THE EFFECTS OF SOCIAL PUNISHMENT ON NONCOMPLIANCE: A COMPARISON WITH TIMEOUT AND POSITIVE PRACTICE

The effects of social punishment, positive practice, and timeout on the noncompliant behavior of four mentally retarded children were assessed in a multitreatment withdrawal design. When programmed, the experimental procedure occurred contingent on noncompliance to experimenter-issued commands. Commands were given at 55-sec intervals throughout each experimental session. The results showed (1) lower levels of noncompliance with social punishment than with the positive-practice or timeout conditions, and (2) that relatively few applications of social punishment were required to obtain this effect. The advantages of social punishment over other punishment procedures, considerations to be made before using it, and the various aspects of the procedure that contribute to its effectiveness were discussed.     

Maternal perception of maladjustment in clinic-referred children: An extension of earlier research

The purpose of the present study was to extend earlier research examining predictors of maternal perceptions of maladjustment in clinic-referred children. Forty-five mothers and their clinic-referred children served as subjects. Maternal perceptions of child maladjustment were measured by the Parent Attitude Test. Maternal depression, marital adjustment, and family socioeconomic status were determined by the Beck Depression Inventory, Locke Marital Adjustment Test, and Myers and Bean index of social status, respectively. Child compliance and child deviant behavior (other than noncompliance) were obtained in home observations collected by independent observers. The results indicated that maternal depression was the best predictor of maternal perception of children. The remaining variables failed to contribute to the multiple regression analyses. Separate analyses also were performed on males and females and different predictor variables emerged for the two groups.The research reported in this study was supported by NIMH Grant 34193.     

Attribution and reconstructive memory

Two experiments were conducted to test the effects of making an attribution on later memory for the event that gave rise to the attribution. Subjects in Experiment 1 observed a scenario in which an actor's behavior was associated with high or low variance (distinctiveness) across situations, and high or low congruence (consensus) to the actions of others. Subjects either made attributions for the actor's behavior immediately following the scenario or not. One week later, subjects were asked to recall consensus and distinctiveness for the actor's original behavior. Subjects who made attributions were significantly better at estimating the high-high and low-low combinations of consensus and distinctiveness than were their no-attribution counterparts. It was suggested that making an attribution may allow for a reconstructed memory for the original event, but not enhance direct access to the original event information. A second experiment tested this concept further by having subjects view an edited version of the scenario in which either the distinctiveness or the consensus information was deleted and having subjects make attributions or not. One week later, subjects were asked to indicate their certainty that consensus and distinctiveness information was a part of the original scenario and to estimate the levels of consensus and distinctiveness. Subjects who made attributions were more confident and accurate in estimating the level of consensus or distinctiveness that was given in the original scenario than were no-attribution subjects. However, attribution subjects were also more confident that consensus information or distinctiveness information was contained in the scenario (when it was not) than were the noattributio subjects. Results of the two experiments suggest that eliciting attributions can distort subsequent memory for the event on which the attributions were based.     

Harm, intent, and the nature of aggressive behavior: measuring naturally occurring aggression in barroom settings

The research goals were to use the constructs of harm and intent to quantify the severity of aggression in the real-world setting of the bar/club, to describe the range of aggressive behaviors and their relationship to harm and intent, and to examine gender differences in the form and severity of aggression. Systematic observations were conducted by trained observers on 1,334 nights in 118 bars/clubs. Observers documented a range of aggressive acts by 1,754 patrons in 1,052 incidents, with many forms of aggression occurring at more than one harm and intent level. Women used different forms of aggression, inflicted less harm, and were more likely to have defensive intent compared with men. Implications of the findings for research and measurement of aggression and applications to preventing aggression and violence are discussed.