October 27, 2014

October 27, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Behaviorist

Dear Reader, 

This author had a great skype conversation with a Belgian behaviorologist. During this conversation this man assisted him in formulating a behaviorological account for Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) and Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). He wondered if SVB and NVB should be explained by Motivating Operations (MO)? This author agreed this was a good idea. The term MO was developed because MOs account for conditions that increase or decrease the effectiveness of a consequence as a reinforcer or punisher. SVB and NVB are definitely explained by the kind of stimuli that communicators want or don’t want. Difference between NVB and SVB is that NVB is coerced and uni-directional, while SVB is mutual and bi-directional.

Those who have NVB produce punishing stimuli for those who have SVB, while those who have SVB produce punishing stimuli for those who have NVB. Only those who have SVB can reinforce those who have SVB, while those who have NVB can be  reinforced by those who have NVB, but also by those who have SVB. This man stated what this author has thought all along, that SVB is a dialogue, while NVB is a/monologue. He saw SVB as a subclass of what Skinner called the autoclitic. 

The autoclitic is verbal behavior that modifies the function of other verbal behavior. The sentences “I think this is SVB” or “I think this is NVB” contain the autoclitic “I think” which moderates the strength of the statement “it is SVB” or “it is NVB.” LIkewise, "I am absolutely sure this is SVB" or "I am absolutely sure this is NVB" contains the autoclitic "I am absolutely sure" which moderates "it is SVB" or "it is NVB" stronger than "I think."

At some point during the conversation he made a sound by hitting a wine glass against a bottle. It was a sharp and unpleasant sound. Then, he knocked his knuckles on the wooden table, which made a darker, more pleasant sound. He then asked if the difference between these sounds was related to NVB and SVB? This writer believes that a majority of people would consider the first sound as more aversive than the second. Likewise, if, and only if, given the choice, most people would experience NVB as sounding unpleasant and SVB as sounding pleasant!! 

Among those who have experimented with NVB/NVB there is 100% agreement. It was a positive conversation. This author will definitely talk with him again. 

On Sunday morning this author went to the gym and had a good work out. While spinning on a seated bicycle, he spoke with a university professor. He spoke with him three times before, but he still can't remember his name. This signifies his lack of connection with this man, who is talkative, but also shallow and distracted. In previous conversations he had spoken with him about behaviorology, the natural science of human behavior. Although at times distracted, he had become interested and praised this author for his knowledge and his results in applying it in his work. Today’s conversation was more serious. He spoke about his brother, who had been successful in a well-paying job and had a happy family, but who got addicted to methamphetamine and lost it all. On top of that, his brother got diagnosed with depression and bipolar disorder. As 9 out of 10 people in the United States, who struggle with mental health, his brother got imprisoned. This is where he finally got clean, but after he got out, he became addicted again. Currently, he was, as is common under such circumstances, living again with his mother. 

This story was typical in that his brother’s environment was reinforcing his maladaptive behavior. As this author explained to professor how conditioning of behavior works and that the so-called treatment of his brother (and many others in similar predicaments) has not worked and is never going to work, he fully agreed and totally understood. After this author had explained that behavior is not caused by us individually, it was as if the light went on in the man, who was frustrated and also very worried about his brother. He shook this author’s hands and left. 

Then this author saw Joe, who would have just walked by if it wasn’t for the fact that this author called his name. This author has known him for some years. Joe  has been to many of his seminars. Long ago, Joe had been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia and hyper-religiosity. He had been hospitalized multiple times had taken all sorts of anti-psychotic medications for many years, before he had met this author. However, due to better circumstances, Joe at some point began to become normal again. He quit taking his medications, he was no longer hospitalized, he stopped believing that god exists and saw through his own grandiose delusions. 

It was wonderful to talk with Joe right after the heavy conversation with the worried professor. Joe made fun of how he used to believe that god made him do the things he did, like throwing an empty beer can at a church. He felt he was better than anyone else and believed that god was constantly testing him. This made him want to prove himself by doing crazy acts. In his younger years, Joe had been good at math and now he was in the process of becoming a math tutor. He was going to try out this idea by first volunteering as a tutor. This author praised him for the way in which he has seen him change and Joe is an example of someone, who has recovered from mental illness by being busy with something more productive and reinforcing. Joe's interest in SVB is sincere and when he was reminded of SVB by this author, he burst out into a hearty bout of laughter and started telling many jokes. 

On Sunday evening this author had q skype conversation with his behaviorist friend from Colombia. He is preparing an important conference presentation about aspects of the stimulus and did research in which he found there is more going on than what was previously understood about discrimination. Specifically, there appears be an innate tendency to view the composite aspects of the stimulus as a whole, something which earlier had been addressed by gestalt psychologists. This author understood that at any given instance we don’t respond to just one simple stimulus, but to many different stimuli and also our responses are not single, but many. This author talked many times with him and is going to publish a paper with him about SVB. This author and he mutually reinforce each other. 

  

What was interesting and new in yesterday’s conversation was that his friend was doing most of the talking. He was trying out his presentation and this author mostly listened and only asked a question or two. This author was impressed by the intellectual power of his friend and felt more grateful for his support and acknowledgment than before. He feels so fortunate that he is in regular contact with this great behaviorist, who does cutting edge research, which he will present at a conference in Brazil that will be attended by many  behaviorists. What a weekend!