Positive Reinforcement and Its Distinction from Reward

Definition

Positive reinforcement is the application of a desirable consequence following behavior in a way that increases the likelihood that behavior will occur again in the future. Critically, a true reinforcer is defined by its effect on behavior, not by the trainer's assumption about what the subject should like. Rain reinforces ducks' water-play but negatively reinforces cats' outdoor time; the same event is positive for one, negative for another, neutral for a third. The concept is distinct from reward: rewards are things we think should be pleasurable (ice cream, praise, money), but they only reinforce behavior if they actually increase that behavior in that individual.

In the Book

Pryor emphasizes the distinction between reinforcement theory (the science) and folk concepts of reward and punishment. She notes that many people misapply rewards by giving them for the wrong reasons ("I'm buying her ice cream to make up for scolding") or assuming they know what will reinforce ("He should want praise"). Reinforcement training is based on behavioral science: "Scientifically speaking, reinforcement is an event that (a) occurs during or upon completion of a behavior; and (b) increases the likelihood of that behavior occurring in the future."

The book describes reinforcement as a feedback mechanism: "If the behavior does not increase, then either the reinforcer was presented too early or too late, or the payoff you selected was not reinforcing to that individual." This definition works bidirectionally like a feedback loop—if you give something you think is a reward and the behavior doesn't increase, you've learned it wasn't actually reinforcing for that subject in that moment.

Pryor contrasts this with humanity's traditional reliance on punishment: "Usually we are using them [the laws of reinforcement] inappropriately. We threaten, we argue, we coerce, we deprive. We pounce on others when things go wrong and pass up the chance to praise them when things go right." The shift to positive reinforcement transforms training relationships: instead of correcting every error, the trainer watches for behavior in the right direction and reinforces it, which is more humane, faster, and builds the behavior rather than just stopping its opposite.

She illustrates with a Wall Street lawyer who transformed his squash game by switching from cursing his errors to praising his good shots. Two weeks later, he had climbed four rungs higher on his club ladder than ever before, played more fun, and felt less angry after matches. The change involved no new equipment or technique training—only a shift in what consequences followed the behavior.

Why It Matters

The positive reinforcement framework reorients training from a punishment/avoidance model ("Don't do that") to a goal-achievement model ("Do this and good things follow"). This has profound practical and psychological implications. First, it explains why punishment often fails: it tells the organism what not to do but not what to do instead, creating guessing and trial-and-error rather than directed learning. Second, it reveals that the same event can reinforce or punish depending on the individual and context—one size does not fit all. Third, it shifts the responsibility for behavior change from blaming the learner ("He's just lazy") to analyzing the consequences ("What is actually reinforcing his behavior right now?"). Fourth, it shows that learning is possible without force or fear, which opens training to subjects that cannot be coerced (wild animals, very young children, cats, dolphins, employees who can quit). For organizational and personal change, it suggests that designing systems where desirable behavior naturally leads to positive outcomes is more effective than designing punishments for undesirable behavior.