Class Notes (837,539)
Canada (510,303)
Psychology (7,785)
PSYB45H3 (337)
Lecture

CH 17+ 18.docx

7 Pages
58 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
PSYB45H3
Professor
Zachariah Campbell
Semester
Winter

Description
CH. 17 USING PUNISHMENT: Time-Out and Response Cost Types of Time Out  Time out is the loss of access to positive reinforcers for a brief period contingent on the problem behavior. The result is a decrease in the future probability of the problem behavior.  2 types of time out: exclusionary and non-exclusionary  Non-exclusionary: in the same environment but away from the reinforcer.  Exclusionary time-out: contingent on the problem behavior, the person is completely removed from the environment that caused the problem Using Reinforcement with Time-Out  The time-out procedure decreases the rate of the problem behavior, and a differential reinforcement procedure increases an alternative behavior to replace the problem (differential reinforcement of alternative behavior DRA) or provides the reinforcer for the absence of the problem behavior (differential reinforcement of other behavior DRO), while at the same time applying extinction for the problem behavior.  Time out procedure eliminates access to positive reinforcers contingent on the problem behavior, it is important for the person to have access to positive reinforcers through a DRA or DRO procedure. If you used time-out without a differential reinforcement procedure, there could be a net loss in reinforcement and the problem behavior be more likely to re-emerge after treatment. Considerations in Using Time-Out - Function of the problem behavior? Time out is appropriate to use with problem behaviors tht are maintained by positive reinforcement involving social or tangible reinforcers. Time out removes access to these and other positive reinforcers contingent on the problem behavior - Time In environment (environment where the problem behavior occurs) must consist of positively reinforcing activities or interactions for timeout to be effective. Removing the person from this environment is time out from positive reinforcement only if the time-in environment is positively reinforcing and the time-out environment is not reinforcing or is less reinforcing - When a problem behavior is maintained by sensory stimulation, time out is not appropriate because it would not function as time-out from positive reinforcement. The person would be removed from the activities or interactions in the time-in environment and would have the opportunity to engage in the problem behavior while along in the time-out area - Is Time Out Practical in the Given Situation? Time out is practical when the change agents can implement the procedure successfully and the physical environment is conductive to its use. In the time-out procedure, the person is often is removed from the room or from the area of the room where the problem behavior occurs. The change agent implementing time out often must physically escort the client to the time out room or area. - Is Time Out Safe? It mustn’t contain any objects that clients could use to hurt themselves. They must be supervised at all time. - Is the Time-out Period Brief? Time out is a brief loss to positive reinforcers. Duration is usually 1-10 minute but if the client is engaging in problem behaviors in the time out area at the end of the timeout period, time out is extended for a brief time (10 seconds to 1 minute) until the client is no longer engaging in the problem behavior. This extension of time-out is called contingent delay. - Can Escape from Time-out Be prevented? Whether using exclusionary or non- exclusionary time-out, change agents should prevent the client from leaving the timeout room or area before the end of the time out interval. Client must not leave until the interval is up. - Can Interactions be avoided during Time-out? It must be implemented calmly and without any emotional response from the change agent. Reprimands, explanations, or any other form of attention must be avoided during time-out because they lessen its effectiveness. - Is Time-out Acceptable in the Given Situation? You must be certain that the procedure is acceptable in the particular treatment environment. Research Evaluating Time Out Procedures - Porterfield and colleagues evaluated time-out with young children who engaged in aggressive and disruptive behaviors in a day care program. He implemented contingent observation: contingent on the occurrence of the problem behavior, the child had to sit and watch the other children play appropriately. The procedure decreased the level of disruptive and aggressive behavior of the children in the day care program. Response Cost - It is the removal of a specified amount of a reinforcer contingent on the occurrence of the problem behavior. Response cost is a negative punishment procedure when it results in a decrease in the future probability of the problem behavior. Using Differential Reinforcement with Response Cost - If a response cost procedure is being used to decrease a problem behavior, differential reinforcement should also be used to increase a desirable alternative behavior (DRA) or to reinforce the absence of the problem behavior (DRO). Comparing Response Cost, Time-Out, and Extinction - All 3 are used to decrease a problem behavior. However different processes are involved. - Extinction: the problem behavior is no longer followed by the reinforcing event that previously maintained the behavior - Time-out: person is removed from access to all source of reinforcement contingent on the problem behavior - Response cost: a specific amount of a reinforcer the person already possesses is removed after the problem behavior. Considerations in Using Response Cost - Which Reinforcer Will Be Removed? You must identify the reinforcer and the amount of the reinforcer you will remove in the response cost procedure. The reinforcer should be one that the change agent has control over so that is can be removed after the problem behavior. The quantity of the reinforcer must be large enough so that its loss contingent on the problem behavior will decrease the problem behavior - Is the Reinforcer Loss Immediate or Delayed? It is typically delayed but can also be immediate. If response cost is to be used with people with severe intellectual deficits, it is best to have an immediate reinforcer loss. A delay between the problem behavior and the loss of the reinforcer may make response cost less effective. If response cost is going to be used with people with severe or profound intellectual disabilities, it may best be used in conjunction with a token reinforcement program. - Is the Loss of Reinforcers Ethical? It is important tht the removal of a reinforcer is the response cost procedure does not violate the rights of the person being treated or result in harm to him or her. - Is Response Cost Practical and Acceptable? It must be practical. The change agent must be capable of carrying out the procedure. The response cost procedure must not stigmatize or embarrass the person with the problem behavior. The change agent implementing the procedure must find the procedure to be an acceptable method for decreasing a problem behavior. CH.18 Positive Punishment Procedures and the Ethics of Punishment - In positive punishment, aversive events are applied contingent on the occurrence of a problem behavior, and the result is a decrease in the future probability of the behavior. - Functional (and nonaversive) treatment approaches should always be used before punishment is considered, and reinforcement procedures should always be in conjunction with punishment. Application of Aversive Activities - Contingent on the problem behavior, the child is made to engage in an aversive activity. As a result, the problem behavior was less likely to occur in the future. - An aversive activity is a low probability behavior the person typically would not choose to engage in - Premack principle: when the requirement to engage in low probability behavior (the aversive activity) is made contingent on the occurence of a high probability behavior (the problem behavior), the high probability behavior will decrease in the future - When applying an aversive activity as a positive
More Less

Related notes for PSYB45H3

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit