Which is the behavioral-scientifically correct way to operationally define a reinforcer? As a stimulus which increases the probability of a response or as a stimulus which strengthens the probability of a response?I know that they are often used interchangeably, but it seems to me that strengthens imply latency,intensity,frequency,and duration factors whereas increases could be construed to imgly principally frequency. Students seem to hang on the idea that reinforcers are rewards and despite different categories of reinforcers the idea of rewards to them is some form of pleasure. However even pain can turn into pleasure,for example in sado-masochistic sexual encounters and in dominatrix swap derivatives as experienced by the Republican party at a gathering. And while on this subject,is there data to support the idea that some sado-maso behavior may have their origin in childhood?The theory states that while the child was being spanked the child had an erection and this led to some kind of classical conditioning association of pain with pleasure and hence the desire to pain with anticipatory sex.
Michael "omnicentric" Sylvester,PhD Daytona Beach,Florida Daytona Beach,Florida --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=2349 or send a blank email to leave-2349-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
