HAHAHAHAHA THIS KID!!!!! - Page 4

On November 13 2008 07:31 Elvin_vn wrote:


Wrong. Negative reinforcement works better when you want to prevent actions. Positive works when you want to encourage actions.

In this case, punishment worked ...in a wrong way. But the result will be good XD

On November 13 2008 07:37 micronesia wrote:

Source? I have studied pedagogy and cognitive development at the undergraduate and graduate level, and this is not the conclusion they have drawn. Of course half of it is total bs.

On November 13 2008 09:24 Elvin_vn wrote:


After a bit research, it turns out that i was confused between negative reinforcement and positive punishment. And in general, like you said, reinforcement was stronger and preferred over punishment due to the side effect of the punishment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_Conditioning
http://allpsych.com/psychology101/reinforcement.html

That is in general. However, in this particular case, I still think that punishment works better.

Say, between positive punishment like spanking the kid and negative reinforcement like stop giving the kid candy when he does something bad like that, the later needs to be applied repeatably before the kid can learn the lesson whereas the former need far less frequency (because when the punishment is applied immediately, it develops a strong link to the action). Yeah but that's just my opinion.

So the correct answer is to spank the kid, not to trip him, and no more candy for him.

On November 13 2008 09:27 micronesia wrote:

I appreciate the thoughtful response. However I think you should be a bit more cautious about tossing around responses like

<quote>
Wrong.

:p

On November 13 2008 09:40 Frits wrote:
positive reinforcement is better because it works in the long run even though a punishment is 4x as powerful