Punishment

 

When people use the phrase:
I’ve told you a hundred times.
They need to realize - it is not the child who is dense.

 

Misbehavior is generally discouraged with punishment:

The behaviors in the chart are punishable misbehaviors identified in United States schools by Hyman. (Hyman pps. 13-14)

Excessive talking in the classroom, hallway, lunchroom...	Indecent language or gestures
Insolence toward school staff	Stealing
Smoking	Drug use
Fighting or attacking school personnel	Defacing and vandalizing school property
Gambling	Throwing objects in class or around school grounds
Loitering in unauthorized places	Dishonesty
Petting	Tardiness
Rudeness	Not bringing required instructional materials to class
Absenteeism from class or school	Leaving class or school without permission
Disobeying requests of school staff	Not completing assignments
Inattention to classroom activities	Possession of weapons
Habitually breaking the dress code	Body odor
Cheating	Extortion of other students
Organized protests

 

Type 1 punishment: is application of an aversive event after a behavior.

Type 2 punishment: is removal of a positive event after a behavior.

Technically punishment is a decrease in the rate of a behavior. For example:

• If a child was spanked for running onto the road and stops running on to the road, then the spanking was punishment.
• If the child continues to run onto the road, then she was not punished.

In the classroom if a child completes an assignment and the teacher says very good and the frequency of completion decreases, because of the teacher’s praise, then the student has been punished.

Again, Punishment is technically defined by its effect on behavior.

Punishment can include sounds, smells, tastes, visual images, or physical sensation.

Research supports both types of punishment as both working and not working.

Research also supports that punishment decreased misbehavior of people not being punished, but observed or heard about the punishment of others (Foxx, 1982; Axelrod, 1983; Van Houten, 1983). By definition it is punishment, since it reduces the future probability of behavior.

Baer (1971) argues that punishment is legitimate, commendable, and justifiable when it relieves persons of the even greater punishments that could result.

Ethical Considerations

1. Identify the rationale for the treatment.
2. Identify techniques to use.
3. Use the doctrine of the least restrictive alternative. This means that other less intrusive procedures must be considered and/or tried before punishment is presented. This is based on the premise that the individual has the right of basic human freedoms. The intervention should not cause pain, tissue damage, humiliation, discomfort, and stigma as expected side effects accompanying the behavior change. Carr and Lovaas (1983) state the use of punishment by contingent presentation of a stimulus should not be the method of first choice, even when trying to reduce self injurious behavior. Should try 1) DRO, 2) DRO with extinction, 3) time out from positive reinforcement, so all environmental reinforcement is reduced, and 4) DRO combined with positive practice overcorrection, the intent is to have the individual practice appropriate, alternative responses. There may be times when none of these are appropriate, but you should have considered them and why they are not appropriate.
4. Know if the issue is related to cruel and unusual punishment, and cruel and unusual punishment according to Longo (1981) serves no more effective purpose than a lesser punishment; and is inflicted arbitrarily. The 18th amendment provides protection from this and the 14th protects individuals from harm. This protection has been upheld by the courts in several cases Wheeler vs. Glass, 1973; NY Association for Retarded Children v. Carey, 1975. Also in Ingraham v. Wright (1977) they upheld the notion that paddling as swatting of a student on the buttocks in the presence of witnesses, does not violate constitutional protection against cruel and unusual punishment. To lessen the risk three controls should be set-up 1) a review mechanism should be followed before, during, and after the punishment is administered; 2) staff should be properly trained and supervised; and 3) informed consent should be obtained from parents or legal guardians. Informed consent should include review of materials to deliver the stimulus, should discuss the nature and side effects of the program, all should experience the aversive stimulus themselves, public should be made aware of the proposed treatment. The person asked for consent should be able and capable to understand the program (language, mentally competent, no jargon).
5. Have consent prior to implementation of a punishment procedure.

Decision Model before Initiation of Punishment

• Assess the severity, harmful, too major to ignore
• Rule out medical problems
• Does the behavior restrict the individual from earning reinforcement? If not use another strategy.
• Is the behavior reinforced by reinforcers? If so use another strategy.
• Could the environment of the classroom be changed? Reduce distractions, add sensory objects to have the subject engage in alternate behavior, ... see environmental.
• Could the curriculum be adapted?
• What extent does an antecedent event affect performance?

If decide punishment is the right procedure, then decide what procedure will be most effective.

Examine previous intervention records for other types and success of interventions and medical records.

If a least restrictive model is used, then the following should be considered in the following order: response cost, time out from positive reinforcement, and overcorrection.

The final decision should be based on:

1. the individual characteristics of the child and the behavior problem,
2. the likelihood of the program being implemented and carried out in a consistent manner,
3. the probability of successfully eliminating the behavior, and
4. the ethical and legal legitimacy of using the procedure. Then implement and evaluate.

Other Considerations

• When any punishing event occurs it should be accompanied by a verbal reprimand so that the verbal reprimand acquires an aversive property. i.e. NO or STOP THAT. Collect data to see if the program is working.
• If a teacher uses mild forms of punishment i.e. saying to please sit down, it may be less effective than saying sit down and mean it once. As Madsen, Becker, Thomas, Koser, and Plager (1968) showed that repeated use of a reprimand served to increase behavior rather than decrease it.
• To be effective the aversive stimulus must be delivered immediately after the maladaptive behavior occurs. It is even more effective to apply the punishment at the start of the procedures, this stops the secondary reinforcers from being initiated Barlow (1972).
• Be consistent and keep warnings to a minimum.
• Use a combination of procedures especially DRI and DRO. Use the FAIR PAIR RULE, for every behavior you decrease increase one or more others. Walker (1979) found punishment was most successful if used with reinforcement of incompatible behavior.
• Holz, Azrin, and Ayllon (1963) found punishment ineffective in reducing psychotic behavior when the behavior was the only way to receive reinforcement.
• Observe for an increase of other inappropriate behaviors that may result from the punishment. Students who are reprimanded for leaving their seats may stay in their seats, but begin to shout or snap their fingers for the teacher’s attention.

Negative Consequences from Punishment

• Punishment creates negative emotions. Since punishment is an averse happening, they cause fear, anger, anxiety, withdrawal, and undermine relationships.
• The punisher is negatively reinforced. That is when the punisher applies the punishment and the behavior stops the punisher is reinforced by the decrease of that behavior. The next time the behavior occurs the punisher will likely use the same procedure to remove the negative effect. Resulting in a belief that punishment works.
• Example, A teacher who starts the day or week by telling students to "be quiet!". Later, the "be quiet!" does not get the same reaction so s/he says "be quiet!" a little louder and gets results. The next time when students do not respond the first time s/he thinks well last time I was a little louder so let’s try it again. Before long s/he is yelling. Resulting in an increase of the teacher's aggressive behavior.
• Severe punishment can produce aggressive behavior to terminate the punishment.
• Most of the time when people are being punished they are thinking about revenge. They may also resolve never to be caught again. If a person does decide not to repeat the behavior that caused the punishment, they do so because of fear and intimidation, not because they have developed a caring attitude, principles of right and wrong, a strong character, or strong moral values.
• Punishment can cause a person to withdraw. A person punished for being late to class may not come to class. Individuals can also escape by taking alcohol and drugs, or tuning out, or suicide.
• People who observed aggressive behavior used the same behaviors. Bandura (1969) BOBO doll.
• Negative modeling: spanking a child while saying, "This will teach you not to hit anyone."
• Punishment is unpredictable.

Source: Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & W. L. Heward. (1987) Applied behavior analysis. Columbus: OH. Merrill Publishing Co.