Ethical Implications of Adverse Conditioning Essay Example

Ethical Implications of Adverse Conditioning Essay Example Ethical Implications of Adverse Conditioning Paper Ethical Implications of Adverse Conditioning Paper Ethical Implications of Aversive Conditioning It is not usual for psychologists to give prominence to ethical issues and Skinner is no exception. However, in writing about the application of behavioral analysis to significant issues in human behavior. Skinner stresses three issues which have general ethical implications. The use of positive reinforcement, the minimization of punishment contingencies and the specification of objectives (Skinner 1953, 1971). Aversive Conditioning is the use of unpleasant stimuli to induce behavior. It means, for example, causing pain to the subject each time he or she shows a behavior that is o be eradicated (Castro 2004). This distinction may also be applied to lower level learning, such as occurred with PavloVs dogs or pigeons in the Skinner box. A dog that salivates when hearing a bell is demonstrating a declarative knowledge, he knows that after the bell comes the food. A pigeon pressing a lever to get food is effectively applying procedural knowledge, it learned how to obtain food. The most important experimental result from the laboratory study of learning is that, for all kinds of learning, the process is more efficient when learning is accomplished in epeated sessions of short duration than in few sessions of long duration. Aversive procedures are used most commonly in the areas of developmental disabilities and to deal with disorders of sexual arousal such as pedophilia and exhibitionism (Repp Singh 1990). In the American Journal of Mental Retardation, the following guidelines for the use of aversive procedures are as follows: Aversive procedures should be used only if the scientific literature supports their use for a specified condition. Aversive procedures should only be used when the targeted behaviors re clearly of danger to the client or others, and there is well documented evidence that non-aversive interventions by competent practitioners have been tried and failed. Aversive procedures should only be used within a broad program of intervention and management. In addition to the use of aversive procedures for reducing challenging behavior, there must be concomitant intervention programs to promote the adaptive skill levels of clients. In all instances where aversive procedures are used, informed consent must have been given by the client or a legal guardian of the client prior to commencement of their use. Developmentally and culturally appropriate explanation of the aversive procedure and its objectives must be provided to clients. Psychologists using aversive procedures must always be familiar with and comply with any legislative requirements regarding the use of aversive procedures. Psychologists who use aversive procedures should have an advanced level of training in the use of behavioral therapies. In all instances where aversive procedures are used with developmentally and intellectually disadvantaged populations and children, a broadly based group should monitor the use of such rocedures. This group should include specialists in the use of aversive procedures, and people who safeguard the rights of the client. In the case of non-intellectually disadvantaged consenting adult clients, it is advisable that the treating psychologist using aversive procedures seek advice and/or supervision from colleagues (American Journal of Mental Retardation 1990). As you can see buy these guidelines the clients are well InTormea ana are taken care 0T In every extreme. Altnougn all provlslon 0T psychological services raises ethical issues, regardless of its theoretical nderpinnings, behavior modification has always received considerable scrutiny. That scrutiny has often been complicated by the existence of a negative image of behavior modification, bases on a number of popular and long held misconceptions. These include the view that behavior modifiers seek to impose control over human behavior that behavioral analysis is a type of mechanic psychology, and that aversive and punitive methods are routinely part of behavior modification. All these misconceptions should be corrected as a preliminary to considering the actual ethical basis of behavioral modification. Skinner took the view that positive einforcement should be preferred because punishment was undesirable and ineffective. In conclusion Aversive procedures are used in combination with other behavioral and cognitive strategies, and have been found to be useful in the management of impulse control problems. Aversive procedures are not in any way intended to cause harm to the individual. Thus it is beneficial for these individuals to seek help with the use of aversive conditioning so as to help the positive outcome of treatment. It will help with a better outlook on the individuals life. American Journal of Mental Retardation 1990, 95, Special Issue. Castro, Hector. Aversive Conditioning and Negative Reinforcement. The Science of Mind. 2004 Guidelines for the Use of Aversive Procedures. The Australian Psychological Society Limited. ABN 23 000 543 788 Leslie, Julian C. Ethical Implications of Behavior Modification, Historical and Current Issues. The Psychological Record, 1997 47 637-648 Repp, A. and Singh, N. Perspectives on the use of nonaversive and aversive interventions for persons with developmental disabilities. P Eds. NY USA Skinner, B. F. Science and Human Behavior. Macmillan. 1953 NY Skinner, B. F. Beyond Freedom and Dignity. Bantam. 1971 NY