Aversive Punishment
Aversive punishment is the process whereby a response is weakened by the application of aversive stimuli (Passer & Smith, 2008). In many studies, primary punishers, “[any] stimulus that is inherently punishing” (Tavris & Wade, 2000), such as electric shocks and highly undesirable stimuli, are used an attempt to stop the behaviour from recurring. This is due to aversive punishment generally being used when attempting to stop a dangerous behaviour, as it brings results fast (Passer & Smith, 2008). These can be difficult to administer, however, as they are unethical and cannot be used often (Tavris & Wade, 2000). As well, secondary punishers, being “[any] stimulus that has acquired punishing properties through association with other reinforcers” (Tavris & Wade, 2000), such as criticisms, fines, and bad grades (Tavris & Wade, 2000) are used in some cases.
Self-mutilation cases, such as when mentally disturbed individuals cause themselves harm by banging their head or pulling out their hair are occasions where aversion therapy is necessary, as the behaviour cannot just be ignored or more harm will occur, or responded to with kindness in case it ends up rewarding the behaviours. It was found that aversive punishment is particularly effective in these cases as immediately punishing the behaviours eliminated them (Lovaas, 1977; Lovaas, Schreibman, & Koegel, 1974, as cited in Tavris & Wade, 2000).
Response Cost
Response cost, in comparison, is the form of punishment whereby a desirable stimulus is taken away in an attempt to stop the behaviour from recurring (Passer & Smith, 2008). This form of punishment is more commonly used in familial situations and everyday life, for example, groundings, loss of privileges, and monetary fines (Passer & Smith, 2008). The time out technique is a form of punishment most commonly used with psychologists (Baumrind et al., 2002, as cited from Passer & Smith, 2008).
Situations in which punishment is administered
Punishment can be found working in all areas of life, teaching individuals of all ages to act in ways which are appropriate for a wide range of contexts. Punishment is required for learning acceptable behaviours for all stages of life, beginning from childhood and working up through school life until adulthood, where it is more formally administered through law enforcement.
In the Home
The family home is one place where punishment is used most frequently, due to its necessity in a child’s development. It is performed by both the parents and the child’s own experiences, teaching it lessons and behaviours necessary for all stages of their life. An interview of 451 parents of schoolchildren carried out by Eron, Walder, Toigo, and Leggowitz (1963) suggested the punishment actually increased the incidence rates of the child’s behaviours in most situations (Lieberman, 2000). Parents were asked what kind of punishment they used in different situations with the results showing aggression both verbally and physically used as punishment for the child’s own aggressive behaviour caused the child to act more aggressively in the school environment.
In schools
Punishment can be found frequently with in the school setting, as teachers constantly need to reprimand children and use various forms of punishment to ensure their co operation and good behaviour. Examples of punishment within schools include the negative aspect of bad grades, being verbally reprimanded for misbehaving and, most popular with teachers, the “time out” (Passer & Smith, 2008). A study conducted by Webster (2006) using an aggressive 13 year old male being given time outs for certain behaviours over a 10-week period showed the extinction of specific behaviours during the seventh week and an increasing interest in school work by the fourth week. (Hastings & Schwieso, 1987).
Another study by Hall et al. (1971) showed the effectiveness of punishment using detention with children. Misbehaving children received five minutes of detention each time they disrupted the class and soon the amount of disruptive behaviour dramatically decreased. (Hastings & Schweiso, 1987).
In society
Society administers punishment both formally and informally, in that the public eye dictates what is appropriate according to social norms and standards through criticism (Tavris & Wade, 2000), as well as the official law enforcers such as the police and government. Brennan and Mednick (1994) investigated 29,000 Danish men born in a 3-year period who had repeat arrests. Results showed that after each arrest, the frequency of subsequent arrests decreased for individuals. However, it also appeared that the decrease was due to the consistency of the punishment (arrests) rather than the severity of the punishment as was believed (Tavris & Wade, 2000).
Is punishment effective?
When punishment does not work
Punishment, however, is not always the most effective way of discouraging undesirable behaviours. Skinner (1948) didn’t believe that punishment was the most successful way of changing behaviour in stating that “We are gradually discovering…that in the long run punishment doesn't reduce the probability that an act will occur.” (Lieberman, 2000). This is believed to be because punishment works to lessen the behaviour, rather than forget the response altogether (Passer & Smith, 2008) or teach new, more appropriate behaviours which is generally what is required to create a permanent, positive change in behaviour (Campbell & Church, 1969, as cited from Gross, McIlveen, Coolican, Clamp, & Russell, 2000). The results of studies using rats by Estes (1970) supports this in that the punishment applied to the rats, being shocking by electric currents, “merely suppressed” the frequency that the rats pressed the lever in the short term, but “did not weaken” the response within the rats (Gross et al., 2000). It was evident that the effectiveness of the suppression in terms of strength and how long it lasted depended on the punishment and its intensity and consistency. The response was still shown to be “suppressed rather than unlearned” (Gross, et al, 2000). In addition, it does not “cause the organism to forget how to make the response” (Passer & Smith, 2008), meaning the behaviour is not properly extinguished and there is the possibility that the response will return through spontaneous recovery.
Moreover, there are numerous aspects in which punishment can be ineffective, or even produce negative side effects that can are detrimental to the idea of extinguishing the behaviour. First of all, punishment can be applied too broadly, causing confusion over which behaviour is the negative one. When angry, humans may “hit or throw things or say things they don’t mean” (Tavris & Wade, 2000) and so may cover unrelated behaviours. As well, most behaviour is difficult to punish as soon as it happens. Often, the behaviour goes unnoticed for a period of time and so in between the action and the negative consequence, the individual can have received positive reinforcement, for example “the bully gets the treats, the mugger gets the gold watch, the drug addict gets high” (Tavris & Wade, 2000). In addition, the act of punishing the behaviour may actually work to reinforce it if the individual is craving attention. In many classroom situations, the attention brought the child in being told off brings admiration from peers and may just be what the child wanted, causing them to be more likely to perform the behaviour again. Also, it can be difficult to give punishment, for example in some cases of aversive punishment, the punishment that is required to be given is unethical and so cannot be easily performed. It can also be difficult to ignore an action as a form of punishment, for example a child hitting another child cannot be ignored or else harm will come to the child. Furthermore, punishment can create fear or anger in an individual, changing their perception of the situation at hand and can generalise to the whole situation. This in turn can cause the individual being punished to feel negatively about the place, circumstance, and other individual. (Tavris & Wade, 2000). Lastly, punishment can teach individuals how to get away with bad behaviour by avoiding doing, or finding ways around, what they have learned will get them punished, a phenomenon known as ‘avoidance learning’ (Church, 1963, as cited from Sanson, Montgomery, Gault, Gridley, & Thomson, 1996).
When punishment is effective
There are examples, however, when punishment is, in fact, effective. For one, a positive aspect of punishment is that it has been found that it is not always the severity of the punishment that is important, but rather the consistency (Tavris & Wade, 2000). As well, more dangerous behaviours are most effectively extinguished through punishment, in particular aversive punishment, and can be easily eliminated if punished immediately (Lovaas, 1977; Lovaas, Schreibman, & Koegel, 1974).
Improving the effectiveness of punishment
It has been suggested that in order to properly extinguish behaviour, it is necessary to that alongside punishing the undesirable behaviour, it is necessary to reinforce the positive behaviours to get true results. Also, punishment needs to be administered directly after the undesirable behaviour has occurred, so that there is no confusion over which behaviour deserved the negative reaction.
The effect of punishment on an individual’s behaviour is a major part of life, determining what actions one makes, what one says, and guidelines by which one lives by. Administered informally, by society, friends, and family, or formally, by the police or government, individuals experience punishment through all ages of life. In addition, there are two types of punishment, aversive punishment and response cost, which alter behaviour by either adding something unsatisfying, or removing a desired stimulus.. Whether the punishment one gives or receives is effective, however, is dependant on various factors, including strength, consistency, and timing.
References
Gross, R. D., McIlveen, R., Coolican, H., Clamp, A., & Russell, J. (2000). Psychology: a new introduction for A level, pp. 744
Hastings N. & Schweiso, J. (1987). New Directions in Educational Psychology: Behaviour and Motivation.
Lerman, D. C., & Vorndran, C. M. (2002). On the status of knowledge for using punishment: Implications for treating behavior disorders. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 431-464.
Lieberman, D. A. (2000). Learning: Behavior and cognition (3rd ed.). pp. 249-283
Passer, M. & Smith, R. (2008) Psychology: The Science of Mind and Behavior.
Sanson, A., Montgomery, B., Gault, U., Gridley, H., & Thomson, D. (1996). Punishment and behaviour change: An Australian Psychology Society position paper. Australian Psychologist, 31, pp. 157-165.
Tavris, C. & Wade, C. (2000) Psychology in Perspective.
