A quantitative examination of punishment research

Lydon, Sinéad; Healy, Olive; Moran, Laura; Foody, Ciara

doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2014.10.036

Cited by 31 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There is no evidence to suggest that it is either possible [6] or beneficial [15] to globally reduce repetitive behaviors. The way in which most RIRBs continue to be seen in intervention programs is exemplified by their grouping with “problematic” behaviors in intervention studies, even being viewed as a justification for punishment [37]. Autistic interests are at best (NDBI) being used to increase engagement between the child and their parent/therapist as an opportunity to make requests or as positive reinforcement of social communication routines.…”

Section: Reconsideration Of Our Attitude Towards Early Repetitive Behmentioning

confidence: 99%

Should we change targets and methods of early intervention in autism, in favor of a strengths-based education?

Mottron

2017

Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early intensive behavioral intervention (EIBI) and its recent variant, naturalist developmental behavioral intervention (NDBI) aim to increase socialization and communication, and to decrease repetitive and challenging behaviors in preschool age autistic children. These behaviorist techniques are based on the precocity and intensity of the intervention, face-to-face interaction, errorless learning, and information fragmentation. Once considered to be “scientifically proven”, the efficacy of these approaches has been called into question in the last decade due to poor-quality data, small effects, low cost-efficiency, and the evolution of ethical and societal standards. Grounded on a reappraisal of the genetic and cognitive neuroscience of autism, we question three aspects of EIBI/NDBI: their focus on prerequisites for typical socio-communicative behaviors, their lack of consideration of autistic language development and learning modes, and their negative view of repetitive behaviors and restricted interests. We propose alternative predictions for empirical validation, based on the strengths of prototypical autistic children: (a) their non-verbal intelligence should be normally distributed and within the normal range; (b) improving access to non-communicative verbal and written auditory language material should favor their subsequent speech development and (c) decrease their problematic behavior; (d) lateral tutorship should increase the well-being of children and parents to a greater extent than personalized, face-to-face interventions by professionals; (e) admission to regular, but supervised daycare centers, combined with parental support and on-site crisis solving, represents a more cost-effective educational intervention than EIBI/NDBI.

show abstract

Section: Reconsideration Of Our Attitude Towards Early Repetitive Behmentioning

confidence: 99%

Should we change targets and methods of early intervention in autism, in favor of a strengths-based education?

Mottron

2017

Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Heyvaert, Saenen, Maes, & Onghena, 2014), and response cost, timeout or other punishment procedure (cf. Lydon, Healy, Moran, & Foody, 2015). Staff persons served as therapists during treatment sessions.…”

Section: Treatment Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional analysis and treatment of problem behavior exhibited by children with fragile X syndrome

Kurtz

Chin

Robinson

et al. 2015

Research in Developmental Disabilities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It appears that Sidman's opposition to the use of aversive control and, more specifically to the use of punishment, may have impacted how punishment is viewed and used by both basic and applied behavior analysts (e.g., Ahearn, 2011; Holth, 2010). There has been an apparent decrease in interest in studying punishment, leaving several empirical and theoretical gaps in the literature (see Critchfield & Rasmussen, 2007; Horner, 2002; Lerman & Vorndran, 2002; Lydon et al, 2015; Todorov, 2001, 2011). However, a similar decrease has not necessarily been observed with negative reinforcement (e.g., Baron & Galizio, 2005, 2006; Magoon & Critchfield, 2008; Sidman, 2006; Thompson & Iwata, 2005).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Punishment and its putative fallout: A reappraisal

Fontes

Shahan

2020

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In his book Coercion and Its Fallout Murray Sidman argued against the use of punishment based on concerns about its shortcomings and side effects. Among his concerns were the temporary nature of response suppression produced by punishment, the dangers of conditioned punishment, increases in escape and avoidance responses, punishment‐induced aggression, and the development of countercontrol. This paper revisits Sidman's arguments about these putative shortcomings and side effects by examining the available data. Although Sidman's concerns are reasonable and should be considered when using any form of behavioral control, there appears to be a lack of strong empirical support for the notion that these potential problems with punishment are necessarily ubiquitous, long‐lasting, or specific to punishment. We describe the need for additional research on punishment in general, and especially on its putative shortcomings and side effects. We also suggest the need for more effective formal theories of punishment that provide a principled account of how, why, and when lasting effects of punishment and its potential side effects might be expected to occur or not. In addition to being necessary for a complete account of behavior, such data and theories might contribute to improved interventions for problems of human concern.

show abstract

A quantitative examination of punishment research

Cited by 31 publications

References 27 publications

Should we change targets and methods of early intervention in autism, in favor of a strengths-based education?

Should we change targets and methods of early intervention in autism, in favor of a strengths-based education?

Functional analysis and treatment of problem behavior exhibited by children with fragile X syndrome

Punishment and its putative fallout: A reappraisal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About