Reply
Wed 1 Feb, 2006 12:20 pm
Any of you folks learn reinforcement theory in college? Do you remember what it said about positive reinforcement? Do you remember what it said about intermittent positive reinforcement, and how it affects the probability of a behavior?
Did you ever learn about extinguishing a behavior?
Just wondered!!!
I voted for wise ass, just because it was an option.
I haven't got a clue as to what you're talking about. Some of us dummies never went to college.
Squeaky wheels and yammering toddlers.....
Positive reinforcement is a crock...I never had any and I turned out just fine.
Are you talking about behaviorism? That's a theory generated by B.F. Skinner, involving the use of positive and negative reinforcement to modify behavior.
Yeah, I heard of it!
(I believe Skinner applied the behaviorism theory to the way he raised his children.)
One thing I want to point out is that positive reinforcement is a reaction at all -- like, even saying "you're an idiot!!" -- whereas negative reinforcement is saying nothing. (People often think that positive reinforcement is "you're right!" and negative reinforcement is "you're an idiot!", when in fact they both are positive reinforcement as they are both a stimulus that makes the response in question more likely to recur.)
Just sayin'.
No reason.
Here's where I explained it more thoroughly once:
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1297900#1297900
Yeah yeah yeah, but ... I'm an insomniac ;-)
Good grief, yes, Phoenix. I learned all that behavior mod stuff in grad school. Then, of course, there's the extinguishing of behavior by absolutely NO reinforcement.
I never said I was not unlike my pigeons
sozobe wrote:One thing I want to point out is that positive reinforcement is a reaction at all -- like, even saying "you're an idiot!!" -- whereas negative reinforcement is saying nothing. (People often think that positive reinforcement is "you're right!" and negative reinforcement is "you're an idiot!", when in fact they both are positive reinforcement as they are both a stimulus that makes the response in question more likely to recur.)
Just sayin'.
No reason.
Here's where I explained it more thoroughly once:
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1297900#1297900
Presupposes response in question
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace