This is Part 5 of a five part series with Dr. Susan Friedman. Susan is a professor emeritus in the Department of Psychology at Utah State University. She is well known around the world for her very popular on-line course: How Behavior Works: Living & Learning With Animals). She has co-authored chapters on behavior change in five veterinary texts, and her popular articles have been translated into 17 languages. She shares many of those articles on her web site: behavior works.org It’s a great resource for all of us who want to learn more about the natural science of behavior.

Susan is a member of the clicker expo faculty. Her presentations at the March Clicker Expo prompted this conversation on schedules of reinforcement.

In Part 1 Susan reviewed with us the basics of fixed and variable schedules. She ended with a question about how you get behavior to vary when you are using a continuous reinforcement schedule. We carried that question over into Part 2.

In Part 2 we took a deeper dive into continuous reinforcement schedules. We considered how you get behavior to vary without using a variable reinforcement schedule. Susan talked about a moving away from transactional training to training with assent.

Part 3 Susan helped us to understand schedules of co-variation. She defined conjugate and synchronous schedules and gave some very practical examples, especially as it relates to husbandry procedures that may involve some discomfort. Again, she discussed what assent looks like and what it means when an animal says no. What conditions must be present for a conjugate schedule to begin and what conditions mean that the training should stop?

Part 4 was very much about working in teams. Especially when you are working on husbandry procedures that the animal may not be comfortable with, you need to notice and respond appropriately to the subtle “no answers” an animal presents. When one person is in charge of feeding and the other is handling the procedure, effective communication needs to be there.

At the Cheyenne Mountain zoo where Susan does a great deal of consulting work, the goal of each training session is not getting the procedure done. It is having a willing animal for the next session.

She talked about the difference between empathy and compassion, and somehow that took us to parenting styles and what to do when a baby cries.

Now in Part 5 of this conversation we’ll be talking about non-linear analysis. Susan talks about the shift in focus from proximal to distant antecedents. She defines what this means and shares several stories that really help us to understand these concepts. When you’re faced with unwanted behavior an empowering question is to ask: if he did what was wanted, what would this individual be giving up? In other words what other contingencies are reinforcing (or perhaps not reinforcing) the behavior such that, from the handler’s perspective, an unwanted behavior emerges. If we could make a change in these other contingencies, we might not have to deal with this unwanted behavior. Susan’s stories make it very clear what this means and how to go about designing behavior change plans that take the distant antecedents into account. My favorite example involves the penguins at the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo.