Assessing preferences for positive and negative reinforcement during treatment of destructive behavior with functional communication training.

Results of prior studies (e.g. [J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 32 (1999) 285]) showing that participants chose alternative behavior (compliance) over escape-reinforced destructive behavior when this latter response produced escape and the former response produced positive reinforcement may have been due to (a) the value of the positive reinforcer overriding the value of the negative reinforcer or (b) the presence of the positive reinforcer altering the value of the negative reinforcer (i.e., lessening the aversiveness of the demands). In this investigation we evaluated the relative contributions of these alternative mechanisms with two girls with autism. We compared the relative effects of positive and negative reinforcement using equivalent communication responses under both a restricted-choice condition (in which participants could choose positive or negative reinforcement, but not both) and an unrestricted-choice condition (in which participants could choose one or both reinforcers). Both participants often chose positive over negative reinforcement in the restricted-choice condition. However, in the unrestricted-choice condition (in which participants could choose one or both reinforcers), one participant consistently chose both reinforcers by the end of the analysis whereas the other primarily chose only positive reinforcement. Results suggested that for one participant the value of the positive reinforcer overrode the value of the negative reinforcer, whereas for the other participant, the presence of the positive reinforcer in the demand context lessened the aversiveness of the demands.

Enhancing the effects of extinction on attention-maintained behavior through noncontingent delivery of attention or stimuli identified via a competing stimulus assessment.

UNLABELLED: Recent research has shown that the noncontingent delivery of competing stimuli can effectively reduce rates of destructive behavior maintained by social-positive reinforcement, even when the contingency for destructive behavior remains intact. It may be useful, therefore, to have a systematic means for predicting which reinforcers do and do not compete successfully with the reinforcer that is maintaining destructive behavior. In the present study, we conducted a brief competing stimulus assessment in which noncontingent access to a variety of tangible stimuli (one toy per trial) was superimposed on a fixed-ratio 1 schedule of attention for destructive behavior for individuals whose behavior was found to be reinforced by attention during a functional analysis. Tangible stimuli that resulted in the lowest rates of destructive behavior and highest percentages of engagement during the competing stimulus assessment were subsequently used in a noncontingent tangible items plus extinction treatment package and were compared to noncontingent attention plus extinction and extinction alone. Results indicated that both treatments resulted in greater reductions in the target behavior than did extinction alone and suggested that the competing stimulus assessment may be helpful in predicting stimuli that can enhance the effects of extinction when noncontingent attention is unavailable. DESCRIPTORS: Attention-maintained problem behavior, competing stimuli, extinction, functional analysis, noncontingent reinforcement

An evaluation of response cost in the treatment of inappropriate vocalizations maintained by automatic reinforcement.

In the current study, we examined the utility of a procedure consisting of noncontingent reinforcement with and without response cost in the treatment of inappropriate vocalizations maintained by automatic reinforcement. Results are discussed in terms of examining the variables that contribute to the effectiveness of response cost as treatment for problem behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement.

Varying response effort in the treatment of pica maintained by automatic reinforcement.

Pica is a life-threatening behavior displayed by many individuals with developmental disabilities. In the current study, automatic reinforcement maintained the pica of 3 participants. Following functional analyses of pica, response-effort manipulations were conducted in which the effort to obtain pica or alternative items was varied systematically. Several general relations emerged as a result of the study. First, levels of pica were reduced relative to baseline when alternative items were available independent of the effort required to obtain alternative items or pica. Second, increasing the effort for alternative items resulted in increases in pica relative to when effort for alternative items was low. Third, increasing response effort for pica produced reductions in pica relative to baseline when alternative items were unavailable. Fourth, the highest levels of pica occurred when the effort to engage in pica was low or medium and no alternative items were available. These findings are discussed in terms of the relative effects of quality of reinforcement and response effort on behavior.