Stimulus Avoidance Assessment: A Systematic Literature Review.

Board certified behavior analysts are ethically required to first address destructive behavior using reinforcement-based and other less intrusive procedures before considering the use of restrictive or punishment-based procedures (ethics standard 2.15; Behavior Analyst Certification Board, 2020). However, the inclusion of punishment in reinforcement-based treatments may be warranted in some cases of severe forms of destructive behavior that poses risk of harm to the client or others. In these cases, behavior analysts are required to base the selection of treatment components on empirical assessment results (ethics standard 2.14; Behavior Analyst Certification Board, 2020). One such preintervention assessment is the stimulus avoidance assessment (SAA), which allows clinicians to identify a procedure that is likely to function as a punisher. Since the inception of this assessment approach, no studies have conducted a systematic literature review of published SAA cases. These data may be pertinent to examine the efficacy, generality, and best practices for the SAA. The current review sought to address this gap by synthesizing findings from peer-reviewed published literature including (1) the phenomenology and epidemiology of the population partaking in the SAA; (2) procedural variations of the SAA across studies (e.g., number of series, session length); (3) important quality indicators of the SAA (i.e., procedural integrity, social validity); and (4) how the SAA informed final treatment efficacy. We discuss findings in the context of the clinical use of the SAA and suggest several avenues for future research.

Retrospective consecutive controlled case series of outcomes for functional analyses of severe destructive behavior.

Functional analysis methods allow clinicians to determine the variable(s) that maintain destructive behavior. Previous reviews of functional analysis outcomes have included large samples of published and unpublished data sets (i.e., clinical samples). The purpose of this review was to conduct a large retrospective consecutive controlled case series of clinical functional analyses. We sought to identify the prevalence of differentiation, procedural modifications for undifferentiated and differentiated cases, and identified function(s) of destructive behavior. In addition, we extended the existing literature by determining whether functional analysis differentiation and function varied when single or multiple behavior topographies were consequated in the functional analysis. We discuss our findings considering previously published functional analysis reviews, provide avenues for future research, and offer suggestions for clinical practice.

Updated Recommendations for Reinforcement Schedule Thinning following Functional Communication Training.

Schedule thinning is a necessary treatment procedure following the acquisition of a communication response during functional communication training. In this article, we update and extend the Hagopian et al. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 4, 4-16, (2011) review and recommendations on schedule-thinning procedures following functional communication training. Since their publication, substantial research has been published on the efficacy, efficiency, and social validity of schedule-thinning methods. We provide updated recommendations for schedule thinning based on contemporary literature that has been published since 2011, as well as discuss key areas for future research.

Resurgence following differential reinforcement of alternative behavior implemented with and without extinction.

In the clinic, differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) often involves programming extinction for destructive behavior while reinforcing an alternative form of communication (e.g., a functional communication response); however, implementing extinction can be unsafe or impractical under some circumstances. Quantitative theories of resurgence (i.e., Behavioral Momentum Theory and Resurgence as Choice) predict differences in the efficacy of treatments that do and do not involve extinction of target responding when reinforcement conditions maintaining alternative responding worsen. We tested these predictions by examining resurgence following two DRA conditions in which we equated rates of reinforcement. In DRA without extinction, target and alternative behavior produced reinforcement. In DRA with extinction plus noncontingent reinforcement, only alternative behavior produced reinforcement. We conducted this study in a reverse-translation sequence, first with participants who engaged in destructive behavior (Experiment 1) and then in a laboratory setting with rats (Experiment 2). Across both experiments, we observed proportionally lower levels of target responding during and following the DRA condition that arranged extinction for the target response. However, levels of resurgence were similar following both arrangements.