AN ASSESSMENT OF SOME THEORIES OF PUNISHMENT AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON CORPORAL PUNISHMENT’S USE AS A BEHAVIOUR MODIFICATION STRATEGY

Kwadwo Oteng Akyina

Abstract


Theories explain the essence of the use of strategies in society. This review analyses the main theories that underpin the use of punishment as a behaviour modification strategy. Four main theories, namely the deterrent theory, incapacitation theory, compensation theory, and reformative theory, were reviewed and discussed in related literature to give an understanding of the use of punishment as a behaviour modification strategy in society. The discussion is concluded by drawing a linkage from the discussed theories with the use of corporal punishment in society. Recommendations are made in support of the use of alternative strategies rather than punishment in our current dispensation.

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter


Keywords


assessment, theories, punishment, deterrent, incapacitation, compensation, reformative

Full Text:

PDF

References


Acosta, J., Chinman, M., Ebener, P. et al. (2019). Evaluation of a whole-school change intervention: Findings from a two-year cluster-randomized trial of the restorative practices’ intervention. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48, 876–890. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-01013-2

Agbenyega, J. S. (2006). Corporal punishment in the schools of Ghana: Does inclusive education suffer? The Australian Educational Researcher, 33(3), 107-122. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF03216844

Akhtar, S. I., & Awan, A. G. (2018). The impact of corporal punishment on students’ performance in public schools. Global Journal of Management, Social Sciences and Humanities, 4(3), 606-621. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326489983_THE_IMPACT_OF_CORPORAL_PUNISHMENT_ON_STUDENTS'_PERFORMANCE_IN_PUBLIC_SCHOOLS

Bevington, T. J. (2015). Appreciative evaluation of restorative approaches in schools. Pastoral Care in Education, 33, 105–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643944.2015.1046475

Childs, K. E., Kincaid, D., George, H. P., & Gage, N. A. (2016). The relationship between school-wide implementation of positive behavior intervention and supports and student discipline outcomes. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18(2), 89-99. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300715590398

Clark, K. R. (2018). Learning theories: behaviorism. Radiologic technology, 90(2), 172-175. Retrieved from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30420574/

Doorn, J. V. & Brouwers, L. (2017). Third-party responses to injustice: A review on the preference for compensation, Crime Psychology Review, 3(1), 59-77, https://doi.org/10.1080/23744006.2018.1470765

Elgar, F. J., Donnelly, P. D., Michaelson, V., Gariépy, G., Riehm, K. E., Walsh, S. D., & Pickett, W. (2018). Corporal punishment bans and physical fighting in adolescents: an ecological study of 88 countries. BMJ open, 8(9), https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-021616

Gage, N. A., Grasley-Boy, N., Lombardo, M., & Anderson, L. (2020). The effect of school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports on disciplinary exclusions: A conceptual replication. Behavioral Disorders, 46(1), 42-53. https://doi.org/10.1177/0198742919896305

Goodman, P. (2022). Arguments for and against the use of corporal punishment. Retrieved from https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Goodman+%282022%29&btnG=

Gupta, A. (2021). Reformative Theory of Punishment in India. Retrieved from https://lawcorner.in/reformative-theory-of-punishment-in-india/

Heekes, S. L., Kruger, C. B., Lester, S. N., & Ward, C. L. (2022). A systematic review of corporal punishment in schools: Global prevalence and correlates. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 23(1), 52-72. Retrieved from https://paulcholinger.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/2020-Heekes-et-al.-A-Systematic-Review-of-Corporal-Punishment-in-Schools-Global-Prevalence-Correlates.pdf

Hu, Y., Strang, S., & Weber, B. (2015). Helping or punishing strangers: Neural correlates of altruistic decisions as third-party and of its relation to empathic concern. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 9, 1–11. Retrieved from https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/behavioral-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00024/full

Kano, E. (2012). Punishment and Learning. Retrieved from https://www.grin.com/document/191323

Karim, E. (2020). The Critical Evaluation of the Different Theories of Punishment. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350134502_The_Critical_Evaluation_of_the_Different_Theories_of_Punishment

Lee, A. & Gage, N. A. (2020). Updating and expanding systematic reviews and meta‐analyses on the effects of school‐wide positive behavior interventions and supports. Psychol Schs., 57, 783-804. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22336

Listwan, S.J., Sullivan, C.J., Agnew, R., Cullen F.T., & Colvin M. (2013). The pains of imprisonment revisited: The impact of strain on inmate recidivism. Justice Quarterly, 30(1), 144–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2011.597772

Maheshwari, P. (2015). Theories of compensation in criminal law. Retrieved from https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/theories-of-compensation-in-criminal-law/

Malsch, M., & Duker, M. (Eds.). (2016). Incapacitation: Trends and new perspectives. Routledge. Retrieved from https://www.routledge.com/Incapacitation-Trends-and-New-Perspectives/Malsch-Duker/p/book/9781138250642

Oxley, L., & Holden, G. W. (2021). Three positive approaches to school discipline: Are they compatible with social justice principles? Educational & Child Psychology, 38(2), 71-81. Retrieved from https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5c795691e6666938223bf6b7/t/62191696c9d59527540b7de1/1645811351188/Oxley%26Holden.pdf

Pathinayake, A. (2017). The Effectiveness of the Objective of Incapacitation: Is It a Myth. Journal of Gender, Race & Justice, 21, 333. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/openview/a3bf73de29b56a90649752d5a75fdea0/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=28588

Rai, D. (2020). Theories of punishment-a thorough study. Retrieved from https://blog.ipleaders.in/theories-of-punishment-a-thorough-study/

Sandeep, A. (2021). Reformative Theory of Punishment. Retrieved from https://aishwaryasandeep.com/2021/08/06/reformative-theory-of-punishment-2/

Shelke, S. & Dharm, J. (2019). Theories of Punishment: Changing Trends in Penology. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT) 8(6S3), 1299-1301. Retrieved from https://www.ijeat.org/wp-content/uploads/papers/v8i6S3/F12250986S319.pdf

Stowe, M. (2016). A restorative trail: Restorative practice – opening up new capacities of hearts and minds in school communities. Journal of Mediation and Applied Conflict Analysis, 3, 368–381.

Wildlife Law Africa (2020). Types of punishment. Retrieved from https://wildlifelawafrica.com/2020/03/11/types-of-punishment/

Yeboah, D. (2020). Teachers' perceptions of the abolition of caning in Ghanaian schools. Issues in Educational Research, 30(1), 379-395. Retrieved from https://www.iier.org.au/iier30/yeboah.pdf

Ziv, G. (2017). The effects of using aversive training methods in dogs—A review. Journal of veterinary behavior, 19, 50-60. Retrieved from https://banshockcollars.ca/pdf/The-effects-of-using-aversive-training-methods-in-dogsdA_review.pdf




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v11i8.5461

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2024 Kwadwo Oteng Akyina

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2015-2023. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All authors who send their manuscripts to this journal and whose articles are published on this journal retain full copyright of their articles. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).