The best one I know is Charlie Catania's LEARNING text. The current (4th) edition is available from the CCBS link below: http://store.behavior.org/CCBS-Sloan-Century-Series-in-Behavior- Analysis-C24.aspx
On Jan 8, 2009, at 2:45 PM, Michael Smith wrote: > > > All Right! > > Thats great. > > BTW. Could you recommend some books on learning but particularly > behavioral analysis (applied & theoretical). I am looking to read a > few books in the summer and wanted to brush up on this area. > > Thanks > > --Mike > > --- On Wed, 1/7/09, Paul Brandon <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Paul Brandon <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [tips] Extinction > To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" > <[email protected]> > Date: Wednesday, January 7, 2009, 2:29 PM > > > I assume that you looked on Amazon, > it's a lot cheaper ($25) at the source. > Go to <http://www.behavior.org/store/authors_cooperative.cfm> > > On Jan 7, 2009, at 2:15 PM, Michael Smith wrote: >> >> No, unfortunately I haven't read 'Coercion and its Fallout', and >> by the looks of the rarity of the book and its cost, I might not >> be able to. I did read the article mentioned in Steven Hall's >> later post and it sounds like I am missing out :( >> >> --Mike >> >> >> --- On Wed, 1/7/09, Paul Brandon <[email protected]> wrote: >> From: Paul Brandon <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [tips] Extinction >> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" >> <[email protected]> >> Date: Wednesday, January 7, 2009, 7:56 AM >> >> >> Agreed! >> Just to reiterate: >> Most interventions that are described as punishment really involve >> negative reinforcement as their main function. >> In common language the term 'punishment' usually implies any use >> of aversive stimulation, irrespective of the contingency. >> BTW -- have you read Sidman's 'Coercion and its Fallout'? >> >> On Jan 7, 2009, at 3:58 AM, Michael Smith wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Thanks for the reply :-) >>> >>> I guess my point was to try and isolate the relative >>> effectiveness of reinforcement of alternate behavior vs. >>> punishment, at eliminating a target behavior without regard for >>> practicalities (…in theory, ….the essence). >>> >>> That is, with respect to the target behavior only, if punishment >>> would eliminate the behavior more effectively than reinforcement >>> of alternate behaviors. I suppose 'more effectively' would >>> probably have to be qualified: Perhaps to mean in the shortest >>> time, with minimum number of applications to achieve behavior >>> change, and permanence of the results (lack of spontaneous recovery) >>> >>> My other point was, I suppose, if this has been explored in >>> behavior analysis, or if it hasn't really been explored because >>> of ethical treatment of humans and other animals. >>> >>> Bringing it back to the realm of practicality: Perhaps THE MOST >>> effective behavior change can be attained through a combination >>> of reward and punishment but punishment is not pursued in >>> combination with reinforcement of alternate behavior because, as >>> you mentioned, it is difficult to implement properly, it has >>> undesirable consequences, or is it mostly because it offends >>> cultural sensibilities. >>> >>> --Mike >>> >>> --- On Tue, 1/6/09, Paul Brandon <[email protected]> wrote: >>> From: Paul Brandon <[email protected]> >>> Subject: Re: [tips] Extinction >>> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" >>> <[email protected]> >>> Date: Tuesday, January 6, 2009, 4:58 PM >>> >>> >>> Yes -- almost as effective as a bullet in the head. >>> But since the side effects of punishment include conditioned >>> emotional effects and avoidance behaviors, I'm not sure what the >>> point is. >>> Punishment would be the best available intervention only within a >>> limited range of life threatening situations that couldn't be >>> addressed by restructuring the environment. >>> Remember that in practice punishment is almost inevitably paired >>> with negative reinforcement (doing something that escapes or >>> avoids the punisher) so that pure punishment is very hard to >>> implement (to put it bluntly). >>> It's more than just ethics. >>> >>> On Jan 6, 2009, at 6:01 PM, Michael Smith wrote: >>>> >>>> Yes. >>>> But what I was interested in is the stopping of behavior. >>>> If we ignore any side effects including physical maiming if >>>> appropriate for the punishment and we don't care about the >>>> individual, which is more effective. >>>> >>>> So. more from a theoretical perspective. What would eliminate a >>>> behavior most effectively (again we don't care about side >>>> effects or the individual concerned) postitive punishment >>>> delivered immediately and as severely as possible, or >>>> reinforcement of an incompatible behavior (or not rewarding the >>>> un-desired behavior). >>>> >>>> I would imagine it would be positive punishment. So that >>>> extinction being more effective must be a qualified statement. >>>> >>>> Would others agree with this theoretical perspective that >>>> positive punishment would be optimal (although ethically >>>> untenable)? >>>> >>>> >>>> --Mike >>>> >>>> --- On Tue, 1/6/09, Paul Brandon <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> From: Paul Brandon <[email protected]> >>>> Subject: Re: [tips] Extinction >>>> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" >>>> <[email protected]> >>>> Date: Tuesday, January 6, 2009, 7:57 AM >>>> >>>> >>>> But then we must deal with punishment's side effects. >>>> It's still not optimal. >>>> The best alternative when available is the reinforcement of >>>> alternative (and incompatible where possible) behavior. >>>> This reallocates reinforcement (which we assume is occurring as >>>> a consequence of the behavior we're trying to eliminate) rather >>>> than simply removing or competing with it. >>>> Makes better ecological sense. >>>> >>>> On Jan 5, 2009, at 11:53 PM, Michael Smith wrote: >>>>> With regard to the note on extinction. >>>>> >>>>> With 121 posts since the last time I logged on, I must admit I >>>>> didn't read a lot of them. But somehwere in the feeding frenzy >>>>> thread about M. Sylvester someone mentioned using extinction >>>>> rather than punishment because it has been shown to be more >>>>> effective. >>>>> >>>>> Would it be fair to say that extinction is more effective than >>>>> punishment because we can't ethically use punishment optimally? >>>>> That is, immediate and as severe as possible? > > > Paul Brandon > Emeritus Professor of Psychology > Minnesota State University, Mankato > [email protected] > > > --- > To make changes to your subscription contact: > > Bill Southerly ([email protected]) > > --- > To make changes to your subscription contact: > > Bill Southerly ([email protected]) Paul Brandon Emeritus Professor of Psychology Minnesota State University, Mankato [email protected] --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
