More About Behaviorism

Perhaps since we can't get people to quit trying to control their fellow men by using behaviorism inaccurately, we can at least teach them some of the basics.  If you don't know or care what behaviorism is all about, please check for future articles that may be more interesting to you.  This blog is purposefully all over the place.

Really basic operant conditioning techniques were a result of studies with non-human animals.  With non humans, basic items like food can be used.  In fact, such training methods are still used with dogs on a regular basis.  Eventually dogs are weaned from the food rewards and respond most of the time to affection from their owners.

It's harder to use food rewards with humans unless they are dependent children or institutionalized adults.  So, the principles of learning from operant conditioning were adapted to use with people.  Much of the work was done in mental institutions at first.  Nathan Azrin and Ted Ayllon, for instance, learned much from studies that they did at Anna State Hospital in Anna, IL in the '60s.

Based upon findings of such research, some basic premises can be emphasized.  In order to control or change others by food or edible treats, it is necessary to already have them in a controlled setting.  Even if you thought to control others by presenting a neighbor with fresh-baked breakfast rolls, she or he would probably not thank you.  Most adults have to control their diets for weight, heart or diabetic concerns.

So, you are left with control by attention.  Uh-huh, try using that in a neighborhood, for instance.  Most people are busy with their own families and business concerns. They could care less about their neighbor's attention.  All most want from each other is peace and quiet.  If you choose to mess with these, the law protects them, not you.

How, for instance, can a neighbor, who has lived on the block for two or three years and bothered to speak to someone once, be expected to have any importance to the other individual.  Such neighbors have none, so using them to apply positive or negative consequences is useless.

In a regular neighborhood there are not many individuals who interact with someone.  Sometimes only the mail carrier sees them occasionally.  What does one want from the carrier?  Just accurate and timely delivery of the mail accompanied by no game playing.  Now if the carrier should try to monkey with one's mail to control an individual, he or she would be breaking federal law and risking job termination.  If he/she were really bad at the delivery, like holding out mail, he would risk incarceration.  So, bad idea to use mail carriers.

Then, let's take the example of using people with whom one has interactions already established.  Let's say one neighbor was generously sharing her things with another.  Then, the controller asks the recipient to report back feedback concerning the person's conversations and behaviors.  The controller, a person with a huge mouth, then shares the information with one or two others and they hit one or more of the local grapevines.  How many times would the sharing neighbor hear her words repeated by a local gossip before she figured out what the recipient was doing?  This is especially true if she were talking only to one individual.  The recipient's importance to the sharing individual is immediately dissolved.  If you are no longer important to an individual, you have no power to reward or punish, much less to spy and report.

In the busy world in which we live, very few individuals need casual acquaintances enough that they can be of use in modifying other people's behaviors.  So, back to the drawing board or risk the possibility of getting the middle finger gesture flipped at you.

It's another form of arrogance, isn't it, to assume that you are of such great worth to mankind that your attention can be used to control another's behavior.  Believe me there are very few people outside my own family and close circle of friends -- including many friends from my school years -- that I care if I ever see again.  So, take my position as a lesson to reinforce this blog.  Be sure you really are a superior being before you mess with others -- that's superior in everyone's opinion, not just your own. 

You also need to determine if the person needs people and thrives on attention.  Many people at my door on a daily basis would be sheer torture, not a positive "reward".  Then build proper rapport before using the techniques so you don't look like a complete incompetent. 

Learn that negative consequences are not very effective and don't teach anything positive.  Be sure you don't damage someone else's peace just for your own ego trip.

And most importantly, be sure you don't infringe on the rights of others or you may become a target for modification yourself.