Psychologies themselves originally accepted the popular belief in the value of punishment – the belief that expressed so dogmatically in the, adage “spare the rod and spoil the child”.
Experiment work of punishment is not consistent. Sometimes it does no. This seems to imply that punishment is not a single psychological mechanism which works in a single fashion but rather that its effectiveness will be a function of the various conditions I- which it is used. If we consider some of the factors that may generally influence the effectiveness of punishment, we shall recall the usual situation in which punishments is brought into play. Generally it is simply one in which we wish will not recur. In other words, we are dealing with a stimulus-response connection which we hope to destroy by punishment. His connection may be one that has been strongly learned and because of its strength is likely to show great resistance to destructive efforts. Thus, one or two punishments may not prevent the response from occurring when the stimulus is again presented. Actually these punishments may decreases the probability that he response will occur, but we do not measure the response with sufficient precision. To be aware of this, we wrongly expect Rome to be built in a day. We give up the punishment thinking it as failed us.
Thus sometimes, we may erroneously decide that he psychological mechanism has failed, where as he failure lies in the “fact that we did not apply it along enough. One reason for the ineffectiveness of punishment is that it usually takes place long after response that it punishes. Let us take a not unusual of a child who shortly before dinner opens a cupboard door and takes a piece of candy from a forbidden box which he knows is kept there for the guests. He pops the chocolate into his mouth, but tell-tale smudges are left on his lips. He misdemeanor is’ discovered and punishment follows. Let us now consider the entire situation. To the stimulus of hunger pangs and the sight of the cupboard door, he made the response of opening the door and the box, and of taking and eating the candy. The candy acts as reward and that particular stimulus-response connection is reinforced. Later he may be punished for this same response which just previously has been reinforced. Note the time relationship. The reward was immediate but the punishment was delayed. So recall that the sooner the consequences follow an act, the greater the learning effect. This fact would serve to give the rewarding effect: of the act greater power than the punishing effect.
This punishments frequently is require to work against the positive reinforcement that is intrinsic in the very commission of the act because the punishment almost always comes later in time than the reward and so its effectiveness is lessened.
The thief who, in a hold-up, obtains money and spends it, has his anti-social actions reinforced. Even if later on –e should be committed to prison for his behaviour-punished, that is his anti-social action may have been strengthened by the reinforcement received. If crime truly did not pay, then criminal acts would be extinguished and eradicated.
Another and unfortunate characteristics of punishment is that often it tells the victims only what not to do but does not tell what to do. It does not build up by the process of reinforcement a strong positive way to reaching. I buildup only an avoidance of a: certain way of acting. These are some of the possible reasons why punishment may be in-effective. How then, may punishment operate when it is effective?
As we understand it to-day, punishment seems to operate in the same manner as the avoidance learning. Behaving in a certain fashion leads to painful consequences and we tend to move away from these painful consequences. At the same time, through a process like conditioning, the stimuli that have been associated with the painful consequences acquire the tendency to produces anxiety reactions. Since we tend to escape from an environment that produces anxiety, we tend to make a different response than the one which has been associated with the pain punishment.
This punishments works not by weakening the original habit but by substituting a conflicting response to the same stimulus. Different people employ different methods to prevent the reoccurrence of some action which a person or a society disapproves of. For ‘example, the dimension of Parental behaviour to the vigor of punishment varies from mild slaps to sound spankings and fro deprivation – of highly valued activities to deprivation of ones of minor worth in the offender’s esteem. Some people employ words which employ to the child that his action has caused them to lose some of their affection for the offender. This technique has proved a very effective manner of control.