OPERANT BEHAVIOR

Not for lack of something better to do, but I thought you folks might find this area of my current read interesting.  Therefore I have typed it out for your perusal.  If there are any typos, oh well.

SCIENCE AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR by B.F. SKINNER

CHAPTER V

OPERANT BEHAVIOR

WHAT EVENTS ARE REINFORCING

Page 72

In dealing with your fellow men in everyday life and in the clinic and laboratory, we may need to know just how reinforcing a specific event is.  We often begin by noting the extent to which our own behavior is reinforced by the same event.  This practice frequently miscarries; yet it is still commonly believed that reinforcers can be identified apart from their effects upon a particular organism.  As the term is used here, however, the only defining characteristic of a reinforcing stimulus is that it reinforces.

The only way to tell whether or not a given event is reinforcing (page 73) to a given organism under given conditions it is to make a direct test.  We observe the frequency of a selected response, then make an event contingent upon it and observe any changes in frequency.  If there is a change, we classify the event as reinforcing to the organism under the existing conditions.  There is nothing circular about classifying events in terms of their effects, the criterion is both empirical and objective.  It would be circular, however, if we then went on to assert that a given event strengthens and operant because it is reinforcing.  We achieve a certain success in guessing at reinforcing powers only because we have in a sense made a crude survey; we have gauged the reinforcing effect of a stimulus upon ourselves and assume the same effect upon others.  We are successful only when we resemble the organism under study and when we have correctly surveyed our own behavior.

Events which are found to be reinforcing are of two sorts.  Some reinforcements consist of presenting stimuli, of adding something–for example, food, water, or sexual contact–to the situation.  These we call positive reinforcers.  Others consist of removing something–for example, a loud noise, a very bright light, extreme cold or heat, or electric shock—from the situation.  These we call negative reinforcers.  In both cases the effect of reinforcement is the same–the probability of response is increased.  We cannot avoid this distinction by arguing that what is reinforcing in the negative case is the absence of the bright light, loud noise, and so on; for it is absence after presence which is effective, and this is only another way of saying that the stimulus is removed.  The difference between the two cases will be clearer when we consider the presentation of a negative reinforcer or the removal of a positive.  These are the consequences which we call punishment (Chapter XII).

A survey of the events which reinforce a given individual is often required in the practical application of operant conditioning.  In every field in which human behavior figures prominently–education–government, the family, the clinic, industry, art, literature, and so on–we are constantly changing probabilities of response by arranging reinforcing consequences.  The industrialist who wants employees to work consistently and without absenteeism must make certain that (Page 74) their behavior is suitably reinforced–not only with wages but with suitable working conditions.  The girl who wants another date must be sure that her friend’s behavior in inviting her and in keeping the appointment is suitably reinforced.  To teach a child to read or sing or play a game effectively, we must work out a program of educational reinforcement in which appropriate responses “pay off” frequently.  If the patient is to return for further counsel, the psychotherapist must make sure that the behavior of coming to him is in some measure reinforced.

We evaluate the strength of reinforcing events when we attempt to discover what someone is “getting out of life.”  What consequences are responsible for his present repertoire and for the relative frequencies of the response in it?  His responses to various topics of conversation tell us something, but his everyday behavior is a better guide.  We infer important reinforcers from nothing more unusual than his “interest” in a writer who deals with certain subjects, in stores or museums which exhibit certain objects, in friends who participate in certain kinds of behavior, in restaurants which serve certain kinds of food, and so on.  The “interest” refers to the probability which results, at least in part, from the consequences of the behavior of “taking an interest.”  We may be more nearly sure of the importance of a reinforcer if we watch the behavior come and go as the reinforcer is alternately supplied and withheld, for the change in probability is then less likely to be due to an incidental change of some other sort.  The behavior of associating with a particular friend varies as the friend varies in supplying reinforcement.  If we observe this covariation, we may then be fairly sure of “what this friendship means” or “what our subject sees in his friend.”

This technique of evaluation may be improved for use in clinical and laboratory investigation.  A direct inventory may be made by allowing a subject to look at an assortment of pictures and recording the time he spends on each.  The behavior of looking at a picture is reinforced by what is seen in it.  Looking at one picture may be more strongly reinforced than looking at another, and the times will vary accordingly.  The information may be valuable if it is necessary for any reason to reinforce or extinguish our subject’s behavior.

(Page 75) Literature, art, and entertainment, are contrived reinforcers.  Whether the public buys books, tickets to performances, and works of art depends upon whether those books, plays, concerts, or pictures are reinforcing.  Frequently the artist confines himself to an exploration of what is reinforcing himself.  When he does so his work “reflects his own individuality,” and it is then an accident (or a measure of universality) if his book or play or piece of music or picture is reinforcing to others.  Insofar as commercial success is important, he may make a direct study of the behavior of others.  (The interpretation of the activity of the writer and artist as an exploration of the reinforcing powers of certain media will be discussed in Chapter XVI.)

We cannot dispense with this survey simply by asking a man what reinforces him.  His reply may be of some value, but it is by no means necessarily reliable.  A reinforcing connection need not be obvious to the individual reinforced.  It is often only in retrospect that one’s tendencies to behave in particular ways are seen to be the result of certain consequences, and, as we shall see in Chapter XVIII, the relation may never be seen at all even though it is obvious to others.

There are, of course, extensive differences between individual in the events which prove to be reinforcing.  The differences between species are so great as scarcely to arouse interest; obviously what is reinforcing a horse need not be reinforcing to a dog or man.  Among the members of a species, the extensive differences are less likely to be due to hereditary endowment, and to that extent may be traced to circumstances in the history of the individual.  The fact that organisms evidently inherit the capacity to be reinforced by certain kinds of events does not help us in predicting the reinforcing effect of an untried stimulus.  Nor does the relation between the reinforcing event and deprivation or any other condition of the organism endow the reinforcing event with any particular physical property.  It is especially unlikely that events which have acquired their power to reinforce will be marked in a special way.  Yet such events are an important species of reinforcer.

That is enough for now.  At present I am up to page 95 which deals with differential reinforcement.  Skinner is a most interesting read.  My first view of his work was in the early 80's.  The book was called “About Behaviorism.”  Ciao all. ~ Maggie ~ November 22, 2008 @ 5:49 p.m. EST

The reawakening of dreams...

Within my dreams I am startled awake by words uttered by me.  I do remember saying “no” in one particular dream.  I do remember the back of a truck–a silver truck–18 wheeler type and although it looked like a regular type of truck, within the back was something dark.  For lack of  better words, I shall use the words evil or void.  There is one thing sad about dreaming such things for me as they come to pass.  I cannot say with certainty what is meant by what I remember for this specific dream.  However, for the dream of last evening which I will not state, I am not sure what to make of it.  Perhaps it is a pulling away in a silent manner or perhaps it is just the way things will be.  I know not, but I will remember what I can and look for it when it comes to pass.  Dreams should not find me with xanax.  I should not be dreaming, but I am.  It is best to dream in the day when clarity can be had and not in the night were uncertainty lays and slips of memory occur. ~ Maggie ~ November 20, 2008 @ 10:27 p.m. EST