In positive punishment contingent removal of an aversive stimulus reduces the likelihood that the response will occur again in the future.
In negative punishment the contingent presentation of a stimulus reduces the likelihood the response will occur again in the future.
<h3>What do positive reinforcement and negative reinforcement have in common with each other?</h3>
- Punishment can be used in a positive or bad way, much like reinforcement.
- Any reinforcer, whether positive or negative, makes a behavioral response more likely.
- Positive or negative punishments both reduce the chance of a behavioral response.
<h3>What is reinforcement and its types?</h3>
- Everything that strengthens or improves a behavior qualifies as reinforcement.
- For instance, in a classroom context, forms of reinforcement may include praise, allowing pupils skip over unneeded assignments, or offering out small rewards like candy, extra downtime, or enjoyable hobbies.
<h3>What is positive and negative reinforcement and punishment?</h3>
- By including something desired, positive reinforcement improves the intended behavior (good).
- Aversive reinforcement reduces the goal behavior in positive punishment (bad).
- By removing an unpleasant stimulus, negative reinforcement makes the intended behavior more frequent.
Learn more about positive and negative reinforcement here:
brainly.com/question/2994390
#SPJ4
Answer:
psychologically; drug withdrawal
Explanation:
Drug withdrawal, according to psychological texts is defined as the beginning of symptoms, both mental and physical effects in the brain, when a material or substance is not given or reduced to the body. Thus, addiction is both physical and psychological.
Withdrawal symptoms include sweating, vomiting, fatigue, headaches, and anxiety, etc.
Arianna is also affected both psychologically and physically. The tendency to be dependent on the coffee is physical symptoms whereas feeling fatigued, and shakiness is psychological.
<span>In the early 1900s, progressives succeeded in strengthening federal control over the money supply by United States Constitution. It's a way to strengthen the way on how the banks in the state will manipulate their financial status. The answer to the question is United States Constitution.</span>
