Pavlov's Diaper

[tigon]

I am not sure who here is at all familiar with Dr. Ivan Pavlov's work in Psychology on classical conditioning, so i will do a quick summary, and post a link. Understand his experiment has to do with an idea for mine.

The short and simplified version-> dog salivates for food. Dr. gives dog food and rings bell. Dogs mind associates bell with food. Repeat bell with food many times. Dr. rings bell without food, dog salivates.

Slightly longer version-> Pavlov noticed that in the presence of a favorable food, a dog salivates. He also noticed that if the same person brought him food every time the dog would begin to salivate at the sight of the person, associating them with the food. So basically what Pavlov did is that when he present food to a dog (triggering salivation), he also rang a bell. He did this many times, to get the dogs subconscious mind to associate food with the sound of the bell. Eventually he could just ring the bell and the dog would salivate...if he did it too many times without give the dog food the dog would no longer salivate at the bell. So long as Pavlov gave food every once in a while with the bell, the dog would continue to salivate at the bell, regardless of the presence of food. This is called an Acquired Automatic Reaction.

Unconditioned Stimulus = food

Unconditioned Response = salivation

conditioned stimulus = bell

conditioned response = salivation

OK, here is my idea/theory

Using this model, replace food with need to pee (tightness in bladder), and/or poop. Replace salivation with pee and/or poop. Bell can be bell or anything.

I am wondering if every time, right before you use the restroom you ring a bell. Do this every time you pee for a while. Then try ringing that bell and i theorize that if you are conditioned enough, you will start to pee (assuming you have not just peed and have some urine in your bladder). Your neural connections should start to connect the sound of the bell with beginning to pee.

Ideally your 'bell' may not want to be a common sound in case this works, you do not really want to piss yourself every time somebody rings the door bell. lol.

(basically I imagine this is what the hypnotic tapes try to get you to do, along the same theory. mine is just more direct)

If you do try this pleas let us know if it works. I may just do so myself, though I want to find some noise/conditioned stimulus that is not common.

thoughts? questions?

[curiositykilledthecat]

you have a lot of free time, don't you?

In theory your idea may work.

[PArms]

Sounds good, but if that were all that was to it, then we'd already have major problems. Everyone else out there in the world would be pissing their pants just by walking into the bathroom.

Maybe it only works with sound. Like running water.

[tigon]

you have a lot of free time, don't you?

In theory your idea may work.

Honestly, I thought of it in a matter of minutes. I know the psychology from my degree, and when my anatomy teacher brought of the idea of it in regards to human responses it just clicked. It is not so much that I have a lot of time, I just think all of the times.

I love theorizing and intellectual ideas, so fun!

[sarah_ab]

we already have this to some extant... example.. first time you wear a diaper.. its hard to pee unless you are sitting on the toilet or standing in front of it.

Many of us have a hard time at first urniating while lying down, because our body is conditioned to only pee in certain positions.

same thing with messing your diaper, its hard to go unless you are sitting/squatting, the 'natural' position we have been conditioned to be in to have a bowel movement.

[tigon]

Good points sarah_ab and PArms, I wonder if this would just amplify our ability to do so. Or if our darn cerebellums get in the way maybe it would work in sleep.

[FretaBWet]

Tigon, This is such an interesting topic. I'm familiar with Pavlov's experiments and I believe it would work based on my experiences. I was a bed wetter until I was 16 and nothing helped me to be dry at night. My parents even had me put into a hospital where a surgeon basically severely altered the end of my penis because he said the problem was the hole was too small. At 16 my mother bought a bed wetting alarm and started using it. Up until that time I slept so soundly that a burglar could steal the bed out from under me and I'd just wake up in a puddle on the floor. It took quite a while but I started to wake right up when the alarm went off (the bell for me). After a while I started to wake up just before my bladder released. Basically this is what it amounts to.

Unconditioned Stimulus = full bladder

Unconditioned Response = release of bladder (salivation)

conditioned stimulus = alarm

conditioned response = wake up (salivation)

Hugs,

Freta

[Yvhuce]

I believe that the major hole in this theory is that only some physical stimuli tend to affect our bathroom habits. And the vast majority of those simply deal with comfort levels. I think you'll find that repeated bouncing will work better than a bell.

In order for a Pavlovian response to be conditioned, there needs to be motivation for it to exist. Dogs love food, so the original experiments worked well with food and salivation. What's the payoff for peeing when a bell rings? Are you goinna get some attractive people of the preferable sex to give us affection for peeing when the bell rings, to help reinforce the connection? Pay us thousands of dollars whenever we pee after hearing the bell?

[tigon]

the payoff is that you peed your diapers, almost out of your control

[Yvhuce]

Not good enough. Especially for those who don't like the feeling of wet diapers. Try again.

[sarah_ab]

the point of classical condition is that you pair a stimulus with a biological response.. no motivation needed, its a completely biological response.. now operant conditioning usually requires something for motivation, often related to the pleasure sense.. taste, touch, smell....

[FretaBWet]

No almost about it. If you're conditioned to the bell then the response is out of your conscious control.

Hugs,

Freta

[BriGuy]

You know according to Pavlov it doesn't have to be an audible trigger. I've noticed that I am predisposed to wet more frequently and I cant hold it long when I am in a diaper. According to Pavlov then my trigger is the diaper itself. You wear enough, and condition yourself to understand diaper means "safe" and "pee" then you will have little control when in a diaper.

At least this has been my own personal experience. Maybe others are different?

~Brian

[Knuxie Fawks]

I agree, Bri. Wearing often enough and knowing that you are safe to pee freely when wearing a diaper will condition you to pee almost without thinking. That's how people who have worn 24/7 are experiencing effects of incontinence.

[Backindiapers]

I've already thought of this idea and was explaining it to my wife because as soon as I put on a diaper I have the urge to pee even if I've already pee'ed right before I put the diaper on. So I see the theory and its workings to some extent. But I would not want a bell to make me pee. lol

[ultrapampers]

You wear enough, and condition yourself to understand diaper means "safe" and "pee" then you will have little control when in a diaper.

I wouldn't say I have "little control", as I can consciously hold it for a long time, but I will say it's now *very* easy for me to let go when wearing a diaper. Yet, I never get the urge to just go in underwear. The body can indeed be conditioned to recognize the feeling of different undergarments, and the consequences of voiding in each. Underwear + wetting = "Wow, what a mess! This is immediately uncomfortable." Diaper + wetting = "I'm pretty sure I wet this thing an hour ago but I can't tell. Doesn't feel wet. Good, absorbent diapers are amazing!"

[tigon]

Not good enough. Especially for those who don't like the feeling of wet diapers. Try again.

If a person does not like wet diapers then it would be rather silly for them to try to lose control via a stumulus.

The payoff is theoretically wet diapers, it's just that, so yes it is only meant for those who want wet diapers.

Brian, yea that's why I put it as 'bell', and that your bell could be anything.

[Diaper Lightning]

right, I am with the duck. I get close to a shower or running bath water and I am toast! I have to go Pee, even the thought of stepping into a warm hot tub makes have to go pee really badly. The conditioning came most likely from 2 areas. 1) PPL telling me to go pee BEFORE we got in the pool or spa, 2) Always peed in the shower as far as I can remember and the tub, so yeah <--- conditioned.

BTW, for those who live by train stations, old churches with bells, or hang wind chimes, it may not be a GREAT idea to condition urself to those sounds as you may not be diapered 24/7 to accommodate the "rush"

[babykeiff]

I am not sure who here is at all familiar with Dr. Ivan Pavlov's work in Psychology on classical conditioning, so i will do a quick summary, and post a link. Understand his experiment has to do with an idea for mine.

...

OK, here is my idea/theory

Using this model, replace food with need to pee (tightness in bladder), and/or poop. Replace salivation with pee and/or poop. Bell can be bell or anything.

I am wondering if every time, right before you use the restroom you ring a bell. Do this every time you pee for a while. Then try ringing that bell and i theorize that if you are conditioned enough, you will start to pee (assuming you have not just peed and have some urine in your bladder). Your neural connections should start to connect the sound of the bell with beginning to pee.

Ideally your 'bell' may not want to be a common sound in case this works, you do not really want to piss yourself every time somebody rings the door bell. lol.

(basically I imagine this is what the hypnotic tapes try to get you to do, along the same theory. mine is just more direct)

If you do try this pleas let us know if it works. I may just do so myself, though I want to find some noise/conditioned stimulus that is not common.

thoughts? questions?

tigon,

you have stumbled on the core methodology used to toilet train a child.

- praise etc on successfully using the potty/toilet for pee/poop

- nothing/critism for using the diaper.

This is the 'reward' for performance. The child strives for 'reward', and will continue the performance past the reward. It IS possible to reverse this, but only by using a different 'reward' - ie a bell etc. This reverse is obtainable by consistent diaper usage only, so to nullify the link between 'reward' and 'performance'. This becomes difficult but not impossible if the 'reward' was praise AND critism was the belittlement. All one has to do is reverse the reward/criticism so that the reward for diaper usage IS praise and the act of failing is belittlement.

Actually, a child IS praised for using its diaper. This, I think is cruel since the parent knows that he/she will critique the same child when he/she is older for doing the same thing.

[tigon]

tigon,

you have stumbled on the core methodology used to toilet train a child.

- praise etc on successfully using the potty/toilet for pee/poop

- nothing/critism for using the diaper.

This is the 'reward' for performance. The child strives for 'reward', and will continue the performance past the reward. It IS possible to reverse this, but only by using a different 'reward' - ie a bell etc. This reverse is obtainable by consistent diaper usage only, so to nullify the link between 'reward' and 'performance'. This becomes difficult but not impossible if the 'reward' was praise AND critism was the belittlement. All one has to do is reverse the reward/criticism so that the reward for diaper usage IS praise and the act of failing is belittlement.

Actually, a child IS praised for using its diaper. This, I think is cruel since the parent knows that he/she will critique the same child when he/she is older for doing the same thing.

Yep! that is what i was getting at. In a sense, reconditioning

[diaperpt]

You know according to Pavlov it doesn't have to be an audible trigger. I've noticed that I am predisposed to wet more frequently and I cant hold it long when I am in a diaper. According to Pavlov then my trigger is the diaper itself. You wear enough, and condition yourself to understand diaper means "safe" and "pee" then you will have little control when in a diaper.

At least this has been my own personal experience. Maybe others are different?

~Brian

If you diaper, pee will come...

what about the factor of how much urine you've got in your bladder? If it's empty, ring the bell all day and you got nothin' to pee!

[tigon]

If you diaper, pee will come...

what about the factor of how much urine you've got in your bladder? If it's empty, ring the bell all day and you got nothin' to pee!

" (assuming you have not just peed and have some urine in your bladder)"

[babykeiff]

Yep! that is what i was getting at. In a sense, reconditioning

The point I was making, although clumsily, was that reconditioning does work - as proven by the fact that toilet training is eventually successful, but remember - toilet training is reconditioning since the subject was originally taught - using praise etc, to use its diaper for all its eliminations. Thus, toilet training is reconditioning AND incontinence training is re-reconditioning. That problem, if successful, will take a lot more work to reverse again, even if 'incontinence training' is successful. Pavlov teaches us that it is, but also teaches us that there are individual limits.

[tigon]

The point I was making, although clumsily, was that reconditioning does work - as proven by the fact that toilet training is eventually successful, but remember - toilet training is reconditioning since the subject was originally taught - using praise etc, to use its diaper for all its eliminations. Thus, toilet training is reconditioning AND incontinence training is re-reconditioning. That problem, if successful, will take a lot more work to reverse again, even if 'incontinence training' is successful. Pavlov teaches us that it is, but also teaches us that there are individual limits.

Perfecto! That is spot on

[timmyc]

I remember many years ago reading an article about a potty training device that would play music if the child started wetting their diaper/pull up. One mother was very adamant against it as she didn't want to have her daughter grow up only to wet her pants at the opera when she was 24 strictly because subconsciously she heard a familiar tune.

I of course was in favor of it (the accident, not the device)