July 17, 2016

July 17, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Behavioral Engineer

Dear Reader, 

This is my thirty second response to “Epistemological Barriers to Radical Behaviorism” by Donohue et al. (1998). Please, read carefully the following sentence: “Requiring a student to accept that there exists a three-term contingency analysis, by which all of his or her behavior may be understood, can be seen as too quickly denying the richness of human experience to the point that the student rejects radical behaviorism without giving it further consideration. “

If we are required and coerced to accept something, we are not likely to accept it. In other words, it is a contradiction to require someone to accept something. If the three-term contingency analysis is explained properly, this is always due to Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB), the kind of vocal verbal behavior in which the speaker’s sound has an appetitive effect on the listener. In SVB there is no aversive stimulation at all.

Students “reject radical behaviorism without giving it further consideration” due to Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB), in which the voice of the teacher/speaker is perceived by the student/listener as an aversive stimulus. Only in SVB will “all of” the student’s/listener’s behavior “be understood.” It is not a question whether it “may” happen, it will happen! When understanding happens this is mutually reinforcing for the teacher (the speaker) as well as the student (the listener).

“Skinner simply wanted to develop an economical analysis that would ultimately lead to practical technologies for bettering the human condition” (e.g., Skinner, 1971). The SVB/NVB distinction makes total sense from a behaviorist perspective. Its implementation has always led to immediate “improvement of the human condition.” In other words, in SVB there is no longer any demand for instant gratification, as our talking, listening, exploring and learning are now experienced as reinforcing activities. Thus, “improvement of the human condition” is not SVB’s “ultimate” goal. SVB instead of NVB is felt as a relief. The “ultimate” goal of SVB can only be conceived as long as we engage in it.