3 ms·

Common mistake: Negative reinforcement is when you take a negative stimulus away to reinforce the desired behavior. What you're describing is positive punishme

• tpoacher 5y ago
  well it shouldn't. makes much more sense to use negative reinforcement as a term to describe a reinforcing stimulus of a negative nature. optimal terminology has never been our strong point as a scientific community.
  • machinerychorus 5y ago
    makes more sense at first glance maybe, but when you dig into it more it's perfectly logical. "positive" refers to adding stimulus, "negative" refers to removing stimulus. "Reinforcement" is anything that increases the occurrence of the behavior, "punishment" is anything that decreases the occurrence of the behavior.
    • renewiltord 5y ago
      Perhaps we should have used “stimulating” and “depriving”. This reminds me of the whole Type One and Type Two error thing.
      • lupire 5y ago
        "additive" and "subtractive"
  • Tabular-Iceberg 5y ago
    That doesn’t make sense at all. That interpretation would make “positive reinforcement” and “negative punishment” redundant, and it would make “positive punishment” and “negative reinforcement” contradictory. It’s very difficult to effectively reason about modes of operant conditioning when you throw that much nuance out of the window.
    • tpoacher 5y ago
      I don't see why. a) the word "punishment" is misleading, since not all negative stimuli are punishments in nature. b) if removing a stimulus is reinforcing behaviour in some way, then it is reinforcement. The argument isnt to reverse the meanings of existing labels containing the word punishment. The argument is that the four categories should be, e.g.: 1. "Positive": Reinforcement of behaviour from positive stimulus 2. "Antipositive" (or similar term): Reinforcement from reversal of positive stimulus 3. "Negative": Reinforcement of behaviour from a negative stimulus 4. "Antinegative": Reinforcement from reversal of a negative stimulus.
      • ascar 5y ago
        The thing is punishment is not reinforcing behavior, it is prohibiting behavior. Reinforcing means increasing the likelihood (by adding something liked or by removing something disliked) while punishment refers to reducing the likelihood (by adding something disliked or removing something liked). If you look at it from a logical point of view both reinforcing stimuli are positive (in the sense of good for the subject, i.e. directly good or not bad) while punishing stimuli are both negative for the subject (in the sense of bad for the subject, i.e. directly bad or not good). The language problem and common mistake comes from the usage of positive and negative with a different meaning from the usual meaning in the context of behavior. Thinking of it like additive and subtractive is more helpful. But making the meaning of reinforcement less specific isn't really helpful.
        • tpoacher 5y ago
          I think we'll agree to disagree, since this is literally playing on words. To me "reinforcement" alludes to a reinforcement of behaviour, not likelihood of action vs inaction. So it's a case for increasing the specificity of the word, not decreasing it. If every time you try to open the door you get an electric shock, this is a "negative/punishing" stimulus that reinforces a particular behaviour of avoiding doors. Similarly if you used to get a treat every time you opened the door which then reinforced a door-opening behaviour, and then you suddenly stop giving treats, then this is the removal of a "positive/rewarding" stimulus, which 'weakens' the particular, previously reinforced behaviour of opening doors. At the very least we should be talking about 'reinforcement vs weakening', 'positive/rewarding stimuli vs negative/punishing stimuli', and 'application vs removal of stimulus'. So, linguistically speaking, using the term "negative reinforcement" to mean "weakening by removal of a positive stimulus" rather than "reinforcement via application of a negative stimulus" is simply misleading, and bad choice of terminology.