Alfie Kohn adamantly opposes the theory of behaviorism,
and that puts him in direct opposition with the views and beliefs of Karen
Pryor. Which theoretical camp does Alfie
Kohn use to validate his views and criticisms on behaviorism and specifically
positive reinforcement? I was not able
to identify a theoretical framework for Kohn’s position.
“If approval isn’t forthcoming next time, the desire
to read, draw, or help is likely to diminish” (2012, Kohn, para. 4). Kohn’s statement is in direct opposition to Pryor’s
experiences. Research has shown that utilizing
positive reinforcement on a variable schedule increases the chance that the
behavior will occur again (2002, Pryor).
Negative reinforcement is a principle used in
learning that follows the theory of behaviorism. An example of negative reinforcement is the beep
that Winston (our six year old American Eskimo) receives from his dog collar
when he exhibits the undesirable behavior of lunging for food on the table. If the beep is not effective in controlling
the behavior, a small electrical shock is the next level of negative
reinforcement. The training time took
less than one week for the desired behavior to occur. After a few weeks, we did not need to put the
collar on Winston. We place the collar
on the table, and he immediately lies down.
This behavior supports the training principle of how negative
reinforcement changes behavior. However,
this also supports Kohn’s (2001) suggestion that we are doing something to Winston, not with Winston. Is this a form
of manipulation, a teaching technique, or a manipulative teaching technique?
Pryor (2002) explained that variable reinforcement was
the most effective way to maintain behavior.
An abusive relationship was used to illustrate that unpredictable behavior
and the longer the time between the desirable good behavior served as a
powerful reinforcement, and the victim waited for those rare “good” moments (2002,
Pryor).
I would like to add to the complexity of this reinforcement.
“The partner is conditioned by her family of origin, by her culture, and by her
relationship” (1996, Evans, p. 111). The
unpredictability of the partner’s behavior is a significant factor in variable
reinforcement, but what about the previous reinforcement by the family of
origin and culture that are part of the unconscious. The victim operates based on the upbringing (environment) and traditions of the family and culture (1996,
Evans).
Also, Gladwell (2005) discussed how psychological
priming uses subtle triggers to influence behavior without the individual being
aware. This adds another layer of
complexity to this example. The abuser typically
uses psychological priming in a manipulative way as they convince the victim
through clever actions and words they deserve the abuse. Examples include, “If you loved me…” or “You
could never do...” or “It is reasonable to expect…”. Also, could psychological priming from an
individual’s culture and family of origin have long term effects that they are
unaware of that influence adaptive unconscious?
References:
Evans,
P. (1996). The verbally abusive
relationship: How to recognize it and how to respond.
Holbrook, MA: Adams Media Corporation.
Gladwell, M. (2005). Blink: The power of thinking
without thinking. New York: Little, Brown
and Company.
Kohn,
A. (2001). Five reasons to stop saying "Good job!" Young Children.
Retrieved from
Kohn, A. (2012). Criticizing (common
criticisms of) praise. Huffington Post, Retrieved
Pryor, K. (2002). Don't shoot the dog: The new art of teaching and training. Gloucestershire, Scotland:
Ringpress Books Ltd.
No comments:
Post a Comment