August 25, 2015

August 25, 2015

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader, 

This is my eight response to Chapter 5.4 “Vocalizations as tools for influencing the affect and behavior of others” by Rendall and Owren, (2010). “A socially influential animal has the opportunity to use a listener’s own learning processes to create vocal “leverage” over its affective states and behavior.” This puts me as the originator of Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) in a unique position. As a teacher and speaker, I am able to create vocal “leverage” over the student’s affective states and behavior. Moreover, I can teach students to acquire this behavior.

As I was and still am involved in singing, music and poetry, I have “the ability to induce differentiated affective outcomes” because of my use of “subtly different call types.”I am able to produce alarming as well as soothing call types. My voice stands out from others and people have repeatedly told me this. Since I know about the SVB/NVB distinction, I am no longer affected by the alarm calls that are coming from those who don’t know about this distinction. “The threat calls of subordinate animals will generally be of little affective consequence for dominants.”

Although I don’t consider myself as a “dominant” animal, I am one by virtue of my knowledge about SVB. Many calls have no effect on me, because I immediately recognize them as NVB and I don’t get involved. “Hence, the capacity to induce learned affect in others depends on the identity of the caller vis à vis the recipient.” I basically leave NVB speakers alone and they leave me alone. “This functional requirement might help to explain why the variety of calls used in such face-to-face contexts in different primate species have regularly proven to contain clear cues to caller identity when such cues have otherwise seemed entirely redundant in these contexts.” My notion of identity is about how speakers sound. Simply stated, if we sound ‘good’, we feel ‘good.’ We don’t make ourselves sound good or feel good. If we do that, we are not sounding or feeling good. Our natural voice always expresses our well-being.

Since sounding good is my identity, I respond effectively to those who sound threatening, intimidating, overwhelming and upsetting. My ability to  recognize these aversively-sounding NVB speakers never fails and affects my behavior. Initially, I felt always influenced and troubled by NVB, but now that I have come to understand that I don’t cause my own behavior, that there is no me, who causes me to be the way I am and to act as I do, I realize I can only sound good and be myself, under certain circumstances and with certain people. 

“In the social groups of many primate species, one’s influence on other group members hinges on individual identity and social status, and therefore simply announcing one’s identity vocally can also influence the affect and arousal of others.” Certainly, I influence others with the sound of my voice. It is as simple as that. Due to my influence, people experience SVB and the difference between SVB and NVB. My social status as an instructor and therapist allows me to do this. I am an “influential individual” whose “identity cues provide additional explicit opportunities to leverage the social behavior of others by controlling the behavioral sequelae that follow from vocal exchanges.” One semester or multiple therapy sessions provide “myriad opportunities for behavioral shaping through processes of conditioning and learning.” I feel fortunate to be in the situation in which I am able to do what I do best.