Abstract

Research on overcorrection was analyzed along a number of dimensions. Two types of overcorrection have been described — restitutional overcorrection and positive-practice overcorrection (Foxx & Azrin, 1972). In restitutional overcorrection an individual who disrupts the environment must restore, and then improve, the environment over its previous state. In positive-practice overcorrection, an offending individual must repeatedly perform an appropriate behavior. The literature indicates that overcorrection has been effective with a wide variety of behaviors, but that its effectiveness compared with alternative procedures is unclear. An adequate assessment of the side effects of overcorrection has been hampered by a lack of objective data and a failure to specify, in advance, which behaviors are of interest. Investigations of various parameters of overcorrection indicate that topographical similarity between an offense and the restitutional procedure is unnecessary, that the duration of time that the process must be administered is unclear, and that a more precise specification of the components of overcorrection is necessary. Finally, it is concluded that Foxx and Azrin have not been sufficiently explicit in relating overcorrection to the punishment process.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.