moment of agency for the animal.
In this context, I’d like to quote myself:
„Freedom starts where ‘no’ is a valid option.”
In positive reinforcement training, that means a „no” isn’t just allowed – it’s an essential part of genuine dialogue. Because anything that isn’t a clear „yes” can be a potential „no.” And a „no” doesn’t necessarily mean “never.” More often, it means “not right now” or “maybe later.” It can manifest in subtle signals: a hesitation, a brief glance to the side, a change in posture, or simply the absence of a response.
This piece, however, is not about the obvious “no’s” – such as leaving a session, calming signals, or clear signs of stress. Those should be well-known and naturally recognized and respected. Rather, I want to focus on how we handle “no” in training as a whole – especially the less obvious forms that are often overlooked.
Listening is the first step toward cooperation – and it starts with the default behavior
I often observe that a „no” is only recognized when the animal is already showing clear signs of discomfort. In my view, this is not only due to a lack of understanding of body language, but also because the foundational aspects of training are often undervalued. While a lot of attention is given to advanced concepts like start buttons or other cooperative protocols, real choice and controlControl (Kontrolle) ist ein fundamentales Grundbedürfnis, da sie einem Individuum die Möglichkeit gibt, aktiv Einfluss auf seine Umwelt und sein eigenes Verhalten zu nehmen. Kontrolle bedeutet, dass Handlungen vorhersehbare und... » Weiterlesen begins much earlier – with clearly established behaviors and reliable stimulusEin Reiz, häufig auch Stimulus genannt, ist eine äußere oder innere Einwirkung, die ein Lebewesen wahrnimmt und die eine Reaktion auslösen kann, aber nicht muss. Reize können aus der Umwelt... » Weiterlesen control. For me, „no” is a natural part of this concept.
The most basic element of „choice and control,” in my experience, is a solid default or fallback behavior. With horses, I often use: „stand still – four feet on the ground, nose forward.” This behavior comes before any cue. When the horse offers this default position, it tells me, without words, that it is ready and willing to engage – and only then do I proceed with the next cue.
Of course, this behavior can vary depending on the context – no one would cue a canter transition from a standstill, for example. But when the default behaviorEin Default Behavior (Basisverhalten) ist ein Verhalten, das ein Tier von sich aus zeigt, wenn es unsicher ist, welche Reaktion gerade gefragt ist. Es dient als eine Art „Standardeinstellung“ oder... » Weiterlesen is an integral part of the training structure, I can already tell by the way it is offered whether the animal is ready or unsure about the situation. Similar to other cooperative cues trained for this purpose, the animal starts to associate: when I offer this baseline behavior, a cue will follow. If the same behavior is offered repeatedly, it may be a situational „no“ – either to the upcoming behavior or to the overall setting. And if the default behavior stops appearing altogether, that’s a clear and valuable “no” to me.
The default behavior serves not only as a preparation for action, but also as a communication strategy and safety mechanism. When an animal has learned that offering this behavior is a valid way to signalEin Signal ist ein Zeichen oder Reiz, der für das Tier eine Bedeutung hat und ein Verhalten auslöst oder einen emotionalen Status hervorruft. Es zeigt dem Tier an, dass es... » Weiterlesen uncertainty or to pause the process, it doesn’t need to fall back on more intense or risky strategies. Instead, it relies on a known and reinforced alternative – a behavior that is heard and acknowledged.
That’s why the default behavior carries the strongest reinforcement history in my training. I reinforce it consistently, even when it’s not followed by the desired behavior. If I didn’t, choosing the default over the cued behavior could become a disadvantage, and the animal might stop offering it altogether. This could create what’s known as an “avoidance-approach conflict,” a situation in which an individual is torn between the desire to approach something rewarding and the simultaneous desire to avoid something potentially aversiveAversiv beschreibt etwas, das als unangenehm oder abstoßend wahrgenommen wird und das ein Lebewesen vermeiden möchte. Ein aversiver Reiz kann physisch, sensorisch oder sozial sein. Beispiele: • Ein Pferd kann... » Weiterlesen in that same situation. But by recognizing this moment of “not now” and adjusting accordingly, I’m not rewarding a failure – I’m reinforcing the animal’s choice to stay in communication. And that, in turn, strengthens cooperation. If necessary, training can be paused at this point to reassess the current strategy, and the horse can be released from the session – ideally with access to pause resources, so that stepping out of training carries no unpleasant consequences.
Clear cues create clarity – and space for cooperation
Another key factor in recognizing and responding to a “no” is stimulus control. Many people underestimate how much unclear cues can disrupt the training process. Often, well-meaning people let things slide in daily interactions, thinking they’re giving their animal more freedom. Others believe that 100% reliability isn’t necessary outside of formal settings. While that may be true in some cases, precise stimulus control is essential in training. I can only recognize when something is off if I know how my animal normally performs a behavior – promptPromptheit – Die Reaktionszeit auf ein Signal und ihre Bedeutung im Training Promptheit beschreibt, wie schnell und zuverlässig ein Tier auf ein gegebenes Signal reagiert. Sie gibt Aufschluss darüber, ob... » Weiterlesen, consistent, and clean.
Stimulus control isn’t just about a correct response to a cue; it also requires the behavior to be generalized – meaning the animal can perform it reliably across various conditions. If a behavior only shows up in ideal situations, I can’t know whether a “no” in another context is truly a choice or simply a reflection of the animal not being able to follow through.
Reliable stimulus control means that a behavior can be performed confidently in different environments, under different conditions, and despite distractions. That’s what allows me to interpret the animal’s response accurately. A delayed, changed, or absent response isn’t just a training mistake – it’s information. And it’s worth listening to.
In fact, one could argue that stimulus control in positive reinforcement training is closer to suggestion than command. Even though we cue a behavior deliberately, it’s still an invitation – not a demand. The animal chooses whether to accept it. That’s what makes stimulus control so powerful: it’s rooted not in pressure, but in clarity, motivationMotivation ist der innere Antrieb, der ein Lebewesen dazu veranlasst, ein bestimmtes Verhalten zu zeigen. Sie entsteht durch die Erwartung, ein Bedürfnis zu befriedigen oder eine Konsequenz zu vermeiden. Motivation... » Weiterlesen, and a communication structure built on predictability and trust.
This illustrates just how interconnected stimulus control, cooperation, and the idea of “no” really are. True cooperation is only possible if the animal has the freedom to decline. But for that freedom to be real, the cue must be clear. The animal must know what’s being asked of it in order to make a conscious choice – whether to participate or not.
From the horse’s point of view, reliability in training doesn’t just mean recognizing a cue. It also means knowing what to expect if it responds – and what to expect if it doesn’t. Only when the horse understands what behavior is being requested and can predict the outcome of that choice can it truly engage in mutual communication. In this context, a “no” isn’t confusion or resistance – it’s an informed response in a clear and mutual dialogue.
So, the quality of our communication isn’t just about how consistently a behavior is performed. It’s also about how clearly we recognize and respect the absence of a response as a valid part of the dialogue.
Cooperative concepts work best when built on solid foundations
Cooperative cues like start buttons, consent behaviors, or stationary targets in medical trainingMedical Training bezeichnet das gezielte Training von medizinischen und Pflege Behandlungen, um dem Tier zu ermöglichen, freiwillig und kooperativ an Untersuchungen, Behandlungen und Pflegemaßnahmen teilzunehmen. Es wird häufig mit positiver... » Weiterlesen undoubtedly play an important role in modern animal training – and it’s easy to see why they’re so appealing. They give animals an active role in the process and bring communication to a new level. However, in the excitement over these advanced concepts, the foundational elements are too often forgotten. Many trainers are genuinely enthusiastic about these techniques – and rightly so – but in their enthusiasm, the basics can unintentionally slip out of focus.
The truth is, even the clearest cooperative concepts can only work reliable if they’re built on a solid foundation. Body language, default behavior, stimulus control – all of these need to be clearly established beforehand. Without that, we often encounter situations where the animal seems to be saying “no” to a specific task, when in reality, the “no” began much earlier – perhaps with an unclear start buttonEin Start-Button ist ein trainiertes Verhalten als eine Art Kooperationssignal, mit dem das Tier aktiv signalisiert, dass es bereit ist, eine bestimmte Handlung oder Prozedur zu beginnen. Es gibt dem... » Weiterlesen, a process the animal didn’t fully understand, or simply because it didn’t grasp what was being asked.
In these situations, the “no” isn’t a rejection of the cooperative behavior itself. Instead, it’s a response to confusion, uncertainty, or overwhelm rooted in missing or inconsistent foundations. That’s why I believe cooperative concepts only make sense once the basics are truly in place.
Of course, there are exceptions – such as when time constraints require focusing on specific behaviors. But for most everyday training situations, one thing remains true: without a solid foundation, there can be no genuine choice.
Structure creates clarity – and leaves space for saying “no”
My response to a “no” always depends on the context. If a behavior that’s normally well established won’t be performed, I’ll usually cue it a second time. If the animal still doesn’t respond, I begin a first round of reflection. With a thoroughly trained behavior, a second missed cue is often enough to count as a clear “no.”
Sometimes the behavior is still offered – but with hesitation, reduced intensity, or in a noticeably different quality. In these cases, I don’t necessarily interrupt the session right away, but I shift into a more observant and reflective mode. These nuanced responses are often easy to overlook, yet they can reveal a great deal. Many of them occur quietly, almost imperceptibly, within the natural rhythm of a session – intuitive, fluid, and deeply connected to the moment.
Ultimately, every “no” might be a sign that something in the process isn’t quite aligned. And that’s exactly what makes it so meaningful: it encourages me, as a trainer, to reflect on my planning, communication, and overall approach – not as a failure, but as an opportunity to grow. In this way, the “no” becomes an invitation to pause, rethink, and refine.
One thought that’s especially important to me: in positive reinforcement training, there is rarely a need for “no” – at least not from the animal’s perspective. Unlike in traditional training approaches with negative reinforcement, where avoidance is often a functional strategy, a “no” in R+Positive Verstärkung (R+) ist eine Methode der operanten Konditionierung, bei der ein angenehmer Reiz hinzugefügt wird, um die Wahrscheinlichkeit eines bestimmten Verhaltens zu erhöhen. Das Tier lernt, dass ein bestimmtes... » Weiterlesen usually points to something that isn’t working in the setup or the context. And that’s something I can change.
When that happens, I typically review three key areas:
– the cue: Was the signal clear, timely, and appropriate for the context?
– the motivation: Is the reinforcer still meaningful? Is the environment distracting or aversive?
– physical or emotional causes: Could pain, discomfort, or emotional overwhelm be interfering?
Some typical examples: A horse might respond with hesitation or delay because the cue was poorly timed, or because the setup was slightly different from what it’s used to. Refusal might stem from soreness after previous exertion, or simply because the horse is tired, overstimulated, or not hungry enough to value the usual reward. Even small changes – like a new training surface or a shift in body language – can tip the balance.
Noticing these patterns helps me adjust training with more awareness, empathy, and clarity.
I often remind myself of the phrase: “A mistake is just information” – and it applies to the trainer, not the animal. This is where the concept of “no” and what we might interpret as a “mistake” intersect. A “no” isn’t a mistake in the traditional sense – the animal hasn’t done anything wrong. Instead, it offers me valuable feedback: it may point to gaps in communication, weaknesses in the training setup, or external factors I’ve missed. In that sense, a “no” becomes an opportunity to reflect, learn, and adjust my approach with greater clarity.
How deeply I go into this analysis depends on the situation. Sometimes a brief pause is enough; other times, more reflection is needed. Over time, I’ve developed a personal sequence for this – and much of it has become intuitive with experience.
In some cases, it’s helpful to have a structured approach. One tool I rely on is my “Troubleshooting Flowchart” – a decision-making aid that helps me stay focused during tricky training moments and evaluate which adjustments might be helpful. You can download the flowchart PDF here: Troubleshooting with R+.
If you’d like to dive deeper into this topic, I also talked about my approach in a podcast episode with Ryan Cartlidge on the Animal Training Academy Podcast. You’ll find it here: ATA Podcast
When “no” opens the door to cooperation and trust
At the heart of it all is this idea: In positive reinforcement training, the animal doesn’t need to understand that it has “made a mistake.” From its perspective, there are no mistakes – only behavior that serves a purpose. When an animal says “no,” it is also expressing a “yes” – a yes to safety, to retreat, to autonomy, or to a need that may have gone unnoticed.
A “no” gives us the opportunity to build long-term trust and genuine cooperation. Every time we choose not to ignore or override a “no,” but instead meet it with curiosity and respect, we’re telling the animal: I see you. I’m listening. Your perspective matters. That’s how true dialogue begins – grounded in mutual understanding. And for me, that’s the essence of a strong, trusting training relationship. Not because everything goes smoothly all the time, but because even the rough patches have their place.
And that’s what makes this kind of training so meaningful to me: it’s not just a chain of cues and responses. It’s a dialogue – one where listening sometimes matters more than speaking. Where a “no” isn’t the end of progress, but the start of real connection.
When we begin to hear even the quietest “no,” training becomes more than effective – it becomes more conscious, more cooperative – and grounded in mutual respect.
Ich stecke viel Herz und Zeit in das Schreiben meiner Artikel, um wertvolle Informationen rund um positive VerstärkungSiehe Verstärkung, positive, » Weiterlesen und pferdefreundliches Training bereitzustellen. Wenn dir dieser Beitrag gefallen hat, würde ich mich riesig freuen, wenn du ihn teilst – als kleines Dankeschön und damit noch mehr Menschen von diesem Wissen profitieren können.