Unit 5 Study Guide

.docx

School

Athabasca University, Calgary *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

387

Subject

Health Science

Date

May 15, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

11

Uploaded by CorporalCaribou4559 on coursehero.com

Unit 5 Chapter 8 Study Questions 1. Define punishment in terms of its three characteristic features. What are punishers? (p. 232) 2. What are the two types of punishment? (pp. 232–234) 3. Describe how punishment differs from negative reinforcement. (p. 233) 4. Describe how the contingency variable influences the effectiveness of punishment. Provide and recognize original examples of the contingency variable as it is involved in making punishment effective. (pp. 234–235) 5. Describe how the contiguity variable influences the effectiveness of punishment. Provide and recognize original examples of the contiguity variable as it is involved in making punishment effective. (pp. 235–238) 6. How does contiguity relate to the problem of texting when driving? (pp. 236– 238) 7. Describe how Abramowitz and O’Leary (1990) demonstrated the relative effectiveness of immediate punishment in examining off-task behaviour. (p. 238) 8. Explain why the initial selection of punishment intensity is important in making punishment effective. Provide and recognize original examples of this influence. Describe the implications this has for parents, teachers, and judges. (pp. 239–240) 9. Describe how the effectiveness of punishment is influenced by the reinforcers available for the punished behaviour. (p. 240) 10.Describe how the availability of sources of reinforcement for alternative behaviours influences the effectiveness of punishment. Provide and recognize original examples of this influence. (pp. 240–241) 11.Explain how motivation influences the effectiveness of punishment. Provide and recognize original examples of this influence. (pp. 241–242) 12.What is the disruption theory of punishment? Describe the evidence that supports/refutes this theory. (p. 243)
13.Describe the two-process theory of punishment. Describe the evidence that supports/refutes this theory. (pp. 243–244) 14.Describe the one-process theory of punishment. Who originally advocated this idea? Describe the evidence that supports/refutes this theory. (pp. 244– 245) 15.Why is punishment used so frequently? Explain in terms of the effects of punishment, including the beneficial side effects. (pp. 243–244) 16.What are the potential problems associated with the use of punishment? Describe each problem, citing evidence. (pp. 245–248) 17.What is response prevention? Provide and recognize original examples of response prevention as an alternative to punishment. (p. 248) 18.Describe the use of extinction as an alternative to punishment. When are there problems with using extinction as an alternative to punishment? (p. 248) 19.Define a DRA schedule of reinforcement. Provide and recognize original examples of DRA schedules of reinforcement. (p. 249) 20.Define a DRI schedule of reinforcement. Provide and recognize original examples of DRI schedules of reinforcement. (p. 249) 21.What is differential reinforcement? Define a DRL schedule of reinforcement. Provide and recognize original examples of DRL schedules of reinforcement. (pp. 249–250) In order to complete the short-answer questions on the Unit 5 Quiz and the final exam, it is essential that you understand the following concepts. Punishment For each of the following illustrations, study the differences between the a items, which are examples of punishment and the b items, which are not examples of punishment. In each item, the target behaviour is italicized. The analysis at the end of each pair of items explains why the a items are examples and why the b items are not. 1. a. Children in the Seattle Day Nursery were trained to press a bar to receive peanuts. Then the children had the opportunity to press a bar for peanuts while watching cartoons. Children in group one could press the bar and enjoy the peanuts while the cartoons were shown.
For children in group two, each pressing of the bar produced a 2- second interruption in the cartoon. Group two children pressed the bar far less often than group one children. b. Children in the Seattle Day Nursery were trained to press a bar to receive peanuts. Then the children had opportunity to press a bar for peanuts while watching cartoons Children in group one could press the bar and enjoy the peanuts while the cartoons were shown. For children in group two, each pressing of the bar produced a 2-second interruption in the cartoon. Analysis: Item a is an example of punishment because a stimulus change, the interruption in the cartoons, depended on group two’s bar presses and this interruption caused fewer bar presses. Item b is not an example of punishment, because there is no mention of a reduction in the frequency of the target behaviour. Note that in item a , the reduction in behaviour frequency is based on a comparison of a punished group and an unpunished group. In most of the examples we have considered, the effect of the procedure is determined by comparing the level of the behaviour before the procedure with the level of the behaviour after the procedure. However, as this item indicates, the effect of behavioural procedures can also be determined by comparisons of groups of subjects. (Baer, 1961) 2. a. Peter is a developmentally delayed four-year-old boy whose mother brought him to a psychologist because she could not control his behaviour. Peter kicked objects and people, took off his clothes, called people unkind names, pushed his sister, threatened others, and hit and bit himself. A procedure was implemented to reduce Peter’s objectionable behaviours : every time he behaved objectionably, he was sent to his room for at least 5 minutes. This method resulted in a decline in Peter’s objectionable behaviours to low, manageable levels. b. Peter is a developmentally delayed four-year-old boy whose mother brought him to a psychologist because she could not control his behaviour. Peter kicked objects and people, took off his clothes, called people unkind names, pushed his sister, threatened others, and hit and bit himself. A procedure was implemented to reduce Peter’s objectionable behaviours : every morning Peter’s mother
announced to him that he was not to perform any of the objectionable behaviours that she listed. This method resulted in a decline in Peter’s objectionable behaviours to low, manageable levels. Analysis: Item a is an example of punishment because a stimulus change, being sent to his room, depended on Peter’s objectionable behaviours and reduced their frequency. Item b is not an example of punishment, because there was no stimulus change dependent on the target behaviours. The reduction in behaviour in item b was owing to instructions, not to punishment. Item a is an example of exclusionary time out, because Peter was excluded from the situation where the objectionable behaviours occurred. (Hawkins, Peterson, Schweid, & Bijou, 1966) 3. a. Psychiatric ward patients at the Brockton Veterans Administration Hospital were in a token economy program. They could earn up to 50 tokens per day for grooming, cleaning, using free time appropriately, and displaying positive social behaviour. However, the patients also received fines for breaking ward rules . Patients would receive tickets specifying how many points they had lost (e.g., 3 tokens for spitting on the walls or floor, 5 tokens for stealing, 15 tokens for destroying property). The ticketing system worked very well. Baseline fines of 22.37 (per patient average) tokens per week were reduced to 5.47 tokens per week by week 8 of the program. These decreases reflected reductions in rule-breaking behaviours. b. Psychiatric ward patients at the Brockton Veterans Administration Hospital were in a token economy program. They could earn up to 50 tokens per day for grooming, cleaning, using free time appropriately, and displaying positive social behaviour. The patients, however, did break some ward rules . In an effort to “show the patients who was boss,” several times a week, at randomly selected times, all patients would be fined 10 tokens no matter what they had been doing. This caused a reduction in rule-breaking. Analysis: Item a is an example of punishment, because a stimulus change (token loss) depended on rule breaking, and it reduced the frequency of rule breaking. This case is an example of response cost, because it involved the removal of tokens. Item b is not an example of punishment, because the stimulus change (token loss) did not depend
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help