The Punishment Controversy

Punishment is a controversial measure, particularly because it has often been misapplied, which has often led to unwanted results. Also because it is extremely associated with physical penalization. Here we are concerned with the controversy of punishment.

Punishment is a behavioral technique that seeks to reduce the emission of a behavior. Used properly, it is a powerful tool for modifying a person’s responses.

Nevertheless, the use of punishment seems to have deteriorated, and not only in the education of children and adolescents but also in their participation in interpersonal relationships (controversy of punishment). The problem is that we very rarely use it in a skillful way, which allows us to achieve the effects we are looking for.

Punishment becomes a dangerous tool which, when improperly applied, involves very serious dangers. Thus, the controversy of punishment or, rather, its application without knowledge has been one of the subjects which has preoccupied psychology in recent years.

How does the punishment work?

Punishment is usually an aversive stimulus which, after the emission of a behavior, seeks to decrease the probability of the latter. It has more powerful effects when applied immediately and has no side benefits.

Before proceeding with a punishment, it is necessary to know the important reinforcers and how they work. Reinforcers, or removing them, work differently in each person.

The differences between positive and negative punishment

As happens with reinforcing elements, two types of punishment can be applied: positive and negative. Positive punishment refers to adding an aversive stimulus after the response you want to change.

In other words, we add something. For example, physical violence could be viewed as positive punishment since it adds pain to the person.

Regarding negative punishment, it represents the withdrawal of a positive or reinforcing stimulus in the face of the emission of the response that we want to suppress. For example, removing a privilege, such as choosing the vacation spot, could be such a punishment. The consequences of the two punishments are aversive, even if their application is different.

Is the use of punishment lawful?

This is one of the most controversial questions about punishment. Numerous studies suggest that non-aversive techniques such as positive reinforcement of alternative behaviors are at least as effective as punishment.

Thus, given that aversive and non-aversive techniques seem to lead to similar results, there does not appear to be any justification for inflicting certain penalties. Nevertheless, the use of positive punishment or punishments that produce pain sometimes seems necessary.

Indeed, some extremely dangerous behaviors can only be suppressed through punishment. Clinical practice shows that certain self-destructive behaviors – for which it is absolutely necessary to intervene – can be effectively suppressed with positive punishment. After that, a strengthening program will be needed.

So, to say that punishment is a substantially wrong thing is impractical. Making sure to use it appropriately – in terms of measure and intensity – when the use of reinforcement is not effective is, on the other hand, much more appropriate and beneficial.

Possible complications deriving from the punishment

Indiscriminate punishments, delivered on the basis of emotion and without the slightest meaning can become dangerous. It is these punishments that are at the origin of the controversy.

Aggression and fear

Appearance of aggressive behavior

Numerous comparative psychology studies – that is, with animals – show that applying painful punishments causes animals to attack their peers. This can lead to questioning the functional value of a painful punishment before applying it, and to know precisely what one wants to obtain from it.

When a child behaves badly and when the first thing his father thinks about is slapping him, he has to ask himself if painful punishment is the only way he has and if there is no other viable options. If there are any, it will always be better if he puts them into practice.

Appearance of conditioned emotional responses

Fear is a non-adaptive response. A person should not learn through fear. In addition, the appearance of crying or terror are generally obstacles to learning an alternative behavior.

Since this is the primary purpose of applying punishment, it is best to proceed with caution. If that same father wants his child to fear him after the punishment is applied, it means that he is not using it well and its practice should be totally censored.

Appearance of escape and avoidance responses

The generalization of aversion is an aspect to be taken into account. For example, if a little girl is punished for not scoring a soccer match, the child may relate sports, sports lessons and matches to an emotional state. negative.

The punishment will cause the behavior contrary to the desired behavior. This is related to the previous point: when we are afraid, escape behaviors can set in and this does not give us time to learn alternative behavior.

Alternative behaviors and modeling

We do not teach the desired behavior: after the application of a punishment, very often, the person being punished is not told how he should have behaved. We naturally say to ourselves that she already knows it. Deleting a behavior is not very interesting if you do not establish any other desired behavior.

We model the behavior to be punished : very often, the person who punishes models, through vicarious learning, the behavior that he precisely wants to suppress. For example, when a parent teaches their child, by shouting, that he cannot scream, or when he condemns his aggressive behavior by slapping him.

When punishment is not enough …

If you frequently apply punishment for behavior that you cannot get rid of, it can turn into a habit. This means that what was previously unpleasant may cease to be so.

For example, if you confiscate your toy cars from a child every time they do something wrong, they might get used to it. In the end, he will no longer pay attention to the cars. At this point, one can try to suppress his behavior by increasing the intensity of the punishment, that is to say by removing other toys from him as well.

Because of all the possible consequences of poor functional application, it is recommended to use reinforcement of desirable alternative behaviors. Punishment is especially useful when we simultaneously reinforce alternative behaviors, a point that is often overlooked.