Methods of Control

[Marquis]

While looking up terms I had heard while learning about Skinner in Psych 101, I came across some info that I found particularly interesting.

Skinner breaks down what he calls Operant Conditioning into 4 categories, ways of exhibiting control over a subject to alter behavior patterns. There is:

1. Positive reinforcement
2. Negative reinforcement
3. Punishment
4. Extinction

For a concise explanation of what these terms mean, click here.


In what ways do you think these methods are applied in D/s relationships you have been in?

Are there any that you think are more appropriate than others in certain situations?

Is it even right for a Dom to alter the behavior of their submissive in this way?

When is it right and when does it become wrong?

 

[jadefirefly]

(Itty bitty off-topic: I had to giggle briefly. I'm not sure who hosts the website that's linked to, but I'm assuming a school? Wherever it is, it's near me - I live in Maricopa County. )

Anyhow, I think that's a question that's going to have a lot of answers, most of which will involve asking for more information. Whether or not it's -right- depends greatly on both the behavior that one is exhibiting, and why one would want to encourage or stop it. I think it's right to want to stop a behavior that's harmful to oneself or to a relationship; I think it's wrong to try to stop a behavior that's not harmful, merely for the sake of having that level of control.

Now, if we're talking about controlling behavior solely in a play sense, then that isn't really so awful. My PYL prefers, I guess, negative reinforcement: he'll give me something to do or not do, and then do whatever he can to get me to disobey that order. Usually that something is incredibly distracting and very tempting. Disobeying, however, means he'll stop. He -did- try to come up with a punishment, once, but it didn't work so well, because I liked it.

I think sometimes I just have a difficult time encompassing the details of a D/s relationship that extends beyond the bedroom, no matter how many times someone asks, and someone else answers. It's not that I don't understand, only that I have a hard time mentally putting myself there, so I can't really give a more specific opinion on whether it's right or wrong in everyday life without more details on what's being encouraged/discouraged, and the methods used to do so.

 

[Still Falling]

i think that operate conditioning exists across all human interaction and BDSM is no different (and in fact could be said to be a more visible example of operate conditioning). The basic rules of relationships, from sex to house work can be seen to clearly have elements of operate conditioning.

For example, when you first get to know someone new, you learn many things about them through how they positively/negatively reinforce and/or punish you. My ex-wife for example would punish me by not talking to me when she was angry at me. I learnt what this was and what this meant very quickly.

In terms of an examples from my BDSM relationship - M’lady recently found a novel way to exercise Her sadistic nature over me. As i am a Masochist She found that She could torment me tremendously by gently running Her nails over my body for an extended period of time without digging them into my flesh. She then would positively reinforce my begging for pain by digging her nails in and raking them across my body; or punish my lack of begging by removing Her hands altogether.

However even with BDSM i feel it would be risky to rely on the simplicity of Operate conditioning to full understand oneself or your reactions in certain situations. We are all just too complex to boil down to something that descrete.

I thought that the two paragraphs below were worth noting:
Responding because behavior has had reinforcing consequences is very different from responding by taking advice, following rules, or obeying laws. We do not take advice because of the particular consequence that will follow; we take it only when taking other advice from similar sources has already had reinforcing consequences. In general, we are much more strongly inclined to do things if they have had immediate reinforcing consequences than if we have been merely advised to do them.

Personal freedom also seems threatened. It is only the feeling of freedom, however, which is affected. Those who respond because their behavior has had positively reinforcing consequences usually feel free. They seem to be doing what they want to do. Those who respond because the reinforcement has been negative and who are therefore avoiding or escaping from punishment are doing what they have to do and do not feel free. These distinctions do not involve the fact of freedom.

(http://www.bfskinner.org/Operant.asp)

To sum up answers to your other questions; i think a Dom does use this conditioning with their Sub to alter their behavior – but the behavioral responses of the Sub and their interaction in the scene/relationship, also condition the Dom. The Dom is likely to be more actively or consciously using these tools to influence behavior but would be naive to think that they are not also being conditioned.

In terms of if it is right or wrong? As long as the overall experience for both partners feels positive then i don’t see how it can really be labeled as wrong.

 

[Netzach]

The Dom is likely to be more actively or consciously using these tools to influence behavior but would be naive to think that they are not also being conditioned.

So true!

 

[serijules]

Wow...nice thread! I was thinking on something like this the other day (different direction but same topic). I might have to post it as it ties in nicely.

In what ways do you think these methods are applied in D/s relationships you have been in?

Im going to speak of my current relationship as my past relationships are just that...history.

I get positive reinforcement in my relationship through feeling proud and happy when I please her. The look on her face when I am hurting for her and taking pain for her makes me feel I can take anything. In past relationships, this would never have been enough for me but since discovering my slave role with D, I have really learned to understand how positive and rewarding service can be. Earning privliges is something that works well for me too. I have to earn orgasms, earn permission to do certain leisure things, etc. It's positive for me because I enjoy those things more knowing I earned them by doing something to please her. Positive reinforcement also comes in the form of telling me when I do things right, especially things I do on my own incentive, not as orders or expectations. Acknowledgment of my actions having pleased her is a very positive thing.

Im not sure how negative reinforcement applies. Perhaps the times when I do something wrong and she doesn't punish me for it directly, but knowing I have disappointed her or knowing she feels I could do better makes me vow to do better. Lectures, looks, or comments about my misdeed, things like that which are meant as warnings. The reaction from her is negative, but gives me the information and incentive I need to learn to do better.

Punishment is given in times when I have made the same mistake too many times and have not learned from other methods of discipline or encouragement, or for certain things that are just not acceptable. Some don't beleive in punishment, but it's a part of our relationship that works for us and I'm glad for it is a good release and way of communicating and addressing issues as well as brings me back to being able to forgive myself when I've done wrong, something I don't do too easily. We are not into that "perfect slave" concept.

"Extinction" reminds me of when Dawnie ignores certain behaviours and waits for me to correct them myself. In a way, that is negative reinforcement as she is ignoring ME in the process, but it's not directly negative because sometimes it takes me awhile to figure out that she is ignoring me when we are around others.

I'm not allowed to say "What" when I mishear something (which, being deaf, I do often!) I'm expected to say pardon me, will you repeat that please, or some other more polite version of "What". Being this is a LIFELONG habit and my most commonly said word, it's a very very hard habit for me to break. If I say "What" to her, she will ignore me. Sometimes it takes me awhile to catch on to why *sigh*. Usually I just think she hasn't heard me, and I get self-conscious about asking people to repeat so I let it drop, and get in trouble for THAT too as I'm not allowed to do that either. She will also refuse to answer if I don't respond to her properly, and will not react to me for awhile if I have done something like served myself before serving her (something I did last time we were together and I was very embarrased when I figured it out). It is effective because it makes me depend on MYSELF to remember to do those things, and not depend on her to correct me whenever I stray from them.

Are there any that you think are more appropriate than others in certain situations?

For me, punishment or negative reinforcement work better in times when I have done wrong and know that I've done wrong. If she is too lenient on me when I have done something I know better than to do, my behaviour tends to worsen as I feel confused and down on myself. In times when I am not aware of my misdeed and am punished for it, I kind of tend to close off and shut down a bit. In those instances, positive reinforcement of what I did do right and going over how she expects it to be done has better results.

"Extinction" is the hardest on me, but it is very effective. I don't feel it is appropriate to use it as a form of punishment though, rather a training tool.

Is it even right for a Dom to alter the behavior of their submissive in this way?

I certainly think so. Maybe that's the slave in me though, I can't really relate so much to being submissive anymore. Modifying how I behave doesn't have to change who I am.

When is it right and when does it become wrong?

Changing behaviour to help a person perform better in their role and in their life is certainly alright IMO as long as the means of doing so are healthy. Constantly degrading someone so they will change to your liking is hardly healthy or productive. Killing someone's spirit or demanding they deny who they are is not modifying behaviour for the right reasons. It becomes wrong when it is done for the wrong reasons.

Some of the behaviour changes I have gone through with the help of the reinforcements listed are things like learning to address her properly and put her needs before my own. Learning to think of myself and conduct myself in a way that is positive and respectful. Quitting bad habits that were not becoming such as smoking, eating too much sugar, using certain phrases, etc. Some things I have grown into and changed not only because I was expected to but because I wanted to as well, some things I will always hold my own opinions on but have learned to act as expected because of my role. She still respects my own opinions on such things, but her expectations come first and I in turn respect that.

 

[Blushing Bottom]

Later when I have more time I will respond to this thread properly as this is my field but did pop in to ask why you chose to leave out Classic Conditioning all together as it plays a major role in bdsm.

Oh and Skinner was a strange dude I had met him once.

While looking up terms I had heard while learning about Skinner in Psych 101, I came across some info that I found particularly interesting.

Skinner breaks down what he calls Operant Conditioning into 4 categories, ways of exhibiting control over a subject to alter behavior patterns. There is:

 

[Lilith]

I was trained by a doctor from UCLA (Lovas program) in Behavior Modification using Skinner techniques. I work with disabled children particularly those with Autism. I've seen amazing things happen with those children using a very strict regimen of training/therapy/education. I believe it is what made accepting my dominant nature and acting on it, feasible. I was able to see the relation between training and conditioning immediately. A good dominant knows these techniques and sees the working proof. I truly believe all behavior is based on the reinforcement the person receives so naturally this includes the behavior of the dominant as well.

When is it wrong? When the reinforcement being used is causing more damage than the behavior it is meant to change/adapt. I find people often confuse negative reinforcement because of the term "negative". They take it to mean the same as punishment but it can be an extremely useful tool to modify behaviors such as fears. I think extinction truly is powerful and you should be careful when using it. The behavior must be one you truly wish to be gone.

 

[shyly curious]

.....

 

[Blushing Bottom]

Opreant Conditionong or a learned behavior modification used to either increase or decrease behaviors. The terms you use Marquis are correct and each has its methods. For example punishment, punishment only works to change a behavior if it follows the behavior immediately and is consistant. So if you punish your GF for not paying 100% of her attention to you when she is sucking your cock, you must punish her immediately and after each demonstration of the behvior you want to change.

Positive reinforcement is easier to work with just by the nature of its methods. I find it works well in adjunct with punishment. You get the attention you want with the punishment and then you give positive strokes for getting the bahaviors you want. She does a good job, no distractions, you reward her. Stroke her hair...tell her she's a good girl and treat her to something pleasant.

Negative Conditioning is tricky to understand for some. I requires that something negative be eliminated to generate a feeling of well being or reward. Like punishment it should immediately follow the behavior desired.

Extenction...self explanitory and usually accomplished with adverse conditioning.

Now that you bored to tears I close with saying all learned behaviors can be unlearned.

While looking up terms I had heard while learning about Skinner in Psych 101, I came across some info that I found particularly interesting.

Skinner breaks down what he calls Operant Conditioning into 4 categories, ways of exhibiting control over a subject to alter behavior patterns. There is:

1. Positive reinforcement
2. Negative reinforcement
3. Punishment
4. Extinction

For a concise explanation of what these terms mean, click here.


In what ways do you think these methods are applied in D/s relationships you have been in?

Are there any that you think are more appropriate than others in certain situations?

Is it even right for a Dom to alter the behavior of their submissive in this way?

When is it right and when does it become wrong?

 

[Purple Sage]

Operant conditioning works, to a point, but people, unlike rats, have complex conceptual structures which can become quite fixed, regardless of feedback. Sometimes these structures act as internal feedback loops that negate the effect of outside feedback. With relatively sophisticated adults, operant conditioning tends to be ineffective if there are significant cognitive conflicts with the goals or methods of the conditioning. On the other hand, conditioning supported by cognitive structures can be extremely powerful. I don't believe that, purely in terms of effectiveness, there's that much difference between the modalities so long as the conditionee is 'on board' with the program.

In D/s terms, this suggests that a submissive who has a conceptualization of the relationship she's in that supports whatever methods her dom employs can be fairly easily conditioned by any of the above methods, but if she regards the relationship or the methods as fundamentally oppressive, conditioning will be very limited. In this context I'm talking about fairly complex behaviors- just making somebody tremble with fear or flinch is such a crude level of conditioning that it requires little cognitive support from the subject. Conditioning someone to have orgasms on command or to consistently adopt a particular demeanor in a given situation requires, I believe, some level of cooperation from the subject.

This doesn't invalidate the power of operant conditioning, though- it just clarifies where and how it can be most effective.

As for changing behaviors being right or wrong- yes. Sometimes. It depends.

Oh, and it's important to remember that operant conditioning doesn't teach behaviors, it just reinforces them (or discourages them). When it comes to getting someone to do something new and different, a different kind of learning is required.

 

[timberwolf05]

When I was in Boot Camp, the Drill Instructor said he had a choice, he could use Neg Reinforcement or Pos reinforcement. He said using Pos would accomplish the same thing, but take much longer to train us. So he said he'd be using Neg Reinforcement to train us.

It worked, we all strived to fulfill his expectations, ... but it didn't endear him to us.

For me, the term "Loving Domme" signifies Her interest in my mental and physical training, growth and pleasure.

==========================================================

It worked, we all strived to fulfill his expectations, ... but it didn't endear him to us.
========>>> up to the exact moment ALL the DI's take off when ya go to the rifle range...they know damned well they could...get...just..''accidently'' shot..

 

[John Doe]

Goood doggie! Here's a biscuit...

 

[landcruisergal]

An interesting theory for behaviour modification in a bdsm/slave context is
here

I was trained by both +ve and -ve reinforcment. My PYL found it amusing to have me trying to predict what was going to reap a reward or punishment.
I use positive reinforcement and punishment on my pup...(dog training habits), with variable results.
As both my relationships are part time, as long as the role required by the PYL is adhered to in scene and communication only, I cannot foresee any long term harm in such behavioural modification in our cases.

 

[RJMasters]

Great thread Marquis,

In many ways Skinner made Maslow his bitch to be sure lol. It may be unfair to do a direct comparison between the two, as one deals more with the dynamics of behavior and the other is more an ordered list of needs, however both make claims as to why people behave the way they do. Some good things can be gleaned from a D/s persepctive of Maslow's thoughts as well. Maslow's original thoughts on the hierarchy of needs had a good basic concept, however his later more developed ideas help to visualize better the understanding of his theories. Original Basic Conepts Further Developed Concepts

In short what I like about Maslow's Further Developed Concepts in the context of a D/s perspective, was in a sense spelling out what I see to be a good basis or foundation for both dominant and submissive. I don't like so much the forced order thing he tries to present from the bottom to the top. I see more of the physical health, emotional health and mental health as representing all three points of the pyramid and arrows coming from each one, pointing to the center where the "self actualize" being exists. The Physical, emotional and mental health represents for me the body, the heart and the mind of a person. This is why I like his concepts in the D/s context only with out the forced order of things. Since one of the core truths in D/s is learning in part to accept yourself as who you are (self actualized), his theories and some of the basic concepts of D/s often coincide with each other. I certainly do not believe this is an all encompassing answer, but for those wishing to delve further into this and glean what they can, I offer that up for thought.

I could spend hours talking about Skinner's Behavior modification concepts and additional similar concepts that modern psychology espouses. I think the reality of behavioral modification often is much more a natural occurrence. I take Marquis's inquiry of this in how it fits into the D/s/BDSM to mean it to be more a determined and planned expression of a dominant's will, with the clear intent to teach certain behaviors using the different modification techniques.

I would say that yes it is often used, especially in teaching rituals. But for me it "usually" happens more from an attached perspective of my morals, attitudes, whims, what have you, and positive and negative reinforcements flow naturally from my reactions. One clear example of me using "planned" behavior modification is I have a no cursing rule in normal conversation(emotional outbursts and humorous situations are taken on a case by case basis). However in normal conversation I have a 3 strike rule and your out. My goal when planning such a thing or making such a rule, has nothing to remotely do with dog training techniques. Perhaps long ago, I may thought such things all the rage, however today my view of such things are uncouth and demeaning. If two people are ok with it, then who am I to say it not a valid method of exchange between them.

In truth this is my biggest hang-up with Skinner’s theories and how it has permeated modern psychology. The aim is at the symptom (the behavior) rather than on curing the source of the problem from which the behavior comes. In the D/s context this is akin to forced submission, which may have its proper place, but by and large I see this as removing the conscience choice of the submissive to willingly submit. Some have correctly said, whatever behavior that is learned can be unlearned. For me the deeper goal of dominance is to win over the heart and mind of a person. So going back to my no profanity rule, my real objective is to "increase the awareness" of said activity in the heart and mind of a living human being capable of thoughts and emotions. So that as they become more increasingly aware of my disliking for said activity, they are then able to make a choice to not do it as an act of submission to my preferences. Do I expect perfection in this? No, but it is deeply satisfying when one slips and does use profanity and it stops them in their tracks and they turn to me and say I am sorry. Just the fact they recognized their mistake and moved quickly on their own to correct that mistake lets me know they get it, and are choosing to make the effort to submit. I am sure it is different for everyone in what they want or expect from their relationship.

Popping a pill to modify behavior is no different than skinner's basic premise is that by changing a person's behavior, that will ultimately change the way a person thinks or feels and I call this, the “outward-in” approach. I don't discount the value of this approach completely, however I feel a much more deeper level of exchange in the D/s context can be found from the “inward-out” approach. My theory is simply this.

What a person believes, effects more than not, how they feel.
How a person feels, often dictates how they behave.
Behavior stems from how a person thinks and feels.

Therefore to experience deeper levels of exchange in a D/s relationship, one must push past the dog training tricks and seek to dominate the mind and heart of another person. This takes time and patience and should not be something you are forcing down their throat but is won over time through consistency and leading by example IMO.

If your into BDSM for more the experience, then Skinner's approach might serve your purposes very well, if you looking for a long term D/s relationship, you are likely to use both, however I would definitely hang my hat on leaning to the inward-out method for more rewarding and long lasting results.


I will conclude my thoughts sharing some of the consequences I have seen or experienced online. Applying Skinner’s approach can lead to:

Pros:

It can help to establish a good routine and rituals from which both can find order from day to day.

It can often be used to meet unique tastes, which are tailored specifically to that dominant’s individualistic desires.

It can help to interrupt destructive type behaviors, thereby stopping the consequences of said behaviors until a deep look at the problem can be done.

It is often a faster way to get results of obedience or a desired behavior.


Cons:

It can produce or lead to lazy dom/dommes and submissives. – During the training phase both sides are eager and put forth a lot of energy to get the desired behavior learnt, however once the behavior is learned there is often hardly any additional energy put into it. It becomes often routine and “often”(not always) they can lead to ruts. We all get into them in life an know what that is like.

It fosters the mindless robot idea of a submissive – Though the submissive may initially make the choice to submit to such training, after the behavior is ingrained and learned, a conscience choice to submit or obey becomes more of a trained response. Some may see this as a desirable outcome, but in a way removes the moment-by-moment choice of submission. Ultimately stunts the growth of a submissive’s potential in that they become reliant upon a system of learned behaviors rather than learning deeper depths of their own submission.

It fosters the I am godlike complex in dominants – Eventually leads to unrealistic expectations for both in the relationship.

When a relationships ends – Submissives are often left with these learned behaviors ranging from orgasm control, knowing the proper side to kneel/walk on, speech patterns etc… and many of these learned behaviors only have meaning when it is expressed to a dominant. Thus all these learned behaviors no longer have a purpose until another dominant enters their life, and even then the new dominant may not want them. These behaviors then become baggage of sorts, which must be unlearned, and the new behavior relearned. Can be very hard on a person after a while.

 

[Blushing Bottom]

Great thread Marquis,

In many ways Skinner made Maslow his bitch to be sure lol.

Excellent insights.

Outstanding!

 

[bmw1080]

Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

These have never been verified by any further studies. Those that have tried cannot validate the original work by Maslow. Consequently, these are considered very basic when it comes to the HR field. Essentially, this work has been discredited by a lot of more scientific validated work since.

 

[RJMasters]

Maslow's hierarchy of needs.
Consequently, these are considered very basic when it comes to the HR field.

MMMmmmmm the phrase "very basic" somehow seems so perfectly adequate. Sometimes the simplest of things are often the best.

Essentially, this work has been discredited by a lot of more scientific validated work since.

This may be true in the scientific and psycological fields, I even seem to recall me saying that skinner made Maslow his bitch. I guess kinda of a crude way to put that I agree. However as applied to D/s.

Wether this theory originated with Maslow or not may be debatable, what is not debatable is the common sense that a core factor in any successful D/s releationship, is the desire that both dominant and submissive alike are very much interested in the physical, emotional and mental well being of each other and themselves.

I remember writing an essay in college psy 101, where I refuted Maslow's theories base on the strictness of order he attached to them(got and A). However to balance the essay, I did acknowledge that the physical, emotional and mental well being of a person, can and does effect the bahavior of a person. Scientists and psychologists can try as they like to discredit that, but I don't need any degree in the HR field to know its ok to laugh at such a farse. The common sense and reality of it is too overwehlming to ignore.

 

[timberwolf05]

1. Positive reinforcement
2. Negative reinforcement
3. Punishment
4. Extinction
=========
its late night
i'm tired
and in no mood right now to go link looking
but for whatever it MAY or not..mean to ya
using the worldly you here-----------------

you have to be damn careful who ya are messing with...
meaning..any dom/domme MUST know the subs..before anything happens
why?


proper communication..yes of course
but i am talking about..
this list you started here
if you try,.,,positive..."I" call your bluff and tell ya you are barking up the wrong tree...coz no one has ever said i was worth a shit so peddle your stuff elsewhere
the negative? i'm used to being told i am a no good sumbitch so it just falls on deaf ears or ya get your jaw jacked with a 2 X 4...
punishment?
good way to start more trouble...someone like ME...i WILL wait til your back is turned if i want to..

and i do not know about the last one

but YOU get my idea here. please????/ if you EVER try this stuff...please.........know whom you are with...

i am trying to be helpful.

i like your ideas but they need some fine tuning.

take care

 

[cati]

A question.

I have no clue what is meant by "extinction", but I'm going to hazzard a guess.
Does it mean ignoring the other person or pretending that they don't exist?

 

[Lilith]

I have no clue what is meant by "extinction", but I'm going to hazzard a guess.
Does it mean ignoring the other person or pretending that they don't exist?

Ignoring a behavior you hope to extinguish. In that way no reinforcment is attached to it and it is thereby dropped. I've seen it work.

 

[cati]

Ahhh I see..thanks Lilith

 

[rosco rathbone]

So true!

We perverse (in the original sense) masters will go to extremes to minimize this.

 

[roomfor1more]

I tend to disregard behavioral learning theory, like Skinner because it works great on animals like mice but when you talk about humans there is allot more to consider. For me I tend to prefer Minuchin's system theory or Bandura's social learning theory . Both theories take into account the effect of the environment and the role cognition, thought, plays in behavior.