January 14, 2016

January 14, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

To analyze Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) as our response of concern we  must place it within the three-term contingency of reinforcement.  To answer questions why we are able to talk in a peaceful manner, we must identify the antecedent and postcedent events which are functionally related to SVB.  The event that preceded SVB tells us why on such an occasion SVB can and will occur. This antecedent event also informs us about the history of the speaker; if,  on past occasions, the speaker was able to engage in SVB, because he or she, by listening to him or herself while he or she spoke, produced a sound, which was strikingly different from the sound which he or she produced when he or she was not listening to how he or she sounded while he or she spoke, we can be confident that his or her SVB was under antecedent control of his or her own voice, which functions like a discriminative stimulus. 

We have discovered why SVB can and will occur on the aforementioned occasion. In addition to this behavioral analysis, we find, that we, as speakers, experience with our body, when we listen to ourselves while we speak, a different sound. This visceral, embodied experience of our own sound is essential to identifying the antecedent discriminative stimulus that functionally evokes our SVB. In other words, SVB is a function of how you sound, since you directly experience the instant energy transfer that occurs between your own voice and your own body which produces this voice. Thus, your own experience of your own body completely changes due to your sound.  This experience can only be obtained, explored and verified by means of self-experimentation.

January 13, 2016

January 13, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

I was describing the discriminative stimulus and the response, that is, the first part of the three-term contingency of Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB). The second part of the three-term contingency of SVB deals with the consequences of SVB, which are, among others: understanding, better relationship, positive emotions and involvement in behaviors which make us happy and successful. However, without the evocative effect of the speaker’s voice SVB cannot and will not occur. 

It is the speaker, who is listening to him or herself while he or she speaks, who can teach the listener to also become a speaker, who listens to him or herself while he or she speaks. People have of course had instances of SVB, but attributed it to the friendliness, empathy, kindness, openness or compassion of the speaker. Such dispositional, mentalistic explanations didn’t and couldn’t bring attention to the sound of the speaker’s voice, because, supposedly, something inside of the speaker caused him or her to behave the way he or she did. 

We don’t pay attention to the audible and measurable environmental stimuli, the sound of the speaker’s voice, as long as we believe in an imaginary inner self, which is causing the speaker to speak. We have felt confused and deluded about our so-called explanations, as  they could never explain why a speaker one moment is kind, but the next hostile. The sound of the speaker’s voice can set the stage for SVB, but can also set the stage for Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). The hostile, defensive, distrustful, aggressive, dramatizing, intimidating sounding speaker sets the stage for NVB with terrible consequences

January 12, 2016

January 12, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

The antecedent event which functionally evokes Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) is difficult to trace as each time the contingency changes, our way of speaking changes. Under what we have come to accept as ‘normal circumstances’ the contingency isn’t stable enough to continue with SVB. 

Each time we engage again in a fear-based way of speaking, we will engage again in Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). Since NVB is so common, we don’t realize that SVB is preceded by an entirely different evocative stimulus, a different sounding voice, than NVB. 

We have not been able to control for our fears long enough during our interactions to trace the independent variable which causes us to talk the way we do. The sound of the voice of the SVB speaker creates an appetitive contingency, whereas the sound of the NVB speaker’s voice creates an aversive contingency for the listener. This discriminative stimulus was never properly analyzed because of the lack of attention in NVB for the speaker-as-own-listener. 

The speaker-as-own-listener is also immediately affected by his or her own voice.As long as the speaker is not listening to him or herself while he or she is speaking, he or she cannot know what causes him or her to speak in the way that he or she speaks. Only when the contingency is without any aversive stimulation will the speaker be able to listen to him or herself while he or she is speaking. When a speaker is familiar with the SVB/NVB distinction, he or she can calmly describe the three-term contingency in which other speakers will listen to themselves while they speak as well. When other speakers do that, they will be able notice that their way of speaking has effortlessly changed from NVB to SVB.    

January 11, 2016

January 11, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

There are good reasons why it has taken such a long time to come up with the contingency analysis for Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB), the conversation in which we understand each other, listen to each other, respect each other and remain calm and sensitive towards each other. We only find out about that contingency while we engage in SVB. 

SVB could not become our response of concern as long as we were unscientific about what caused it. In absence of scientific knowledge about how SVB works we invented many spurious explanations, which compete with each other and only cause more Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). We didn’t and couldn’t engage in SVB long enough to be able to find out what really causes it. By the time we raised the question: what is the discriminative stimulus without which SVB cannot occur?, the contingency had already changed and we were engaging again in NVB. 

To understand what causes SVB we must go back and forth between instances of SVB and NVB. Stated differently, we can only find out the cause of SVB if we can also acknowledge what causes NVB. Different environmental stimuli set the stage for each response, but one cannot be found without the other. The discriminative stimulus that is functionally related to SVB is not what someone is saying, but how he or she sounds. 

I call the sound which evokes SVB Voice II as it can only be produced if we differentiate it from Voice I, which causes NVB. Voice I is Voice I because it must be recognized first. We cannot recognize Voice II as long as we haven’t recognized Voice I and we keep having Voice I, because we don’t recognize it as such and refuse to call it NVB.      

January 10, 2016

January 10, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

It is no exaggeration to state that due to Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB) - the spoken communication that we are continuously exposed to and conditioned by - we are becoming more and more speech-impaired. As a consequence of our speech impairments our relationships are troubled. Furthermore, our failure to effectively communicate results in less and less communication. In addition, due to our excessive use of technology, our communication failure and lack of skills are obfuscated, unaddressed and continues to remain unresolved. Yet, our impairment is very real and it must be remediated like any other behavioral problem. 

SVB is the replacement of NVB, our target behavior. As you witness the increase of SVB you notice an overall increase in communication. Liberation from your speech impairment and isolation will co-occur with a sense of freedom and a thoroughgoing understanding that something better is both possible and necessary. NVB could only pretend to offer this, but could never deliver it. What goes wrong in interaction has to do with your way of talking which causes, perpetuates and exploits your negative emotions. 

You may laugh at this and think that this too simple, but most likely you haven’t experienced the ongoing interaction which is based on positive emotions. You may have thought of it, dreamed about it or hypothesized about it, but you have never consciously engaged in it as there was no person who evoked SVB and reinforced it. To have SVB or NVB is not a matter of being right or wrong, but whether you are happy or not. Being unhappy isn’t wrong and being happy isn’t right, it is just what it is.  By listening to the sound of it you can accept it.