Factors that Influence Whether a Given Contingency Functions as a Punisher

Factors that Influence Whether a Given Contingency Functions as a Punisher

Introduction

Parents have different perspectives on the use of punishment for behavior modification for their children. Some of them do not see the effectiveness of punishment, and they take it as mistreatment to the children. Others have been lead to believe that punishment can negatively affect a child’s development. To save both the parents and the children, Ennio Cipan outlined some basic guidelines on how to punish a child effectively. In his article “Punishment on Trial,” Cipan gives six principles of effective punishment to children. Various factors determine the effectiveness of a punisher. The six principles of punishment feature the mentioned factors.

The first principle states that ‘There Must Exist a Behavioral Contingency.’ It is generally accepted that the main aim of punishment is to change or discourage defiant behavior. Behavioral contingency, therefore, refers to the relationship between the specific behavior and the consequence or outcome for that behavior. Cipan referred to this as “If _, Then _,” statement. This means that the consequences are dependent on the particular behavior. It can be used to both encourage and discourage the behavior.

A real-life example that applies this principle is here; children in pre-school and lower-primary levels are known to have a high interest in Cartoon movies. They get so occupied with these movies that, in some cases, they forget to attempt the homework given by their teachers. A caring parent should ensure assignments and Homeworks are done. She can apply Behavioral Contingency to make sure the assigned activities are done. If the pupil completes the homework, ‘THEN’ he will watch a cartoon movie. If the homework is not done, then no watching the cartoon. However, you must take into account the effectiveness of the punisher. There must be a close relationship between the behavior and the intended outcome. In the above example, the punisher is to skip the cartoon program. Since the particular kid is addicted to cartoons, he has to make sure he completes the assignments on time.

Behavioral contingency applies punishment theory to help parents to modify the behavior of the child. This principle becomes successful in changing behavior if a powerful relationship exists between the specific behavior and the consequences. One contingency cannot be applied in correcting a variety of behaviors at once. Confusion may arise in an attempt to change many behaviors at once. Additionally, the immediate cause of misbehavior should be defined and identified before the principle is applied. This is intended to make the kid aware of the defiant behavior that bore the punishment.  Cipan suggested that “If a specific behavior is not delineated, then the parent’s judgment about the child’s misbehavior is required….

Similarly, a behavioral contingency plan that requires an adult to detect accurately when the child is misbehaving is not something you want to bet on” (Cipan, 104). Accordingly, the kid should know the good act that earned him a reward. This is the case where a reward is given to reinforce good behavior.

The second is the principle of Consistency. Here, Cipana clearly stated the role of a parent in disciplining the child, “Who would deny that parents should be consistent in disciplining their child? Everyone believes in consistency. This is a principle that people verbally profess upon cue, but such verbal commitment does not often translate into practice. I believe many people who say they are consistent really believe they are. However, they think of consistency as a phenomenon above 50%…” (Cipan, 107). The point here is that there should be no further changes for the outcomes. If the punishment is a five-minute time-out at the bathroom, there will be a notable decrease in misbehavior. But this will work only if the parent’s intervention is applied consistently.

When the targeted behavior is performed, then the consequences must be inevitable. The parent should consistently discipline the child and keep the promise as agreed. Note the use of “when” and not “if” in the article, “When the subject performs the target behavior, the consequence must be inevitable. If this, then this implies the concept of inevitability. The concept of inevitability certainly does not say, if this then maybe this” (Cipan, 107). When applying a behavioral plan to modify a child’s behavior, the reliability of the contingency is vital. Many parents fail mostly in cases where they use an inevitable contingency.

According to the article, if a parent is in the process of discouraging a lousy behavior by applying time-outs, he should be consistent. If a time-out is given per single act, the parent should make sure the consequences are the same at any given time. Your Family Clinic Organization noted that “Being consistent in behavior modification is significant. If you are inconsistent, your child becomes confused, and learning an acceptable behavior takes much longer. In fact, if you are not consistent, your child may not learn the correct behavior at all.” For consistency purposes, the parent should never ignore disruptive behavior even once. If the parent is less than consistent, then the behavioral contingency cannot produce a significant change in the target behavior for the child.

The third principle is called The “Even Swap” Rule. It provides that punishment should go hand in hand with reinforcement. This means that when punishment is applied to decrease challenging behavior, reinforcement must also be used to encourage the desired behavior. Cipan confirms that “The even swap rule has tremendous implications for parents. The objective to reduce a child’s target problem behavior is made more probable if you can combine punishment of a target behavior with reinforcement of an alternate behavior” (Cipan, 115). Therefore, if a punisher involves the withdrawal of reinforcement for a target behavior, then take advantage of the same reinforcement to increase the behavior.’

For instance, a parent targeting her son’s arrogant behavior towards the house help. If the behavioral contingency is that he is locked in the house the whole day for insulting the house help, he concurrently gains a chance to go and play with his friends the entire day if he doesn’t offend. In this, an even swap is observed whereby; an appropriate behavior is developed while reducing negative behavior. Cipan argues that “Every time you want to target a specific undesirable behavior for a decrease, concurrently determine what behavior(s) you want to increase. In this manner, there will be an even swap” (Cipan, 115).

The fourth principle involves the Removal of Competing Consequences. It is observed in situations whereby the negative behavior under punishment is producing unintended reinforcers and in which the source is the punishing event. In such circumstances, the ability of the contingency to function as a punisher is reduced. More often, the application of time-out as a punishment brings a competing contingency. As a result, the ability to change behavior reduces, thus making it unreliable. Conversely, there is an observable increase in negative behavior due to the effect of the unintended reinforcer.

For instance, a teacher may choose to punish the lazy pupils by sending them out of class for a whole lesson. The intention is to discourage sleeping during a given lesson. More surprisingly, instead of observing an improvement in behavior change, there is a steady increase in the number of pupils who are sent out of class. The reason is that a room is created for lazy pupils to get out of class and enjoy the warmth from the sun. As per Cipan, “Often the use of time-out may provide a competing contingency, which wreaks havoc on its ability to effect behavior change” (Cipan, 117).

The fifth principle is, “Be Specific.” Cipan recommended the reinforcement of a positive behavior change and a punishment for a negative change in the treatment of behavioral problems. “When he engages in good behavior, reinforce him. Of course, when he engages in misbehavior, you should not reward him” (Cipan, 121). the statement applies only for specified punishing consequences. Parents and teachers are encouraged to adhere to the principle of the specification to effect a positive change in a child’s behavior, “This punishing consequence is precisely specified so that it will be administered in the same fashion each time. If you decide to use certain procedures to effect change in your child’s behavior, it is imperative that you adhere to this principle. The specification of the consequence should be delineated before initiating the strategy.” (Cipan, 121) Some instruments point out the specifications for the application of sequences.

Finally, there should be a prove to show that a particular punishment works for specific behavior. This is the sixth principle of punishment. The researchers who formulated these principles had already carried some tests with animals. After proving the use of the basic principles of punishment, they recommended their application to modify human behavior. It is stated in Cipan’s article, “Research findings have driven application and theory. We do not have a theory regarding which events will always function as a punisher” (Cipan, 122.) Ignoring a particular deviant behavior portrayed by a child is not recommended as the only best approach to modify behavior. According to the article, medication can be combined with the behavioral strategy to produce a substantial change of behavior.

In conclusion, the six basic principles of punishment described by Cipan in his article are used to point out whether a given contingency function as a punisher. If there is no close link between the punisher and the targeted behavior, then the contingency is unreliable. Additionally, parents and teachers should be consistent in disciplining the children to achieve the necessary change. There should be an even swap for punishment and reinforcement in an attempt to modify a child’s behavior. Consequently, the competing consequences ought to be removed to achieve a favorable outcome. The principle of specification holds equally, then provide proof to show that the recommended punisher works to change behavior.