Michael, J., Palmer, D. C., & Sundberg, M. L. (2011). The multiple control of verbal behavior. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 27, 3–22. __
Readers sometimes fail to recognize that pure forms of the respective verbal operants are rare outside the laboratory or instructional contexts, and a common preoccupation of students is to try to classify utterances as one or another verbal operant on the assumption that the example must be exclusively one type. Perhaps more importantly, if one fails to consider multiple control, one’s interpretations of verbal behavior are likely to be conspicuously inadequate. (p. 4)
- Comportamento verbal sob controle de múltiplos estímulos é a regra não a excessão, seja de maneira convergente ou divergente.
A mouse cannot give birth to a wooly mammoth, no matter what the selection contingencies, but a typical adult can enter a correct 10-digit phone number in one trial by engaging in appropriate echoic and self-echoic behavior. To do so through random variation would take more than a lifetime. (p. 5)
- Comportamento verbal como um aspecto vantajoso ante a natureza estocástica.
Thus, a particular topography of a response under thematic control often reveals something about the speaker’s history and the relative importance of controlling variables in a way that a response under formal control does not. (p. 5)
- A distinção entre controle formal e temático é feita por meio do conceito (pouco claro) de
correspondência ponto-a-pontoentre estímulos e resposta verbal e não sobrevive sem exemplos concretos que mostrem “algo” distintivo na história do falante. A distinção em termos de “decodificação” e “compreensão” (e.g., Souza, Hanna, Albuquerque & Hübner, 2014) talvez seja mais promissora e mais clara. Diria-se, então, que o controle formal refere-se a repertórios de “decodificação”, mas não de “compreensão”.
Rather, it is a response whose topography is common to a variety of verbal operants, each of which contributes to the emission of the response. It is a unique event evoked by a confluence of controlling variables that are unlikely ever to be repeated. Much verbal behavior is of this sort. At the level of extended verbal utterances, conventionally called sentences, it is the rule rather than the exception, but even at the level of single responses, convergent multiple control is typical. (p. 7)
- Eis o valor de sempre tomar notas sobre um novo pensamento; as circunstâncias que o produziram possivelmente nunca ocorrerão novamente
All behavior within a response system can be thought of as in competition with other behavior in that response system. Thus, many verbal responses may be relatively strong at a particular moment, but only one can be emitted at a time. Presumably one response, the prepotent response, is stronger because of its conditioning history, or perhaps because of the confluence of other evocative variables at the moment. (p. 7)
- A audiência, se entendida como um estímulo discriminativo (simples, condicional ou contextual) exemplifica o primeiro caso. O efeito de somação algébrica e tatos impuros, exemplificam do segundo caso.
That is, the strength of a response of a particular topography is the summation of the effects of all concurrent variables, be they mutually supporting or antagonistic. (p. 7, negrito adicionado por mim)
- Antecedentes verbais podem ser apresentados de maneira simultânea ou sucessiva; há efeitos diferenciais sobre a “somação algébrica”? Seria a “somação temporal de subliminares”, no nível respondente, o princípio por trás da “somação algébrica”?
The auditory verbal stimulus “color” strengthens a variety of intraverbal responses, such as blue, yellow, red, and green, while the visual nonverbal stimulus (the ball) strengthens a variety of tacts, such as ball, small, round, and green. The response green is under the control of both variables and is strengthened accordingly. That it is actually emitted arises from motivational variables and audience control as well. (p. 8, negritos adicionados por mim)
- Destacam-se (no VB) dois sentidos para a noção de
fortalecimento: a) história de fortalecimento (e.g., variáveis motivacionais) e b) variações de frequência moduladas por discriminativos (e.g., audiência). O segundo sentido, no contexto do exemplo, implica necessariamente em respostas emitidas (aberta ou privadamente). Mas respostas incompatíveis não podem ocorrer concorrentemente. Não é claro, portanto, como tal exemplo se traduz para a realidade.
In contrast, in a “good” pun, the secondary source of control is strong in the context but does not exert discriminative control over the behavior of the listener until the pun is uttered. (p. 10)
- Seria interessante um estudo mais sistemático com comediantes (ou com o produto do comportamento deles) investigando em que medida tal método de construção de trocadilhos e conteúdo humorístico é aplicado.
Moreover, just as a rat’s first lever-press, before the delivery of reinforcement, is not an operant, the first instance of a response under multiple control is not an operant. (p. 13)
- Uma alternativa: não há operante nunca.
We cannot claim that such an explanation applies to every case of derived relational responding; appeals to joint control are inferential, but they have an important advantage: They are easily accommodated by well-established behavioral principles and require no revision of our conceptual machinery. Moreover, they can potentially account for the great variability in the proportion of correct responding that is characteristic of most studies of derived relational responding […].(p. 18)
- A intermediação por controle conjugado é possível no emparelhamento simultâneo, ao longo do chamado stimuli scan. Seria possível no caso do emparelhamento sucessivo?
It’s also possible that under the control of MOs that may have been present during the initial exposure and come to strength later, a child mands koala without direct training (p. 18)
- Sobre a “dependência” entre funções verbais.