Posted by gardenergirl on August 28, 2005, at 16:38:06
In reply to Re: extinction of behavior and negative punishment » gardenergirl, posted by alexandra_k on August 28, 2005, at 1:26:38
> - A punisher is something that reduces the frequency of behaviour.
>
> - A reinforcer is something that increases the frequency of behaviour.
>
> Ignoring someone is a negative punisher because it is taking away something that the person wants (a reinforcer) in order to extinguish the behaviour.
>
> After delivery of a reinforcer ceases the person basically gets worse for a while. The behaviour becomes more intense, more frequent, and more variable. There can be a danger in this depending on the severity of the kinds of behaviours that are being extinguished.
>
> -Punishment is not as effective as reinforcing a viable alternative behaviour. Presumably the initial behaviour led to the fulfillment of some urge (or drive reduction) and so it may be unethical to extinguish a behaviour where that leads to the unfulfillment of need.
>
> - I think that means figuring out what function the behaviour serves and working out viable alternatives.
>
> - Then one needs to actively reinforce the alternatives.
>
>
> Or at least, that would seem to be more humane to me...
>
>
Go for it! I'm certainly not an expert behaviorist, and assessing one's needs and drives via the internet would pose complications beyond which I have energy for.And meanwhile, I can choose to ignore that which I do not wish to continue so as not to reinforce that behavior.
gg
poster:gardenergirl
thread:547344
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20050828/msgs/547734.html