Punishment Bench
💣 👉🏻👉🏻👉🏻 ALL INFORMATION CLICK HERE 👈🏻👈🏻👈🏻
Home
Relationships
12 Examples of Positive Punishment & Negative Reinforcement
You might be thinking that “positive punishment” sounds like an oxymoron, after all, how can punishment be positive?
Not many people “like” punishment, right?
The disconnect in understanding this concept comes from the usage of the word “positive;” here at PositivePsychology.com, we generally use the term “positive” to refer to things that are inherently good, things that are life-giving, and things that promote thriving and flourishing.
The concept of positive punishment comes from a very different era and a very different perspective on psychology; namely, the 1930s and behaviorism.
So, what actually is positive punishment and how does it relate to parenting, teaching, and even the workplace?
Before you read on, we thought you might like to download our 3 Positive Psychology Exercises for free. These science-based exercises will explore fundamental aspects of positive psychology including strengths, values and self-compassion and will give you the tools to enhance the wellbeing of your children, clients, students or employees.
You can download the free PDF here.
Positive punishment is one of four (positive parenting) methods of modifying behavior according to the theory of operant conditioning (Skinner, 1971). The four types are:
These methods are categorized based on two factors:
Although it can be difficult to see “positive” as discouraging behaviors and “negative” as encouraging behaviors, it’s easy to catch on when you realize that, when it comes to operant conditioning, the terms “positive” and “negative” are not used in the manner we generally think of them. In this theory, “positive” doesn’t necessarily mean “good” and “negative” doesn’t necessarily mean “bad.”
The theory of operant conditioning was developed by famed behaviorist B. F. Skinner (1971). If you’re not familiar with behaviorism, it’s definitely worth a dive into the literature; however, for the purposes of this piece, we’ll give a brief overview.
Behaviorism was the guiding perspective on psychology for several decades, from around the 1930s to the 1960s. It was championed by John Watson, but Skinner is the psychologist most often associated with behaviorism thanks to his many theories and experiments (GoodTherapy, 2015). The general idea behind behaviorism is that people (and animals) are heavily influenced and directed by outside factors. In the “nature vs. nurture” debate, behaviorists fall firmly on the “nurture” side.
The more hardline behaviorists believed that humans are born as “blank slates” with virtually no pre-existing programming or inherent characteristics. According to them, just about everything that you could use to describe yourself—whether that is traits, skills, titles, or preferences—comes from your environment. In this view, we are all born with roughly equal potential, barring genetic disorders and other physical limitations or advantages.
It was in this vein that Skinner developed his theory of operant conditioning. This theory holds that classical conditioning—the phenomenon by which Pavlov discovered that we associate things that happen sequentially as causally related—is too simplistic to explain how behavior is usually influenced, particularly the more complex behaviors (McLeod, 2018).
Operant conditioning is built on the foundation of rewards and punishment: when our behavior is rewarded, we are encouraged to repeat or continue that behavior, and when our behavior is punished, we are discouraged from repeating or continuing that behavior.
We form an association between the behavior we exhibited and the consequence, whether good or bad. When we are encouraged and rewarded for a behavior, that behavior is reinforced; when we are punished for a behavior, that behavior tends to die out (McLeod, 2018).
As we noted above, operant conditioning outlines four ways of influencing behavior based on the consequence and the desired result:
Some examples of these methods of influencing behavior will be outlined below.
Positive punishment is an attempt to influence behavior by adding something unpleasant, while negative reinforcement is an attempt to influence behavior by taking away something unpleasant. Both methods are employed to influence behavior, but positive punishment looks to remove or decrease a “bad” behavior while negative reinforcement seeks to encourage or increase a “good” behavior.
For example, spanking a child when he throws a tantrum is an example of positive punishment. Something is added to the mix (spanking) to discourage a bad behavior (throwing a tantrum).
On the other hand, removing restrictions from a child when she follows the rules is an example of negative reinforcement. Something unpleasant (a set of restrictions) is removed to encourage the child’s good behavior (following the rules).
Positive punishment differs from positive reinforcement in only one aspect: whether the behavior is encouraged or discouraged.
In both cases, something is added to the mix, whether it is something pleasant (positive reinforcement) or something unpleasant (positive punishment).
As listed above, positive punishment involves adding something unpleasant to discourage a behavior. Positive reinforcement involves adding something pleasant to encourage a behavior.
For example, treating a child to an ice cream cone when he stays quiet and obedient during a shopping trip is positive reinforcement. The child’s behavior (being quiet and obedient while out shopping) is reinforced by adding something pleasant (an ice cream cone). Hopefully, the child will understand that he is getting an ice cream cone because he behaved himself on the shopping trip, and he will be more likely to behave himself on the next shopping trip.
There are many more ways to use positive punishment to influence behavior, including:
Not all of these punishments are necessarily good ways to discourage behavior, but they are examples of the concept of positive punishment.
There are also many examples of negative reinforcement in practice (with varying degrees of effectiveness), including:
Although “punishment” sounds inherently negative, it’s not necessarily a negative thing. In operant conditioning, punishment is simply the discouragement of a behavior; it can be as benign as sitting a child down and explaining to them why they should no longer engage in a bad behavior.
The positive outcomes of using punishment include:
Of course, there are some downsides to punishment as well:
Ideally, a child would be raised with both reinforcement and punishment in a healthy mix—receiving rewards for good behavior and being corrected for bad behavior. Often, both are vital pieces of parenting and each can accomplish what the other fails to accomplish.
For example, reinforcement is a great tool for encouraging good behavior, but it gives the child no feedback on bad behavior (although sometimes the bad behavior is simply the opposite of the good, like adhering to the curfew vs. breaking the curfew). Likewise, punishment is good for discouraging bad behavior, but it has the unfortunate flaw of telling the child nothing about which behavior is actually desired.
Of course, these flaws in each method largely disappear when parents employ both methods and are communicative about what they expect to see and what they expect not to see from their child.
Positive punishment can be an extremely effective tool in the parents’ toolbox, and as we learned above, it doesn’t have to be physical. Positive punishment describes any situation in which parents add something that is undesirable to the child in order to encourage them to refrain from a specific behavior they do not consider appropriate or acceptable.
There are many ways to do this. James Lehman, social worker and expert on working with troubled youth, offers these seven guidelines for using positive punishment:
However, there are limits on how and when to use positive punishment; according to James Lehman, grounding your child will only teach them how to “do time,” but it doesn’t actually show them how to improve their behavior (Lehman, 2012). Kids that are frequently grounded will eventually get used to it and learn to cope with it, but they won’t necessarily learn what you’re trying to teach them (see our post on building resilience in children).
Instead of providing them with instruction on appropriate behavior and a chance to do better, grounding a child restricts their behavior and keeps them from even having a choice about whether to behave in the desired manner or not. They may feel so restricted that it leaves them with no opportunity to evaluate their choices and make better decisions, giving them no room to grow.
Research also shows that positive punishment does not always weaken a person’s behavior when punished, it may simply suppress it. If a child fears being punished, they may continue to engage in the bad behavior while they are away from the parent(s) who punishes them. Children will behave when you are looking because they don’t like the punishment, but they may still enjoy secretly engaging in the behavior itself (Smith, 2012).
Positive punishment can also be used in the classroom, but the same guidelines and caveats listed above apply here as well.
There may be less leeway since teachers generally do not have the same authority over children that their parents do, but there is also an added element that can help or harm efforts to use positive punishment: the presence of their peers.
Peer pressure is a highly impactful factor that can be harnessed to normalize and encourage good behavior, but punishing children in front of their peers can also cause shame, embarrassment, and seething resentment when applied incorrectly.
One of the most important rules to follow when it comes to positive punishment in the classroom is to refrain from using shame or embarrassment as a tool for learning; if a child is embarrassed in front of her peers, she is not likely to think of it as a positive learning experience and may become openly hostile instead of being encouraged to evaluate her own behavior and make better choices.
Along with this important rule, follow these six guidelines to ensure positive punishment is used effectively and appropriately in the classroom:
Positive punishment can be a very useful tool in the classroom when applied conscientiously and with careful consideration.
Punishment doesn’t necessarily stop when we become adults.
The idea that punishment can be effective in stopping undesirable employee behaviors, such as tardiness and absenteeism, is a popular one. It’s something you’ve likely seen in your own workplace, either directed towards yourself or someone else.
For example, these are all instances of positive punishment at work:
In some cases, these forms of punishment can be extremely effective. Sometimes all it takes to discourage bad behavior and encourage good behavior is a “talking to” from your manager. Other times, it’s not so effective.
Research has shown that positive punishment doesn’t always bring about good behavior at work; sometimes, it only temporarily stops one bad behavior from happening and may also lead to fear, psychological tension, anxiety, and other undesirable outcomes. These emotional and behavioral responses are likely to negatively impact work productivity and work behavior (Milbourn Jr., 1996).
Similar to the consequences of overzealous or unnecessarily harsh parenting techniques, employees who feel as if they have no choice or control over their work may begin to act out, repress their true intentions, or even engage in more nefarious behavior like embezzling, sabotage, or otherwise undermining their employer.
Positive punishment at work may be effective in some cases, but like positive punishment for children, it should be used sparingly, appropriately, and in conjunction with reinforcement techniques.
As we covered earlier, there are some definite downsides to positive punishment; it can confuse children about what they should be doing instead of the bad behavior, cause them to develop fears or other maladaptive habits or feelings, cause anger or rebelliousness, and may only lead to suppression of the behavior instead of true “extinction” of the behavior.
These are some common criticisms of the effectiveness of positive punishment, but there are also some quite strong aversions to positive punishment for another reason: whether it is ethical or not.
Many modern parents are averse to any type of positive punishment that involves unpleasant physical consequences, and for good reason—a large body of research shows that physical punishment may not only be ineffective in many cases, it may also result in unintended consequences or even backfire on the parents (Cherry, 2018).
A recent meta-analysis of several decades’ worth of research on spanking and other physical punishments largely considered not to be abusive showed that these punishments made a child significantly more likely to display undesirable and unintended consequences, such as anti-social behavior and mental health problems (Gershoff & Grogan-Kaylor, 2016). In fact, the effects of spanking and other “non-abusive” forms of physical punishment were observed to be almost as detrimental as physical abuse.
As Alan Kazdin, a psychology professor at Yale University and expert on parenting notes:
“You cannot punish out these behaviors that you do not want… there is no need for corporal punishment based on the research. We are not giving up an effective technique. We are saying that this is a horrible thing that does not work” (Smith, 2012).
The bottom line is that, like many other techniques and methods, positive punishment can be very effective or very ineffective depending on how it is applied.
Positive punishment that is appropriately targeted and matches the level of the infraction can be a great tool to discourage or extinguish behavior; inappropriately targeted and mismatched positive punishment can result in everything from failing to teach the lesson you want to teach to mental health problems and the continuation of parenting styles that simply do not work.
If you use common sense and follow the easy-to-understand guidelines in this article, you should have no major trouble using mild, effective positive punishment to encourage good behavior.
What do you think about positive punishment? Do you find it effective for your children, students, and/or employees? What are your go-to punishments or reinforcements? Let us know in the comments!
We hope you enjoyed reading this article. Don’t forget to download our 3 Positive Psychology Exercises for free.
If you wish for more, our Positive Psychology Toolkit© contains over 300 science-based positive psychology exercises, interventions, questionnaires and assessments for practitioners to use in their therapy, coaching or workplace.
Courtney Ackerman, MA, is a graduate of the positive organizational psychology and evaluation program at Claremont Graduate University. She is currently working as a researcher for the State of California and her professional interests include survey research, wellbeing in the workplace, and compassion.
Zerihun Negesa on 27 February 2020 at 06:30
This research is clearly posted. thank you very much
This article is well researched. Thanks a lot
Referring to Jeff’s comment about grounding, by definition, being a removal, I’d like to point out that a child confined to his room, a classic “grounding” can easily be a the definition of a positive punishment because confinement is added. Unlike math, this real world example, it adding confinement with nothing to entertain can also easily be both an added restriction or confinement as well as a removal of normal freedoms, diversions and privileges. A number cannot be both 3 and -3 but a consequence can be something added and something (the opposite opportunity) removed. It is the nature of language that descriptions can have ambiguity with regard to this strictly operant-conditioning definition of the words “positive” and “negative.” I content this is why these ideas are so commonly misunderstood, difficult to correctly apply and falling from use.
Ravinder on 15 January 2019 at 17:00
Thanks for posting this article let. Nicely written and very understandable to everyone. Very useful one. PL keep writing.
Joshua Jonathan on 3 December 2018 at 07:29
thanks for nice and fantastic lesson about punishment;
Mobile Training Course in Delhi on 11 October 2018 at 09:59
Looking forward to reading more. Great article post.Really thank you! Really Cool.
Mark Stephen on 9 October 2018 at 09:42
Usually, I never comment on blogs but your article convinced me to comment on it as is written so well. And telling someone how awesome they are is essential so that on my part I convince you to write more often.
Craig Smith on 10 October 2018 at 01:04
Thanks for the feedback Mark, it’s greatly appreciated!
Great work. You made confusing concepts rather easily understandable.
Praise and blame are both forms of control used to limit and inhibit freedoms. In order for us to fit the ideals of those who follow the rules of “polite society” as children we are manipulated, bullied, chorused and controlled to fit a mould that serves the masses yet can very much destroy the spirit of an individual.
No longer are we humans born into free will. We are animals, born to be domesticated in order to politely serve without disobedience in the big machine.
In other areas of psychology we are told that no one can make us do or feel anything. That it is our own choice and interpretation of others behaviour or demands that give us the freedom to choose.
But it’s little wonder that depression and anxiety are the worlds biggest epidemics when we spend the entirety of our formative years being beaten out of the concept of free thought.
Don’t get me wrong. Chaos and anarchy don’t seem to be much fun either but I can’t help thinking there could be a better way than forcing our will on our newest arrivals, just because that’s what we’ve always done, in order to uphold a set of schemas dictated to us a long time ago by people other than ourselves who decided for us what life should look like.
Some interesting philosophical books that look at this are “ The four agreements “ by don Miguel Ruiz, “the way of the peaceful warrior” by Dan Millman and “Lost Connections
Uncovering the Real Causes of Depression – and the Unexpected Solutions” By Johann Hari
Michele Madrigal on 25 August 2018 at 23:41
I love your comment! What are some suggestions that you can offer? I’ve just finished reading The Four Agreements again and am trying to figure out ways to help my 7 year old who’s in second grade. He hates the traditional ways of learning like handouts and writing and such. I’m blessed to be at a charter school who’s willing to work with us. I’d love to hear some suggestions. Thanks!
Terry Rosen on 4 December 2020 at 17:09
The article does provide a wonderfully clear examination of the terms. Michael Wu provides a related, and very clear description of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation that anyone interested in this article should also read: https://community.khoros.com/t5/Khoros-Communities-Blog/Intrinsic-vs-Extrinsic-Rewards-and-Their-Differences-from/ba-p/128969
However, both view are fundamentally flawed. Not incorrect, but flawed. Skinners theories are based on animal behaviors, and in order to render them with clarity, animals that were food deprived in order to enhance the results of his studies. Applying his ideas to humans, or more specifically children, is inherently fraught with unmeasured risks.
Dr. W Edwards Deming, (world famous quality improvement guru), used the term overjustification. Alfie Kohn’s works are descriptions of the risk involved in treating children as though they a
Negative Punishment - Psychestudy
12 Examples of Positive Punishment & Negative Reinforcement
Impractical Jokers - Murr Gets Chained To A Park Bench (Punishment)
Купить punishment bench design easily заказать с доставкой
Punishment - Wikipedia
Mature Women Creampie Videos
Porno Mom Black
Huge Tits Seduction
Punishment Bench
