October 16, 2016

October 16, 2016 

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

It is as simple as this: our common way of talking prevents behavioral change. Most of our talking is Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB) in which the speaker dominates the listener. Although many things are getting done in this way, we haven’t acknowledged the fallout from the fact that most of our behavior is controlled by aversive contingencies.

Every time the speaker’s sound is experienced by the listener as an aversive stimulus, this listener asserts some sort of counter-control. In other words, as forceful, dominating, insensitive, but also stressful, anxious, uptight, aggressive and demanding speakers, we elicit negative emotions in the listeners, who as speakers will do the exact same thing.

The NVB speaker continuously punishes his or her listener. Punishment occurs in two different ways. It may involve the reduction of behavior via application of an aversive stimulus, called positive punishment or punishment by addition. The second form of punishment is known as negative punishment also known as punishment by subtraction in which behavior is decreased by the removal of an appetitive stimulus. NVB is the kind of speech in which behavior cannot be changed as it is only reduced. To increase behavior Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) is needed.

Only in SVB speakers reinforce listeners. SVB is needed to change behavior and learn new behavior. Reinforcement happens in two ways.  When we speak with a sound which is experienced by the listener as appetitive, we add a positive stimulus to our speech. The sound of the speaker is experienced by the listener as a positive reinforcer.

The second kind of reinforcement is called negative reinforcement or reinforcement by subtraction. After SVB and NVB have been properly discriminated the probability of SVB is increased as a consequence of the withdrawal of the pleasant-sounding voice of the speaker. Once we know how good speech can be we will be motivated to have SVB again.

When I as a teacher don’t sound as good anymore to my students, they have been instructed to stop the lecture and to change my NVB into SVB. They signal this by point their hands. By doing this together we are learning to switch from NVB to SVB. All my students report they experience an increase in their SVB and a decrease their NVB over the course of the semester with their friends, family and colleagues.

Reinforcement is key to teaching SVB or any other kind of prosocial behavior, but punishment, which always results into counter-control, fosters a decrease of prosocial behavior and therefore it stimulates anti-social behavior. Yes, NVB is and promotes anti-social behavior.

The point of today’s writing is: we need SVB to be able to experience, stimulate, shape and maintain novel behaviors. As long as we haven’t acknowledged that NVB is our dominant way of talking, we continue to expect to see behavioral change which cannot and will not occur.

Our NVB will be increased as long as we still lack knowledge about the SVB/NVB distinction. Our failure to really communicate and to have SVB results into admiration, celebration and reinforcement of violence and coerciveness. We accept NVB as normal, but once we know the difference between NVB and SVB, we recognize that NVB should be seen as abnormal as it prevents and undermines any social development.

The only way to change our own and each other’s behavior is by talking. NVB makes false promises, but SVB delivers the predicted results. Our harmonious relationships are made possible by how we interact. During SVB, the speaker’s voice is experienced by the listener as something he or she can and wants to listen to; in SVB listeners like to listen.