Immediate and delayed punishment of human behavior by loss of reinforcement

Trenholme, Irene; Baron, Alan

doi:10.1016/0023-9690(75)90035-1

Cited by 25 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Various stimuli have been established as conditioned punishers in the basic laboratory, including tones, lights, and low-voltage shock (e.g., Crowell, 1974;Davidson, 1970;Hake & Azrin, 1965). With a few exceptions (e.g., Trenholme & Baron, 1975), the unconditioned stimulus was electric shock and the subjects were rats or pigeons. Conditioned punishers were established via one of two primary methods.…”

Section: Conditioned Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Laboratory findings with rats indicate that the lengthier the delay between the occurrence of the response and delivery of contingent shock, the smaller the amount of response suppression under punishment (e.g., Baron, Kaufman, & Fazzini, 1969;Camp, Raymond, & Church, 1967). Even brief delays of 10 s or 20 s have been found to seriously compromise the effects of contingent shock with rats and college students (e.g., Banks & Vogel-Sprott, 1965;Goodall, 1984) and of reinforcement loss with college students (Trenholme & Baron, 1975).…”

Section: Immediacy Of the Punishermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the Status of Knowledge for Using Punishment: Implications for Treating Behavior Disorders

Lerman¹,

Vorndran²

2002

J of App Behav Analysis

212

170

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we review basic and applied findings on punishment and discuss the importance of conducting further research in this area. The characteristics of responding during punishment and numerous factors that interact with basic processes are delineated in conjunction with implications for the treatment of behavior disorders in clinical populations. We conclude that further understanding of punishment processes is needed to develop a highly systematic, effective technology of behavior change, including strategies for improving the efficacy of less intrusive procedures and for successfully fading treatment.

show abstract

Section: Conditioned Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Immediacy Of the Punishermentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Status of Knowledge for Using Punishment: Implications for Treating Behavior Disorders

Lerman¹,

Vorndran²

2002

J of App Behav Analysis

212

170

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It can be introduced while the punished response is being emitted, immediately after the punished response, or sometime after the response. Tren-holme and Baron [1975] and reviews by Johnston [1972], Parke [1972], and Church [1963] indicate that, in general, the effectiveness of punishment is enhanced when the aversive event is delivered close in time to the punished response. Punishment of the response while it is in progress is also effective but care should be exercised that the aversive stimulus does not last longer than the punished response, otherwise the behavior emitted just before the termination of the aversive stimuli will be reinforced and strengthened.…”

Section: Timing Of Punishmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Punishment in Organizations: A Review, Propositions, and Research Suggestions

Arvey¹,

Ivancevich²

1980

The Academy of Management Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Historical events could maintain giving without getting for extended periods of time. Histories of reinforcement commonly induce extended human responding in the absence of reinforcement during extinction (Weiner, 1964), when behavior is in transition from one steady state to another (Weiner, 1969), or under delay of reinforcement conditions (Trenholme and Baron, 1975). Certain histories may produce human responding that persists in the face of reinforcement loss, even though such loss is unnecessary for positive reinforcement (Weiner, 1970).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Operant Analysis of Human Altruistic Responding

Weiner

1977

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human altruistic responding (called give responding), which delivered a reinforcer to someone other than the responder, was compared to responding where the responder was the recipient of the reinforcer (called earn responding). The same type of response (button pressing), the same reinforcer (a point representing a penny), and the same reinforcer contingency (a 40-response fixed-ratio schedule) were used for both give and earn responding. Since points representing pennies were used to reinforce give and earn responding, responding for points not worth money was also assessed. Give, earn, and point responding were arranged as concurrent incompatible operants. Lowest rates were obtained for point responding. Compared to earn responding, give responding occurred at lower rates, was more susceptible to cessation when point responding was possible, extinguished more rapidly in the absence of money, and produced less responding during reconditioning compared to conditioning when reconditioning followed a period of nonreinforcement. Give responding was less when it reduced the giver's opportunity to earn. Finally, histories of getting reinforcement from others were shown to determine give responding.

show abstract

Immediate and delayed punishment of human behavior by loss of reinforcement

Cited by 25 publications

References 20 publications

On the Status of Knowledge for Using Punishment: Implications for Treating Behavior Disorders

On the Status of Knowledge for Using Punishment: Implications for Treating Behavior Disorders

Punishment in Organizations: A Review, Propositions, and Research Suggestions

An Operant Analysis of Human Altruistic Responding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About