September 5, 2016

September 5, 2016 

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

This is my ninth response to “Verbal behavior in clinical context: behavior analysis methodological contributions” by Zamignani and Meyer (2007). I have arrived at page ten of the paper, but due to my lack of familiarity with what these authors describe I am no longer as eager to respond. For my taste, their paper is too much about the classic approach and too little about the pragmatic approach. 

I am looking for phrases which make me want to say something about the distinction between Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) and Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). The fact that I can’t find them tells me how far these authors are from being able to discriminate this distinction. 

When they write “frequency of responses,” I am back on track and think of the high rates of NVB and low rates of SVB everywhere. The term “punitive audiences” refers to certain kind of listeners. If the speaker’s speech is under control of a punitive audience, he or she produces NVB, whereas if his or her speech is under control of a positively reinforcing audience, he or she produces SVB. 

It is important to recognize that SVB or NVB are caused by the kind of audience the speaker has. Our common inclination is to think of the relationship between the speaker and the listener in terms of how the speaker affects the listener, instead of the other way around. 

The frequency of SVB responses is so low because it is punished instead of reinforced. If in a verbal episode the frequency of SVB responses is increased this always goes together with a decrease of NVB responses. We are as used to NVB as we are used to our belief in an inner self.