How effective is punishment in changing behavior?
Punishment is defined as the administration of aversive stimulus to reduce or eliminate unwanted behavior. It can be either physical or nonphysical. Punishment differs from negative reinforcement in that the latter increases the frequency of behavior by removing a negative event. Punishment can be as simple as giving electric shocks to lab rats to prevent them from touching a lever or as complex—and controversial—as placing criminals in jail for breaking the law. The use and effectiveness of corporal punishment have also been debated by psychologists, parents, teachers, and religious leaders for many years. Research studies have found that punishment is effective in suppressing or eliminating unwanted behavior. But in order for punishment to be effective it must happen immediately after the behavior, be severe, and occur every time the behavior occurs. Detractors of the use of punishment have pointed out that, outside the laboratory setting, it is almost impossible to consistently administer punishment in this manner. Even when punishment is administered "properly," psychologists have questioned the value of punishment in truly changing behavior, arguing that the desired outcome is only temporary. As evidenced by increasing crime rates in most major cities, punishment (fines, imprisonment,
social stigma, etc.) does not appear to deter unwanted behavior. In addition, psychologists have identified other "downsides" to using punishment. For instance, people use punishment inappropriately, decreasing its effectiveness. People punish when they are upset or angry. The recipient experiences anxiety, fear, rage, or hatred. The use of punishment can lead to more resistance and aggression on the part of the one being punished. The punishment can also backfire—instead of serving to punish a child, for example, spanking brings the wanted attention of a parent. In addition, corporal punishment defeats its own purpose by modeling aggressive or physical behavior, the very behavior it is often attempting to correct. Most current promoters of punitive discipline in the United States espouse nonphysical forms of control, such as the use of reinforcements, logical consequences, or penalties. With children, behavior modification techniques such as time-out have proven very effective in modifying disruptive behaviors such as hitting, grabbing, talking back, or tantrums. Further ReadingMcCord, Joan, ed. Coercion and Punishment in Long-Term Perspectives. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Straus, Murray, Richard Gelles, and Suzanne Steinmetz. Behind Closed Doors: Violence in the American Family. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1980. TORONTO — While recently published parenting books have preached the effectiveness of positive parenting and “no drama” discipline, psychologists presenting at the American Psychological Association’s 123rd Annual Convention said don’t put timeout in timeout yet. “Parental discipline and positive parenting techniques are often polarized in popular parenting resources and in parenting research conclusions,” presenter and researcher Robert Larzelere, PhD, of Oklahoma State University, said at a symposium. “But scientifically supported parenting interventions for young defiant children have found that timeouts and other types of assertive tactics can work if they’re administered correctly.” In his presentation, Larzelere said his research team interviewed 102 mothers who provided detailed descriptions of five times they had to discipline their toddlers for hitting, whining, defiance, negotiating or not listening. Offering compromises was the most effective tactic for immediate behavior improvements, regardless of the type of behavior. Reasoning was the next most effective response when mothers were reacting to mildly annoying behaviors, such as negotiating or whining. Punishments, such as timeouts or taking away something, were more effective than reasoning when dealing with a toddler who was acting defiant or hitting. However, punishments were the least effective tactic for negotiating and whining children and reasoning was not effective when used with children who were defiant or hitting. Longer-term effects revealed a different pattern. When the moms were interviewed two months later, those who offered compromises too frequently to the children who were hitting or acting defiant said their children were acting worse, Larzelere said. Reasoning, however, was most effective over time for these children, even though it was the least effective response immediately. A moderate use of timeouts and other punishments (less than 16 percent of the time) led to improved behavior subsequently but only for these defiant children. In another presentation at the same symposium, Ennio Cipani, PhD, of National University, said the reason timeouts don’t work or are viewed negatively is because they are not used properly. Cipani and colleagues have been able to observe, in real time, the mistakes parents can make in implementing timeout as part of their in-home services, Cipani said. For example, parents should not make spur-of-the-moment decisions to use a timeout. Rather, they should tell their children ahead of time which behaviors (e.g., hitting, yelling at other children) will put them in timeout and always follow through, he added. Examples of his work are used in his resource guide for parents, "Punishment on Trial (PDF, 423KB)." “Our clinical case findings have shown that timeout used consistently for select behaviors and situations significantly reduced problem behaviors over time” Cipani said. Child behavior therapy can also help parents and children who are struggling, said David Reitman, PhD, of Nova Southeastern University, and Mark Roberts, PhD, of Idaho State University. Roberts presented information on the Hanf method of parenting, based on the work of Constance Hanf, PhD, which allows for an initial stage of positive discipline (i.e., rewarding children for good behavior) and eventually moves into more authoritative parenting techniques (i.e., timeout). “Allowing the child a second chance to comply with parent instructions by offering a warning for noncompliance has proven beneficial. The number of timeouts during initial therapy declines, while the necessity and effectiveness of timeout remains,” Roberts said. “Over time both parent instructions and warnings becoming increasingly effective, reducing the necessity of timeout for noncompliance.” Reitman suggested that parents of typically developing children may view behavior therapy as concerned solely with punishment rather than having broad value for promoting positive child development. “People who are critical of behavior therapists because they try to ‘control’ children’s behavior are not mindful of behavior therapists’ efforts to convey to parents the value of connecting positively with the child,” Reitman said. “Therapists can help parents understand the problem, facilitate changes in the environment and help the children acquire the skills they need to become successful.” Session 1295: “Children Need Positive Parenting and Timeout — A Rejoinder to the New Book No-Drama Discipline,” Symposium, Thursday, Aug. 6, 2-3:50 p.m. EDT, Metro Convention Centre, Room 713A South Building, Metro Toronto Convention Centre, 255 Front St. West, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Presentations:
Presentations are available from the APA Public Affairs Office. Mark Roberts can be contacted by email or by phone at (208) 282-2462 [office] or (208) 705-1370 [cell]. Ennio Cipani can be contacted by email or by phone at (559) 256-4939 [office] or (559) 679-7389 [cell]. David Reitman can be contacted by email or by phone at (954) 262-5717 [office] or (954)-562-4323 [cell]. Robert Larzelere can be contacted by email or by phone at (405) 744-2053 [office] or (405) 564-3616 [cell]. The American Psychological Association, in Washington, D.C., is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States. APA's membership includes more than 122,500 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students. Through its divisions in 54 subfields of psychology and affiliations with 60 state, territorial and Canadian provincial associations, APA works to advance the creation, communication and application of psychological knowledge to benefit society and improve people's lives. What effect does punishment have on behavior?Remember that reinforcement, even when it is negative, always increases a behavior. In contrast, punishment always decreases a behavior. In positive punishment, you add an undesirable stimulus to decrease a behavior. An example of positive punishment is scolding a student to get the student to stop texting in class.
Is punishment an effective means of controlling behaviour?It has been clearly and repeatedly demonstrated that punishment can very effectively be used to control behavior. negative side effects of punishment. If we wish to stop a behavior that is already occurring, we can usually do so by simply eliminating the reinforcement for the behavior — a process we call extinction.
Is punishment completely effective?The effectiveness of punishment depends on several factors: Frequency of punishment, immediacy of punishment, and positive reinforcement on positive or good behavior. However punishment may also have serious negative effects if not carried out properly.
What makes a punishment effective?Consistency is the key to effective positive punishment.
Studies have shown that positive punishment is only effective if it is consistent. This means that the same consequence should apply each time the negative behavior is displayed. A lack of consistency will make the punishment less effective.
|
