 Sharon, Sharon, Sharon, Sophia, Sharon, Sophia, there's a, I don't know why I'm awful with names, I just am. So, Sharon, you asked a question about pairing, developing new reinforcers and all that stuff on the video regarding, hold on, let me get my cheat sheet here, unconditioned reinforcers. So really what I have to do is say, you know what, just back the truck up, completely back it right up all the way to Pavlov because that's where you're going to need to go to understand the answer here, all right, and that's a long back up and you're going to have to cross an ocean. So, I don't know, maybe there's a land bridge, maybe we have to back up so far that there's a land bridge. No, I'm sorry, I'm trying to be funny a little bit and just be out of line, but it's a classical conditioning procedure, right? So, if we're developing a new reinforcer, so if we have a neutral stimulus and we're going to pair it with a stimulus that isn't neutral, that's an unconditioned stimulus, right? So, we're going to pair this neutral stimulus with an unconditioned stimulus and this neutral stimulus will soon become a conditioned stimulus if you do your work right, okay? So, now this conditioned stimulus takes on some of the properties and don't tell Skinner I said it that way because it's completely wrong, but it's going to take on some, it's have some of the similar properties, it's going to have some of the similar effects on behavior that this unconditioned stimulus did, all right? It's not exactly the same, there's a lot of nuance here and I'm bastardizing an entire field down into like one second sentence, but I just don't judge me too much. So, we have this conditioned stimulus which is now a reinforcer, right? So, sure, you could take another stimulus, another neutral stimulus and pair it with this one, okay? And that's called secondary level conditioning. If you did it again, it would be tertiary level conditioning, here's the problem. It doesn't hold much value for the organism. You can do it, there's a fair amount of evidence supporting secondary level conditioning. So, I'm talking classical conditioning now. So, you take the neutral stimulus, you pair it with an unconditioned stimulus, you develop a conditioned stimulus. Now, we're going to take a neutral stimulus and pair it with that new conditioned stimulus and we're going to develop the second conditioned stimulus up here, or sorry, this one becomes the second conditioned stimulus. That secondary conditioning, tertiary, we're bringing that to a whole new level, the evidence just starts to get really wonky as you get further away from that original unconditioned stimulus. I don't have a really good answer for you as to why, without getting into a lot of conjecture about some biology. Wow, that's an interesting way to say biology. So, it was biology there for you. So, about getting into biology, we just know that based on the empirical literature from non-humans and humans alike, that you really do need to try to pair any new stimulus with an unconditioned reinforcer. Part of the reason, I think, is that when you start to get into motivating operations and things like that, they're going to start losing their, these neutral stimuli that become conditioned stimuli, they're going to start losing their effect because, oh man, I wasn't going to get into the Rescorla-Wagner model, but I have to. Did you catch that? Go back and read Rescorla-Wagner. Please, just go to classical conditioning, read Rescorla-Wagner. Understand that conditioning is actually about predictability. Okay, does the conditioned stimulus happen? Does it basically predict that the unconditioned stimulus is going to occur? Again, go back to Rescorla-Wagner, understand it as you start to get further away from that unconditioned stimulus, the probability of that stimulus predicting the unconditioned stimulus is largely gone. Okay, and it'll hold behavior for a little while, but it's not going to hold it for a long time. So you have to keep reintroducing that unconditioned stimulus, keep repairing it. All right, so I know I'm sitting here talking about classical conditioning, like, but I had an operate question that was about, or it was about reinforcement and operate conditioning, and I just wanted to know why those reinforcers work the way they did, and they can't do this and can't do that. And you're answering me with all sorts of stuff about Pavlov and Rescorla-Wagner. Yep. It's all tied together, folks. There isn't really a separation between classical and operate conditioning and pragmatics, I mean, in a real sense, because they're all interlinked, right? They're just different types of reinforcement or just different types of conditioning that's happening to you as an organism. So remember that. They're not, he's just like, I'm going to own the use up and conditioning. Congratulations, and you did respond to conditioning to do it. Anyway, so sorry, they all interlinked, they all related to each other. So yep, I am telling you to go back to your book, maybe go back to some of our videos and look up some of the stuff on classical conditioning. I think that'll help you a little bit. Secondary and tertiary conditioning is your reasoning. Sharon, Sharon, Sophia, whatever it is. Thank you very much for your question. Please do ask more and I will try to be a little less snarky next time, or not. We haven't quite figured out what reinforces us here at Psychor, but we know one thing's for certain that you could probably maybe possibly do some reinforcement for us by liking, subscribing, and sharing. It might keep the videos coming because who knows, it's a pretty damn thin schedule that we're on and who knows when we're going to reach that extinction break point and it just starts to go downhill. I don't know when that's going to happen. So prevent it, please.