Learning Chapter 7 Pt2-1

Theories of Punishment

Disruption Theory • Skinner and Guthrie (and others) thought that instinctive, often emotional, reactions to aversive events were simply incompatible with the reinforced behavior. • A shocked rat will engage in jump-freeze-runpoop behavior • This sequence of behaviors is incompatible with lever pressing. • Therefore lever pressing will temporarily decline during this automatic response sequence.

Problems with Disruption Theory

• Response competition alone is insufficient to make punishment effective. • When punishment is contingent on behavior instead of just co-occurring at random, it is much more effective. • Random shocks do not produce the punishing effects of contingent shocks, even when the shocks occur with the same frequency.

Two Process Theory • Two-process theory states that punishment involves both classical (Pavlovian) conditioning and operant conditioning. – When a rat is shocked for pressing a lever, the lever becomes a conditioned stimulus for pain and fear. • Lever : Shock  fear/pain

– As a result, the lever becomes aversive, and the rat will avoid it, thus decreasing the rate of lever pressing. – This is a popular theory, but it is losing ground to a one-process theory.

One Process Theory – Also called the “Negative Law of Effect” – This was Thorndike’s original view, before he decided that punishment actually had no effect on behavior. – Originally, he argued that punishment was simply the mirror image of reinforcement – He suggested that punishment weakens the previous established relationship between an action and a reinforcer (a previously established neurological S-R bond is weakened).

One Process Theory • Problem with this theory: – Skinner’s finding that suppression of behavior is sometimes only temporary contradicts this.

– Why would a weakened S-R bond regain its strength over time under conditions of extinction?

One Process Theory • More recent research, however, has shown that punishment can have dramatic, lasting effects on behavior – Skinner and Thorndikes stimuli were too weak. • Supporters of one-process theory say that if reinforcement is just a mirror image of reinforcement, then the Premack Principle should apply to punishment as well as reinforcement.

• Original Premack: Eat your spinach, then I’ll let you eat your cake.

Premack and Punishment • If punishment is just another form of operant conditioning, then a less preferred behavior should be able to punish a more preferred behavior. • Premack for Punishment: If you eat your cake, I’ll make you eat a plate of spinach. • Much research conforms that the Premack Principle applies to punishment as well as to reinforcement. • Mazur (1975): Hungry rats will reduce the rate pressing a lever for food (a preferred behavior) if the rat is also made to run in a wheel (less preferred) after eating.

Problems with Punishment • Some common side effects of punishment: • Punishment is aversive and threatening, so it can lead to fight or flight responses. • Flight: Escape/Avoidance – People and other organisms will simply avoid the punisher or the punishing situation.

• Fight: Aggression (as with extinction) – Attacking. An eye for an eye, revenge, etc. – After being shocked, rats will attack other rats and objects.

More Problems with Punishment • Apathy: Sometimes an organism will simply stop behaving (period) if punishment is severe enough. – Seligman’s learned helplessness theory of depression.

• Imitation of Punisher: Punishment can become a tradition. • Punitive Managers have subordinates who become punishers.

Alternatives to Punishment • Differential Reinforcement – DR0 – differential reinforcement of zero responding • Reinforce the organism when it goes for a period without engaging in the behavior at all.

– DRL – differential reinforcement of low rate • Reinforce the organism when it shows a lower rate of the unwanted behavior

– DRI – differential reinforcement of incompatible behavior • Reinforce alternative behaviors that differ from, and are incompatible with, the unwanted behavior.