In a previous article, I described how I have decided to define Drive: “I’ve had to choose to organize the different definitions of drive into 3 categories: a motivation like hunger as Type A Drive, play as Type B Drive, and the classical set of these behaviors (Sex; Prey; Defensive; and Pack) as Class C Drive.” This was done because it was about time to make sense of the misuse of the term Drive, and to compensate for how it is used in various ways in various studies and books since there is no way to re-write every study to make clarifications. By making these distinctions, I find it is easier to explain, discuss, and implement practical training and behavior modification. Someone needed to take this step, so here we are.
Let’s discuss a bit about taxis and conditioning. This topic covers some of the most primitive responses to stimuli that evoke motivation.
When discussing the scientific study of motivation, we should start with the contributions of the work of Theodor Engelmann (1843–1909) and Wilhelm Friedrich Philipp Pfeffer (1884) regarding taxis movements (approach or avoid responses by microorganisms to various stimuli). Moving forward, H.S. Jennings experiments in his book, “Behavior of the Lower Organisms, (1906)” defining the approach/ avoid response to various stimuli (chemical, electric, acid/ base, gravity, light/ dark, temperature, etc.) as either “positive” (going towards) or “negative” (going away). More recently, Clark Hull and Kenneth Spence proposed their drive reduction theory, using hunger motivation, which they would define as an example of a primary drive, and then describing secondary drives as those that result through learning because of an association with a primary drive. And even more recently, Kupfermann, Kandel and Iversen (Principles of Neural Science, 2000) adopt a variation of this same theme, but from a bio-neurological viewpoint, cast in the light of pleasure and pain processed through neural mechanisms. Note that most of the scientific work on motivation has been done in a laboratory, creating artificial responses to stimuli in ways that would not happen in nature. Rats and pigeons don’t press bars in cages to get treats in nature. Thus, surrogate experiments are being used to create pictures that can’t exist in the real world.
I propose three subcategories of what I call Type A Drive (with more consideration, I might refine these levels, but here is a beginning): 1.) Taxis; 2.) Reflexive, which would include sleep and awake cycles; and 3.) Preservative, such as hunger.
Explaining all behavior from this viewpoint is extremely limiting. I do not believe it adequately explains ether Type B or C Drives. Play, for example, is not explained this way. Neither are hunting, mating, defensive, or social organization and interaction. Higher order behavioral mechanisms, the B and C Drives, go well beyond the Type A category.
There are numerous simple motivations that we use in dog training, such as hunger. But hunger satisfaction alone isn’t going to result in having a well-mannered, obedient dog with proper social skills.
How to use my drive model in the real world?
Read my other articles.
Plan accordingly.