Unit 2: Do Reinforcements and Punishments have an Impact?

Current Research

I have conducted research on the impact reinforcements and punishments have on student motivation levels. This information is being included to put you in the frame of mind of an outsider (e.g. researcher) instead of a teacher in a classroom. This information will benefit you and enable you to reflect on your own practices for Unit 3.

• The purpose of this current research is to determine the impact that punishments and reinforcements have on the motivation of students.

- Combination of Reinforcements and Punishments: In the research study by J Miller, D. Lerman and J. Fritz (2010), an experiment was conducted through role play because manipulating problem behaviors in order to analyze the impact of reprimands and reinforcers raises ethical concerns. The experiment was conducted due to an interest in the effects of certain reactions on the occurrence of problem behaviors (e.g., reprimands, removal of demands). Sessions for this study were conducted in a psychology laboratory (3.4 m by 4.3 m) equipped with a one-way observation window and an unobtrusive recording system. Two experimenters conducted each of the participants sessions; one gave directions before each session and interacted with participants after each session as well. The other experimenter role played with participants and pretended to be a student with severe developmental disabilities. Sessions were conducted during 3-hr blocks across 1 or 2 days and all sessions were 10 min long. The participants were asked to role play as the teacher and instruct the experimenter (acting as student) a variety of academic skills. At first the experimenter exhibited no problem behaviors. The purpose for this was to see how many reprimands would be given when no problem behavior was being exhibited. After, the experimenter exhibited problem behavior for 30s. According to J Miller, D. Lerman and J. Fritz (2010) the purpose for this was to determine if problem behavior would set occasion for reprimands and if reprimands would be sensitive to the negative contingency. The last condition studied was the continuation in problem behavior for 30s, without regard to the participant’s behavior. Problem behavior continued until 5s of time elapsed without a reprimand in order to prevent accidental reinforcement. As stated in the research study by J Miller, D. Lerman and J. Fritz (2010), the purpose of this condition was to determine if reprimands would decrease when they no longer terminated problem behavior. Results from this study “suggested that adult reprimands may be sensitive to negative reinforcement in the form of termination of children’s problem behavior” (Miller J., Lerman D., & Fritz J., 2010, p. 771). Three of the seven participants ended their session early. Each of the participants ended their session after an extinction session. This provided the researchers with “some evidence that problem behavior was aversive to these individuals” (Miller J., Lerman D., & Fritz J., 2010, p. 769). When participants engaged in alternative methods when reprimands didn’t produce immediate escape, which allowed them to avoid the problem behavior in entirety. Results from this study provide a platform for further studies to build upon when evaluating a caregiver or instructor's response to problem behavior. This study suggested that negative reinforcements are often correlated to adult responses to problem behaviors in the form of reprimands. It should be known that the problem behavior exhibited by the experimenters were property destruction and self-injury. Further studies would need to be conducted to show correlation to other problem behaviors. Due ethical concerns it would be difficult to directly conduct this experiment in a real-life setting with children, but other methods, such as data collection, can be used to replicate this study in an ethical form. Furthermore, it would be interesting to examine other adult responses that maintain problem behaviors. In the research study titled by T.J. Newby (1991), an experiment was conducted in order to investigate the quantity and use of motivational strategies implemented in the classroom of first-year teachers and the relationship between strategy used and student behavior. This study mainly focused on on-task behaviors of students. According to Newby (1990, p. 195) , an increase in positive behaviors “can be attributed to strategies facilitating the creation of either an extrinsic or an intrinsic orientation in the student”. As stated in this study an extrinsic orientation is “demonstrated when a student increases motivation and effort in order to obtain a desired item” and an intrinsic orientation is when “participation in the task is considered, not as means, but rather as the desired end” (Newby, 1990, p. 195). Participants in this study included, 30 elementary school teachers over 4 months. Of those 30 teachers, 24 were women and 6 were men and two taught kindergarten, 8 taught first grade, 2 taught second grade, 6 taught third grade, 3 taught fourth grade, 4 taught fifth grade, and 4 taught sixth grade. Thirteen separate schools in three different school districts were represented by the sample of teachers. All teachers were in their first semester as full time teachers at the start of this study. Six observers were trained to conduct and systematically record the classroom observations in narrative form. The six observes met with the lead investigator each week and reviews sample narratives for quality control. Once ready to begin, observes met with the teacher participants and explained that observations would be done randomly throughout the 4 months and each session would last about 50 minutes. During each observation the observer made sure to sit in an unobtrusive area and was able to have a clear visual of the teacher and students as well as, be able to clearly hear conversations and interactions throughput the classroom. The observer took notes on almost all of the verbal and written interactions the students. After the 50 minute session had passed, the observer would quietly leave the room after the lesson or a natural break occurred as to not disrupt the class. The results displayed that on average 10 strategies per observation session were observed to be used by the teachers. “That indicates that a major portion of their efforts were directly involved with motivational issues” (Newby, 1990, p. 198). That may have been noticed due to the age of the students and the fact that teacher may have felt the need to redirect and refocus the students to ensure that tasks were being completed. The majority of strategies used by teachers were “based on supplying or restricting extrinsic satisfiers” (Newby, 1990, p. 198). Extrinsic satisfiers may include; gaining a toy, moving up on the behavior chart, gaining more recess, obtaining a sticker etc.. Results from this study concluded that “a positive correlation was shown to exist between the use of two types of satisfiers, indicating that those teachers using higher amount of rewards also used more punishments” (Newby, 1990, p. 197). According to Newby (1990), the classrooms in which teachers gave more reasons as to the importance of a task or in which encouragement was given to relate the task to students personal lives, there was a decrease in the need for redirection and an increase in on task behaviors.

Labeled Praise: What is the importance and effectiveness of positive attending which is also commonly described as strategic use of labeled praise?

• Positive attending is method of positive reinforcement. Use of positive attending can and should transcend one specific room or teacher can be utilized across settings. "Positive attending is used with active ignoring when a teacher systematically withholds attention from a student when that student engages in an undesired attention-seeking behavior that is ignorable, termed differential attention, it is most efficient. (Perle, 2016, p.254)

Food for Thought: How are you using reinforcements and punishments in your classroom? Are your techniques and strategies effective? Please post responses on the discussion board for Unit 2.