![\"\"](\"http:\/\/clickandtreat.com\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/05\/050814_0316_LeftorRight1.png\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The chart above signifies something. First, you have to know that this is a standard celeration chart. The horizontal lines increase logarithmically. Meaning from the baseline to the first line is 10. From the first line to the second line is 100. Next is 1,000 and the final one is 10,000. The individual human in this study is doing an undesired behavior, such as self-injury, up to 100 times a day. More than 5 per hour. The left side of the chart shows the use of positive methods to control the behavior. (That is the meaning of “positive programming” in this example.) The chart below shows the full cumulative record after a change in treatment. It shows a dramatic drop in the behavior. What was the change? The introduction of contingent punishment in the form of skin-shock. Meaning if you do X (pound your eyes) you will be shocked. If you do not do X you will not be shocked. ![\"\"](\"http:\/\/clickandtreat.com\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/05\/050814_0316_LeftorRight2.png\")
<\/p>\n
So, according to the full chart (and common observation) the decades old myth that positive reinforcement can solve all problems is bunk. There is at least one behavior that does not respond to advanced, scientific methods.Likewise, the myth that punishment doesn’t work is false. An intelligent person would conclude that if a behavior has to be stopped, the procedure depicted on the left would be a bad choice. The chart on the right has taken a rate of up to 100 responses per day and dropped it to less than 1 and then to zero.( If you are a positive reinforcement advocate you would likely prefer that I not put this chart in context. Too bad. My master is veritas<\/em> – truth for truth’s sake…and this is the truth.)\u00a0 How about self-injurious behavior? Like a dog that fights violently to escape any confinement, thereby hurting itself? That is a common problem. It’s called separation anxiety. A similar problem can occur because of noise phobias. The animal panics and goes through sheet-rock, plumbing fixtures and rips itself up pretty bad in the process.<\/p>\n Now I would ask a few simple questions. Why would someone pick the chart on the left for anything? Would it be kind or ethical to block the treatment that stopped the behavior? Would it be evil to attack a practitioner who used the method that caused the reduction in the dangerous behavior? Is skin shock in the same league as a face ripped by nails as the dog goes through the sheet rock at the back of a toilet, trying to escape? Is skin shock as invasive as a tooth broken off in wild panic trying to get through galvanized steel plumbing pipes? I have no answers for you other than to say that there are many behaviorists, modern trainers and “humane advocates” who prefer the chart on the left and attack any discussion or use of tools that would lead to the chart on the right. That being said, which side are you on?<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The chart above signifies something. First, you have to know that this is a standard celeration chart. The horizontal lines increase logarithmically. Meaning from the baseline to the first line is 10. From the first line to the second line is 100. Next is 1,000 and the final one is 10,000. The individual human in this study is doing an undesired behavior, such as self-injury, up to 100 times a day. More than 5 … Continue reading