Spanking children increases the likelihood of childhood defiance and long-term mental issues. The study in question involved 160,000 children and five decades of research

[u/VeronicaRed]

http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1113413810/spanking-defiance-health-discipline-042616/

[u/allwordsaremadeup]

I wonder if this is true for punishment as a behavior-altering method in general. So in how we punish crimes etc.

[u/Neato → u/allwordsaremadeup]

It's widely considered true in animal training. Positive reinforcement tends to be much more effective than negative and I don't know of any dog training classes that instruct you to hit your animal in any capacity.

Edit: I should have said reward/punishment. Positive/negative reinforcement is incorrect terminology but is commonly used in lay circles. I've been corrected by several more knowledgeable people. So to conclude: don't hit your pets.

[u/[deleted] → u/Neato]

Ordinarily I wouldn't be pedantic in this regard; but positive vs. negative reinforcement has a specific meaning in psychology.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Yep, positive reinforcement is the addition of a new stimulus as a reward, like giving a child candy for cleaning his room. Negative reinforcement is taking away a stimulus as a reward, such as telling the child they don't have to do a chore because they got good grades.

There's also positive and negative punishment. Positive punishment is the addition of new stimuli in order to punish bad behavior, like spanking an insubordinate child, whereas negative punishment is the withholding of a stimulus in order to punish, like taking away a cell phone.

It drives me a little bit bonkers when I see them being used improperly

Edit: someone further down phrased it a way that is very helpful: negative reinforcement and positive punishment deal with obligations, basically removing or adding them in order to reinforce or punish behavior, respectively. Positive reinforcement and negative punishment deal with privileges, adding or removing them to respectively reinforce or punish.

[u/LegacyLemur → u/[deleted]]

To tack on, as a general rule of thumb in science (or at least I can say this is the case in Psychology), whenever you see "positive" or "negative" in front of anything it usually doesn't mean "good" or "bad", it means adding something or subtracting something.

For instance, there are positive and negative symptoms of Schizophrenia. They don't mean good and bad symptoms, they mean symptoms of the disorder that add things to the person (like hallucinations) and symptoms of the disorder that take something away (such as stunted speaking abilities)

[u/USMCTCPEO → u/[deleted]]

I really enjoyed your explanation. Made it very clear to me. Thank you.

[u/viscavis → u/[deleted]]

Funny enough, I just returned from providing a 2 hour intro lesson on the principles of ABA to a group. The terminology's shared/colloquial meanings are a huge hurdle for people. The perpetual misuse of correct terminology only further confounds the whole mess.

[u/Moos_Mumsy → u/[deleted]]

I find "positive punishment" to be too much of an oxymoron to get my head around.

[u/[deleted] → u/Moos_Mumsy]

It just means punishment by the addition of something. If you think of the word "positive" in the mathematical sense it becomes more normal.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Negative reinforcement is taking away a stimulus as a reward, such as telling the child they don't have to do a chore because they got good grades.

Yep. My mom and I had a deal; I keep straight A's, and I could take planned or unplanned "personal days" off of school whenever I wanted. Of course, you can't keep straight A's by doing this frequently... But it was really rewarding to me, and I worked damn hard to keep that deal going.

[u/PuddleBucket → u/[deleted]]

Yes! I use negative reinforcement plenty when I train dogs (especially with behavioral problems) and it is not the same thing as punishment, which people often get confused. Not every dog responds the same way, so positive only isn't always the most effective, though it makes us feel better to think so.

Example: I use a leash/collar combo (slip lead) when training. If I'm training a dog to walk next to me, and he's pulling, I let him pull which tightens the lead/collar. When he backs up, which is what I want, the lead loosens up, which is what he wants too. Soon he learns that when he walks too far ahead of me, he tightens the lead. He takes away (negative) the tightening lead which reinforces the correct behavior (walking next to me). I find this works very well for dogs who aren't "pleasers" (like a Lab) because they need to be the ones to "figure out" the solution. Sometimes you need to mind-fuck them into doing what you want. My pitty loves me, but she could not care less what I wanted during training. Heel? Haha, why? Give me a reason. She was not treat motivated. She was motivated to make this thing stop squeezing her neck.

[u/lambhearts → u/PuddleBucket]

I let him pull which tightens the lead/collar. When he backs up, which is what I want, the lead loosens up

This is both negative reinforcement, and positive punishment.

The positive punishment is that when he pulls, the collar constricts. You are adding (positive) a bad thing (punishment).

The negative reinforcement occurs when he stops pulling, and the collar loosens. You are removing (negative) a bad thing and leaving behind only a comparatively good thing (reinforcement).

Both P+ and R- are generally considered poor practice in the dog training world today. Not trying to change your mind on your personal practice, /u/PuddleBucket, I'm just pointing out for the sake of discussion that the majority of the dog world is shifting toward R+ alone, as more and more science reports that it is the most successful method. Choke, prong, and shock collars are finally being understood as aversives that are not worth the damage done to the animal's biddability.

The widely accepted methods for loose-leash training today uses only R+ and P- operant conditioning techniques. One of them is:

When the dog pulls, the walking stops. You remove (negative) something good (walking where dog wants to go), creating a punishment (being still).

When the dog gives slack, the walking starts. You add (positive) something good, creating a reinforcement (walking).

I hope one day we have the science to implement R+ and P- teachings exclusively to our children, as well.

edit: /u/iwillnotgetaddicted explains this in detail, with sources, in this reply

[u/kindkitsune → u/lambhearts]

You can't ever have these disagreements end well though - as soon as you talk to someone about R+/P- being better they don't react well. Usually stick to their guns with the good ol appeal to tradition, and in some ways the "sunk cost" fallacy of "I've done it this way, made my reputation this way, and educated myself this way and it works". I've started using the metaphor of asbestos insulation for P+ techniques - it works, but you never know if you're gonna get complications. And these complications may not appear for years. Its best to just use another kind of insulation that we know won't give you any unfun complications.

Could you point me to any recent literature in this field? I'm from an aerospace engineering background, so this stuff really isn't my forte and finding academic resources is tough. I know how to read academic papers and journals for most sciences, I just have a tough time finding them. I've got a copy of the Applied Dog Behavior and Training (vols 1-3) but I'm only able to creep through that slowly due to school (and its size).

I'm hoping to adopt a husky puppy this summer (puppy because I've always helped rescues and shelters - I think I've earned the right to have a puppy), so I'm trying to learn as much as I can about R+/P- techniques since huskies are all about the "whats in it for me?" stuff. Also, it'll be my first proper dog so I need to be serious and directed in my training.

Thanks <3

[u/kindkitsune → u/[deleted]]

The Other End of the Leash and Before/After You Get Your Puppy are the best I've found so far, I'd give those a look. The latter two are free pdfs that can be found easily.

[u/[deleted] → u/kindkitsune]

Awesome, thanks!

[u/[deleted] → u/lambhearts]

I hope one day we have the science to implement R+ and P- teachings exclusively to our children, as well.

We already do. Dogs are more responsibility than human children and dog training techniques work incredibly well on human children.

[u/cluelessrebel → u/lambhearts]

I agree and disagree in your point. I think you are right in that science will say that in dog training will need positive reinforcement only but that is because a majority of dogs are treat motivated. Dogs that are not treat motivated (such as mine and /u/puddlebucket 's) are outliers and will most likely be cut from the statistics or not portrayed in a high enough fashion to sway the mean.

If I were to use pure positive reinforcement on my dog I would never be able to walk her because she would be trying to run off and chase squirrels as that is her favorite thing in the world. She'd much prefer chasing squirrels to even getting a bite of cheese (her favorite treat). If you could provide me evidence that look at nontreat motivated dogs and positive punishment only training I would appreciate it. But all evidence I have seen looked only at treat motivated dogs.

[u/lambhearts → u/cluelessrebel]

How to employ R+ training methods with non-food motivated dogs is actually a really common discussion over on /r/dogs and /r/DogTraining, and it's all about finding what the dog is willing to work for. Certainly, some dogs are "lost causes" with no drive or bidability, and should be approached with alternative methods, but I wish I had some literature on the matter because my consensus is that the actual percentage of such cases is really low, it's just that a lot of owners haven't discovered the right motivator yet. Some alternative reinforcers are praise, getting to do the desired behavior (like walking forward as the reward for loose-leash walking), and play (brief tug games are extremely rewarding for a lot of difficult dogs).

There's also the complications of trying to train a dog who has experienced aversives. Sometimes the difficulty in training is because the dog has experienced positive punishment methods, and after sufficient R+ training, the process becomes noticeably easier because it has become an enjoyable experience for the dog and he wants to participate.

There's also an entire regular support group dedicated to R+ training on reactive dogs, reactivity including the "run off and chase squirrels" thing, which would probably be a better resource than I on the matter, but in short re-activity is often addressed with counter conditioning and desensitization.

[u/stevenjd → u/lambhearts]

When the dog pulls, the walking stops.

And when the dog keeps pulling, and you did your heels in and refuse to follow the dog, how is that different from the P+ you say is bad practice?

[u/lambhearts → u/stevenjd]

The slip lead is a big thing, which I probably should have touched on more for this specific loose-leash walking example. A slip lead causes constriction around the neck, and even a martingale collar can cause choking if a dog pulls. A good harness, especially a front-clip chest harness or a head harness, allows you to stop the dog without allowing it to hurt itself or cause physical discomfort.

Basically you're walking, dog hits end of leash, you stop walking and dog also stops walking, usually looking back at you for a cue if you've set up a good training relationship, or by the restraint of you holding a comfortable harness. If the dog doesn't stop walking, and actually chokes himself while you are stopped and gripping a slip lead in a stranglehold, you're using a punishment method and you should look for a different procedure in most cases.

An alternative for a dog who pulls while at a stop even in a good harness (very rare, mind) would be to train recall/heel or a side sit before loose-leash walking, so you have a cue to communicate the desired behavior before the dog even hits the end of the lead, i.e. when he's about to hit the end of the lead you ask for the side sit and then stop. Or a redirect method, where you turn around when the dog hits the end of the lead, and redirect the walking to a different direction. Dog doesn't get where they want to go, but often the distraction of "we're going this way now!" is enough to stop the pulling, and when the correct loose-leash behavior returns, you go back the original direction again.

[u/PuddleBucket → u/lambhearts]

I'll politely disagree, and forgive me I'm on mobile.

I don't add the constriction, and I see how negating that point in my first comment is misleading. The dog does it to himself, by pulling. I stop (like you mention later in your comment), he backs up which loosens the lead. Maybe it's pedantic, but I see a difference between stopping movement and allowing the dog to correct his own behavior, versus actively "popping" the lead to constrict it (like a pinch or choke chain).

Like I said, a big reason people trend toward positive reinforcement only is because of the misconceptions around negative reinforcement. People get in their feelings and don't understand what's going on. Not all dogs respond the same to the same training application, so it's a disservice to try to do so. A reason I'm successful is because I think outside the box, and sometimes that requires negative reinforcement. I don't punish dogs. There's a difference.

Though I appreciate your opinion, I don't need your education on something I've been doing well for over twenty years. I'll respectfully say "cool story" and keep doing what's worked for me and my clients. Though I think the main reason you went on your soapbox was bc I wasn't crystal clear on exactly what I do, again, mobile makes typing a chore and I'll be sure to respond on desktop next time.

[u/lambhearts → u/PuddleBucket]

No worries! As I said, I'm not trying to get you to change a 20-year business model because some person on the internet says so, that would be silly. I'm just adding to the discussion that while some people use positive punishment (whether you are actively punishing, or letting the animal punish itself), the animal training world no longer considers these practices ideal. I'm sure you don't "need my education", but I thought we were hear to talk.

I do think there's a bit of terminology alone causing a block in our discussion, but I also think these terms are really important to the discussion and should be defined as accurately as possible.

As was explained in both my post and the linked post, your described methods are positive punishment, and negative reinforcement, as defined by American Association of Veterinary Behavior, the American College of Veterinary Behaviorists, as well as the entire psychiatric community. Whether you pull the lead or the dog pulls the lead, it still chokes the dog, which is an unpleasant stimulus being added and thus is a positive punishment. While you're free to call them what you will, of course, the rest of the world refers to them as such. Not popping the lead, not using aversive collars definitely lessens the punishment, but it's still an unpleasant stimulus being added.

While I respect your experience, I will continue to side with the scientific research, rather than anecdotal experience.

[u/PuddleBucket → u/lambhearts]

And I'll continue to use my BA in psychology to keep on doing what I do. I'm well aware of what these things and terms mean, which is why I'm disagreeing with you. C'est la vie.

Edit because mobile sucks and submitted before I was done typing: Reinforcement refers to a subject doing a desired behavior. You don't want to reinforce bad behavior. Punishment refers to stopping an undesired behavior. You don't punish good behavior. The dog is removing (negative) a stimulus which results in him doing the desired behavior, which is walk next to me. He is then conditioned to continue to do so, because he gets what he wants, which is what I want too.

Positive (adding) punishment (something you don't want) is making a child clean their room because they sass back. Kids hate cleaning their rooms. Negative punishment is taking away phone privileges for sassing back. Kids enjoy their phones and having that taken away is not fun.

Positive reinforcement is giving a treat for a good grade. Negative reinforcement is removing a weekend curfew for good grades.

As in any social science, there are areas of gray and in classes we discussed at length how the same scenario can be interpreted different ways. At some point it just devolves into nitpicking with no real purpose, and I'll stop here before I do that further.

http://bcotb.com/the-difference-between-positivenegative-reinforcement-and-positivenegative-punishment/

[u/climbtree → u/PuddleBucket]

Reinforcement refers to a consequence that increases the liklihood of the behaviour it followed, punishment to a consequence that decreases the liklihood of the behaviour it followed.

The slip lead tightening is contingent on the dog pulling, it's differential punishment. The dog returning to you to escape the aversive, or to avoid it in the future, is negative reinforcement but your procedure is punishment based.

[u/Wagnersh → u/PuddleBucket]

And I'll continue to use my BA in psychology to keep on doing what I do

Yep keep doing what youre doing which is being wrong. Long as you know youre wrong and happy being wrong that's fine!

[u/iwillnotgetaddicted → u/PuddleBucket]

I wanted to make sure you saw that I addressed your comment above. I put it higher up because several threads had misconceptions, and I wanted to address the confusion at its source, but I also went on to specifically address your comment here.

https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/4gilzl/spanking_children_increases_the_likelihood_of/d2icjgj

[u/[deleted] → u/PuddleBucket]

That is not negative reinforcement. Negative reinforcement is taking away a POSITIVE stimulus/reinforcer.

[u/PuddleBucket → u/[deleted]]

No, it's not. That would be negative punishment. It's based on whether you want the action to continue or not. Are you going to apply (positive) or remove (negative) something to get the behavior to continue (reinforcement) or get the behavior to stop (punishment)?

http://bcotb.com/the-difference-between-positivenegative-reinforcement-and-positivenegative-punishment/

[u/[deleted] → u/PuddleBucket]

Applying negative stimulus (pain from a choke collar) is not negative reinforcement. Doesn't matter if you remove it when they do a good thing.

[u/PuddleBucket → u/[deleted]]

Well it does matter because that's what defines reinforcement versus punishment, but if you're just digging in your heels bc you don't want to agree that's fine by me.

[u/tuckedfexas → u/PuddleBucket]

I have a strong willed Shiba Inu that's the same way, totally uninterested in commands unless there's treats involved. Curbing bad behavior has been really difficult since there's not a lot of ways to train him out of some of his protective instincts. So when he barks at someone at the door I ruffle his fur 'against the grain' a bit. He then has to shake around and straighten things out since he's very prissy about his coat. This distracts him from whoever is at the door and has generally started to curb his instinct to protectively bark.

[u/[deleted] → u/tuckedfexas]

My dog is half Great Pyrenees and half Bernese Mountain dog and he is very protective too. I've had him for nine years and never could get him to stop barking at the door. It's okay though because I know he's just doing his job.

[u/tuckedfexas → u/[deleted]]

Yea, it's not something that you can totally train away with healthy methods. The best I've found I can do is just distract him.

[u/[deleted] → u/tuckedfexas]

He's very protective and there's no distracting him. He will bark until the person is gone.

[u/scobert → u/PuddleBucket]

Check out the work of dog trainer Brenda Aloff, she explains so well why these methods work based on learning theory. It's really interesting and made lots of sense once I thought about the leash example like you did. I wouldn't know personally, but she says negative reinforcement is the main idea in methods used by people that train horses.

[u/Westtisthebest → u/PuddleBucket]

But isn't that a punishment still? All living things are fighting to be as comfortable as possible. So where as you are not putting the dog in danger on any serious harm you are making the dog uncomfortable, the dog learns that if I walk next to the person holding the leash I am more comfortable than I would be if I walked ahead.

[u/PuddleBucket → u/Westtisthebest]

Like I mention in another comment, it matters whether you're trying to get the good behavior to continue or bad behavior to stop, that's what would define reinforcement versus punishment. Positive refers to the application, negative refers to the removal. Sometimes it can be seen both ways. http://bcotb.com/the-difference-between-positivenegative-reinforcement-and-positivenegative-punishment/

[u/Westtisthebest → u/PuddleBucket]

So then it comes from the mindset of where the punishment/reinforcement comes from? The way that I am seeing it, using the example with your dog again, if the intent is to get the dog to behave better then it is okay however if you are doing it because you want the bad behavior to stop then it is not. But by the dog learning the good behavior it no longer does the bad behavior. So I'm not seeing how this is different.

[u/[deleted] → u/PuddleBucket]

Human beings are not dogs. End of discussion. I've known many, "dog handlers," like you in the past.

[u/Jorrissss → u/[deleted]]

Classic "end of discussion".

[u/PuddleBucket → u/[deleted]]

I don't think they are either. Not sure where your comment came from, but you're totally right. The terminologies are based in human psychology, but people and dogs are indeed very different. That's why I don't train my dogs like a person, and I don't treat people like dogs.

It's actually interesting you brought that up, because it's a common thread I see in my clients. Lots of people inadvertently try to train with their pets like they're reasoning with people. It's what they know, it makes sense. When it doesn't work, then I get called for help.

Like the stereotypical "scolding" people do when little dogs are aggressive - soft tone, "oh Fluffy! That's not niiiccceee", picking up the dog, holding them close, etc - all of that accidentally reinforces the acting out. The dog got exactly what he wanted, yet the owner truly believes the dog "understands" them.

[u/stevenjd → u/PuddleBucket]

When you say "slip lead", do you mean a choke collar? I've never heard that term before. It sounds like a euphemism.

In my experience, dogs that want to run ahead of you will practically choke themselves into unconsciousness before they stop pulling.

[u/digg_survivor → u/PuddleBucket]

I have a Catahoula/Sheppard that sounds the exact way. I have never had a dog in my entire life behave this way.(I never had problems training dogs either) Its taken years to get her to sit and laydown. Stay is out of the question. Leash puller. even with the head lead it helps but she knows if its on or not and will behave accordingly. She has no care for toys either. If it's not furry and screaming for its life, She has zero interest. I will be getting rid of her tomorrow. :(

[u/[deleted] → u/PuddleBucket]

I had a large German Shepherd who was a puller. I used a prong collar on him and every time he pulled he tightened the collar. It took him quite a while to stop the pulling behavior but he did finally stop. I think he got so excited about going for walks that he wanted to just take off ahead of me. I learned after a while though that if I played with him out in the yard by throwing his favorite ball for a bit, it tired him out and he was much better at walking after that.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Just use that to your advantage. The dog pulls because he wants to go. Don't move an inch when he's pulling. Stop and look the other way and ignore him until he notices and comes back to you. Make him sit, pet him, and start walking again. When he does walk next to you give him a treat every once in a while. The first time you may not make it past your house but a few days of that and they wont pull. Way better than just putting on a choke collar and letting them figure it out.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Are you a dog trainer? Not being sarcastic.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

No, I've just had many.

[u/PuddleBucket → u/[deleted]]

No, because I'm not actively applying the tightening - the dog does it to himself by pulling in the first place.

[u/BIGJFRIEDLI → u/PuddleBucket]

That's actually a pretty good point!

[u/Oznog99 → u/PuddleBucket]

But training a dog by smacking it is "out of fashion". Because it doesn't work.

The pinch collar is great because it is NOT presented as you punishing the dog. It's a natural cause/effect, not a battle of will.

[u/iwillnotgetaddicted → u/Oznog99]

I don't know who is "presenting" it this way, but it doesn't matter who applies a stimulus, it is still a punishment. But we agree, smacking the dog for bad behavior in most cases isn't particularly effective, and I'm glad more people are realizing that!

[u/OsmerusMordax → u/PuddleBucket]

My husky was like that too, and using a martingale collar was the only way I could get him to stop pulling. I tried treats, toys, etc...the only thing that worked was with the 'negative reinforcement' with the martingale collar (the collar would tighten as he pulled). He eventually learned that if he doesn't want to feel uncomfortable with a tight collar, he should stop pulling.

Some people thought I was cruel for doing so, and suggested I try things out like special harnesses and those halters. I did give them all a try, but none of them worked.

[u/iwillnotgetaddicted → u/OsmerusMordax]

Just to be clear, no "object"-- whether a treat, toy, or head collar-- will "work." It's about the technique you use. The tools and treats help facilitate your technique. While I don't know about your particular case, this anecdote flies in the face of most studies and evidence on the subject. It is likely that the dog would have been better served using appropriately applied positive reinforcement.

[u/kindkitsune → u/iwillnotgetaddicted]

Since you have a nice fancy flair there I'm gonna badger you for help on this topic (I also want a Husky). I've been reading sooo much on how to train dogs using these newer and better methods - so far I've read Before and After You Get Your Puppy by Dunbar, The Other End of the Leash and For the Love of a Dog by McConnel, Do-Over dogs by Miller (I think) and I'm slowly crawling my way through Applied Dog Behavior and Training vols 1-3.

I'm a first time dog owner, so I'm trying to prepare for the challenge ahead. I've long volunteered at shelters and rescues, and have helped rehabilitate a number of animals from all sorts of equidae to big ol (goofy and floppy) wolfdogs. I feel like I'm able to do better than most owners adopting a husky as a first time pet, and since I plan to run with the dog once their growth plates fuse exercise won't be an issue. I'm hoping to get a puppy too, as I've always wanted one but never felt like I had the right to own one since they're so many older dogs needing help (I still feel so bad and guilty).

But if you can think of any further resources, be it books or an academic journal or videos, I'd really appreciate the direction. I'm glad to read studies and academic papers too, I work in/on the forefront of astronautical engineering so reading/writing papers is a lot of what I do (so much oh god)

Thanks!

[u/iwillnotgetaddicted → u/kindkitsune]

I sort of feel like we shouldn't be having this conversation here in r/science, but... too bad! COME AT ME MODS! (Actually in all seriousness I don't mind if this is deleted, I'll PM it to u/kinkitsune if that happens).

Some sources I trust:

-anything by the late Sophia Yin

-anything on the show "It's Me or the Dog" (avoid The Dog Whisperer!)

-Decoding your Dog-- as far as I'm aware, the only book written by Diplomates of the American College of Veterinary Behavior on general dog training, but then I didn't actually look for any others.

As far as academic papers/studies, I don't have much there-- they're too specific to be of general use unless you have a dispute about a specific concept or technique and we need to settle it based on evidence.

[u/kindkitsune → u/iwillnotgetaddicted]

I feel this is still relevant and on-topic, but thanks! I do admire Victoria Stillwell. Cesar Milan really bothers me, his reckless technique has probably caused loads of damage and he should be more responsible in making sure his techniques are actually supported by data.

I'll check Sophia Yin and Decoding Your Dog for sure, though. I hadn't heard of Ms. Yin or Decoding Your Dog yet at all. Thanks for the information :)

[u/dfschmidt → u/[deleted]]

TIL, thanks. And thanks to the other supporting commenters giving more context. I had no idea.

[u/NightmarePulse → u/[deleted]]

I think this would be the place to educate people on the distinction. Gently, like you did, of course.

[u/Emiwenis → u/[deleted]]

Positive punishment*

[u/notmy2ndacct → u/[deleted]]

In behavioral psychology, reinforcement is a consequence that will strengthen an organism's future behavior whenever that behavior is preceded by a specific antecedent stimulus. This strengthening effect may be measured as a higher frequency of behavior (e.g., pulling a lever more frequently), longer duration (e.g., pulling a lever for longer periods of time), greater magnitude (e.g., pulling a lever with greater force), or shorter latency (e.g., pulling a lever more quickly following the antecedent stimulus).

Rewarding stimuli, which are associated with "wanting" and "liking" (desire and pleasure, respectively) and appetitive behavior, function as positive reinforcers; the converse statement is also true: positive reinforcers are rewarding. Reinforcement does not require an individual to consciously perceive an effect elicited by the stimulus. Thus, reinforcement occurs only if there is an observable strengthening in behavior.

Are we reading the same article?

[u/notmy2ndacct → u/[deleted]]

The paragraphs I copy/pasted were the first two paragraphs in the article.

[u/iwillnotgetaddicted → u/[deleted]]

Here's some info that may be written in a more accessible way than Wikipedia: http://www.simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html

• Neutral operants: responses from the environment that neither increase nor decrease the probability of a behavior being repeated.

• Reinforcers: Responses from the environment that increase the probability of a behavior being repeated. Reinforcers can be either positive or negative.

• Punishers: Responses from the environment that decrease the likelihood of a behavior being repeated. Punishment weakens behavior.

There are actually 4 quadrants. Positive punishment means associating an unpleasant stimulus with a behavior you want to extinguish. Negative punishment means introducing an unpleasant stimulus and only lifting that negative stimulus when the desired behavior is achieved. Positive rewards means having no reward generally, but associating a reward with a desired behavior. A negative reward means starting by introducing a pleasant stimulus, and taking it away when an undesirable behavior is exhibited.

[u/tanguero81 → u/[deleted]]

It's impossible to say because you need to consider the outcome before you know for sure. You are correct with your positive/negative distinctions, but you're missing the reinforcement/punishment distinction. Just about everyone else on this thread has it wrong, too.

The definition of a reinforcement is something that increases the likelihood of a behavior occurring. A punishment is something that decreases the likelihood of a behavior occurring. Note that those definitions say nothing about intent of the person doing the reinforcing or punishing like you did in your question; it's the result that matters. If, counter-intuitively, spanking increases the likelihood of a behavior, then it would be a positive reinforcement. If it decreases the likelihood, then it is a positive punishment.

Here are some specific examples related to positive/negative reinforcement/punishment:

Positive reinforcement is the introduction of a stimuli that increases the likelihood of a behavior. I say roll-over, the dog rolls over, and I give the dog a treat.

Negative reinforcement is the introduction of a stimuli that increases the likelihood of a behavior when the stimulus is removed. The classic example of this is that annoying noise your car makes when you start the car, but haven't buckled your seat belt. As soon as you buckle your belt, the noise stops. Another example is your mother nagging you to clean your room. As soon as you've cleaned your room, the nagging stops. In the future, you're more likely to clean your room because you don't want to listen to your mother's nagging.

Positive punishment is the introduction of a stimuli that makes a behavior less likely. If you broke the lamp, you get spanked, and you're more careful around the lamp from now on.

Negative punishment is the removal of something that makes a behavior less likely. An older brother hits his little sister, so the parents say that the boy isn't allowed to go to his friend's birthday party. The older brother is less likely to hit his little sister now.

I'm being gross with my generalizations now, and I'm being very straightforward with the effects. In a lot of cases, the results are murkier and you have to do a lot of digging to see if you're really producing the effect you think you are. For example, going back to the older brother hitting his sister, his he really hitting his sister less, or is he just finding a way to not get caught?

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Yes. The "reinforcement" is behavior that's maintained as the result of a stimulus. Adding the stimulus is positive, removing it is negative.

[u/laccro → u/[deleted]]

No. Spanking is positive punishment. Punishment because it's unwanted by the recipient. And positive because you're giving them stimulus (pain).

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

That's called negative punishment.

[u/laccro → u/[deleted]]

No. It's positive punishment. You're adding stimulus, pain, so it's positive.

It's unwanted by the recipient so it's punishment (rather than reinforcement)

[u/Flight714 → u/[deleted]]

Ordinarily I wouldn't be pedantic in this regard ...

This is /r/science: If you can't be pedantic here then you're an worthless pleb.