Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Punishment. Positive Reinforcement Negative Reinforcement Positive Punishment Negative Punishment Behavior Increase Decrease Presented Remove Or Omitted.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Punishment. Positive Reinforcement Negative Reinforcement Positive Punishment Negative Punishment Behavior Increase Decrease Presented Remove Or Omitted."— Presentation transcript:

1 Punishment

2 Positive Reinforcement Negative Reinforcement Positive Punishment Negative Punishment Behavior Increase Decrease Presented Remove Or Omitted stimulus So, reinforcement= behavior punishment= behavior

3 Types of Punishment Positive Punishment –Generally referred to as Punishment –When response occurs, consequence is presentation of an aversive stimulus –Probability of response decreases =  Negative Punishment –More often referred to as Penalty –When response occurs, consequence is removal of a reinforcer –Probability of response decreases = 

4 A behavior reduction process in which the occurrence of a behavior is followed by an aversive stimulus (punisher) Punishment Positive Behavior  Adverse Consequence Behavior ADDS something undesirable environment Touch a stove  get burned Risky sexual beh.  STD Pay Bill late  late charge Negative Behavior  Adverse Consequence Behavior TAKES something desirable environment Speeding  $ bye bye Child fighting  no recess Cheat  girlfriend bye bye

5 Last winter Alvin went downhill skiing for the first time. He had a bad fall on the ski hill and broke his leg. What impact will this have on Alvin’s skiing? If Alvin is less likely to go downhill skiing in the future because of this consequence, then his skiing behavior has been punished

6 As with Reinforcement, Punishment: Primary and Secondary Punishers –Primary Punisher: does not require learning to be effective pain is avoided from birth hunger –Secondary Punisher:..experience: punishment that was originally neutral and became aversive through pairing it with a primary punisher for example, loss of an allowance has been associated with inability to buy things which has been associated with hunger

7 Intrinsic & Extrinsic Punishment –Intrinsic = the activity itself is punishing for example, riding a roller coaster makes you feel sick; you’re less likely to ride another one because it was inherently punishing –Extrinsic = the activity is followed by a separate event that is punishing for example, being rude to a parent results in loss of your allowance for the week; you’re less likely to be rude to your parent in the near future

8 Does Punishment Work?

9 Does punishment work? Skinner (1938) - 2 grps rats – VI of lever pressing for food (3 session) - 4 th session - extinction - Punishment: slap on paw – 1 st 10 min

10 Trained to Lever press for food 3 Extinction session – 2 grps (con & press + shock) Only shocked during 1 st Extinction session Estes (1944)

11 Pigeons (key pressing) VI schedule punishment introduced “mild shock” first decreased response Over course of sessions behavior back to normal habitation to the mild shock Azrin (1960)

12 Does punishment work in animals? Punishment works…“Temporary Suppression” Not good for changing behavior for the long-term Revision of Thorndikes “Law of Effect” …punishing a response does nothing to the strength of connection… unsatisfying consequence doesn’t make behavior less

13 Boe & Church (1967)Punishment worked Effect of Shock Intensity on Responses 15 min

14 1. manner of introduction (intensity) 2. immediacy of punishment (delay) 3. schedule of punishment Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of Punishment Effective Punishers must be…

15 1. Manner of Introduction Intensity Punishment needs to be immediately introduced at full intensity Azrin, Holtz & Hake (1963) Pigeons (key pressing) 80 v – total suppression 60 v – no suppression then up to 300 v suppression If punisher to mild could backfire

16 2. Immediacy of Punishment (Delay) Delay between response  punishment Less time between these 2 more effective

17 Solomon, Turner, Lessac (1968) Stage 1 Dogs offered choice between preferred/nonpreferred food Room with experimenter & 2 dishes Eat good stuff = wack on snout with newspaper Delay of hit on snout  0, 5 & 15 sec 3 to 4 wacks dogs learned not to eat good food for all groups

18 Solomon, Turner, Lessac (1968) Stage 2 – How effective was punishment? Later “temptation trials” (10 min) No experimenter in room – 500g good /20g bad stuff Food deprived – hungry How longs for dogs to eat? 15 sec delay = 3 min 5 sec delay = 8 days 0 sec delay = 2 weeks “wait till your Dad gets home”

19 3. Schedule of punishment Factors influencing the effectiveness of punishment FR FI VR VI CRF is best / FR 1 vs Fr 1000 Punishment is not similar to Reinforcement

20 1. manner of introduction (intensity) 2. immediacy of punishment (delay) 3. schedule of punishment Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of Punishment Effective Punishers must be…

21 same as animals? Punishment in Humans Bucher & Lovaas (1968) Electric shock used on Autistic child Highly destructive behavior Case Study “John” (7 yr old) OCD – banging head/hitting self Hospitalized – kept in restraints Reinforcement didn’t work Shocked after destructive behavior

22 Punishment very effective in controlling human behavior 1. Can promote long-term suppression of behavior (5 yrs) 2. Environment can control the response (stimulus control) E= punisher 250 tx

23 Punishment in humans Same as animals but new addition** Manner of introduction (Intensity): self mutilation behavior in mentally retarded – mild shock did not work but greater did Schedule: FR1 – Mom’s kept diary of punishment, higher proportion of bad behavior to punishment = less misbehaving… same with arrests  higher proportion of arrests followed by punishment = less likely to re offend

24 Immediacy of punishment (Delay): similar to dogs  toys Aronfreed (1968) repeated Solomon’s Study Children (pairs of toys)  attractive and no so attractive The attractive one was always punished (take away candy)  delays of 0, 2, 6, or 12 seconds All groups learned to avoid the toy (after 2-3 punishments) Results: In extinction: Only 50% 0 & 2 sec delay groups reached …after 5 min Other groups all reached and in less than 1 min

25 Explanation for punishment Aronfreed (1968) – immediacy of punishment Added a group  punished when picking up toy but given explanation for why they should not do so Explanation group significantly more likely to resist the temptation of the toy **Accompanied by a clear (fair) example

26 Explanation for punishment – more info on why…better Cheyne (1969) – Children with toys (3rd graders) Punished group of children for picking up toy “That’s Bad” “That’s bad you shouldn’t play with it” “That’s bad you shouldn’t play with it because that toy belongs to someone else” Full explanation group significantly more likely to resist the temptation of the toy

27

28 Punishment Immediate Firm Consistent Delivered in a variety of settings Clear & Fair Explanation

29 Nearly 50% of drunk drivers are repeat offenders –Punishment isn’t strong enough –Stronger punishments are more effective and last longer To be effective punishment must occur every time –Odds of getting caught drunk driving are 1/2000 Punishment for drunk driving occurs much later then the offense –Punishment should not be delayed

30 YES….Heller & Strang (1873) Punishment…works with involuntary behavior??? Bruxism: Grinding and gnashing teeth 5 % of College Students damage to jaw and teeth social implications Baseline (noise activated device): 100 ocurrances/hr Pt. Wore ear plug…3 sec burst of noise when activated Decreased grinding to 30/hr Also effective for chronic coughing, sneezing, vomitting

31 Side Effects of Punishment 1. Emotional Effects FearAnger Impact on learning & Performance

32 The strong emotional responses that accompany punishment may interfere with the ability to attend to and/or learn from the situation: narrowing of attention …Like the Yerkes-Dodson law

33 College students Memory tasks Mistake punished by shock or by a tone Shock group worked slower & made more mistakes Balaban et al (1990) teacher  goal to reduce mistakes…punishment can backfire

34 CER (Emotions) may be classically conditioned to stimuli associated with punishment –e.g., fear and anxiety to the person and/or situation; person may avoid the person administering punishment –Martin (1977) Boys working on series of tasks were praised, reprimanded or ignored for effort Put more effort into reprimanded tasks In absence of teacher, reprimanded tasks were never freely chosen …avoided the teacher…

35 Side Effects of Punishment -Against punisher or anyone around -“pain elicited aggression” Aggression Ulrich & Azrin (1962) 2 rats peaceful Get shocks = fighting “attack when hurt” Been shown in cats, raccoons, monkeys & alligators Prison!

36 Berkowitz, Cochrane & Embree (1979) - University Women - Cold/warm water - Reinforcement vs punishment of partner - Cold water = more punishment Modeling  For children: Learning that punishment is acceptable… “Teachers” with their hand in ice-cold water chose to be more punitive with their “Pupils”

37 Side Effects of Punishment Spanking…. Toilet Accidents = Bedwetting children Dedendency = more dependent Aggressive = more aggressive children Please someone do this for their paper…. Does spanking work?

38 Side Effects of Punishment 2. Low Generalization: Continual Monitoring  Guilt In real world situation must monitor continually “Daddy, I did something wrong…come punish me” No likely to happen! Suppress behavior only in the presence of punisher..may lead to guilt

39 Side Effects of Punishment -Clever Rats -Received shock for lever pressing (food) -rat learned to still display behavior lying on back – fur served as buffer from shock 3. Circumvent punishment People more ingenious

40 Side Effects of Punishment 4. General Suppression of Behavior Ex: classroom behavior  reduce needless questions “that’s a stupid question”  not only reduce “stupid questions” but all questions Entire Class..indicates “what not” to do instead of “what to do”…no additional learning required… +

41 Side Effects of Punishment 5. Learned Helplessness Giving up  helpless to control the situation No need to try and avoid & escape Seligman (1967) -10 sec warning signal of shock  50 sec of shock -over barrier escape…tone=no shock: during shock=no shock -Control grp learned to escape -Tx group = 64 inescapable shocks -Con quickly learned to jump over - Tx group did not learn…took shocks Floor (shock)

42 Is Punishment Effective? Punishment is most effective when it is immediate, firm, consistent, delivered in a variety of settings, and when it is accompanied by a clear (and fair) explanation Under these circumstances, punishment can be a powerful technique for suppressing behavior But negative Effects….why do people use punishment?….

43 Reinforcing to the Punisher… Immediate effect…works for that Immediate situation Which type if reinforcement??? Negative..increase behavior to take bad behavior away

44 Principle of Minimal Force

45 Mild Forms of Punishment (negative) Time Out (time out from positive reinforcement): involves secluding or ignoring an individual so that access to positive reinforcers are cut off for a specified short period of time extinction.. Misbehavior results in removal to a less Reinforcing environment for a specified period Sit in corner  make sure that the new environment does not provide any reinforcement

46 ABAB TX Design Stan (brain injury) fro hoarding cig butts, pieces of dust, Food, socks, underwear in pockets Time out: 10 min in quiet area + reinforcement for good behavior 10 episodes

47 Response cost (Token Economies)  Withdrawl of previously earned reinforcers  Reinforcer is taken away following behavior Token Economies  lost points or tokens appears to be most effective when combined with reinforcement of appropriate behavior

48 Response Cost Children…

49 Reprimands – scolding or admonishing as punishment reprimands are often more effective when they are accompanied by eye contact or a firm grip – or spoken quietly in close proximity to the child being punished

50 Restitution and Overcorrection a misbehaving individual must return the environment to the same state of affairs it was in before the misbehavior e.g., a child who breaks a window must pay for a new one; child who makes a mess must clean it up Restitution is a good example of a logical consequence, where the punishment fits the crime. People take actions that correct the results of their misdeeds

51 Restitutional & Positive Practice (1) Restitutional overcorrection, the punished individual must make things better than they were before the inappropriate behavior e.g., a student who throws food in the lunchroom has to clean the whole lunchroom Overcorrection

52 (2) Positive Practice -- an individual must repeat an action, this time doing it correctly, perhaps in an exaggerated fashion e.g., a student who runs dangerously down a corridor might be asked to go back and walk (perhaps in slow motion) down the hall Overcorrection


Download ppt "Punishment. Positive Reinforcement Negative Reinforcement Positive Punishment Negative Punishment Behavior Increase Decrease Presented Remove Or Omitted."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google