A Systematic Review of the Ethics of Punishment-Based Procedures for Young Children With Disabilities

Abstract

Punishment-based procedures are used to reduce challenging behavior in both special education and applied behavior analytic practices. Although commonly effective, these interventions are associated with an increased level of risk, making their use controversial. However, no research has specifically analyzed the extent to which researchers comply with the ethical standards of the professional organizations for special educators and behavior analysts (i.e., Council for Exceptional Children [CEC] and the Behavior Analyst Certification Board [BACB], respectively) when implementing punishment-based procedures. This might be especially important for young children with disabilities, who are a highly vulnerable population. We systematically analyzed the use of punishment-based procedures with this population to determine (a) characteristics of included children and treatments and (b) the degree to which researchers adhered to ethical standards during implementation. Results indicated a variety of punishment-based procedures have been used with this population and have generally resulted in decreased challenging behavior; these results were demonstrated across age, diagnosis, target behavior, and treatment type. However, researchers demonstrated minimal adherence to ethical standards, with no improvements over time. This indicates a need for improved ethical rigor of researchers implementing punishment-based interventions. Recommendations include (a) the creation and validation of an ethics code to assess the degree to which researchers demonstrate ethical practices, and (b) the development of tools to help practitioners recognize the ethical implications of punishment-based interventions and choose/implement appropriate interventions for behavioral interventions.