September 10, 2016

September 10, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

This is my second response to “Sound, Symbolism, and Swearing; an Affect Induction Perspective” (2010) by Yardy. The Affect Induction Model (AIM) of animal communication totally explains why it makes sense to differentiate between Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) and Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB) in human spoken communication. 

The AIM “follows the selfish-gene logic of evolution emphasized by Dawkins and Krebs (1978) and “argues that signaling is, first and foremost, a means of influencing others in ways that benefit signalers and might, but need not, benefit receivers as well.” This describes to the reader precisely the great difference between NVB and SVB.

In NVB the speaker influences the listener in ways that ONLY benefit the speaker, but in SVB the speaker influences the listener in ways which ALWAYS benefit BOTH the speaker as well as the listener. One easily recognizes the adaptive value of both ways of talking as NVB is only concerned with the benefits for the individual organism, while SVB is always only about benefits for the entire family or group. 

The AIM also explains why the NVB speaker’s voice is experienced by the listener as an aversive stimulus. Owren and Rendall (1997) explain that the AIM is “likely to involve exploiting low-level auditory and nervous system processes of arousal and motivation that are difficult for receivers to resist.” In NVB, the inferior listener is often not able to turn away from the superior speaker, that is, NVB is hierarchical. 

Owren and Rendal (1997) argue “the acoustic signals are particularly suited to such models of influence because they are especially difficult for receivers to ignore or block out.” An inferior employee may like to, but cannot escape the NVB superior employer as he or she is unable to shut down his or her ears “to minimize the effects of acoustic signals.” 

The conditioning effects of inescapable aversive stimulation have been shown to be very troubling. This makes me think of the many clients I treat who suffer from bipolar disorder. With me they are able to be calm, but with others they get very loud, argumentative and annoying? The AIM tells me why. They were conditioned to remain fearful and unless I or someone else reassures them they are constantly freaking out. 

Could it be that the manic screaming of bipolar clients originates in the frightening sounds animals make while they are facing death? “One dramatic example of affect induction through the use of sounds is that of “death screams,” these are “are harsh sounding vocalizations with abrupt onset and high amplitude that prey animals, such as rabbits, exhibit during an attack” (Wise, Connover & Knowlton, 1999). Bipolar pressured speech occurs at such a high response rate because it is reinforced. This is the only reason they keep screaming for their life. 

While exploring the behavioral history of manic clients, I repeatedly found out they grew up in threatening, abusive, hostile environments in which only their screaming had positive consequences as it made the predator, the dysfunctional parent, back off. What may evolve into mania was negatively reinforced as it warded off threatening stimuli. 

“Death screams are proposed to have an impact on the auditory and nervous systems of the attackers in such a way as to induce an acoustic startle response that potentially enables the prey animal to escape (Reviewed in Rendall et al., 2009). Bipolar clients will produce more or less instances of NVB based upon whether they feel threatened or not. 

Whether we acknowledge this or not, are aware of this or not or are willing to admit this or not, the fact remains that people really don’t like being threatened and will produce NVB to defend themselves.  Stated differently, NVB and SVB are simply two ends of a continuum