Whaddya Lookin’ 1
At? An Analysis of
Confrontation
Seeking
MERRILL WINSTON, PH.D., BCBA-D
WINSTON BEHAVIORAL SOLUTIONS INC.
2
“If you meet Buddha
on the Road, Kill Him!”
Zen Master Linji, (the founder of the Rinzai sect)
But I’m sure you knew that…
There are many ways to interpret this
Buddha is a real bad-ass and you need to strike first
Someone tells you he is Buddha, and Buddha would totally
not introduce himself as Buddha so this Buddha is clearly an
imposter, and you must kill him
On the road to enlightenment, you must destroy the image
of someone else who knows what enlightenment is and can
lead you there.
It’s like rule-governed vs. contingency-shaped behavior.
Some things you just have to struggle through, they cannot
be given to you in the form of rules.
3
Kill
Buddha
4
Overview
An examination of the concept of “confrontation
seeking”
Examine the concept of affective vs. instrumental
aggression
Examine the concept of “self-control” as it relates to
confrontation seeking
Draw distinctions between confrontation seeking and
general attention seeking/attention-maintained
behavior
Provide common examples of confrontation seeking
Provide suggestions for several avenues of treatment
for this kind of problem
What is confrontation 5
seeking? (which I totally made up)
There are 2 parts to Confrontation Seeking (CFS)
1. Behavior motivated by aversive stimulation that
momentarily establishes injury* to others (physical or
emotional) as a reinforcer. Typically, after injury has
been produced, the motivation to seek subsequent
injury may be greatly reduced or eliminated.
2. The individual who is confrontation seeking:
Has some level of self-control,
Is well socialized, and
Has a decent repertoire of behavior that will
produce some opposition on the part of
parents/teachers/staff, i.e., the individual knows how
to “piss people off.”
An example of confrontation 7
seeking in a bar…
There areConfrontation
no JABA references for this
seeking isa Jabba reference
There is, however
totally a thing.
Ho, ho, ho, ho.
What is confrontation seeking? 8
(CFS) Continued…
Behavior that
demands
intervention
Confrontation
MO SD
Seeking
Shitty Morning Prompt to work
(single MO or (which is
multiple, usually NOT an
distant or Sd for CFS)
Aggression Injury
proximal)
Confrontation seeking: 9
Does the injury have to be
physical?
No!
Seeing that someone is hurting emotionally may
be sufficient
There are other social phenomenon in which the
reinforcer may be the external correlates of
emotional pain. Apologies often involve some
sort of emotional distress on the part of the
person giving the apology
This emotional distress can make the difference
between a forced and a sincere apology
Remember! You can make someone say “I’m
Sorry” but you can’t make them apologize!
10
This is NOT an Apology
Face!
Fine! I’m
Sorry! Okay?
11
This IS an
apology face!
Shame! Pain!
Sadness! You appear
to be injured!
12
Instrumental
Bimodal classification of aggression:
affective defense and predatory attack.
Weinshanker, NJ., & Seigel, A., Aggression
Vs. Affective and Violent Behavior 7 (2002)
Aggression Animal ethologists have long talked about
affective Vs. instrumental aggression
13
Instrumental Vs. Affective Aggression
Instrumental Vs. Affective 14
Aggression
Copyright 2021 Winston Behavioral Solutions Inc
Confrontation seeking starts off as (primarily) instrumental (off-task,
inappropriate behavior, disrupting the environment, property
destruction) and may become more affective in nature depending
upon the course of the aggressive interaction
It is quite common to see instrumental aggression turn affective very
quickly
It can be seen in children engaging in “horseplay”
First there is laughing, smiling and wrestling
Then there is crying, yelling and hitting
Back to CFS… 17
So, what about confrontation seeking? At least at the beginning, this is
INSTRUMENTAL aggression at it’s finest.
This means that the individual is showing considerable self-control
whereas lower-functioning individuals don’t have to “start something”
with you, they simply attack.
This is not to say that the child’s aggression cannot enter the realm of
affective aggression when the sympathetic nervous system starts to
“max out”
18
“Self” Control
He knows where your
new leather briefcase is
and he has a full bladder
“Self” Control 19
Self-control isn’t really a thing, neither is self-reinforcement (Catania, 1972)
This is really nothing more than subtle control by the mere presence of others
who can exert control if you don’t, or by very powerful contingencies of
reinforcement and punishment in the absence of any immediate social
consequence real or implied
The good news about individuals who show confrontation seeking is that they
already have pretty good self-control!
This individual is well-socialized and has learned that you just can’t walk up
to people and hit them, you must create a situation that justifies your attack
(like our friends in the Mos Isley Spaceport Cantina). It is in essence (most
likely) a negative reinforcement paradigm, you are avoiding “being in the
wrong” or feeling guilty, or something similar.
“But he threw the first punch!”
“He started it!”
“He shouldn’t have called me that name, he deserved it!”
Isn’t confrontation seeking just 20
attention seeking?
It depends on how you define attention
Looking at someone?
Speaking to someone?
Touching someone?
Moving closer to someone?
Making a particular facial expression?
Socially-Mediated (Ennio Cipani and Kevin Schock Some Book He
Wrote, A bunch of years ago)
The variables that maintain confrontation seeking appear to be
socially-mediated, yet not typical “attention.”
Isn’t confrontation seeking just 22
attention seeking?
If you turn your back each time an individual slaps his face, that
change in the environment may be enough to maintain the behavior
Each time I hit myself, this lady turns away
The act of turning away could be enough to maintain the behavior
Most people would not characterize these conditions as “giving
attention”
In fact, most behavior analysts would refer to this as “removing
attention”
Regardless, there is a clear functional relationship
Using the word “attention” is unfortunate as attention, like “punishment,”
is a word that was taken from common language. This almost always
creates problems
Isn’t confrontation seeking just 23
attention seeking?
The important difference between punishment and attention is that “attention” is neither a
clearly defined behavioral procedure, or a behavioral process, instead the term
encompasses a complex set of response-produced “human” stimuli (hence the often-heard
phrase “negative attention”)
Whereas “punishment,” although also borrowed from common language, has a clearly
defined procedure and a clearly described behavioral process.
In essence, confrontation seeking is most likely not maintained by the same socially-
mediated stimuli as most “attention-maintained behavior” (e.g., looking at or talking to
someone)
If CFS were maintained by “traditional” attention, then providing ample amounts of this
attention, right after the first instance of low-level confrontation seeking, would give the
individual what he wants, and the behavior should stabilize
Unless! The stimuli produced were of the wrong type or magnitude. The stimuli produced
might not function as the primary reinforcers, but they may act as conditioned reinforcers or
perhaps serve a discriminative function (i.e., now it’s time to start punching).
24
Is the ultimate reinforcer eye contact? Or is eye
contact an Sd or MO?
Is the behavior of public speaking 25
maintained by eye contact?
26
Back to confrontation
seeking…
CFS is not likely maintained by the typical stimuli that we
call attention, but instead it is the access to
fight/injure/destroy.
Typical attention likely serves Sd/MO functions when CFS is
taking place
Function-wise??? Access to signs of damage is one way to
conceptualize things. The behavior is “appetitive” in
nature, they want something. They aren’t trying to escape
FROM something. Ya?
When differentially diagnosing this social behavior, it’s
important to know if the individual just needs you to get
something else (a cookie), or if the person is seeking signs
of damage to YOU (emotional/physical/property)
27
Individuals may engage in behavior that they “know” is
not allowed, behaviors that will reliably increase staff
Other proximity and/or produce a demand (messing with
property or peers, roaming out of area)
examples of The initiation of verbal behavior that reliably produces an
argument or a demand, e.g., “I’m not taking my meds
confrontation today and you can’t make me!” or claiming there is a
problem when there really isn’t one (LB)
seeking Contrary responding that leads to an argument, e.g.,
Student “I can’t find my folder with the assignments”
Teacher “It’s right there pinned to the bulletin board
Student (looks right at bulletin board) “No it isn’t!”
Teasing is sometimes done not just to hurt/embarrass an
individual but to produce an attack that will justify a
counter-attack
28
Treatment
Directions
Copyright 2021 Winston Behavioral Solutions Inc
Treatment options for confrontation 29
seeking
These are not research-based suggestions for treatment,
but they are reasonable approaches given our
understanding of the problem and are all based on
fundamental principles of behavior
In essence, you can try to attack this problem
on the front end (no MO NO CFS yet),
in the middle (MO already happened no CFS yet but it’s on the
way), or
on the back end (MO happened CFS has happened, and
everyone is like I’m getting tired of this MF CFS!
Copyright 2021 Winston Behavioral Solutions Inc
The “front end” tactics 30
(MO has not occurred yet)
If you know what the MO(s) is, you can try to carefully control
exposure to it while simultaneously teaching the individual how to
respond appropriately to it
For example, this child had a problem with his work being
corrected in any way (nobody likes criticism).
One way to address this “super-sensitivity” to constructive
feedback is to get the individual accustomed to it during
something that really doesn’t matter that much (don’t start with a
difficult assignment you must correct). Start with something fairly
inconsequential (a game)
Set up specific IMMEDIATE, POWERFUL reinforcement for showing
the right response to constructive criticism. Provide reinforcement
for staying calm and for doing the correct behaviors after
criticism is given (and of course everyone must know what these
correct behaviors are well in advance)
31
The “front end” tactics
Eventually the individual should be able to handle
criticism without issue
Naturally, this tactic may not address all the
variables that contribute to confrontation seeking,
but it will address a major one
You could also use the tactic of eliminating the MO
if it is something that is reasonable to eliminate (the
individual confrontation seeks after intense
teasing). People should not be teasing him to
begin with
Naturally, you could see some improvement if staff
change the way they give feedback, the tone they
use, the words they use, the time they give the
feedback, the presence of others, etc. This teaches
the individual nothing new, but may produce rapid
stability
Tackling confrontation 32
seeking in the middle (MO
has already happened)
Let’s say you don’t know what the MO is for
confrontation seeking, and even if you did maybe it
can’t be avoided.
The individual, on most days, follows a request to work
with no problems
On a day when the MO has occurred, the same
request to work now produces confrontation seeking
If you don’t know what the MO is, but YOU HAVE AN
IDEA THAT IT HAS HAPPENED (the individual “looks” a
certain way when they’ve had a crap morning) then
you MAY be able to “reset” the individual by
dropping a huge reinforcer on them before doing
something that might be an Sd for confrontation
seeking
Cancelling an MO 33
34
Tackling confrontation
seeking in the middle
The other option, which can be used together with cancelling the
MO, or if you can’t cancel the MO, is to change the Sd that
normally occasions confrontation seeking
That is, instead of saying “it’s time to work” you ask the individual
“what would you like to earn today?”
Essentially you are trying to “counter” their confrontation seeking
by not allowing one. This is an antecedent manipulation, getting
rid of any resistance.
The problem with this approach is that some individuals really
aren’t upset about what they say they are upset about. They are
simply trying to legitimize their escalation (the daughter and her
clothes)
Finally, if someone is violating important rules as a means of
confrontation seeking, you can’t just let them do whatever they
like as a means of preventing a crisis (not a great idea in the short
run, and a terrible idea in the long run)
“Back End” tactics 35
(Confrontation seeking has
already started)
If the individual has JUST STARTED confrontation seeking and is in
what we would call the “instrumental mode” then it may still be
possible to set up a situation with competing reinforcers. Access
to one excludes the other and they are both available
concurrently
The reasoning is like this:
You are seeking a particular reinforcer (hurting others) which is
available right now if you do the right behavior (confrontation
seek)
There are currently no other easily available powerful reinforcers
that can compete. Remember, when motivation to injure is high,
typical “reinforcers” may not be able to compete, not like they
could if the motivation to injure were low
You announce the availability of the reinforcer and the behavior
that will produce it (which must be easy to do)
36
Access to this potential competing reinforcer should
“Back End”
be designed such that it reduces the possibility of
access to injury as a reinforcer
tactics For example, if there are numerous targets for
aggression in the classroom, the reinforcer is located
elsewhere
If confrontation seeking continues then the other
potential competing reinforcer is “taken off the table”
If they accept the proposed competing reinforcer, you
give it after a small amount of appropriate behavior
It is possible that you could reinforce a “chain” of
behavior that starts with low level confrontation
seeking and ends with a potent reinforcer. This is true,
however the wost behavior you will see is low-level
confrontation seeking and this is a MUCH better
problem
37
No matter what, whether they go for the
“Back End”
competing reinforcer or not, you want put the
chain of behavior on a very short leash so you
tactics can “speed things up” and try to snuff out
these sparks before they become a fire
That is, if you intervene quickly, before the
sympathetic nervous system is in high gear,
you have a better chance at de-escalation
and redirection.
For example, if normally the child starts with
noncompliance, then pacing, then cursing,
then attempted low level property
destruction, then attempted high level
property destruction, then aggression, you
would want to intervene at non-compliance
38
“Back End”
You would also want to limit the availability
of the reinforcer (hurting others) in any way
you could
tactics It might mean calling for back up quickly
If the ultimate target of aggression is the
teacher then you may want to remove the
child from the presence of the teacher or
vice-versa
If the consequence of initial confrontation
seeking is the removal of access to further
confrontation seeking, this may help
eliminate the behavior
39
You also can try prompting a replacement behavior
“Back End”
that was practiced during periods of stable functioning
(MO for CFS not present)
tactics Now, more than likely, given that you could do both,
the individual will most likely not show the
replacement behavior as it will produce a reinforcer
that is of a different type/magnitude
That is, you could teach the student to “get his teacher
in trouble” by writing them up for what they did or said
and sending their complaint to the principal. This is
what WE do when someone pisses us off, we may try to
get them in trouble with their supervisor
It is a socially acceptable way of “hurting” someone
If you CAN’T access the reinforcer you really want,
(physical damage or physical pain) you may be more
likely to accept a similar but less “satisfying” reinforcer
(revenge via formal complaint).
40
“Back End”
The individual may even be able to earn
bonus reinforcers for demonstrating the
more socially acceptable way of “feeling
tactics better again”
41
Treatment overview
Remember, confrontation seeking is a normal human behavior,
we’ve all done it at one time or another
Wanting to see someone else hurt (physically or emotionally or
financially or what have you) is also a very normal phenomenon
The goal is NOT for the child to never become upset again
The goal is NOT zero aggression for the rest of their lives
The goal is when you feel you’ve been wronged, try to “get
back” at people in socially acceptable ways (complaints,
getting an apology, compensation for psychological damages,
etc.)
The goal is to limit access to this unacceptable reinforcer to the
greatest extent possible and to encourage accepting a lesser,
more socially acceptable form of the reinforcer
The goal is to learn how to cope with the things that momentarily
establish injury to others as a reinforcer
Where can I get a copy of this 42
presentation???
Email me at Merrill@[Link]
OR scan this code with your phone for my contact info
Thank You!!!
Copyright 2021 Winston Behavioral Solutions Inc