 N, C, R, non-contingent reinforcement, right? Nevermind the weird sort of issue with reinforcement and the definition of it requiring contingency of it. Independent of that, please. It's the delivery of reinforcers non-contingently. So pause before y'all break out and tell me that you can't deliver a reinforcer non-contingently. Yes, you can. A reinforcer is a stimulus. Reinforcement is a process. You are correct that reinforcement needs contingency, but a reinforcer is simply a stimulus. So I could deliver all sorts of reinforcers non-contingently. It's another way of saying, I'm going to mess with you. No, really, it has this weird effect of reducing behaviors kind of across the board. So non-contingent reinforcement, you could just, you're not waiting for a particular response, you just drop reinforcers on people. I suppose in practice, so it also relates to playing with the value of things. So if I deliver a bunch of attention for random sort of things that are appropriate in the classroom just kind of throughout the day, it might reduce your undesirable behavior that you would engage in to receive attention because we sort of satiate, did you want attention or even habituated you to attention. So that delivery, it reduces, it has to do with affecting the motivating operation. So if we're going to overwhelm you with candy or attention, let's say, then when the behavior that is maintained by those things is occurring or it's about ready to occur, as in the context of occurring, it will be less likely to happen simply because the value of that reinforcer of attention or candy, whatever it is you've been delivering non-contingently has dropped. It's a type of abolishing operation I guess in one sense. This is really weird stuff, but have fun with it.