WSV on the ironies of Behav-An/BVC
William S. Verplanck
the methodology followed by CCBS staff in setting up Behav-An/BVC. CCBS
is, as it should be, an organization whose mission is the application of
behavior analytic concepts and principles to problems of the "real world,"
working towards the orderly solution of the specific problems of
individuals, as in the special fields of applied behavior analysis, and to
more general fields of behavior. It aims to bring our efforts to the
"general public."
The Behavior Analysis list, as shown by the behavior of its listmembers,
has been--until recently--an excellent uncontrived example of how the
research-based principles of behavior analysis work. Listmembers, checking
their mailboxes, are from time to time presented with SD's, e.g., Date,
From, Subject, Comments, To, etc. The entries at "From" and "Subject" set
the occasion for pressing a key and tacting the post, an instance of a
reinforcement contingency. Some specific From/Subject combinations
produced a different response, an instance of avoidance behavior: pressing
"delete." Some posts prove _also_ to be the SD's for a lengthy string of
intraverbals: The listmember sends a post to the list. Sending such
posts, "replying," is reinforced by further replies from other listmembers.
The content of these replies, "pro" or "con," is indifferent in
reinforcing the posting. We all had a hard time in withholding such
replies, as required to extinguish the postings that include specific SD's
(From/Subject). (I've finally managed this self-control. To a point.)
Listmembers have shown these orderly operant verbal behaviors over a period
of years. Our behaviors have been _free_ of control by "authority," that
authority being Joe Plaud, as listowner. The list has exemplified
"freedom" as written of by BFS (and yes, even by John Stuart Mill).
The only "rules" listmembers comply with have been the natural laws of
human behavior. We have conformed, with no coercion to do so.
We have freely joined the list, and freely socially/verbally behaved with
one another as a community. Those to whom the contents of the list provide
insufficient reinforcements have needed only to send "sign-off behav-an."
Comes 28 June--hey! We're evolving! On 4 August, there we were, "evolved"
into a BVC.
Instead of receiving posts with no response required other than just
checking our e-mail in general, we must now comply with an explicitly (if
confusingly) stated set of rules which specify and requires a _chain_ of
responses, the final one of which may or may not produce a post that is
reinforcing when tacted. One rule-giver tells us that only he or the
poster can "delete." All of this is more than a bit confusing.
That single reinforcing post is now accessible, not by simple failure to
press the "delete" key, but rather by putting on a clown suit, jumping
through a hoop, then grabbing and swinging on a trapeze, and if the swing
is right, getting the post/pellet--otherwise hitting the deck.
Given such alternatives, what rat would run through the chain rather than
press an available bar? The bar that Psychology 2000 now offers, the bar
we had available to press before the "evolution." Remember, evolution,
change, may yield a species so specialized that it promptly becomes
extinct. Evolutionary change, we need to recall, must have positive
consequences, else the line ends.
Given the data produced by downloading both Behav-An No. Dakota and
Behav-An/BVC, extinction is exactly what is happening to Behav-An. Look at
the data, look at the counts.
Listmembers seem to be voting with their feet.
For the future of the list, and for the good reputation of CCBS and its
Website Committee as representatives of behavior analysis/radical
behaviorism, it seems imperative that the only change in the Behav-An list
be its address. Joe Plaud's post of 6 August now assures us that this will
be the case--for a while.
I await, bemused, for information on how all the bells and whistles of a
"significantly enhanced interface" will benefit the (nonvirtual, AKA
"real") BA community.
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
"Just because you can, doesn't mean you should."
I shall await, with the patience Joe requests, the development of
Behavioral Virtual Communities, pretty sure that they cannot and will not
_replace_ the communities of listmembers on e-mail listserves.
To succeed, BVCs will need to be _communities_ of members freely
associating with one another with a shared interest. It's easy and fun to
dream up communities as we would like to have them function. But
communities set up from "on high," from authority, should grow from the
"grass-roots" on the basis of what potential members might put together.
A suggestion to Joe and Ken: Announce to the members of the several
listserves that are behaviorally oriented (e.g., besides Behav-An, the SC
list, the one Joe Cautilli wishes to put together, and so on) that BVCs are
being set up--not to duplicate these lists, but to be complementary to
them, and advise them of what BVCs might do.
Use the suggestions you receive, remembering:
Rule No. 1. Keep BVCs simple, easy to use, requiring minimal instruction
or experience.
Rule No. 2. Emphasize content; do not be distracted by all the cosmetic
possibilities offered by up-to-the-minute computer possibilities.
Only in the movies can one say, "If you build it, they will come."
WSV
____________________________________________
William S. Verplanck wver...@utk.edu
An award-winning site: http://web.utk.edu/~wverplan/
http://web.utk.edu/~wverplan/kantor/kantor.html
____________________________________________
---------------------------------------------
To join the Behavior Analysis (Behav-An) forum, send the command
SUBSCRIBE BEHAV-AN YOURFIRSTNAME YOURLASTNAME;
to leave the forum, send the command
SIGNOFF BEHAV-AN
to LIST...@LISTSERV.NODAK.EDU or, if you experience difficulties, write to BEHAV-AN...@LISTSERV.NODAK.EDU.
John Eshleman
wver...@utkux.utcc.utk.edu writes (between the << and >>
greater and lesser quotes; my comments appear between the
quoted passages):
<< Ironic, tragic, and absurd are only three of the adjectives that
apply to the methodology followed by CCBS staff in setting up
Behav-An/BVC. CCBS is, as it should be, an organization whose
mission is the application of behavior analytic concepts and
principles to problems of the "real world," working towards the
orderly solution of the specific problems of individuals, as in the
special fields of applied behavior analysis, and to more general
fields of behavior. It aims to bring our efforts to the "general
public." >>
CCBS can, should, and does set its own mission. If it wants to
set up and run a forum or list or whatever, that's its business.
If you belong to CCBS you have some say in the matter,
presumably. Otherwise, you don't. I don't belong to CCBS,
so I have no say. Even if I did belong, the say would be
akin to the say one has in a company in which one owns
stock. At most. Probably not even that.
Moreover, Behav-An never charged a subscription fee, so,
truth be known, none of us except Joe Plaud has any say
in the affairs of Behav-An. Oh sure, we can and do complain,
but that's not a real say in the matter.
If you go to the BVC website, the natural laws have been replaced with
a discrete warning.
<< Comes 28 June--hey! We're evolving! On 4 August, there we
were, "evolved" into a BVC. >>
As you say below, extinction can be one consequence of evolution!
I seem to be one of the "variations" that didn't make it through
the evolution. I can't get in the new Behav-An site, even with
a password and username. I don't get any of the new Behav-An
email, either.
<< Instead of receiving posts with no response required other than
just checking our e-mail in general, we must now comply with
an explicitly (if confusingly) stated set of rules which specify and
requires a _chain_ of responses, the final one of which may or
may not produce a post that is reinforcing when tacted. One
rule-giver tells us that only he or the poster can "delete." All of this
is more than a bit confusing. >>
Rule-giver? <grin>
The idea is to "mark" the messages you've read as "marked as
read." Of course, you have to remember to do that, I guess.
In the long run this evolution represents an interesting test of
the "push" versus "pull" technology that it mention in the BVC
posts (I can read the BVC "conferences," just not the new
Behav-An).
An interesting little side experiment's underway with the Verbal
Behavior SIG website. Bill Potter created a nice, simple, easy-to-use
forum there. I've lurked, but not posted there. The VB SIG
webforum represents that "pull" technology. But, you have
to remember to get "pulled" in. Sometimes I go for days or
even weeks without "pulling" myself into the VB SIG webforum.
If I clean out my Temporary Internet Files folder, when I return
to the VB SIG webforum, all of the message headers that used
to be in purple (marked as "read") have reverted to blue (unread),
so I have to remember that I have, indeed, read some of those
blue messages already.
By the way, if you don't clear out the Temp Internet Files, that
area just keeps building up, and building up. Since I am now,
seemingly, forced to "accept" cookies (who the hell ever thought
up that name for files?), I clear out the Temp Internet in a somewhat
more invovled process whereby I save the cookies.
<< That single reinforcing post is now accessible, not by simple
failure to press the "delete" key, but rather by putting on a clown
suit, jumping through a hoop, then grabbing and swinging on a
trapeze, and if the swing is right, getting the post/pellet--otherwise
hitting the deck. >>
Great metaphor!
<< Given such alternatives, what rat would run through the chain
rather than press an available bar? The bar that Psychology 2000
now offers, the bar we had available to press before the "evolution."
Remember, evolution, change, may yield a species so specialized
that it promptly becomes extinct. Evolutionary change, we need to
recall, must have positive consequences, else the line ends. >>
I believe the new mutation variation is named Behavior2000, not
Psychology2000. And someone asked what'll happen when
2001 arrives. Well, the real beginning of the new millenium!
(Arthur C. Clarke knew this decades ago when he titled his
story 2001 A Space Odyssey.) By then the US will be under
Martial Law (strong form*) anyway more than likely, so who cares?
<< Given the data produced by downloading both Behav-An No.
Dakota and Behav-An/BVC, extinction is exactly what is
happening to Behav-An. Look at the data, look at the counts. >>
I have looked. There are few "on topic" (i.e., about some behavioral
issue or problem) messages of late, and a general deceleration
in messages per month since April. That could be due, in part,
to summer.
<< Listmembers seem to be voting with their feet. >>
The only vote we have!
<< For the future of the list, and for the good reputation of CCBS
and its Website Committee as representatives of behavior
analysis/radical behaviorism, it seems imperative that the only
change in the Behav-An list be its address. Joe Plaud's post
of 6 August now assures us that this will be the case--for a while. >>
If so, how's a come I am not receiving the new Behav-An messages,
only the ones still posted to nodak.edu?
<>
Several of us are somewhat bemused by the whole situation.
<< "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." >>
Sage advice!
<< "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should." >>
Equally sage, though with a tough of thyme!
<< I shall await, with the patience Joe requests, the development
of Behavioral Virtual Communities, pretty sure that they cannot
and will not _replace_ the communities of listmembers on e-mail
listserves. >>
All we can do is wait.
<< To succeed, BVCs will need to be _communities_ of
members freely associating with one another with a shared
interest. It's easy and fun to dream up communities as we would
like to have them function. But communities set up from "on high,"
from authority, should grow from the "grass-roots" on the basis of
what potential members might put together. >>
That's your definition of success. Other people might have
other definitions.
<< A suggestion to Joe and Ken: Announce to the members of
the several listserves that are behaviorally oriented (e.g., besides
Behav-An, the SC list, the one Joe Cautilli wishes to put together,
and so on) that BVCs are being set up--not to duplicate these
lists, but to be complementary to them, and advise them of what
BVCs might do. >>
<< Use the suggestions you receive, remembering:
Rule No. 1. Keep BVCs simple, easy to use, requiring minimal
instruction or experience.
Rule No. 2. Emphasize content; do not be distracted by all the
cosmetic possibilities offered by up-to-the-minute computer possibilities.>>
<< Only in the movies can one say, "If you build it, they will come.">>
<< WSV >>
-- JE
* The U.S. has been under a continuous state of declared National
Emergency since 1933 when FDR declared such a state. The
law was changed in 1976, after a Senate committee re-discovered
that the U.S. had been under a continuous state of National
Emergency since 1933, requiring the President to declare a
national emergency every year, else it terminates. Every President
since Carter has declared at least one National Emergency per
year, by way of Executive Order. For some odd reason, these
declarations of National Emergency are seldom, if ever, reported
in the press. I guess they must not mean much!