December 13, 2014

December 13, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader, 

 

It happens very often that this writer reads something, but doesn’t like it. He likes to read about spoken communication, but usually, what is written about it doesn’t represent it well enough to interest this author. The notion that writing should represent speaking seems to have gotten lost. Nowadays, people make it seem as if speaking is not necessary anymore and can even be avoided. Supposedly, what is written is the same as what is said and can therefore replace it. Similarly, we don’t talk because we listen to others, who are doing the talking for us on TV. 

The writing which represents speaking is different writing than most writing this author is familiar with. This author knows that most writing takes our attention away from speaking instead of bringing us closer to it. The question: “What kind of writing would bring us closer to speaking?” is one he is interested in and he is capable of answering it. Other questions are “How is this shaping of spoken communication going to be possible with written words?”; “What are those intermediate written steps that will take us back to our spoken communication?”; and “What writing can cure our obsession with written words?” This writing is intended to make it possible again for us to speak. 

Of course, we can already speak, but these written words should not make us forgetful about that. We have already spoken, but these words make what we have said more or less meaningful. If these written words, as written words usually do, make what we have said less meaningful, they decrease the likelihood that we will say more. “Why” one might ask “do we even read such words?” We read them because they make it seem as if we are speaking, as if we are part of some conversation. The reality is, however, most of us are merely reading something. If we are involved in writing, our writing is meant to be read and not to be talked about. 

When writings are read and talked about, when movies are seen and talked about, this doesn’t mean that we are really talking. Our talk about what has already been made is predetermined talk. We are just like actors in a movie or a play. Authentic conversation is never scripted. To the contrary, genuine interaction is only possible when we have no agenda. Dialogue can only happen when there is no monologue. This writing is not telling you what to talk about. If, because of this writing, your monologue stops, if you speak in a manner you haven’t spoken before, you know nothing is repeated.

December 12, 2014

December 12, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader, 

 

Recently, there have been some pretty drastic environmental changes, which have affected the behaviors and the lives of many people in North California. Due to the heavy rain, this author got flooded out of his office. The classes for the clients have been cancelled and this author and his colleagues have had to move out of their office to Chico. Next week, the program will be started back up again in a building which was temporarily rented for this purpose. The rains have flooded many houses and one colleague had a cow which unfortunately drowned.

Although currently there is not much that can be done, except calling a few clients, this author doesn’t feel too badly affected by the chaos. The worst part was when his office flooded and when he had to remove his car, which was parked right next to the creek which had overflown. His shoes and his trousers had all gotten wet and when he drove back to Chico, the road was closed and he had to make a big detour and almost came too late to his class. That night he taught with wet feet, but other than that there was no real problem. His time at the Chico office is spend mostly idle.

As the rain kept pouring, the parking lot in front of the Chico office got flooded. Although the water had reached higher than the curb and apparently wasn’t draining, there was no alarm that the water would reach as high as the building. The person in charge was monitoring the situation closely and arranged for some workers to come and pump away the water. One anxious colleague, however, who always wants to control  the situation, insisted that the water might enter the building. Even though she was not the one to decide, she urged everyone to start clearing all the items from the ground and instantly people were putting everything that was on the floor on the tables and shelves. As expected by this author, this activity was totally unnecessary, since the water never came that close. The fact that entire file cabinets had been lifted from the floor and had been placed on office desks, that computers, wires, boxes and books had been stacked up everywhere, was not appreciated by the colleagues whose office had suddenly been drastically reorganized. One colleague was complaining that no permission had been given to leave early. Her otherwise cheery mood was negatively affected by this challenging event. A third colleague worried about the clients and she made a depressed impression. A fourth one, the supervisor, became hyper talkative and reached out for a hug, while this author’s boss seemed withdrawn and gloomy. It is was interesting to see how everyone's behavior had changed due to this unexpected situation. Of course, it created stress about how to get the program started back up, but there was not much left of everyone's so-called positive attitude. 

December 11, 2014

December 11, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer 

Dear Reader, 

 

This author is overjoyed with the results he is having with the students in the psychology class that he is teaching. Yesterday night it was such a fun class. There was a wonderful energy in the room. One student, who had been to this author’s seminar, suggested we do an experiment. It went very well. Students had to get on their feet and meet with at least 7 people. They wrote on a piece of paper a plus if they were experiencing Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) and a minus if they were having Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). Everybody was talking and laughing. Most of them had 6xSVB and 1xNVB or 5xSVB and 2xNVB. The experiment was an incredible success. Everyone was buzzing with excitement. 

The accumulative effects of a semester of teaching SVB were unleashed. One of the students had even brought a friend to class, because she wanted her to get an experience of how wonderful this class is. Also, this author returned all the papers to his students and gave them lots of feedback and compliments. During Thanks Giving, while he had been with his Chinese family, he had been reading papers. He had felt so connected with his students through their writings. It had seemed as if they were talking with him. This writer had never before experienced this powerful written feedback. Many were writing about things that were said during class and that were important to their lives outside the class. Particularly the SVB/NVB distinction is very relevant to his students. 

SVB can be classified as “a communication-based intervention”, since it eliminates “problem behavior” (NVB) by “teaching individuals a specific form of communication” (SVB) (Carr et al, 1997). Because SVB is more effective, more energizing and more fun in influencing others than NVB, it may eventually replace it. The student who had been to this author’s seminar, commented that although outside of class most people may not be inclined to have SVB, he felt that the higher number of times he had NVB made the few times he was able to have SVB more valuable. He was referring to the stimulation and maintenance of SVB by what is known in behaviorism as a variable ratio reinforcement schedule, because he knew that continuous reinforcement was not likely to happen. People don’t need to feel rejected if they can’t have SVB. When they understand how it works, they know and trust it will happen if it can happen and not make a big deal when it doesn’t happen, because when it doesn’t happen, this simply means that it can’t happen. All sorts of emotional problems can now be avoided in this way.

December 10, 2014

December 10, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader, 

It is less and less the case that this writer is upset about the fact that other people are having Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). This used to be the case all the time. He often felt left out because he wanted another communication. When this didn’t occur, he would protest or say something which would make others reject him. He has learned not to do that anymore. This doesn’t mean he is now capable of changing others, but it definitely means he is better at keeping himself out of trouble. One of the reasons he is able to do that is because he understands that people have a particular history due to which they can basically only have NVB. In a sense, he is more forgiving because he understands that they are incapable of doing anything else. Another way of viewing things is that he no longer takes things so personal. Whenever people are having NVB he doesn’t join, but simply listens. 

He doesn’t try as hard anymore, because it is not going anywhere. All of the above is in line with Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB), which is based on active avoidance. In the presence of aversive stimulation, it is natural to avoid rather than to come closer. Due to the environment in which he grew up, this writer was not able to avoid and, consequently, his nervous system adjusted to the proximity of the aversive stimulation of his abusive father. This tendency, to stay close to the noxious stimulus and to address the noxious stimulus in an attempt to gain support, has led to many problems in this author’s life. Ever since this author has stopped having contact with his family, his nervous system has slowly adjusted to being away permanently from the aversive stimulation of his father and from everyone else who was abused by him, but who nevertheless still protected him. 

Before, this author wasn’t able to avoid aversive stimulation and he would still instead approach. Currently, his approach behaviors are less than ever before. He used to have a lot of approach behaviors, but these days he has minimal amounts of approach behaviors. The reason for this is that his needs are met by his current way of life. He has two fulfilling jobs, one full time job as a case manager with parolees and one part time job as a psychology instructor. Furthermore, he has many friends and healthy activities, such as working out in the gym, hiking, bike-riding, writing, skyping, organizing seminars, which he is happily involved in. It is a huge relief to this author that his approach behaviors have finally decreased. He has stopped begging or demanding to be accepted.

Another behavior which he is much less involved in than before is escape behavior. Such behavior was inevitable once he got close to the aversive stimulus. It still happens on occasion, but it happens less and less. As his avoidance behaviors have increased and improved, his escape behaviors have decreased as well, because they were no longer necessary as much. Increase of avoidance behaviors has also led to an improvement of avoidance behaviors. By being more focused on avoiding rather than solving problems, this writer has found that his life has become much easier. 

At this point, this writer’s avoidance behavior is stronger than ever. Approximately 70% is avoidance, 20% is approach behavior and only 10% is escape behavior. This is a remarkable achievement given his reactivity in the past. The essence of the problem this writer was struggling with for so long was that he couldn’t resist the temptation of coming closer to the aversive stimulus. Even if he tried not to do this, he would still do it. He needed behavioral science to understand why this was happening. Without the knowledge that this was the way in which his body had been conditioned, he would have gone insane. Moreover, without knowing that his body responds to the environment in which it finds itself, even if this means an imagined threat or sense of safety, he would have continued to make himself responsible and undermine himself. The notion that we are not responsible for our own behavior, but that the environment sets the stage for us to behave in a particular way, took away the stress this writer was feeling as long as he thought and believed that he needed to change. 

Now that his difficulties at long last have begun to get less, he realizes, how much others, who don’t know anything about behaviorism, have contributed to his trouble. He realizes how the lack of knowledge about behaviorism adds nothing but trouble for people who struggle with problems similar to the ones he had to deal with. The most problematic one is that individuals supposedly have free will. Nobody seems to realize how incredibly harmful this view is and how undermining and self-defeating it is to keep thinking this way. This writer is 56 years old, but it wasn’t until 2 years ago that he finally realized that he wanted to live a happier life he should sever all ties with his family. Due to B.F. Skinner's Radical Behaviorism, he was able to finally make this decision. Without reading his works, he would have never have been able to overcome his problems. His feverish approach behaviors would have been at 50% (or more), escape behavior 40%, because he got continuously in trouble and his active avoidance behavior would have been minimal, at only 10%.             

December 9, 2014

December 9, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader, 

It is no coincidence why, generally speaking, Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB) happens at a much higher rate than Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB). As with any problem behavior, NVB serves a purpose. NVB occurs so frequently, lasts so long and is so difficult to deal with, because it represents men’s unfulfilled needs for attention, understanding, validation and acceptance. To the extent that our needs are properly expressed and met, we will see a decrease in NVB and an increase in SVB. The ubiquity of NVB signifies how bad we are at communicating and getting our needs met. Everybody wants to avoid failure, pain, and discomfort. Yet, NVB signifies we are not doing a good job at that. 

SVB is a different form than NVB. It sounds and it looks different. SVB is the replacement behavior for NVB, which is the problem behavior, but which is functionally similar to SVB. In SVB and NVB communicators attempt to get the same thing, but only in the former do they get it, in the latter they can’t obtain it. It can be compared to making music on a piano. The person who is not very skilled at playing, is bound to make noise, but only someone who knows how to play can make music. Few people learn how to play piano well enough to play classical music, but many attempt to play it, but stop practicing, because it is too frustrating. They get stuck in their particular way of playing and because their style gets the attention, they continue with that style. This is how different styles (e.g. boogie woogie or jazz) were created. Similarly, NVB gets the attention and is reinforced and since it is easier than SVB, it occurs at a higher rate. 

From this we can see that SVB and NVB are both maintained by our environment. However, even though NVB is going on everywhere, it doesn’t and can’t get us what we want. Although we would like to get with NVB the same thing as with SVB, although they are functionally not different, we obtain with SVB something different than with NVB. Similarly, we will obtain with rock music an entirely different effect than with classical music. Dismissal of this effect makes the least refined behavior become dominant, while acknowledgement of this effect will make us more appreciative of refined behavior. It is interesting to note here that in the United States there is very little interest in classical music, while styles such as jazz, blues, country and hard rock thrive. The distinction between SVB and NVB is also apparent in how comedy is done. In Holland SVB is much more part of comedy than in the US, where it is mainly NVB and just a lost of screaming and cussing.