Punishment:By Stimulus Presentation

By Stimulus Removal

Chaps 14 and 15

Punishment:By Stimulus Presentation

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.

Linscheid, Iwata, Ricketts, Williams, & Griffin, 1990

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

Rapp et al. (2001)

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.

Punishment:By Stimulus

Removal

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

Response Cost Considerations

Collateral reductions of desirable behaviors may occur Response cost may unintentionally

suppress other, desirable behaviors, as well as the target problem behaviors

Response cost calls attention to inappropriate behaviors

Be prepared for unpredictability