Are Discrimination & Hate Byproducts of COVID-19? (Part 2)

A Behavior Analyst’s View on How to Prevent and Undo the Escalation of Hate and Racism During the Pandemic

If you haven’t read Part 1 of this story, you might want to check it out here.

I discussed the reasons that hate, discrimination, and racism will escalate during the COVID-19 pandemic. I discussed the mechanisms of negative reinforcement and punishment, the problems with unclear behaviors, and the results of faulty stimulus control. I also mentioned that there are things that each of us can do to counteract this.

Before I provide the exact steps in how to counteract this, I want to first talk about positive reinforcement. Reinforcement is the reason we do what we do. We examined negative reinforcement at length in my last article. Positive reinforcement is the more preferred, much nicer sibling in the pair. Positive reinforcement does not have any negative side effects and it is actually the way that you can not only establish new behavior, but increase behavior and ensure it maintains over time. Simply put negative reinforcement happens when something pleasant or preferred is added to the environment following a behavior. For example, when walking down the street, I encounter another person and smile. The other person smiles back. The other person’s smile is the positive reinforcement for my smiling. Next time I approach someone, I am now more likely to smile. Positive reinforcement is essential to undoing and counteracting the negative effects of the aversive condition we are all currently experiencing.

The way to fight the escalation of hate and racism is to first address the problems discussed in the previous article while ensuring positive reinforcement is incorporated. Let’s look at them one at a time.

1. Unclear behavior.

Performance management literature has shown us that when expectations for behavior are ambiguous, performance and satisfaction decreases and defensiveness increases (Smith, 1957). We also discussed that when expectations are unclear, people identify the behaviors they think are most likely to result in positive results. Right now, there is lack of clarity in two things:

a. What to do to prevent the spread of COVID-19, and more importantly, how to ensure it does not spread to us

b. How to ensure that the effects of COVID-19 are minimized for everyone

I don’t want to minimize the complexity of these answers. However, given that there are many smart people in the world, we are all examining these two sets of behaviors and making decisions on our own about what do to do to minimize the spread and what to do to minimize the lasting effects of an economy that is shut down. This lack of clarity results in each of us responding slightly (or vastly) differently and an increase in our own defensiveness to justify our actions. Neither of these have positive results.

Our leaders can help us with clarifying what to do. They may not be able to give us the one solution that will work best for everyone, but there are some things that leaders can do to increase the likeliness their followers will do what is asked. Here are some of the most powerful tools that leaders have.

a. Honesty. The more honest and transparent leaders are with their followers, the more likely it is that followers will adhere to the leader’s instructions. In behavior analysis, we honesty is having high say-do and do-say correspondence. Simply put, we what we say corresponds with what we or others do and what we do corresponds well with what others say. For example, if I say I will respond to you today and do just that, there is say-do correspondence. If I don’t, the correspondence is not there. Similarly, if I say something, but then others say something different and then provide additional backup for their statements, my initial statement does not have good correspondence. In other words, high levels of do-say and say-do correspondence result in honesty and low levels result in dishonesty. Many leaders fall victim to thinking they must have all of the answers. The opposite is actually true. I think it is safe to say that everyone knows we are in a time of uncertainty where no one has all of the answers. Leaders who acknowledge that and then clearly state what they are doing to solve the problem and identify the best answers will be followed more closely.

b. Pinpointing of behaviors. Leaders who can state exactly what it is they want followers to do and the outcomes that can be expected are more likely to have followers who will adhere to instructions (Kubina & Yurick, 2012). Right now there are several sets of behaviors that have been identified, which is why people are doing different things. People doing different things and the problem not getting better is what leads to finger pointing, blaming, and defensiveness. Leaders who provide clear targets and projected outcomes are more successful.

c. Feedback. Feedback is one of the most powerful tools leaders have (Ventura et al., in press). Feedback tells us what impact our behavior had. Right now we are inundated with feedback regarding the number of individuals who have COVID-19, the death rates of COVID-19 and the shortage of materials throughout America. However, there is little to no feedback on how well we are doing the things that have been asked of us. Have companies successfully transitioned to working at home? Are we figuring out how to educate online? Are we minimizing the rate of the spread of COVID-19? Without feedback regarding how our behaviors are impacting the targeted outcomes, people will eventually begin to respond differently. Leaders who provide high levels of feedback regarding targeted behaviors and the results of those targeted behaviors are more effective at directing follower behavior.

2. Coercion.

In my last article, I discussed the many negative effects of coercion. The opposite of coercion is positive reinforcement. To undo the negative effects of coercion (emotional responding, aggression, avoidance, etc.), we must ensure that positive reinforcement is plentiful throughout the day. This is where we, as individuals can make a large impact. Understanding that most of us are operating under negative reinforcement contingencies means that we understand that we are more likely to display behaviors that are less than exemplary. However, we can counteract this by engaging in behaviors that will result in positive reinforcement for ourselves and for others.

Here are some ways that you can increase positive reinforcement for both yourself and others:

a. While distancing ourselves from others, we drastically reduce the amount of social attention we usually receive from one another. Send a quick note to a coworker just to check in or create a group text message with family members. Group texts not only decrease the amount you have to respond, but drastically increases the rate at which you receive attention from others.

b. Create happy hours or other social gathering events via videoconferencing software. Get a group of friends together on video chat and turn the TV on to watch a show together. Have a drink together and turn on some music. There are creative ways that we can interact with one anther that minimizes the distance between us.

c. There are small things that we can do when out in public to acknowledge one another in a friendly way. These things will differ depending on culture by may include a smile, head nod, facial expression, or wave. When in public you can make interactions with one another during this difficult time a bit less aversive (and hopefully even pleasant) by demonstrating these niceties when you come across another person. What you might even see is that your acknowledgement of the person is returned pleasantly, further increasing the positive reinforcement you receive.

3. Faulty Stimulus Control.

Faulty stimulus control is the main reason that we see the negative responding directed at specific groups of individuals rather than it being randomly spread to everyone. Faulty stimulus control is one of the reasons that racism, sexism, ageism, and all of the other negative -isms in the world develop. Because we have not identified the correct stimulus to reliably predict an aversive condition, we adopt other stimuli (faulty ones). When contingencies are unclear, we also adopt the stimuli that are easiest to notice. For example, thunder is sometimes associated with rainstorms. Usually, lightening comes just before thunder and people learn that if they see lightening, they will hear thunder. However, when it is light outside, it may be more difficult to see lightening. Also, when you are inside you may observe that the sky gets darker, but if the curtains or blinds are closed, you may not see the lightening. If this happens, you may develop faulty stimulus control as it relates to thunder. You might instead learn that dark skies result in thunder and a fear for night develops. Because the sky is dark at night and you have associated dark skies with thunder, you are now scared of the dark. Faulty, right? Tying this back to my original premise, faulty stimulus control is now being seen across the world as people respond negatively to people of Asian decent. Because COVID-19 developed in China, all things in China have become stimuli associated with COVID-19 including people, food, and cultural practices.

Two of the most noticeable things about people is the way they look and talk. Right now we don’t want to talk to anyone, as that requires you getting close to them and we know that getting close to others increases the risk of contracting COVID-19. This leaves us with finding a different way. One way to determine if a person is aversive (in this case, has COVID-19) is based on how they look or their physical characteristics. We know that COVID-19 does not discriminate or select any race or population above another with the exception of the very young and the elderly. We know that elderly are more likely to get it and are at a much higher rate of death if they contract it. We also know that the very young are less likely to get it or at least show symptoms of it. We can fairly easily tell the difference between someone who is very old and someone who is very young. Thus, we are more likely to now stay away from the elderly and more likely to be okay with contact from young children (NBC News). Additionally, we are also searching for the reason that we all have to stay home (another aversive condition). We know it is to stop the spread, but under faulty stimulus control, an individual may adopt that really it is to stop the spread to the elderly. If you are younger, this will feel like undo punishment, which, as discussed, is something you will try to avoid and anything that is associated with that punisher will adopt the properties of that punishment. Moving forward, the elderly are now associated with having to stay home and adopt the negative association with that. Now, when you see an elderly person, you are more likely to respond in ways to escape or avoid them.

This pattern can happen with any group of people that is easily identified by their physical characteristics. Currently we know that COVID-19 initially started in Wuhan, China. I don’t know of any single person or group of people that are actually responsible for starting this virus, but because it started in this region, the negative aspects of COVID-19 are now associated with this region, the people in this region, and other things associated with this region like food, for example. Those who live in China will not adopt this same faulty stimulus control, but those who live in other regions are much more likely to. In America, it is difficult to tell the difference between someone who is American and someone who is not, but it is easier to tell the difference between an American of European decent than an American of Asian decent. Thus, in America, the faulty stimulus control will spread to those of Asian and/or Chinese decent, even if they are American and have never been to China.

How do we counteract this?

The first step is to be aware that each and every one of us has faulty stimulus control. The second step is to identify all of the things that you associate with COVID-19, good and bad. For example, you may think those who are offering to go shopping for the elderly are doing good things while those who are having their kids play together is negative. You may be more likely to eat a burger over pasta right now. Take a moment to think about how your behavior has changed over the past few weeks and what you are now doing to stay away from or not contract COVID-19. Once you have some awareness of this, do what you can to counteract these behaviors that have generalized towards a group of individuals. This is not easy and this will be something that must be done each and every day. The difficult thing in this is that most of us are not aware of how we are behaving differently or why we suddenly don’t want pasta or egg fu young anymore. Yet the more we try to identify these things and then acknowledge that faulty stimulus control has taken over, the easier it will be to change what we are doing.

Pair this with the positive reinforcement I discussed in #2 and we will be on the road to counteracting the negative effects of the largely aversive situation we are all encountering.

References:

Kubina, R. M. & Yurick, K. K. L. (2012). The Precision Teaching Book. Greatness Achieved Publishing: College Station, PA.

Smith, E. E. (1957). The effects of clear and unclear role expectations on group productivity and defensiveness. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 55(2), 213–217.