Does someones personality dictate how they train their dog?

Do you think someone with a mild, passive personality is likely to use more positive reinforcement with their dog than someone with a more forceful personality? Would you find it odd if they preferred a more 'old school' type training?Would you be surprised at a dominant type person using very mild methods to train their dog?Or do you think their personality wouldn't really come into it?..It would be based more on how well they think each method works from an entirely intellectual point of view?

I'm a generally very laid back person, but I still use stern commands to correct my puppy when he does something I consider 'bad'. Personality can contribute to the methods that the person uses, but you should NEVER use negativity (other than words) to correct a dog. Positive reinforcement tells the dog that he is doing something right. Negative reinforcement just says that you're dominant and he's submissive, and he'll get confused.

I trained my dogs very mildly, whats the point in not doing so. Fear is the wrong way to train anything. I am Alpha male in my pack and they know it. Both my, and my dogs, personalities come into effect every day in training and in play. Be kind and masterful and you will have a friend for life.

I've always thought that the way you were disciplined as a child reflects the way that you'll train your animal. People who's parents were too lenient will usually fail to properly discipline their dogs because they have no sense of structure. Parents who were overly strict will teach their children that the only way is the RIGHT way-- which produces a much harsher training environment for the dog [these people are usually the smacking, nose-rubbing folks].It has been shown, however, that the dog usually directly mirrors the owner, aggressive personalities=aggressive dogs, passive personalities=passive dogs. But again, that could [as you proposed] directly relate to the way the dogs were trained.

Oh, Im sure personality is a big part of it.In my case, I like puzzles. I dont mind spending time trying to figure out different ways to get a dog to respond. I see a problem dog as a puzzle to be solved, and I enjoy solving it. A lot of people dont..On the other hand, I bought a DVD on marker training, and while I found some of the concepts useful, I also found that having a dog so intently focused on treats and on me to be very unappealing.Obviously many people feel differently.I believe that people should do what is right, without expectation of reward, and I tend to expect that from my dogs as well.

I'm a very laid back person. I train my dogs using different methods, depending on the dog. For instance, a Chihuahua and Doberman have very different drives.I sure can't use the same on one as the other. .When I had GSD, Doberman, and Afghan hound, they still needed different training disciplines.Once I hit the right motivator/communication, we've got it made.Dog training isn't a 'one size fits all'.Added:I don't think dogs reflect their owners. Owners may choose breeds that reflect themselves, but just as often, opposites attract. I am a friendly and hospitable person. My Dobermans were anything BUT..My GSD was ever watchful for a reason to confront..My Afghans are wary and aloof, my Terrier is cautious, my Chihuahua loves anyone that sits down.

I think training techniques are more often dictated by personal beliefs, and not personality types. For instance, I am a very strong personality type, but a big fan of non-confrontational methods that do not involve physical correction of any kind. That does not make me a laid back person-it was a decision made after investigating other methods and matching them to my personal beliefs of how animals should be respected and treated.

Yes it does...and NO, it should not. Training should be based on the DOG'S temperament, not the human who's training the dog's temperament. Most people are weak. Soft. Which is why most people on here will choose Victoria Stillwell over Ceasar Milan when it comes to their methods (I'm using them as an example simply because they're very well known to even common folk). Their both crap BUT Ceasar uses corrections, Victoria doesn't, therefore Ceasar is "mean" and Victoria is doing things very PETA friendly (minus the PETA psychos who think owning animals is "slavery"). Corrections are a must and when comparing their two..."techniques" Ceasar's clearly WORK BETTER simply because he has half an ounce worth of understanding in the department that ALL DOGS NEED CORRECTIONS. I was against clicker/marker training in the late 90's because the clicker purists didn't believe in corrections, it wasn't until Michael Ellis showed how to use both marker/clicker training AND corrections that I swallowed my words and began using his techniques myself (because they fricken work...great). The original clicker purist came from training whales and dolphins and parrots...well you can't correct either of the three, their not animals who use corrections on each other, dogs DO give corrections to each other...furthermore dogs do indeed NEED corrections to be fully trained animals. My dogs never disobey...but I've seen several killer whales drag zoo goers to the bottom of their tanks by the leg on "When Animals Attack"...enough said.-edit- See? I hadn't read any of the answers until I answered myself and you see what Chetco said in the first 2 lines about training the dog based on it's temperament and drives? Tada!!! Every good trainer knows it's the dog's temperament that matters, not their own!!! My point is proven *hats off to Chetco*

I think skill level and experience is really what dictates how a person trains their dogs.People with a high skill level and lots of experience are able to very effectively match the type of training necessary to the dog they are working.People who are less experienced and therefor less aware of their own actions as well as the effects of their methods on a dog will be less able to modify their 'personality' to match the dog. Largely because they simply don't know how.I am generally a loud, laid back, relatively outspoken and boisterous person... and yet I am able to modify my 'personality' as well as my own body language when I work with very soft dogs. In fact, because it causes me to remove myself from my normal state of being, I actually tend to prefer soft and 'damaged' dogs. I've become very good at working with them.

Dogs can sense your type of personality by what you allow him/her to do. They will play that against you if you are not consistent.

It shouldn't, but I believe it plays a big role. I also think that most females are more patient, tolerant and accepting of bad behavior than men are. Don't get me wrong. There are many, many women that know and do properly train their dogs. I am just referring to the majority.