I don’t believe it was negative reinforcement that was being used; for nothing was taken away and there were no aversive stimuli present.
I belive the term is extinction. The behavior of the players of wanting more, more, more, which is truely their right and the owners holding pat is them ignoring their behavior to place it on extinction. Which is more likely to occur if you follow behaviorism.
While I agree with most of your points, especially the main one about money. That is what this is about, money. And along with that comes greed, which more importantly describes the situation. I think to a point, all CBA issues in any line of work all fall back on money. I guess the difference is the amount of money.
I don’t belive Bettman is doing what the owners want him to do, but rather what they NEED him to do. The owners have shown more solidarity throughout this entire process than the players have; evidenced by questions of several players questioning Goodenow’s timing in acceptance of a cap.]]>
1. Why didn’t you just take the cap in the first place instead of wasting time?
2. Why didn’t you look at the Levitt report 6 months ago?
3. Why wouldn’t a system of the owners reporting their financial gains have been sufficient then?
Because the players thought it would be easy to break the owners; and continue the way things were under the old agreement.]]>