# Operant Conditioning Model...moved...



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

rick smith said:


> NOT operant conditioning folks !!!
> applying a stim when a command is given and releasing with compliance is by anyone's definition......COMPULSION
> - if you try and claim you are allowing the dog time to "make a decision" you are in denial IMO
> - then, if it doesn't work at a low pleasant level it is OF COURSE simply turned up to a higher less pleasant but still not "abusive" level until it DOES work and the dog is compliant, right ???
> ...


sure... but first of all, the stim is not turned up and up when I do this, at least not for me. The dog performs well with most things, and actual "corrections" are not used all that often. for a correction or +P, I turn the collar up and nick or stim, but that is rare...and certainly not for any length of time...

*If you want to say it is compulsion, I will not argue. *

I am not saying I gave the dog time to make a decision at all in some of the instances that I am using the collar in that fashion, although I do obvious give the dog opportunites to make choices while training, which is NOT as far as I know a requirement of the -R in the OC theory...

I would also like to say I use all 4 quadrants, both forms of reinforcements and both forms of punishment. But do lean way more towards +R and -P, as do most people I think....I am not going to get into a big argument about which areas are more effective, as I will readily agree that the use of -R, alone has been shown to be not as effective in most cases. I use it for what I use it for, and use it sparingly, along with the other (+R)reinforcers (food, tug, ball rewards), and use the -R (witholding or removal of food, tug, ball, or other pleasing things) and also the +P (corrections, punishments) on occasion.

*If the arguement it is that what I am doing is NOT OC. I will debate that for sure....*

In Operant Conditioning, as I understand it, you have 2 types of reinforcement. Correct?

Reinforcement is used to increase the likelyhood that a behavior will be increased. Correct?

There is positive reinforcement. (+R) The addition of a reward, when a desired behavior occurs. correct?

There is negative reinforcement. (-R) The removal of an unpleasant stimulus, when a desired behavior occurs. correct?

Then you have the 2 types of punishment. Punishment is used to decrease the likelyhood of a behavior.

Positive Punishment (+P) The addition of a stimulus used to when an undesirable behavior occurs. (example, a correction from a collar, or a scruff grab, a smack, whatever.

Negative Punishment (-P) The removal of a stimulus used to decrease the behavior, such as removal of a toy when an undesired behavior occurs.

Before we can argue I would need for you to agree that these are the correct definitions. 

I found this chart that lays the OC model pretty clearly.. not very specific, but all I could find easily...

*SEE CHART BELOW*

If the above definitions are agreed upon, now we can debate...

Since the argument is that the way I use the collar IS NOT in line with OC, and I am claiming it is (-R) Negative reinforcement, I will post a few outside quotes to help bolster my stance in the debate.

_"The removal of an unpleasant reinforcer can also strengthen behavior. This is known as Negative Reinforcement because it is the removal of an adverse stimulus which is ‘rewarding’ to the animal. Negative reinforcement strengthens behavior because it stops or removes an unpleasant experience."_

_"Skinner showed how negative reinforcement worked by placing a rat in his Skinner box and then subjecting it to an unpleasant electric current which caused it some discomfort. As the rat moved about the box it would accidentally knock the lever. Immediately it did so the electric current would be switched off. The rats quickly learned to go straight to the lever after a few times of being put in the box. The consequence of escaping the electric current ensured that they would repeat the action again and again."
_
addition to above by me, Skinner also used loud noises, or bright lights, I believe. at least that is some info I found while looking around...

_"In fact Skinner even taught the rats to avoid the electric current by turning on a light just before the electric current came on. The rats soon learned to press the lever when the light came on because they knew that this would stop the electric current being switched on.
These two learned responses are known as Escape Learning and Avoidance Learning."_
.......................................................................
_"Negative Reinforcement versus Punishment

One mistake that people often make is confusing negative reinforcement with punishment. Remember, however, that negative reinforcement involves the removal of a negative condition in order to strengthen a behavior. Punishment, on the other hand, involves either presenting or taking away a stimulus in order to weaken a behavior."_
........................................................................

_"Note that both positive reinforcement and negative reinforcement are reinforcement and thus increase the probability that a response will occur. Both positive punishment and negative punishment are punishment and thus decrease the probability that a response will occur. So even though many people use “negative reinforcement” to mean “punishment” (thinking that “negative” must mean “opposite” so “negative reinforcement” must mean “the opposite of reinforcement”), they are actually polar opposites and have opposite consequences. Negative reinforcement rewards the behavior by removing an aversive stimulus and increases the probability of its future occurrence, whereas punishment (both positive and negative) punishes the behavior and decreases the probability of its future occurrence.

Please honor the memory and work of B. F. Skinner and please do not desecrate it by using negative reinforcement and punishment synonymously!"_

*IF POSSIBLE, (HOPEFULLY IT IS POSSIBLE) keep the "argument/debate" as to why you think I am wrong when I say that my use of the ecollar on low stim level (for -R) falls under the OC theory, and not your opinions on what you think about how I am using it, or whether you think it is right or wrong, or whether or not their are better ways in your opinion... lets try to keep a linear debate/argument here for once...*


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Chart from Joby's above post:


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

and other chart  with doggie clipart..  "LETS GET REEADDY TO ARGUE!"


----------



## Timothy Saunders (Mar 12, 2009)

no need to argue . you are right. You would do well with barts method.


----------

