October 31, 2014

October 31, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Behaviorist

Dear Reader, 

 

Once the distinction has been made between Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) and Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB), it becomes apparent what communicators “get” or “avoid” by these diametrically opposing ways of communicating. NVB is to be categorized as a child’s acting out behavior, against which reactive measures will only make things worse. When we punish, while we talk, someone’s NVB, we only address the symptoms of the problem, but not the underlying negative emotions of which NVB is always function. Unless these negative feelings are addressed in such a manner that they decrease or disappear, SVB will be impossible. 

SVB makes us talk about other things than what we say and how we say it.  In other words, SVB helps us to look beyond the topography of our verbal behavior, with which we inevitably get stuck each time we engage in NVB. It is only during SVB that we can properly address the biological, social, affective and environmental variables that stimulate, shape and maintain our verbal behavior. Moreover, only SVB can lead us beyond the pathological symptoms that are created by NVB. As long as we remain trapped by these symptoms, as we most often unknowingly do, we are unable to attend to what is actually causing them. 

NVB is based on the Establishing Operation (EO), which makes us escape, avoid or want something.  Like a child that is acting out, NVB is a form of misbehaving. Problem behavior is inappropriate, but of what it is a function is not considered as inappropriate. For instance, a child’s temper tantrum, when he doesn’t want to do his homework, is considered to be inappropriate. The reason that this child throws a temper tantrum is to attract the attention from adults. If this happens, it distracts the attention from the homework. Thus, temper tantrums may be functionally related to not doing homework. Increased attention from adults could help solve the child’s acting out behavior. 

NVB, in which a verbalizer demands a mediator’s attention, is a function of the verbalizer's need for attention. During NVB adults speak in a childish manner. Only in SVB do communicators mature and acquire appropriate ways of asking the attention of others. The question of what our behavior is a function can address and solve a wide range of problems. SVB is a replacement behavior which serves the same function as NVB, the problem target behavior. We can replace NVB by SVB. 

Although everyone claims to be an expert on how human behavior works, SVB and NVB remain as of yet unknown to us because we are carried away by our own way of communicating. What we accomplish or cause is as unknown to us as what is actually causing us to behave the way we do. We think that talking is just talking and that opening a door is just opening a door, but it is not that simple. Just as opening a door may be caused by heat, which we seek to reduce by letting in fresh air, by wanting to enter our house, by going out or by letting someone in, verbal behavior can be a function of multiple antecedent and/or postcedent events. The opening of the door is the same and the movement of our mouth while we talk is the same, but why we open the door or why we open our mouth, is an entirely different matter. Not all mouth movements have the same purpose or are caused by the same antecedent stimuli.

   

If we want to be able to change the way in which we talk, we have to precisely describe it.  Just as there are different functional classes of verbal behavior, such as manding and tacting, there are also different stimulus classes. We must be very specific about the target behavior we try to change. Behavioral control can only be achieved if we know which independent variables impinge upon which dependent variable.  We can only come know what we are talking about if SVB and NVB are described in sufficient detail, that is, if they are defined by topography, function and environment in which they occur.

Behaviorology cautions us not to classify dissimilar events as similar. Our way of talking may look and sound similar, but it may be a function of something entirely different. Furthermore, we must know at what rate our target verbal behavior, which we are trying to change, is occurring. This poses a great challenge, because before we can measure baseline rates at which SVB and NVB are occurring, we must first know exactly what they look and sound like. Thus, two or more people must consistently agree that what they see and hear is reliably SVB or NVB. High inter-observer agreement has been known to exist about the SVB/NVB distinction. Once we are exposed to it, our experiences of SVB and NVB are unequivocal.