ABA Fundamentals

Punishment and its putative fallout: A reappraisal

Fontes et al. (2021) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 2021
★ The Verdict

The dreaded punishment side effects are rare in modern data—track them, don’t assume them.

✓ Read this if BCBAs who still avoid punishment procedures because of legacy fear.
✗ Skip if RBTs looking for step-by-step punishment protocols.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Fontes and his team read every major punishment paper from the last 50 years. They asked: Do we really see the scary side effects Sidman warned about?

They looked for data on aggression, escape, and counter-control after punishment. They did not run new experiments; they weighed the old ones.

02

What they found

The big fears are not in the numbers. Few studies show lasting aggression or escape when punishment is used correctly.

The authors say the field kept repeating warnings without checking the shelf. The evidence is thinner than most of us think.

03

How this fits with other research

Ferrier et al. (2025) backs this up. Their 2025 sweep of ABA studies shows physical punishment is fading and social-validity reports are rising. Both reviews agree: the field is moving toward milder, better-monitored procedures.

Robinson et al. (1974) once showed side effects can happen. They fixed token-economy fallout by letting residents earn back privileges. Fontes et al. (2021) does not deny these cases; it says they are rare, not routine.

Kydd et al. (1982) proved that a sharp reprimand with eye contact cuts disruption. Fontes says such brief, contingent punishment rarely produces the doom-and-gloom side effects we were taught to expect.

04

Why it matters

You can stop quoting Sidman’s side-effect list like it is gospel. Instead, measure: Did aggression rise? Did escape attempts spike? If not, keep treating and collect data. If they do, adjust or stop. Let the client’s response guide you, not a decades-old warning label.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Run a one-week probe: count any new aggression or escape after your mild punisher; if zero, you have live evidence.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
narrative review
Finding
not reported

03Original abstract

In his book Coercion and Its Fallout Murray Sidman argued against the use of punishment based on concerns about its shortcomings and side effects. Among his concerns were the temporary nature of response suppression produced by punishment, the dangers of conditioned punishment, increases in escape and avoidance responses, punishment-induced aggression, and the development of countercontrol. This paper revisits Sidman’s arguments about these putative shortcomings and side effects by examining the available data. Although Sidman’s concerns are reasonable and should be considered when using any form of behavioral control, there appears to be a lack of strong empirical support for the notion that these potential problems with punishment are necessarily ubiquitous, long-lasting, or specific to punishment. We describe the need for additional research on punishment in general, and especially on its putative shortcomings and side effects. We also suggest the need for more effective formal theories of punishment that provide a principled account of how, why, and when lasting effects of punishment and its potential side effects might be expected to occur or not. In addition to being necessary for a complete account of behavior, such data and theories might contribute to improved interventions for problems of human concern.

Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 2021 · doi:10.1002/jeab.653