Negative reinforcement thoughts?

[Jebonia]

I was watching he LTT livestream yesterday and i heard linus say "negative reinforcement doesn't work". I disagreed. I think negative reinforcement works. If i was to be electrocuted every time i open my pc case and disconnect stuff while it is on, i will learn to not disconnect stuff while it is on pretty fast. I was raised in Philippines up till the age of 6 where negative reinforcement was socially accepted. This meaning i would get hit by my parents (not very hard) if i did something wrong.  I don't think positive reinforcement works aswell. Why should someone be rewarded for doing something they are expected to do? They should be rewarded for going above and beyond expected .It will also lead to people doing something only for the reward. I don't mean to offend anyone's beliefs or values  How i was raised also has an impact on my thoughts of this.

 

Discuss this topic below..

 

I'm talking strictly humans and not animals

[Jebonia]

 .

[Art Vandelay]

if you try negative reinforcement, people will just get defensive. That's what he meant.

[Godlygamer23]

Sometimes it's hard to do something you find boring. Example: school. How easy is it going to school if you don't have any incentive to go?

[T.Vengeance]

I think negative reinforcement does not work. Mind you, take what I say with a grain of salt because I grew up in North America so there will be biases. That said, the reason why I think negative reinforcement doesn't work because we are not robots (unless you're a baby, then maybe it works). When you teach someone a way of living, you teach them not because it is right, but because you believe it is right. The saying "Give a man a fish, he will eat for one day. Teach a man to fish, he will eat for a life time." applies greatly here. Negative reinforcement is only temporary. Rather, positive reinforcement is life long. Positive reinforcement implants an idea into the mind of the person being taught. Negative reinforcement only says "because I say so, this is wrong and you have to accept it". I think you missinterpret positive reinforcement. Positive reinforcement rewards for the best choice of 2 or more choices. This, not only increases better decision making skills but also allows for an internal reward system. Making a good decision and getting a reward induces more happiness as compared the obvious opposite.

 

I remember as a kid, back in Singapore, I feared the bamboo cane. I lived a life of fear, too afraid to do anything. I'd have to ask my mom to go to the washroom. I'd have to ask if I could take more food (not that they'd ever restrict me, but I was afraid to act at all.). If I spilled milk, I would cry because i knew what was coming. (I'd actually imagine myself teaching my kids to clean up after spilled milk. Then they'll stop doing it.) To any adult this seems stupid and trivial, but to a kid where one mistake can get you the cane, anything you do must ask your authoritative figure which is stupid. Any kid can think for themselves. They may not be as mature, but they can understand. I remember as soon as my parents stopped beating me, I became less hateful and rebellious.

 

For me personally, my parents lay out the reality of life. An example: curfews and bedtimes. They are meant so that you are safe and can be alert for school tomorrow. My parents don't have a set curfew or bedtime for me. I know that if I don't sleep enough, I will be tired in class. I will not be able to concentrate. The snowballing effect occurs. My marks will drop. I will not be able to go to university. 

 

I'll leave with an article I found. I think it's pretty interesting and solves what you said about "doing things based on reward". (That being said...that is how the world works. You go to work for money. If no salary, you don't go to work. Even for a charity, many altruistic acts are actually an oxymoron. Many give because of the selfish desire to feel good.)

 

http://lifehacker.com/10-things-to-stop-saying-to-your-kids-and-what-to-say-474962146

[EricX2]

I disagree, it may teach you not to do something but it doesn't teach you the right thing to do.

 

If my boss yells at me for every mistake I do and never praises me I'll do nothing at all, but if she says good job when I do something good I work harder and try to not make mistakes. But that's just me.

 

EDIT: I guess technically my example is considered punishment not reinforcement based on the information here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement

 

So negative reinforcement to teach you to not do something harmful is probably good.

[Godlygamer23]

Negative reinforcement can work. If I put my hand in a fire, it burns and hurts. I'll eventually associate my hand in the fire with pain, and not put my hand in the fire anymore(assuming pain is not something I enjoy).

[Jebonia]

I think negative reinforcement does not work. Mind you, take what I say with a grain of salt because you and I grew up in North America so there will be biases. That said, the reason why I think negative reinforcement doesn't work because we are not robots (unless you're a baby, then maybe it works). When you teach someone a way of living, you teach them not because it is right, but because you believe it is right. The saying "Give a man a fish, he will eat for one day. Teach a man to fish, he will eat for a life time." applies greatly here. Negative reinforcement is only temporary. Rather, positive reinforcement is life long. Positive reinforcement implants an idea into the mind of the person being taught. Negative reinforcement only says that "because I say so, this is wrong and you have to accept it". I think you miss interpret positive reinforcement. Positive reinforcement rewards for the best choice of 2 or more choices. This, not only increases decision making skills but also allows for an internal reward system. Making a good decision and getting a reward induces more happiness as compared the obvious opposite. 

Do you think it doesn't work at all?. I like Godlygamer23's example

 

Negative reinforcement can work. If I put my hand in a fire, it burns and hurts. I'll eventually associate my hand in the fire with pain, and not put my hand in the fire anymore(assuming pain is not something I enjoy).

I'm not saying that  negative reinforcement is the best method, i am just arguing that it works opposed to people thoughts of it not working at all.

 

And i think negative reinforcement  is life long. Go back again to godly's example. however, i don't think positive isn't life long. e.g. In primary school, you get stickers for picking up rubbish or whatever. leave primary school and you don't get anything for picking up rubbish so most people won't pick it up.

[Dim]

You are referring to punishment, not negative reinforcement. There is a fine line between the two.

Punishment is, as it says, getting punished for doing something wrong - such as not being able to play games because you failed a maths exam.

 

I think the negative reinforcement Linus was referring to was in more severe cases. Let me give you an example.

Eric Cartman wants attention. Eric realises that crying and throwing a tantrum when he wants something leads to his mum giving him whatever it is. This is negative reinforcement, as the mother is providing Eric with what he wants in response to negative stimuli.

[Jebonia]

my example of negative reinforcement is this: Your boss gives you something to do. if you do it, you keep your job (expected) however, if you don't do it, will loose it. Isn't that why people whine about their 'mean' boss giving them lots of work, yet keep their job? 

[Vitalius]

Negative reinforcement can work. If I put my hand in a fire, it burns and hurts. I'll eventually associate my hand in the fire with pain, and not put my hand in the fire anymore(assuming pain is not something I enjoy).

This.

I think what people do is that they go to the extreme. "Oh, this doesn't work in X, Y, an Z situations with X, Y, and Z circumstances. It must be bad."

Negative Reinforcement works, in the right situations under the right circumstances.

Positive Reinforcement works, in the right situations under the right circumstances.

 

Punishment works the same.

It's just defining those circumstances.

If I tell my son (who isn't born yet, or conceived of beyond thoughts) to not take a stick and run along a fence with it, and he does, he will be spanked (a punishment) and he will have to repaint the fence (a negative reinforcement) and once he's done, if he's done a good job, I'll take him to get ice cream (a positive reinforcement) all while explaining to him why each thing was done. 

I don't believe time-outs work. I've never seen them work, even with extended experience with them. I've never seen taking things from children work, unless it was immediate, and even then it only lasted for about 10 seconds.

I'm just going to go with raising my kids the way I was raised. I believe it has gone well so far.

[Dim]

This article should help clear up any confusion between punishment and reinforcement.

It discerns the difference between negative punishment and negative reinforcement. 

[Dim]

If I tell my son (who isn't born yet, or conceived of beyond thoughts) to not take a stick and run along a fence with it, and he does, he will be spanked (a punishment) and he will have to repaint the fence (a negative reinforcement) and once he's done, if he's done a good job, I'll take him to get ice cream (a positive reinforcement) all while explaining to him why each thing was done.

 

That is positive punishment, not negative reinforcement. Time-out is also a positive punishment, it just isn't as severe.

 

 

Positive punishment works by presenting a negative consequence after an undesired behavior is exhibited, making the behavior less likely to happen in the future. 

[Jebonia]

You are referring to punishment, not negative reinforcement. There is a fine line between the two.

Punishment is, as it says, getting punished for doing something wrong - such as not being able to play games because you failed a maths exam.

 

I think the negative reinforcement Linus was referring to was in more severe cases. Let me give you an example.

Eric Cartman wants attention. Eric realises that crying and throwing a tantrum when he wants something leads to his mum giving him whatever it is. This is negative reinforcement, as the mother is providing Eric with what he wants in response to negative stimuli.

Does that mean Linus used the term negative reinforcement wrong? they were talking about some guy hitting his friend in the head for getting a mac pro for facebook. wouldn't that be defined as punishment?

[qwertywarrior]

with some people negative reinforcement works and with some it doesnt

it really depends from person to person

my father never hurts me and never punishes me he treats me as a friend

i grew to love him more than anything in this world

my brother on the other hand turned to be a spoiled a**hole

[Vitalius]

That is positive punishment, not negative reinforcement. Time-out is also a positive punishment, it just isn't as severe.

I said a negative reinforcement was painting the fence. It would be a positive punishment if I said "If you don't paint the fence, you will get a spanking."

At least that's based on how positive punishment is explained. I wouldn't tell him he will get ice cream if he doesn't do a good job in painting the fence. 

 

with some people negative reinforcement works and with some it doesnt

it really depends from person to person

my father never hurts me and never punishes me he treats me as a friend

i grew to love him more than anything in this world

my brother on the other hand turned to be a spoiled a**hole

This as well.

Sometimes, children punish themselves far more than you ever could for what they do. 

I know a little girl that likely goes through her own emotional torment (caused either by herself, or painful experiences in her past) when she does something wrong, and that is likely why she rarely does anything wrong. 

For kids like that, you have to change the way you do things. I'm sure there are quite a lot of varieties, and that's why I said the whole "situation/circumstances" thing. It just all depends. 

If, for whatever reason, my son is like that girl, I will likely not spank him very often, if at all. He probably will be, because that's how I am. 

[Dim]

Does that mean Linus used the term negative reinforcement wrong? they were talking about some guy hitting his friend in the head for getting a mac pro for facebook. wouldn't that be defined as punishment?

 

Technically it would be punishment. But in this instance, it is not very fair punishment.

 

For example, a temporary ban on the forums can be considered a punishment. If a user is a huge Mac fan, and I ban him for solely that reason, that is not really a fair punishment.

The guy hitting his friend (it probably wasn't very hard, but let's pretend his friend is now concussed...) achieves nothing since buying a Mac is not something that the friend considers wrong. I think the point he was making was that it's not really the correct way of addressing the issue.

[Jebonia]

Technically it would be punishment. But in this instance, it is not very fair punishment.

 

For example, a temporary ban on the forums can be considered a punishment. If a user is a huge Mac fan, and I ban him for solely that reason, that is not really a fair punishment.

The guy hitting his friend (it probably wasn't very hard, but let's pretend his friend is now concussed...) achieves nothing since buying a Mac is not something that the friend considers wrong. I think the point he was making was that it's not really the correct way of addressing the issue.

We aren't really talking about the correct way of addressing an issue as this will vary depending of backgrounds and beliefs. we are discussing whether different methods work or not

[Dim]

I said a negative reinforcement was painting the fence. It would be a positive punishment if I said "If you don't paint the fence, you will get a spanking."

 

The result of negative reinforcement is increasing the frequency of the action.

Probably the best example of negative reinforcement is smoking cigarettes because they relieve stress.

 

EDIT: I should clarify why this is negative reinforcement.

Smoking in order to relieve stress uses "stress" as the negative reinforcer for smoking. That is to say, stress itself is the negative reinforcer - not the cigarettes.

[Dim]

We aren't really talking about the correct way of addressing an issue as this will vary depending of backgrounds and beliefs. we are discussing whether different methods work or not

 

if your friend buys a Mac Pro and you hit him, what are you aiming to achieve with the hit? Let's say that Mac Pro's are illicit machines. By hitting him, you are providing positive punishment that, as a result, will prevent him from buying a Mac Pro again.

 

So if your aim is to let him know never to buy a Mac Pro again, you would have achieved it.

The method certainly works. The only issue in this scenario is the Mac Pros aren't something you buy often, which is why the correct course of action would be education and not punishment.

[Jebonia]

if your friend buys a Mac Pro and you hit him, what are you aiming to achieve with the hit? Let's say that Mac Pro's are illicit machines. By hitting him, you are providing positive punishment that, as a result, will prevent him from buying a Mac Pro again.

 

So if your aim is to let him know never to buy a Mac Pro again, you would have achieved it.

The method certainly works. The only issue in this scenario is the Mac Pros aren't something you buy often, which is why the correct course of action would be education and not punishment.

See? it works. I never said it is the best way. My idea was to discuss whether it works or not. Not what discipline method works best.

[Jebonia]

The result of negative reinforcement is increasing the frequency of the action.

Probably the best example of negative reinforcement is smoking cigarettes because they relieve stress.

Lets assume the child won't do it again because destroying a fence in order paint iit fence in order to get an ice cream is a stupid a idea. The amount of time and energy used to paint a fence isn't worth a single icecream. Instead, he could CHOOSE (therefore isn't expected) to help around the house in order to get pocket money and buy an icecream. Making the pocket money a reward

[T.Vengeance]

my example of negative reinforcement is this: Your boss gives you something to do. if you do it, you keep your job (expected) however, if you don't do it, will loose it. Isn't that why people whine about their 'mean' boss giving them lots of work, yet keep their job? 

I think there should be a differentiation between consequences and negative reinforcement. In that example, your boss yells at you because you are not performing to what is being expected of you. You got hired because your resume says that you can perform to that expectation and if you slack off, you under perform and cause the company to lose money. All that being said, I admit that what I said is extreme. Reading all these post, I realize that of course positive reinforcement doesn't work always and negative might work sometimes. But I refuse to accept the idea of parenting/teaching with a constant use of negative reinforcement.

[Vitalius]

I think I understand now. Not sure why I didn't at first.
 

Think about how they are phrased and it makes sense in how they work.

Positive reinforcement. Something positive happens to cause you to do the action more or less. 
Negative reinforcement. Something negative happens to cause you to do the action more or less. 

Punishment is simply a form of negative reinforcement and not a separate thing on it's own. Spanking being an example of reinforcing that something shouldn't be done. Reinforcement doesn't necessarily have to be to do something more, but just to reinforce either more or less of a behavior to occur.

if your friend buys a Mac Pro and you hit him, what are you aiming to achieve with the hit? Let's say that Mac Pro's are illicit machines. By hitting him, you are providing positive punishment that, as a result, will prevent him from buying a Mac Pro again.

 

So if your aim is to let him know never to buy a Mac Pro again, you would have achieved it.

The method certainly works. The only issue in this scenario is the Mac Pros aren't something you buy often, which is why the correct course of action would be education and not punishment.

Positive punishment is an oxymoron. :P Basically.

[Jebonia]

I think negative reinforcement does not work. Mind you, take what I say with a grain of salt because I grew up in North America so there will be biases. That said, the reason why I think negative reinforcement doesn't work because we are not robots (unless you're a baby, then maybe it works). When you teach someone a way of living, you teach them not because it is right, but because you believe it is right. The saying "Give a man a fish, he will eat for one day. Teach a man to fish, he will eat for a life time." applies greatly here. Negative reinforcement is only temporary. Rather, positive reinforcement is life long. Positive reinforcement implants an idea into the mind of the person being taught. Negative reinforcement only says "because I say so, this is wrong and you have to accept it". I think you missinterpret positive reinforcement. Positive reinforcement rewards for the best choice of 2 or more choices. This, not only increases better decision making skills but also allows for an internal reward system. Making a good decision and getting a reward induces more happiness as compared the obvious opposite.

 

I remember as a kid, back in Singapore, I feared the bamboo cane. I lived a life of fear, too afraid to do anything. I'd have to ask my mom to go to the washroom. I'd have to ask if I could take more food (not that they'd ever restrict me, but I was afraid to act at all.). If I spilled milk, I would cry because i knew what was coming. (I'd actually imagine myself teaching my kids to clean up after spilled milk. Then they'll stop doing it.) To any adult this seems stupid and trivial, but to a kid where one mistake can get you the cane, anything you do must ask your authoritative figure which is stupid. Any kid can think for themselves. They may not be as mature, but they can understand. I remember as soon as my parents stopped beating me, I became less hateful and rebellious.

 

For me personally, my parents lay out the reality of life. An example: curfews and bedtimes. They are meant so that you are safe and can be alert for school tomorrow. My parents don't have a set curfew or bedtime for me. I know that if I don't sleep enough, I will be tired in class. I will not be able to concentrate. The snowballing effect occurs. My marks will drop. I will not be able to go to university. 

 

I'll leave with an article I found. I think it's pretty interesting and solves what you said about "doing things based on reward". (That being said...that is how the world works. You go to work for money. If no salary, you don't go to work. Even for a charity, many altruistic acts are actually an oxymoron. Many give because of the selfish desire to feel good.)

 

http://lifehacker.com/10-things-to-stop-saying-to-your-kids-and-what-to-say-474962146

You are most likely going to work to get money to LIVE. If people could live for free, they wouldn't go to work. And if you talking about working for a reward to buy toys and not necessity to live , that emphasizes my thought of postive reinforcement not working aswell. You won't work as soon as you stop getting the reward.