Introduction Punishment is:
Poorly understood Frequently misapplied Controversial
Will you ever use it? Under what conditions? Why talk about it?
Many states have outlawed the use of some punishers (e.g., contingent electric shock)
Some advocates claim that reinforcement-based procedures are sufficient to reduce all problem behavior (e.g., DRO, DRA) Others disagree Even if we are able to eliminate the clinical/educational
need for punishment, research on punishment is still warranted
Punishment contingencies that are arranged by the physical world are impossible to eliminate – exs?
Punishment is Controversial
Punishment…….
Should only be used if there is a doctoral level behavior analyst on staff full time
Why?
Introduction
As a principle of behavior, punishment is not about punishing the person.
Punishment is a: response consequence contingency that suppresses the future frequency of similar responses.
Definitions & Nature of PunishmentPositive Punishment: Type I Punishment
Presentation of a stimulus (or an increase in the intensity of an already present stimulus) immediately following a behavior that results in a decrease in the frequency of the behavior.
Negative Punishment: Type II Punishment
The termination of an already present stimulus (or a decrease in the intensity of an already present stimulus) immediately following a behavior that results in a decrease in the future frequency of the behavior.
Three-term contingencies illustrating positive and negative punishment of a discriminated operant:
•A discriminated operant for punishment is the product of a conditioning history in which responses in the presence of the SDp have been punished and similar responses in the absence of the SDp have not been punished.
•A response (R) emitted in the presence of a discriminative stimulus (SDp) is followed closely in time by a stimulus change (SP) and results in a decreased frequency of similar responses in
the future when the SDp is present.
Definitions & Nature of PunishmentDiscriminative Effects of Punishment
SDp
A stimulus condition in the presence of which a response has a lower probability of occurrence than it does in its absence as a result of response-contingent punishment delivery in the presence of the stimulus.
Definitions & Nature of Punishment Unconditioned Punisher
Primary punisher or unlearned punisher E.g.?
Conditioned Punisher Secondary punisher or learned punisher E.g.?
Verbal Analog Conditioning E.g.,?
Generalized Conditioned Punisher E.g.,?
Definitions & Nature of Punishment
- IMPORTANT POINT -
Punishers, like reinforcers, are not defined by their physical properties, but by their functions.
What does that mean?
Ethical Considerations Regarding the Use of Punishment
Right to Safe and Humane Treatment The first ethical canon and responsibility for any human
services program is to do no harm. Least Restrictive Alternative
Doctrine of the Least Restrictive Alternative The less intrusive procedures should be tried and found to
be ineffective before more intrusive procedures are implemented.
Interventions can be viewed as falling along a continuum of restrictiveness from least to most.
Gast & Wolery (1987) suggest that a more intrusive but effective procedure should be chosen over a less intrusive but ineffective procedure
Hierarchy of Procedural Alternatives Level I
Reinforcement-Based Strategies Level II
Extinction Level III
Negative Punishment Level IV
Positive Punishment
Least intrusive
Most intrusive
Ethical Considerations Regarding the Use of Punishment Right to Effective Treatment
Failing to use a punishment procedure that research has show to suppress self-destructive behavior similar to the client’s is unethical because it withholds a potentially effective treatment and may maintain a dangerous or uncomfortable state for the person.
Developing and Using a Punishment Policy with Procedural Safeguards Follow a written policy statement. Consult local, state, or professional association
policy statement regarding the use of punishment.
BACB Guidelines for Responsible Conducthttp://www.bacb.com/consum_frame.html
4.02 Reinforcement/Punishment.
The behavior analyst recommends reinforcement rather than punishment whenever possible. If punishment procedures are necessary, the behavior analyst always includes reinforcement procedures for alternative behavior in the program
ABA Statement on the Right to Effective Behavioral Treatmentwww.abainternational.org/ABA/statements/treatment.asp
Individuals who receive behavioral treatment have a right to… 6 - The most effective treatment procedures available: An
individual is entitled to effective and scientifically validated treatment; in turn, the behavior analyst has an obligation to use only those procedures demonstrated by research to be effective. Decisions on the use of potentially restrictive treatment are based on consideration of its absolute and relative level of restrictiveness, the amount of time required to produce a clinically significant outcome, and the consequences that would result from delayed intervention.
Possible Side Effects and Problems with Punishment
Elicitation of undesirable emotional response and aggression Punishment, especially positive punishment in the form of
aversive stimulation, may evoke aggressive behavior with respondent and operant components.
Aggressive behavior following punishment that occurs because it has enabled the person to escape the aversive stimulation in the past is referred to as operant aggression.
Escape and Avoidance Natural reactions to aversive stimulation As the intensity of the punisher increases, so does the
likelihood of escape and avoidance. Can be minimized by providing alternative responses that
come into contact with reinforcement and avoid the punisher.
Possible Side Effects and Problems with Punishment
Increased rate of the problem behavior under nonpunishment Behavioral Contrast
Change in one component of a multiple schedule that increases or decreases the rate of responding on that component is accompanied by a change in the response rate in the opposite direction on the other, unaltered component of the schedule.
Possible Side Effects and Problems with Punishment Modeling undesirable behavior
Punishment tactics may model undesirable behaviors. 2 decades of research have found strong correlation between young
children’s exposure to harsh and excessive punishment and antisocial behavior and conduct disorders as adolescents and adults.
(Patterson, 1982; Patterson, Reid, & Dishion, 1992; Sprague & Walker, 2000).
Not teaching the learner what to do
Overusing punishment because of the negative reinforcement it provides the punishing agent.
Negative Reinforcement of the Punishing Agent’s Behavior Punishment reinforces the punisher. Punishment tends to terminate the punished behavior quickly. The
punisher’s behavior tends to be negatively reinforced by the immediate cessation of the punished behavior.
Begin with a moderately high-intensity stimulus Do not begin with a mild punisher and
slowly escalate the intensity (habituation might occur)
Deliver the event immediately following behavior
Deliver the event on an CRF schedule Schedule thinning can occur after the
response has been reduced
Increasing the Effectiveness of Punishment
Reinforce an alternative behavior
Open = No SR+
Closed = SR+
No Punishment Punishment
Thompson et al. (1999)
Examples of Positive Punishment Interventions Reprimands
The delivery of verbal reprimands following the occurrence of misbehavior is an example of attempted positive punishment.
Reprimands given repeatedly may lead to the subject habituating to the stimulus
Response Blocking Physically intervening as soon as the person begins to emit the problem
behavior to prevent or “block” the completion of the response has been show to be effective in reducing the frequency of some problem behaviors.
Suppressive effects of response blocking may be due to punishment or to extinction.
Response blocking as a treatment intervention must be approached with great care.
Side effects such as aggression and resistance to the response blocking procedure have occurred in some studies.
Examples of Positive Punishment Interventions Contingent Exercise
An intervention in which a person is required to perform a response that is not topographically related to the problem behavior.
Contingent Electric Stimulation 46 studies have demonstrated that contingent electric
stimulation can be a safe and highly effective method for suppressing chronic and life- threatening self-injurious behavior (SIB).
Self Injurious Behavior Inhibiting System (SIBIS) One of the most rigorously researched and carefully
applied procedures for implementing punishment by electric stimulation for self-inflicted blows to the head or face.
Guidelines for Using Punishment Effectively Select Effective and Appropriate Punishers
Punishment as part of a behavior change program has nothing to do with retribution.
Punishment is not about threats. When punishers are threatened and not delivered, the child learns that
your verbal threats are not associated with the actual punishing behavior. Conduct Punisher Assessments
Parallel process to a reinforcer assessment Advantages: 1. The sooner an effective punisher can be identified, the sooner it can be
applied to treat the problem behavior. 2. Data from punisher assessments might reveal the magnitude or intensity
of punisher necessary for behavioral suppression. Allows practitioner to determine the smallest intensity of punisher that is still affective.
Consider Using Varied Punishers Varying the form of the punishing stimulus enhanced the punishing effect. It appears that by presenting a varied format of commonly used punishers,
inappropriate behaviors may further decrease without the use of more intrusive punishment procedures.
Guidelines for Using Punishment Effectively
Use the Least Intensity of Punishment That is Effective
Ethical guidelines and the doctrine of the least restrictive alternative demand that the most effective, but least intrusive, form of punishment be used initially.
Questions to answer when deciding on a form of punishment: Will this form of punishment suppress the behavior? Will this form of punishment be controlled from application to
application? Punishment is more effective when the stimulus is delivered at its
optimum level initially than when its intensity is gradually increased over time.
Guidelines for Using Punishment Effectively Deliver the Punishment Immediately
Every instance of the inappropriate behavior should be punished. Punishment affects most the behavior that immediately precedes the
onset of punishment.
Deliver the Punishment at the Beginning of the Response Chain
As much as practical, punishment should occur early in the behavioral sequence rather than later.
. Experience the Punishment Personally
Practitioners should experience any punisher personally before the treatment begins
Doing to reminds the practitioner that the technique produces physical discomfort.
Guidelines for Using Punishment Effectively Punish Each Instance of the Behavior
Punishment is most effective when the punisher follows each instance of the behavior.
Record, Graph and Evaluate Data Daily Data collection in the first session or two of a punishment based intervention is
especially critical. Graphing the frequency of the target behavior before, during, and after the
presentation of the punisher establishes the effectiveness of punishment
Deliver the Punishment Unemotionally Punishment should be delivered in a business-like, matter-of-fact manner. Resist statement such as, “I told you so.” “Now, you’ve gone and done i.”
and “What do you have to say for yourself?” All you want to do is modify behavior, not make people atone for their sins.
Guidelines for Using Punishment Effectively
Watch for Side Effects of Punishment The suppression of one inappropriate behavior may lead to the
increased expression of another or the complete suppression of all other behaviors.
Decreasing episodes of self-injurious behavior bay produce increased levels of verbal noncompliance
Expand observations to include collateral or parallel behaviors
Provide Response Prompts and Reinforcement for Alternative Behavior.
Punishment is most effective when the learner can make other responses for reinforcement.
The more reinforcement the learner obtains by emitting appropriate behavior, the less motivate he will be to emit the problem behavior.
Some Research to Consider Positive punishment is sometimes necessary to reduce problem
behavior Hagopian et al. (1998) – Participants with DD who displayed
problem behaviors with various functions FCT alone was ineffective FCT + EXT ineffective for over half of participants when
they tried to thin the schedule of reinforcement FCT + punishment produced a 90% or greater reduction
in problem behavior even when schedule was thinned Positive punishment may be less aversive than extinction
Hanley et al. (2005) allowed individuals to choose which intervention they preferred
FCT + Punishment was preferred to FCT + Extinction
Some Research to Consider Modeled use of LRA and moving
through the hierarchy Rapp et al. (2001) Treated a girl with pica – evaluated: Noncontingent Reinforcement (food) Blocking versus Mild reprimand NCR + Blocking Aversive tone
Concluding Perspectives Recognizing Punishment's Natural and
Necessary Role in Learning Behavior analysts should not dismiss punishment
as a potentially helpful option
Punishment is a natural part of life Whether punishment is socially mediated, planned
or unplanned, or conducted by sophisticated practitioners, Vollmer (1998) believed that a science of behavior should study punishment.
Concluding Perspectives More Research on Punishment is Needed
Many recommendations for punishment are derived from basic research conducted more than 40 years ago.
Interventions Featuring Positive Punishment Should be Treated as Default Technologies Iwata (1988) recommended that punishment-based
intervention involving the contingent application of aversive stimulation, such as SIBIS, be treated as default technologies.
A default technology is one that a practitioner turns to when other methods have failed.
Level III – Negative Punishment
An event is terminated immediately following a behavior behavioral reduction
2 Types Response cost: Loss of actual reinforcers to which
the individual currently had access e.g., loss of tokens
Time-out: Loss of access or opportunity to receive reinforcers contingent upon problem behavior
e.g., loss of access to Mom’s attention and cool toys around the house
Contraindicated for behaviors maintained by escape!
Example of Time Out SD
Adult says, “Let’s open
our books to page 12.
Each of you should read
the first paragraph to your buddy.”
Response
Child pokes his
buddy
SR-
Adult places child in time
out (peer attention is removed)
Poking a buddy occurs less often in the future when the teacher gives a classroom instruction and peer buddies are available.
EO
Child is participating in classroom
buddy activities,
where attention
from peers (a positive
reinforcer) is available.
Time-out Procedures
Nonexclusion Planned ignoring Withdrawal of a specific positive
reinforcer Contingent observation Time-out ribbon
Exclusion Time-out room Partition time-out Hallway time-out
Effective Use of Time Out Reinforce and enrich the time-in
environment Utilize differential reinforcement to
reinforce alternative and incompatible behaviors
Clearly define the behaviors leading to time-out All parties (including the target individual)
should have explicit, observable definitions of the problem behavior
Effective Use of Time Out Define procedures for the duration of time-out
Initial duration should be short Longer than 15 minutes ineffective
After time out return student to activity he was previously engaged in (don’t “hold a grudge”)
Define exit criteria If individual is misbehaving when time-out ends, it
should be continued until inappropriate behavior ceases
Effective Use of Time Out Exclusion vs. nonexclusion time-out
Consider institutional policies that may prevent exclusion time-out
Physical factors (i.e., lack of appropriate space) may prevent exclusion time-out
Explain time-out rules to the individual Target behaviors, duration, exit criteria
Obtain permission Administrative approvals Parental approvals
Effective Use of Time Out Apply consistently Evaluate effectiveness
Target behavior should decrease Track frequency and duration of time outs Also track collateral behaviors for side effects
Consider other less intrusive procedures first
Consider legal and ethical issues
Example of Response Cost
SD
Adult says, “Let’s open
our books to page 12.
Each of you should read
the first paragraph to your buddy.”
Response
Child pokes his
buddy
SR-
5 minutes of the recess
time is removed
Poking a buddy occurs less often in the future when the teacher gives a classroom instruction and recess is available.
EO
Child has 15 minutes of recess on schedule
every morning.
Methods of Response Cost Direct fine Bonus response cost
The use of reinforcers reduce the legal and ethical concerns
Combined with positive reinforcement The use of reinforcers reduce the legal and
ethical concerns Group arrangements
Effective Use of Response Cost Specifically define the target behaviors
that will result in response cost, as well as the fines
Establish rules for refusals to comply with the response-cost procedure, and explain these
Greater fines should be associated with more severe forms of problem behavior Be cautious of making fines so great that the
individual becomes “bankrupt”
Effective Use of Response Cost Fines should be posed immediately Response cost vs. bonus response
cost Use least aversive initially (bonus
response cost) Increases acceptability Decreases emotional outbursts
Ensure reinforcement reserve (decrease likelihood of “bankruptcy”
Effective Use of Response Cost Be prepared for unplanned or
unexpected outcomes Response cost can reinforce rather than
punish undesirable behavior Individuals can refuse to give up positive
reinforcers Avoid overuse Keep records to evaluate effectiveness
Response Cost Considerations
Increased aggression may occur Ignore emotional outbursts when possible
don’t use or be prepared to” ride out the storm”
Avoidance of the person who administers response cost or the setting may occur These become “conditioned aversive stimuli” Make sure positive reinforcement is available
for appropriate behavior to reduce the likelihood of this outcome