Behavior Modification Children Case Study

Behavior modification uses a series of positive and negative reinforcers to shape a child’s behavior. In the case of Stuart, his teacher has been unconsciously positively reinforcing the undesirable behavior of crying and whining by comforting him when he comes to her for attention. Instead, she should negatively punish this behavior by withdrawing rather than offering her attention and ignoring his crying. “Negative punishment is taking away favorable consequences to reduce unwanted behavior” (Scott, Jain, & Cogburn 2025, par.4). The teacher can encourage Stuart’s positive behaviors through positive reinforcement; for example, when he plays quietly with his friends, she can tell him he is being a good boy, or offering praise and attention for exhibiting the desired behavior.

Negative reinforcement involves removing a negative stimulus to encourage the behavior. For example, if Stuart was being punished for his whining with being forced to sit in a corner, withdrawing the punishment would be an example of negative reinforcement (Scott, Jain, & Cogburn 2025). But from the description offered, it sounds like the teacher has not been punishing the crying or whining with positive punishment (for example, taking away privileges from Stuart). Given Stuart’s age, using negative punishment such as yelling or time outs would not be the most desirable first resort to modify his behavior, and hopefully simply withdrawing the teacher’s positive reinforcement will be enough to discourage him from seeking attention through whining and crying.

However, if his behavior does not change, a more structured behavioral modification plan might be needed, such as creating a system of gold stars, where he is rewarded with a star for every day he does not whine and cry, ultimately cumulating in a larger reward after accumulating a certain number of stars.

This scenario reflects the behavioral modification principle of extinction. In the first, presented scenario, Clarie was shaping Sarah’s behavior through the use of positive reinforcement, by responding to her first when she was called on in group activities. Gradually, the reinforcement cycle becomes more sporadic to maintain the behavior without constantly having to reinforce it immediately with the reinforcer. But, after Claire was absent and the substitute teacher did not reinforce the behavior at all by calling on her first, Sarah began to not exhibit the confidence and willingness to reply at all to any type of inquiries.

Although Claire was well-meaning, she did not use behavioral modification in an optimal manner. Instead of constantly reinforcing Sarah’s behavior, she should have prepared her for more realistic classroom scenarios by only sometimes reinforcing Sarah’s behavior, but at other times not calling on her first, so Sarah’s positive behaviors did not depend upon immediate reinforcement alone, but also the expectation of reinforcement. Claire did not introduce a modified reinforcement schedule where the behavior is only occasionally rewarded, which made the extinction phenomena very difficult to avoid when reinforcement was abruptly and completely withdrawn.

Claire could also have appropriately briefed the substitute about Sarah’s issue, so the substitute could have continued an occasional reinforcement schedule. A schedule of occasional reinforcement is also more reasonable to enforce by someone outside the classroom, since most teachers would find it odd to only call on one student first.