Discussion Board (DB) 2: Building Cooperative Contexts as Speakers and Listeners (hint: meaningful posts & replying to those who respond to your post)

You should have already read Chapter 15: Prosocial- Using Contextual Behavior Science to Build Healthy, Flexible Relationships (Atkins et al., 2019) and/or watched any course videos that discuss communication. I invite you to go back to this chapter now, (specifically pp. 265-268) to the section on skills for cooperation in groups and the behavioral repertoires of perspective-taking and psychological flexibility in context of a group. As emphasized here, cooperation in groups cannot come to fruition without perspective-taking and psychological flexibility repertoires of members of the group.  As a professional behavior analyst, you will be a member of many groups composed of individuals with different roles, different identities (see 2 min video on intersectionalityLinks to an external site.), and different values. As a supervisor, you will mentor and actively support others who are members of clinical teams, IEP teams, agency departments. This means you will need to cooperate and liaise with other professionals and other departments in the community (e.g. regional centers, hospitals, doctor’s offices, community centers, potential employers for clients, preschools/daycare centers for inclusion support) and work effectively in and across work groups.

Individual interactions influence group culture and operate multi-directionally. And so, the design of a group (in the sense of the rules by which it operates), may promote a culture of cooperation and prosociality, or it may not (which can be very unpleasant). Fundamentally, group culture influences and is determined by the way we choose our words, and the words we choose should be in the interest of increasing appetitive control and decreasing aversive/coercive control —a primary task from Skinner’s (1953) perspective for evolving a more prosocial culture. This is at the heart of prosocial design of a group from a language perspective —the ways in which we speak and listen influence the extent to which we can promote well-being for all and ensure that every person in a group has the opportunity to contribute and that their voice is heard by other members of the group.

For this discussion board you re-read the couple pages from Atkins et al. (2019) from the assigned readings, and the excerpt from Ming, Gould, & Fiebig (in press) entitled “Inclusive Decision Making and Theme Centered Interaction,” which addresses CDP 3 on finding consensus in a group and Ruth Cohn’s Theme Centered Interaction work and the 10 auxillary principles for cooperative group interaction. This resource took us a little out of more traditional behavior analytic literature, and perhaps the language used, the way in which ideas were expressed felt unfamiliar and even led to some uncomfortable feelings.  Here is what is important about that – it is essential that as practicing behavior analysts we do not live and practice in a silo of our subject and our field. Ideally, we are seeking to find consilience, which is the agreement between the approaches to a topic of different academic subjects and, although that may not always be possible, there are many lines of study and knowledge outside of the field of behavior analysis that enhance our knowledge and vice versa. You will have seen in the reading that Cohn also viewed the environment as setting the context for an individual’s actions (behavior) – very much in line with the environment-behavior relations described in the science of behavior. Her work highlighted ways for individuals in groups to have meaningful exchanges on a variety of topics to come to a better understanding of each other, to take an improved and flexible perspective, in the interest of more prosocial exchanges for individual and group well-being.

This semester you will do significant work together in your groups and this is an opportunity not only to complete the trainer’s project itself with quality, but to expand your perspective-taking skills, and to pay attention to your own willingness and psychological flexibility or rigidity, in the interest of personal and group member well-being.

Houmanfar and colleagues (2015) described well-being in terms of the extent to which coercive control is minimized and optimal levels of choice are established, as reflected by individual verbal behavior with respect to others and the environment, as well as the direct acting contingencies operating within the environment. They define prosocial behavior as being any behavior that:

1. Operates in the context of positive reinforcement contingencies for others
2. Minimizes aversive or coercive conditions and the contingencies of others while not explicitly operating as part of those conditions or contingencies
3. Aids others in identifying or achieving optimal levels of choice (p 9)

Biglan and Embry (2013) identified the key features of nurturing environments as the minimization of toxic events; promoting, teaching and reinforcing prosociality; limiting opportunities for problem (antisocial) behavior; and promoting psychological flexibility. Aiming for prosociality between individuals and groups means that we are aiming to gain understanding and perspective.  We do this through language, aligning communication with values of willingness, empathy, curiosity, and equity.

Original Post (OP) 

For this discussion board we invite you to think back to a group experience you had recently – it may have been a team meeting at your workplace, or an IEP meeting, or a group interaction in your family system or friend group.  Consider what was said in interactions and how the words said may have had an effect of appetitive control or aversive control. Then:

1. Write a brief (short paragraph) summary of the interaction and identify what was said that was appetitive or what might have been said that had aversive effects. Do not share the names of the people who were involved. You can give them different names, but please make sure they are consistent with their stated identities. 

2. Identify at least 2 of the 10 auxillary principles for cooperative group interaction that went well (or did not go well) in the past interaction. 

3. Write an operational definition for both of the principles that you have identified such that you would be able to use that operational definition in the process of teaching a supervisee, or a group you are leading, how to engage in those behaviors successfully

4. Share anything you have learned about the group interaction in the process of reflecting on it in this discussion board exercise. Is there anything that could have been done proactively that might have prevented the situation or changed the situation? Work to become comfortable expressing your role in the interactions, including what went well and what did not go well. We are all imperfect and will all continue to grow as we better self-assess with self-gaslightingLinks to an external site..

Response posts (RP):

Ask one classmate a question that is meaningfully connected to their post and the readings.

• A non-example of a meaningful post is: “What do you think is the best way to create cooperative contexts as supervisors?” Although this is a question worth reflecting on, it does not connect to the specific comments made the classmate.
• An example of a meaningful post is: “You wrote about prosociality and the need to show empathy within a supervisory relationship. Can you think of an example when the same behavior might be viewed as prosocial by one person but antisocial by another person in the workplace?”

REMINDERS:

• You must respond to the topic before viewing other replies
• All students are expected to provide meaningful OPs and RPs. Performative posts will result in your instructor prompting you to write in a more meaningful way. Points are earned through meaningful posts in which you are actually interacting based on each other’s statements.
• Respond only to posts that have not yet received a response. If you provide an RP to a comment someone has already responded to, you will need to provide a new RP to someone else. If you are late in completing this DB, it may mean that you have to wait until after the due date for this DB. If a second classmate responds to your OP, gently remind them to respond to someone who has not yet had a response so that they can earn full credit for this assignment.
• Always respond to RPs. Remember these may come in late in the evening right before the due date (when you might be in bed sleeping!). This means you will likely need to respond after the DB has closed. The easiest way to avoid this is to post early!!
• Go ahead and ask each other questions if you have questions about the other person’s articles or what was written. Be sensitive that the topic may be difficult for your classmate.
• Answer your classmates’ questions if you are asked – even if it is posted up to 5 days after the question or comment was posted. Avoid ‘ghosting’ your classmates because that is decidedly not prosocial!
• If your classmate doesn’t answer your question, send them an email (they probably didn’t see it). But if you get an email, you still need to go back and respond in the DB (not via email).
• If you still don’t get a response, send them another email and cc me (I can help follow up if needed). Again, if you get an email from your classmate or me, you still need to go back and respond in the DB (not via email).
• You don’t get credit for anything that doesn’t appear on the DB so avoid outside means of communication (even if they seem more efficient). I want you to get all the points you deserve.
• We know this is a different process than you have used in other courses. Ask questions on the community thread or at office hours if you feel uncertain how to post!