But then we must deal with punishment's side effects. It's still not optimal. The best alternative when available is the reinforcement of alternative (and incompatible where possible) behavior. This reallocates reinforcement (which we assume is occurring as a consequence of the behavior we're trying to eliminate) rather than simply removing or competing with it. Makes better ecological sense.
On Jan 5, 2009, at 11:53 PM, Michael Smith wrote: > With regard to the note on extinction. > > With 121 posts since the last time I logged on, I must admit I > didn't read a lot of them. But somehwere in the feeding frenzy > thread about M. Sylvester someone mentioned using extinction rather > than punishment because it has been shown to be more effective. > > Would it be fair to say that extinction is more effective than > punishment because we can't ethically use punishment optimally? > That is, immediate and as severe as possible? Paul Brandon Emeritus Professor of Psychology Minnesota State University, Mankato paul.bran...@mnsu.edu --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)
