beth, That's about the best definitions of punishers and reinforcers I've read outside of grad school.
larry -- Larry C. Lyons ColdFusion/Web Developer Certified Advanced ColdFusion 5 Developer EBStor.com 8870 Rixlew Lane, Suite 204 Manassas, Virginia 20109-3795 tel: (703) 393-7930 fax: (703) 393-2659 Web: http://www.ebstor.com http://www.pacel.com email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done. -- > -----Original Message----- > From: Beth F [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 5:36 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: Librals Suck ~ lol > > > You have your terms confused slightly - the removal of "good > things" is > "negative punishment". It works but it works much slower > than Positive > Punishment. > Negative Punishment > > Negative punishment is reducing behavior by taking away > Something Good. If > the animal was enjoying or depending on Something Good she > will work to > avoid it getting taken away. They are less likely to repeat a > behavior that > results in the loss of a Good Thing. This type of consequence > is a little > harder to control. > > Positive Punishment > > Positive punishment is something that is applied to reduce a > behavior. The > term "positive" often confuses people, because in common > terms "positive" > means something good, upbeat, happy, pleasant, rewarding. > Remember, this is > technical terminology we're using, though, so here "positive" > means "added" > or "started". Also keep in mind that in these terms, it is > not the animal > that is "punished" (treated badly to pay for some moral > wrong), but the > behavior that is punished (reduced). Positive punishment, when applied > correctly, is the most effective way to stop unwanted > behaviors. Its main > flaw is that it does not teach specific alternative behaviors. > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Nate Nielsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 1:16 PM > Subject: Re: Librals Suck ~ lol > > > > Well, it could be argued that the freedoms you enjoy everyday IS the > > intended positive reinforcement. Not granting those > anymore being the > > punishment. > > > > =P~ > > > > Nate Nielsen > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 4:12 PM > > Subject: Re: Librals Suck ~ lol > > > > > > > It's funny .. we train animals with positive > reinforcement, but we try > to > > > train those that break the law using negative > reinforcement. Guess > which > > > group we have better success with? > > > > > > Todd > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Beth F" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 4:57 PM > > > Subject: Re: Librals Suck ~ lol > > > > > > > > > > But, the intended purpose of our prison system should either be > > punishment > > > > or rehabilitation. Or perhaps both. I would think that > punishment > would > > > be > > > > cheaper than what we have now, and rehabilitation would be worth > paying > > > for. > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
