In response to Matthew and Claudia -
Yes, schedules can be applied to the application of punishment. Claudia is
correct that in some situations this may not be an effective procedure, but
not always because of the reasons she gave. Imagine this scenario: a rat
has been reinforced for lever pressing and now presses the lever with
significant frequency. Suppose we now begin to administer shock following
every third lever press. That's an FR3 punishment schedule. What will the
rat do? It depends. If reinforcement also continues, the behavior will be
a "compromise" based on the relative values of reinforcement and punishment.
If reinforcement ceases and is replaced by intermittent punishment, the
behavior will simply cease.
Claudia indicated that when an intermittent punishment schedule is in force,
unpunished responses are reinforced because they're not followed by
punishment, and that this amounts to reinforcement via avoidance (negative
reinforcement). This is not correct. In an avoidance contingency, the
response is reinforced because it PREVENTS the aversive condition (shock).
That's not what's happening here.
The reason that punishment is sometimes not effective is that the target
behavior is still being reinforced. And, in fact, if the reinforcement
contingency can be identified and eliminated (e.g., stop presenting food
following lever presses), this will lead to extinction of the response, and
punishment isn't necessary. This is another argument against the use of
punishment, namely, that in some situations it isn't necessary because the
target behavior can be eliminated via extinction instead, and this is
generally less aversive for everyone.
----------
Patrick S. Williams
Dept. of Social Sciences
University of Houston-Downtown
