Characterization and implementation of YoIP, a novel dog-training modality
This is merely an abstract, which you can view for free—only because I’m feeling generous. In order to view the full text, to which you do not yet have access, even if your institution subscribes to this publication, you will need to order the article, which will cost you dearly. My sincerest apologies. Sucks for you.
Background
It is widely accepted that dogs bark on occasion, and those that bark excessively or inconveniently may ultimately cause societal strains between their owners and owners’ neighbors, especially in densely populated habitations. A vast array of products have been introduced to limit barking, including but not limited to electrostatic stimulation (”shock”) collars, ultrasonic feedback collars and wall units, and collars emitting irritating but harmless chemicals, such as citronella. However, few of these products exhibit sufficient efficacies as to warrant their worry-free use, and significant data, both predicted and anecdotal, exists to suggest that some owners never cease to think about the potential harm a barking dog in the home could cause during working hours. Methods
Two Apple computers (one Powerbook and one MacBook Pro), each equipped with built-in speakers and microphones, wireless internet capability, and iChat, an instant messaging client, were used in the study, which—it is appropriate to mention here—was neither “scientific” nor “a study” whatsoever. The Powerbook, hereafter referred to as the home computer, was set up two feet from a crate containing Charles T. O’Hara, an English-type yellow labrador retriever and probably the coolest dog in the world, save for the barking, prior to normal working hours when the owners were planning to be absent from the home. Prior to the study, the iChat client was modified to automatically accept incoming audio and video chats using an Apple script (macosxhints.com, probably somewhere in California, USA) and opened, and the volume was set to 100%. The MacBook Pro, hereafter referred to as the remote computer, was brought to a remote location approximately six miles to the south of the home computer and connected wirelessly to a network. Upon opening iChat, an audio chat was initiated with the home computer, which was automatically accepted, and the chat was muted with respect to the remote computer so that the home computer could not hear the remote location. In this fashion, the remote computer could be used to monitor the sound environment of the home location. As needed, one-way video chats were additionally initiated by the remote computer and similarly muted. Also as needed, in both audio and video modes, the remote location was unmuted to allow its user to remotely reprimand Charles.
Results
Because the test subject had endured the use of all previously mentioned modalities of barking cessation previously, he undoubtedly was at least partially rehabilitated prior to the commencement of the study. Nevertheless, this modality unquestionably worked (p<0.000046). Over a two-day test period, during which the test subject whined often and barked occasionally, remote vocal reprimanding markedly reduced subsequent barking for a substantial period of time, which increased with subsequent vocal reprimands. Similar soothing effects were seen with remote visual reprimanding using video chat capability. Overall, this trial moved Charles from the category of probably the coolest dog in the world to definitely the coolest dog in the world and increased his coolness quotient (CQ) by 26%* (n=1, * denotes p<0.05).
Discussion
Dog barking has been a major problem for millennia and probably since the inception of Earth only a handful of centuries before that. In this vein, I have devised a system for remote reprimanding of one’s dog while at the workplace involving yelling over internet protocol, or YoIP. This system is similar to common voice over internet protocol (VoIP) applications, with the major differences being that in this system, one party is a dog, making the conversation primarily one-sided; and that the amplitude with which one speaks is significantly louder, usually qualifying as yelling. Additional differences would include the significant limitation of the observed vocabulary using this system, which largely involves the use of phrases such as “no,” personal identifiers such as “Charlie,” and “SHUT THE HELL UP” (emphasis denoted based on actual conversations). During video use, certain facial expressions were often present, such as characteristic lowering of the eyebrows, that are typically not employed during conventional VoIP use.
Reprints of this
Charlie, Owner of. Characterization and implementation of YoIP, a novel dog-training modality. Aequanimitas. 2007;1(and only):1-46.
I LOVE this idea. We have a barker as well (we call it the ‘barkathon’ when she goes berzerk), and a neighbor threatened to ‘have our dog removed’ by the police once for her 10 minutes of incessant barking (the removal threat was a great laugh for us).
We’re going to try your experiment! If only the iPhone had iChat capability already…
You should definitely try it, in my professional, scientific opinion. Once, our neighbor threatened to file a complaint to the apartment board for his “all day” of incessant barking, which in reality was about 6 hours total. Geez, chill out people! It’s just a little barking that makes you want to kill yourself after five minutes! Get over it! Six hours, schmix hours!