» Articles » PMID: 8682733

A Preliminary Procedure for Predicting the Positive and Negative Effects of Reinforcement-based Procedures

Overview
Specialty Social Sciences
Date 1996 Jan 1
PMID 8682733
Citations 27
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

In the current investigation, a modification was made to the preference assessment described by Pace, Ivancic, Edwards, Iwata, and Page (1985) to predict the effects of stimuli when used in a differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior (DRO) schedule for 2 clients with severe self-injurious behavior (SIB) and profound mental retardation. Based on the results of the preference assessment, three types of stimuli were identified: (a) high-preference stimuli associated with high rates of SIB (HP/HS), (b) high-preference stimuli associated with relatively lower rates of SIB (HP/LS), and (c)low-preference stimuli associated with low rates of SIB (LP/LS). Consistent with the results of the preference assessment, the DRO schedule with HP/HS stimuli resulted in increased SIB, and the DRO schedule with LP/LS stimuli resulted in no change in SIB when used in a DRO schedule. Thus, the stimulus preference assessment may be useful clinically in some situations for predicting both the beneficial and the negative side effects of stimuli in DRO procedures.

Citing Articles

Competing stimulus assessments: A systematic review.

Haddock J, P Hagopian L J Appl Behav Anal. 2020; 53(4):1982-2001.

PMID: 32720719 PMC: 8151254. DOI: 10.1002/jaba.754.


Behavioral treatment of automatically reinforced SIB: 1982 - 2015.

Rooker G, Bonner A, Dillon C, Zarcone J J Appl Behav Anal. 2018; 51(4):974-997.

PMID: 29989153 PMC: 7984853. DOI: 10.1002/jaba.492.


Noncontingent reinforcement for the treatment of severe problem behavior: An analysis of 27 consecutive applications.

Phillips C, Iannaccone J, Rooker G, P Hagopian L J Appl Behav Anal. 2017; 50(2):357-376.

PMID: 28177118 PMC: 8793041. DOI: 10.1002/jaba.376.


Further analysis of subtypes of automatically reinforced SIB: A replication and quantitative analysis of published datasets.

P Hagopian L, Rooker G, Zarcone J, Bonner A, Arevalo A J Appl Behav Anal. 2016; 50(1):48-66.

PMID: 28032344 PMC: 5292128. DOI: 10.1002/jaba.368.


An integrated model for guiding the selection of treatment components for problem behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement.

Berg W, Wacker D, Ringdahl J, Stricker J, Vinquist K, Salil Kumar Dutt A J Appl Behav Anal. 2016; 49(3):617-38.

PMID: 26990962 PMC: 5023446. DOI: 10.1002/jaba.303.


References
1.
Cowdery G, Iwata B, Pace G . Effects and side effects of DRO as treatment for self-injurious behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 1990; 23(4):497-506. PMC: 1286265. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1990.23-497. View

2.
Pace G, Ivancic M, Edwards G, Iwata B, Page T . Assessment of stimulus preference and reinforcer value with profoundly retarded individuals. J Appl Behav Anal. 1985; 18(3):249-55. PMC: 1308015. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1985.18-249. View

3.
Carr E, Durand V . Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training. J Appl Behav Anal. 1985; 18(2):111-26. PMC: 1307999. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1985.18-111. View

4.
Iwata B, Dorsey M, Slifer K, Bauman K, Richman G . Toward a functional analysis of self-injury. J Appl Behav Anal. 1994; 27(2):197-209. PMC: 1297798. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-197. View

5.
Vollmer T, Marcus B, Leblanc L . Treatment of self-injury and hand mouthing following inconclusive functional analyses. J Appl Behav Anal. 1994; 27(2):331-44. PMC: 1297810. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-331. View