Joined
·
10,192 Posts
We document ours as such.
1. plus sign + for a positive, unassisted response.
To be a positive, unassisted response, the handler can not know the location, or actually, if anything is even there.
2. plus sign with a circle around it (+) indicates an "assisted response" .
Assisted response indicates, the dog is obviously in odor, but either can not determine source or will not give the final response. The handler is instructed as to the exact location of the target and told to get the cue response. Counts as a miss when figuring reliability.
3. Minus sign - indicates a miss. A miss is scored if the search is completed if the search area would have been vacated without anything being found.
Reliability is easy to figure. The number of positive responses divided by the number of targets placed.
Actual searches for drug detectors is figured in a similar fashion, number of "finds" divided by the number of responses.
False responses are determined by the number of false responses divided by the number of opportunities the dog had to respond correctly.
It's really a lot easier than it seems. It's a did or didn't scenario. I've found it very useful in court. There is no appearance of smoke and mirrors or some language that only master dog trainers can understand.
DFrost
1. plus sign + for a positive, unassisted response.
To be a positive, unassisted response, the handler can not know the location, or actually, if anything is even there.
2. plus sign with a circle around it (+) indicates an "assisted response" .
Assisted response indicates, the dog is obviously in odor, but either can not determine source or will not give the final response. The handler is instructed as to the exact location of the target and told to get the cue response. Counts as a miss when figuring reliability.
3. Minus sign - indicates a miss. A miss is scored if the search is completed if the search area would have been vacated without anything being found.
Reliability is easy to figure. The number of positive responses divided by the number of targets placed.
Actual searches for drug detectors is figured in a similar fashion, number of "finds" divided by the number of responses.
False responses are determined by the number of false responses divided by the number of opportunities the dog had to respond correctly.
It's really a lot easier than it seems. It's a did or didn't scenario. I've found it very useful in court. There is no appearance of smoke and mirrors or some language that only master dog trainers can understand.
DFrost