What is most effective in all aspects of life? Reinforcement or Punishment?

Question

In other words, hypothetically speaking...if you had to choose either punishment only or reinforcement only to run a society or to raise a child, which would you choose to make it most successful?

Answer 1

both, the degree of balance depending on the situation. to explain this better - the pleasure has to outweight the possibility of pain. if negative, fear of the consequences should be enough to deter an negative action. on the other hand, the aniticpated pleasures and rewards for a positive action, should outweight the challenges of the negative. some ppl take pleasure in the negative. so we need a balance of the two. depends on the mentality of the child or society. compare south africa to switzerland for example, or a psychotic killer to a missionary. what works for one, doesn't work for the other.

if you were a child being slapped on the hand in a supermarket, and you KNEW that if you continue, this is the worst that will happen, and you'll eventually get your own way, then you won't stop will you? however if you know that a slap is the first step in a series of steadily worstening punishments that you KNOW have consequences you will NOT like, then you won't do it. if you know that being positive will get you a chocolate at the end of the day plus the praise of your family, you will act that way rather than risk punishment and no treat for negative. this is why i am saying to use both in accordance with each other, depending on the situation.

society, just like children, needs to know their boundaries. otherwise what would be the point of rules and laws, and preventing crime, if the only response is "coochy coo pls don't do it?" what is then to prevent the miscreant from simply taking what it wants, if theres no punishment? not everyone has the mental capacity to reason in a positive way, and children are not adults.

Answer 2

To raise a child, I would choose reinforcement only. Punishment only shows a child what not to do. Instead of a punishment for "bad" behaviors, I can use re-direction, which is simply bringing them to another "good" activity. And when he/she makes a good choice--reinforce.

Studies have shown that reinforcement is more effective in the long run when raising a child (or even training an animal).

I don't think reinforcement would work for society in general--especially at this point.

Answer 3

There is no fixed answer. It really depends on the situation. Different circumstances call for different measures.

In my experience, punishment works best when you're trying to mould someone's character. And moulding a character does not happen when one already has a fixed personality. The analogy of clay here is useful. Think of wet clay as a personality/character that hasn't been fully formed yet (though it possesses some sort of a shape). Think of dry, bakes clay as a persnality/character that has been fully formed and now is very hard. Then think of the act of "moulding" as a punishment. When you try to mould the wet clay, it will automatically morph into your desired shape. But when you try to "mould" baked clay, it will almost inevitably, break.

Even with a "wet clay" type personality, punishment may not necessarily be the most viable option.

As for reinforcement, it works best when trying to influence behaviors. One hopes that a cognitive dissonance (a gap between a person's beliefs and the actions that they're being compelled to do via reinforcement) will force the people to change their mental attitudes. This theory, for the most part remains untested. So far, in organizational culture, the only thing that has altered significantly, via reinforcment, is behaviour, not personality. If you remove the reinforcement, chances are that the behaviors you were trying to prevent will return.

Therefore, reinforcement, should only be used when one is concerned with changing behaviours, and the end is not to change another person's character. Using reinforcement to change an entire personality/character is downright impossible.

The best general approach, that does change characters and personalities, is the "lead-by-example" approach. This subject is an extension of spirituality, and perhaps will entail a discussion of mystical metaphysics.

Answer 4

Positive reinforcement is always the most reliable method. It increases the probability that the desired behavior will occur. Punishment decreases the probability that the undesired behavior will occur. Punishment does not address the desired behavior.

For example, a parent in the supermarket with her toddler. The child is going to reach for anything and everything in reach. A smack on the hand only tells the toddler that they cannot have THAT item. Ten feet further, the child reaches for something else, once again drawing the wrath of the parent. This can go on all day, because the parent has not told the child what is expected. Negative consequences are not generalized.

Answer 5

Reinforcement

Answer 6

reinforcement, because punishment only leads to fear and revolution. Reinforcement can be positive reinforcement, i.e Be a decent person, work the best you can - you will reap the benefits.

Answer 7

Punishment definitely-------via fact that time 0, and it would not rely of what descent the two, have united to style communities out of shock with regard to the movements of others. The community mutually is extra effectual than a single individual.....This community grew into cities, states, and international locations. Now there's a flow to make the international right into a large community (the european Union is an occasion) that makes use of its length to bully the smaller worldwide places into following their concepts

Answer 8

Punishment,
in a society where it is a limb for a limb,
there is less of a chance for a person to commit a crime because he is scared of the consequence.

Answer 9

Reinforcement.

It's much easier, and I'm lazy.