Behavioral Principles - Term Paper Example

 «Behavioral Principles» Reinforcement is a technique that relies on the concept of “consequences influence behaviour”. It makes the use of the people’s thinking that they do things because they know other things will follow. The theory of reinforcement shapes an individual’s behaviour by controlling the consequences of the behaviour. It can be categorized into two types: one that is of supportive type i.e. positive reinforcement and the other one that acts as an aversive stimulus i.e. negative reinforcement (Sulzer-Azaroff, 1991). Positive reinforcement is used for strengthening a response by the use of a positive trigger presented as a consequence. The primary function of a positive trigger is to act as a stimulus for enhancing a person’s behaviour in a given context (Sulzer-Azaroff, 1991). Positive reinforcement is carried out by the presentation of a consequence that is dependent on behaviour which makes the behaviour more likely to occur. It is generally comprised of things such as praise or rewards for the motivation to carry out certain behaviour. Certain universities give scholarship facilities to students provided they get a certain level of grade point average (GPA) . The scholarship program can be seen as an incentive provided to the students for getting better grades, or in terms of positive reinforcement we can say that a consequence (scholarship) was presented dependent on the target behaviour (specific GPA). The scholarship was dependent on the grades on an if-then relationship; if the student got that certain GPA then scholarship was given, otherwise not. Hence we can see the use of the method of positive reinforcement here. In negative reinforcement however a stimulus is removed from a situation to reinforce certain behaviour. Negative reinforcement tends to make people avoid or escape undesired consequences (Sulzer-Azaroff, 1991). Hence, we can say that it increases the probability of the occurrence of certain behaviour by taking away something bad. In case of negative reinforcement an aversive stimulus is set aside or is avoided as a consequence of a certain response (Sulzer-Azaroff, 1991). Example of negative reinforcement can be seen in terms of a child that is told to tidy his room and he deliberately chooses not to do so. In such a case, the parent can handle the situation through negative reinforcement by telling the child that he will not get the dessert if he does not tidy his room first. In other words the forbidding of the child from getting dessert; something that the child does not want to let go as a consequence of his not tidying the room, is an aversive stimulus that he would want to avoid and hence do what s/he is told. Though the negative reinforcement and punishment may seem to be in the same category but the reality of it is quite different. Negative reinforcement is quite a different approach from punishment. It can be reiterated by the fact that they differ in their main underlying concepts and aims. Negative reinforcement strengthens behaviour by making the use of it as a way to avoid or stop a negative condition from occurring. Punishment on the other hand makes the use of the negative condition for making the undesired behaviour to diminish in the future. It weakens the behaviour by the introduction of a negative condition or experience as a consequence of that behaviour (Malott, 2003). The core of their difference can be highlighted by the fact that negative reinforcement removes an aversive consequence, while punishment presents an aversive consequence. In addition to that, reinforcement enhances behaviour while punishment diminishes behaviour (Sulzer-Azaroff, 1991). Same is the case with penalties; while taking reprimands into account, we see that they are not as effective as reinforcement and can be easily ignored or taken for granted. In addition to that the effects of reprimands do not usually last long. Sometimes the term positive reinforcement is misunderstood by people as bribery; however, the two are not the same. Bribery is something given in advance before the behaviour is delivered and is not affective, as with the reward already in hand; the attention of the individual falls short on the delivery. Reinforcement rather than buying the behaviour like bribery is based upon the return after the desired behaviour has been achieved. Rewards on the other hand differ from reinforcement according to Vargas (2009, pg. 48) as follows: “Reinforcement is contingent on the ebb and flow of behaviour. Rewards are things: tangible items or privileges.” In addition to that she also says that you reward people, you reinforce actions but many things that act as positive triggers cannot be considered as rewards. In today’s era, where the complexities of human mind and its potential have reached new heights, it has become essential to be able to interpret the human mind using the tools of behaviour principles and to be able to bring them to positive use. The discoveries leading to the ability to understand, analyze and discover behavioural patterns has enabled the professionals to develop a better understanding not only on how to deal in terms of interaction among people alone, but also in enhancing the way we live. So it is up to us now to decide on how far we want to go for adding to this field and are willing to obtain from it. Throughout history we have seen generations of people fighting for the right of freedom. Freedom of choice, when comes to our daily lives, is something that we take totally for granted. But there are also people among us that can hardly do anything with respect to their own preferences. Bannerman’s points relating to the importance of teaching mentally handicapped people to exercise freedom cannot just be restricted to that particular category of patients. His points shed light on the needs of all the victims of health issues, be it mental or physical. The wants and rights that he has emphasized upon, of the patients dependent on others need to be met in all circumstances for their satisfaction and adjustment. People with health issues, be it mental or physical, that are under the care of doctors or special homes are not usually given a right to choose or freedom to exercise their preferences. A patient may have a little input in the decisions regarding treatment plans or the procedures being used by the experts. This in turn affects their motivation level in achieving specific goals as they have little say in the proceedings. They might even go to the extent of resisting the procedures being followed (Bannerman, Sheldon, Sherman & Harchik, 1990). Usually patients that are under the care of others find it hard to have even the leisurely activities to their preference. They are restricted by the options provided to them by the service staff or the advocates or guardians responsible for them (Bannerman, Sheldon, Sherman & Harchik, 1990). They are not encouraged to make any decisions of their own or make choices to obtain their own preferences. Opportunities for choice are not usually given. Some of the clinics/service providers of the patients put too much emphasis on scheduling in order to meet the regulatory standards. Such inflexible scheduling plans also restrain the choices of the patients, not taking into consideration what and when they want to do something (Bannerman, Sheldon, Sherman & Harchik, 1990). Another issue in this situation arises and that is of determining whether restraining such liberties and freedom from the patient is in his/her best interests or not. Everyone has a right to make choices to some extent in view of his abilities. People with illnesses should be able to exercise their opinion which is not only significant but also essential for their satisfaction and well being. Freedom of choice can also help medically impaired people to mentally adjust to the idea of settling in a normal social circle where people have the liberty to make decisions and choices. Bannerman’s points can also be seen applied in the situation where the issue of dealing with different population groups arises. The background and the population category to which the patients belong to also should be taken into consideration while dealing with patients with long term mental or physical illnesses. They have to be dealt with in accordance to their age groups and preferences etc. For example the needs of teens might differ from those of adolescents. Similarly, the preferences, interests and activities of people belonging to different sects might be different and might need special attention. Such needs have to be taken care of in order to keep the patient calm and content and help him adjust to his disabilities. Giving the patients a right to choice greatly enhances their level of preferences and they even tend to be more participative in activities where choices are provided to them. In addition to that, giving opportunities to patients also enhances their level of performance, in turn boosting their goodwill. It is also useful in reducing the behaviour problems when it comes to disabled people or people that are sick with other illnesses (Bannerman, Sheldon, Sherman & Harchik, 1990). In our nursing practice the points that have been highlighted above should be taken into account in terms of dealing with the patients and making their livelihood more comfortable. The right to choice making should be incorporated in the everyday routine of the patients. Things such as independent living skills and other functional behaviours chosen by the patient should be encouraged in order to equip them with the ability to make decisions to adjust in the social circle outside of their hospitals/clinics. A patient’s consent should be incorporated in the future decisions or even the treatment plans for his/her better corporation and motivation. They should be allowed input in defining their activities. The environment in the clinics and hospitals is so restrictive that it becomes suffocating for the patients, for which we should try to make it as comfortable and cooperative as possible in view of their abilities. To make the treatment and living there easier for them they should be given opportunities to make choices as much as possible. They should be able to make choices even in relation to their residential arrangements and work settings within and between the allocated schedules. The staff members have to be motivated and cooperative enough to provide such facilities to the patients and they should be able to identify whether the choices being made by the patients are in their interests or not and handle the situation accordingly. If the preferences of the patients cannot be honoured the staff members should be facilitated to allow them to figure out how and when can they be honoured (Bannerman, Sheldon, Sherman & Harchik, 1990). Clinicians and doctors should always be vigilant enough for the provision of basic human rights to the patients to direct their lives as independently as possible because as Bannerman puts it “All people have the right to eat too many doughnuts and take a nap.” Read More