• assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Positive reinforcement is always better than potential negative reinforcement.

    Not if you’ve experienced the potential negative. And I think there’s actually a psychological basis to this. The best example of this is food that’s a little past the expiry date. The only reason to not eat it is because I could get sick. If I’ve been fine so far, I’ll just eat it without a worry. But if I end up with painful stomach cramps and nausea and I’m running to the bathroom constantly, the next time I’m faced with the dilemma, I’m just throwing the food in the trash.

    Psychologically I think our lizard brain creates a negative association. If we eat something that makes us sick, we aren’t going to be eager to eat it again in the future because of our negative experience. That’s why I’ll still occasionally gag if I have a drink with whiskey.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not if you’ve experienced the potential negative

      Nope, still is.

      It’s basically psychology. Might not be taught in highschool, but it’s incredibly basic.

      Not just humans either, it’s how all mammals are, that’s how basic it is.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Yeah, theres some good studies on it you can look up if you want. But I was dumb enough to major in psych in college and they can still be a bit wordy for me.

          Think about a slot machine. People will dump thousands of dollars into one a night for the brief dopamine of a single $200 win.

          Meanwhile everyone going 10 mph over the speed limit keep doing it despite knowing at any minute they may get a speeding ticket.

          Even if the negative is consistent after a certain threshold, all that does is get the bare minimum to avoid it.

          What is surprising is a random positive reward is better at motivating than a consistent one. To take it back to slot machines, if everytime you put in a dollar you got a dime, no one would ever play. Even if the result is the same at the end of the day, the randomness makes our brain want to keep trying.

          • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Agreed. Our brain keeps thinking “the next one could be it”.

            I think I see what you’re saying about speeding. Negative reinforcement can influence behavior, but it’ll go as far as to avoid the negative, no further. You won’t get a compulsion like you do with random rewards. I see your point.