|
Location: UK
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,551
|
|
Originally Posted by ClobThere are 3 stages of training dogs.
All 4 parts of operant theory can be consistently applied, under all conditions.....................My principle method of use is as a [I
negative reinforcer[/I] which gives a consistent
positive reinforcer, under all circumstances and range every time = 100% consistency in applying a
positive reinforcer and at the same time resolving the problem of sensory narrowing.
.[/I]
Hum Clod, you have declined to answer me on this and so I thought I'd plunge in instead.
Apologies to anyone who is bored by this, please ignore this post!
Clod, firstly I've understood OC has 5 parts doesn't it? What about extinction? In all the books I've read and discussions on this, there is 5 so not sure why you ignore that.
Secondly, in the absence of your discussion, I take it you mean that immediately after a negative reinforcement, the dog gets a positive reinforcement. You use the term "gives" suggesting that the negative reinforcement gives the positive reinforcement to the dog.
Again in the absence of your reply, are you suggesting that the reason R- works is because the removal of the aversive is so pleasurable that the dog works to get it? If so you are deluding yourself, as if it were true, they would chain the bad with the good in order to get the shock.
Instead they avoid the shock by choosing the wanted behaviour - R- works through avoidance, not through "pleasure".
R- is a reward stimulus. Behaviour increases - it's reinforcement by definition. Something has to be removed for the behaviour to increase - generally that thing removed is an aversive. This has to be in place before the wanted target behaviour in order to be removed in the first place.
An example is that of a gundog who is meant to run iin a straight line.
Dog starts off but veers left - shock is applied - the dog straightens out. This is in fact the target behaviour ... the trainer stops shocking the dog. Dog learns to run straight in order to avoid the shock.
Was veering left punished by the shock? maybe..mmaybe it wasn't. The decrease in veering left may have been a result of the reinforcement of the alternative behaviour rather than as an actual result of the aversive shock.
The idea that the release of the collar gives a positive reinforcer is incorrect.
In fact it is ridiculous. With OC with animals, one is dealing with observable phenomena. What was added or removed from the environment? The shock was removed. That is indeed R- but nothingwas added to the environment.
Internal things may be going on for the dog - he may be finding something internally reinforcing such as say, getting to the bird faster .. however, we cant observe or measure this, it is unobservable and cannot be counted. We can see only what is observable if we are going by OC and scientific workings (which after all is what you are attempting to show) - there is only one phemomena which is observable in this scenario, and that is the removal of the shock which is R- .
It is the removal of an aversive leading to the increase of the target behaviour. It is R-
there is no R+.
Sorry!