Model A and Operant Conditioning - Informational Reinforcement and Punishment

[mu4]

Model A and Operant Conditioning - Informational Reinforcement and Punishment

Model A functional blocks have always been termed by Freudian and Jungian terminology, but these blocks can also be related to operant conditioning and the system of punishment and reinforcement as described within.

In human beings, with a conscious developed mind which process information, information itself becomes a source of reinforcement and punishment for the individual.

The four blocks of information are described below:

Ego	Negative Reinforcement(Escape)
Super-Ego	Positive Punishment(Punishment)
Super-ID	Positive Reinforcement(Reinforcement)
ID	Negative Punishment(Penalty)

When one thinks of the blocks as areas of informational reinforcement and punishment, one can see that for example when we act on our ID impulses and are penalized by the removal of Super-ID(Reinforcement) information and punished by Super-ego information(this is often thru social interaction or interaction with the world), the mind escapes to the Ego in contemplation. The ego devises the means of negotiating the world and formulating the means by which an individual communicates with the world and in turn receives new Super-ID information as Reinforcement. It is thru this back and forth that the entirety of a individuals Personality develops, weaknesses, strengths, sore spots, and sweet spots.

In progress

I have been working on this for a while and will write more about this as time permits, but I wanted to at least to give people a new way of thinking of the informational blocks within Model A, as in socionics it is not only the Ego that is important but the whole of a person's psyche.

[tcaudilllg]

Shouldn't this be moved to hypotheses/new theories?

[mu4]

It's Model A and not deviating from Model A, it's just way to integrate Model A with operant conditioning.

[tcaudilllg]

Be that as it may:
- it's not been published in a journal.
- it's your original work

You're making an exception for yourself.

[mu4]

And? I would post any of Rick's articles here as well, as well as various other members that have been on this site such as Expat. This is still my site, and in that sense my journal, and the moderation staff here maintains editorial control.

[tcaudilllg]

I think it would be constructive to see how accurate your theory really is. And I think you would be the perfect subject for that experiment, because I'm seeing a MAJOR Fi fail here.

But I guess it's good to be the king, right? Way to go, Hikikomori: you're showing us how dictatorships are really done. All pigs, after all, are equal BUT SOME PIGS...

[Gilly]

I actually agree with tcaud...this is obviously not really a 1-1 obvious correlation (and therefore speculative) and its also highly restrictive of the operative definitions of the different forms of reinforcement.

[mu4]

I actually agree with tcaud...this is obviously not really a 1-1 obvious correlation (and therefore speculative) and its also highly restrictive of the operative definitions of the different forms of reinforcement.

Operant conditioning via Skinner is based off of Freud's pleasure principle(which represented Freud's monolithic unconscious ID, but divided by death/life instinct), except when Skinner did his work it was a radical behaviorist approach and did not consider the cognitive and psychodynamic aspects.

The super-ego block is specific described as:

"The Super-ego can be thought of as a type of conscience that punishes misbehavior with feelings of guilt."

The ego is described as:

"it seeks to please the id’s drive in realistic ways that will benefit in the long term rather than bringing grief"

This is a mechanism which reduces punishment.

Freud himself laid the framework for this I'm making the association.

Anyways, I will be starting a Viewpoints forum as one of the starting points for a Socionics Journal which would collate moderation staff selected content.

[strangeling]

Outline of your concepts that I used
Positive reinforcement - something good (valued) is gained for engaging in a behavior
Negative reinforcement - something good (valued) is gained by not engaging in another behavior
Positive Punishment - punishment is avoided by not engaging in a certain behavior
Negative Punishment - something good (valued) is taken away for engaging in a behavior



How I digested it
This is really interesting. To help alleviate the problems that Gilly seems to have, I'll suggest some things. First, since the ego is really part of the superid in terms of repression in how the unconscious superid affects the conscious ego, they can be considered together, so:

Ego Negative Reinforcement(Escape)
Super-ID Positive Reinforcement(Reinforcement)

Basically, since the ego is a result of repression (thus an implied negative reinforcement to it), any positive reinforcement that the ego might create or find would help mend that conflict as it pertains directly to the superid. Then you also have:

Super-Ego Positive Punishment(Punishment)
ID Negative Punishment(Penalty)

Then, similarly, since the superego and ID are also linked in others that value it, awareness of the super-ego helps avoid being blindsided by the ID and having the superid hurt. Interestingly, it reaches the conclusion that the superego is a positive thing to have awareness of and receive through the environment, since it helps the superid. I think socionics theory acknowledges this, but it seems like most people don't understand it or disagree.



Potential Problem
The only caveat I can then think of is that you're basically suggesting that both the extroverted process and introverted process have the same operant conditioning. I could see an argument for introversion being about dealing with the negative and extroversion about dealing with the positive. Illustratively, if we consider an Ne Ti ego, then I could see an argument for an ILE using Ne to produce positive reinforcement and Ti to deal with negative reinforcement.

[mu4]

I don't think your understanding of it is any different then what I've outlined and have attempted to explain, but note I only jotted this down very quickly; I just think this is a very reliable association.

So yes, the valued functions acts as areas of reinforcement while the subdued functions acts as area of punishment. But think of this in informational terms/communication rather then behavior.

It also provides an explanation for the mechanism for the reinforcement that duality relations predicts as well as the dissolution of that interaction in conflict relations. The information reinforcement within a duality relationship, as the valued functions are areas of positive reinforcement for the duals, create a stronger bond.

Potential Problem
The only caveat I can then think of is that you're basically suggesting that both the extroverted process and introverted process have the same operant conditioning. I could see an argument for introversion being about dealing with the negative and extroversion about dealing with the positive. Illustratively, if we consider an Ne Ti ego, then I could see an argument for an ILE using Ne to produce positive reinforcement and Ti to deal with negative reinforcement.

I've thought about this before, and I wanted to go over this. Each block contains not just a introverted and extraverted function, but also a accepting and producing function.

Note the diagram below from this article: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...lation-Model-A

Work of Model A

(→)	1	→	2	→
	↑		↓		Mental Ring
(←)	4	←	3	←
(←)	6	←	5	←
	↓		↑		Vital Ring
(→)	7	→	8	→

The order of the functions of the model A is a consensus among socionists. To some extent, the standard is described in the works of Augustinavichiute diagram showing the transfer of information on the rings (the mental and vital) consecutively in the order 1 → 2 → 3 → 4 → 1 and 5 → 6 → 7 → 8 → 5. Accordingly, the main entry point for incoming information are role-playing and suggestive functions, exit points - creative and background, that is, information exchange with the outside world "meets" all the contact function.

Each block and the functions within that block works as a unit. One function a input function and another a output function.

Also I want to note that the bolded area, as the main entry point of information exchange with the outside world is the areas of positive reinforcement and punishment which are external stimulus which reinforces or punishes.

[strangeling]

So, um,

1 & 3 (leading & role) are accepting
2 & 4 (creative & polr) are producing

5 & 7 (suggestive & limiting) are accepting
6 & 8 (mobilizing & demonstrative) are producing

So if I understand this right, applying it to your model, it seems that you could further delineate this (if you haven't already) into
Accepting desires that function usage from others.
Producing desires that function usage from them-self.
Then, as an example to show how I understand that, I could say the mobilizing is positive reinforcement produced by the individual self and the suggestive is positive reinforcement produced by others.

This would solve the introversion/extroversion potential problem and you could specify how duality relates logically speaking; but you'd probably have to explain how accepting/producing differs from extroversion/introversion, so that people don't get confused, just to state the obvious.

Please let me know if this is off.

[mu4]

So, um,

1 & 3 (leading & role) are accepting
2 & 4 (creative & polr) are producing

5 & 7 (suggestive & limiting) are accepting
6 & 8 (mobilizing & demonstrative) are producing

So if I understand this right, applying it to your model, it seems that you could further delineate this (if you haven't already) into
Accepting desires that function usage from others.
Producing desires that function usage from them-self.
Then, as an example to show how I understand that, I could say the mobilizing is positive reinforcement produced by the individual self and the suggestive is positive reinforcement produced by others.

This would solve the introversion/extroversion potential problem and you could specify how duality relates logically speaking; but you'd probably have to explain how accepting/producing differs from extroversion/introversion, so that people don't get confused, just to state the obvious.

Please let me know if this is off.

Accepting and producing functions are Model A observations.

• Accepting functions - learn about the world, they are the first in the blocks to receive inform[ation from the outside. Their task - to get a model of reality, their goal - an understanding that comes around.
• Producing functions - means of changing reality. Being in a model after the accepting function, they find the solution of tasks set before them, so they do not reflect reality, as accepting, and generate a distorted picture of an imaginary world, which is a solution of their tasks.

Also I want to note Contact/Inert functions

• Inert (reference) functions - rather rigid in their work, they are almost immune to internal changes. They require an external impulse of sufficient strength to them that something has changed. They are characterized by fairly long response, and often commit the state to which led the external impact. Thus they tend towards relative permanence.
• Contact functions are very mobile and able to well manage their internal state. Through them a primary reaction to the impact from the outside happens (?). They produce an initial processing of information received, they also generate a final decision. Thus, their activity is determined by what happens around or current tasks, among which they can easily switch.

Thought of as the most important for outside stimulus are contact, accepting functions. These are the functions which are the most reactive to outside stimulus, these are the 3rd and 5th function which are in the super-ego and super-id. I think Aiss related this to me, but the article for this is not translated, and I'm not sure where it is at this time.

[Beautiful sky]

Is this your idea?

[tcaudilllg]

I'm not sure this is compatible with dual-type theory.

And it seems a major oversimplification. But I'm sure the despots who rule your island will be pleased to have yet another brainwashing method at your disposal. Your life is 1984, after all.

I can't wait to see the day that Reuben kicks your ass.

In the meantime, have fun in Walden Two.

[mu4]

Is this your idea?

Yes. I'm not done writing/discussing all aspects of it yet, think of this as an abstract.

[Creepy-male]

Yes. I'm not done writing/discussing all aspects of it yet, think of this as an abstract.

shouldn't you write the abstract last once you understand all the details? That's usually what I do, I was taught to write it last and to make it as concise as possible without being too concise. I'm just curious what your process is...

call it an abstract because it gets criticized?

[mu4]

shouldn't you write the abstract last once you understand all the details? That's usually what I do, I was taught to write it last and to make it as concise as possible without being too concise. I'm just curious what your process is...

call it an abstract because it gets criticized?

Just because I haven't finished writing about doesn't mean I haven't thought of many details. I have been discussing with people who have met me amongst other things for years.

I'm not a academic and I don't try to work the way academics do. If I write something and put it out there, the point is for it to be criticized. Some will be constructive, other will be pointless.

Anyways, it doesn't matter what people say about it or criticize it, it only matter if it's right or not. And I don't think Marista was criticizing me, I just wanted her to know I am still putting stuff down.

[Creepy-male]

I was just asking about your methodology -- you go with the "put something out there for it to be criticized method" hmmm yesssss quite interesting....

[Beautiful sky]

Yes. I'm not done writing/discussing all aspects of it yet, think of this as an abstract.

Wow, it's great.