Competition between noncontingent and contingent reinforcement schedules during response acquisition

We examined the extent to which noncontingent reinforcement (NCR), when used as treatment to reduce problem behavior, might interfere with differential reinforcement contingencies designed to strengthen alternative behavior. After conducting a functional analysis to identify the reinforcers maintaining 2 participants' self-injurious behavior (SIB), we delivered those reinforcers under dense NCR schedules. We delivered the same reinforcers concurrently under differential-reinforcement-of-alternative-behavior (DRA) contingencies in an attempt to strengthen replacement behaviors (mands). Results showed that the NCR plus DRA intervention was associated with a decrease in SIB but little or no increase in appropriate mands. In a subsequent phase, when the NCR schedule was thinned while the DRA schedule remained unchanged, SIB remained low and mands increased. These results suggest that dense NCR schedules may alter establishing operations that result in not only suppression of problem behavior but also interference with the acquisition of appropriate behavior. Thus, the strengthening of socially appropriate behaviors as replacements for problem behavior during NCR interventions might best be achieved if the NCR schedule is first thinned.     

ON THE EFFECTS OF NONCONTINGENT DELIVERY OF DIFFERING MAGNITUDES OF REINFORCEMENT

We conducted a parametric analysis of response suppression associated with different magnitudes of noncontingent reinforcement (NCR). Participants were 5 adults with severe or profound mental retardation who engaged in a manual response that was reinforced on variable-ratio schedules during baseline. Participants were then exposed to NCR via multielement and reversal designs. The fixed-time schedules were kept constant while the magnitude of the reinforcing stimulus was varied across three levels (low, medium, and high). Results showed that high-magnitude NCR schedules produced large and consistent reductions in response rates, medium-magnitude schedules produced less consistent and smaller reductions, and low-magnitude schedules produced little or no effect on responding. These results suggest that (a) NCR affects responding by altering an establishing operation (i.e., attenuating a deprivation state) rather than through extinction, and (b) magnitude of reinforcement is an important variable in determining the effectiveness of NCR.     

SCHEDULE EFFECTS OF NONCONTINGENT REINFORCEMENT ON ATTENTION-MAINTAINED DESTRUCTIVE BEHAVIOR IN IDENTICAL QUADRUPLETS

Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR), a response-independent schedule for the delivery of reinforcement, has been found to be effective in reducing behavior when the reinforcer delivered is responsible for behavioral maintenance. In this study, dense and lean schedules of response-independent attention were compared to determine whether it is necessary to begin with a dense schedule before fading to a lean schedule, or whether treatment would be as effective using a lean schedule at the outset. The subjects were 5-year-old identical quadruplets diagnosed with mental retardation and pervasive developmental disorder who displayed destructive behavior that was maintained by social attention. NCR was selected partially because it is not very labor intensive and could be implemented by a single mother simultaneously with all 4 children. Using a combination multielement and multiple baseline design, it was found that (a) a dense schedule of response-independent reinforcement (i.e., fixed-time 10 s) resulted in immediate and dramatic reductions in destructive behavior with no evidence of an extinction burst, and (b) an equivalent reduction in destructive behavior was achieved with a lean schedule of response-independent reinforcement (fixed-time 5 min) only after a systematic fading procedure was implemented. The findings suggest that the effectiveness of NCR may be dependent on the use of a dense schedule initially, and that systematic fading can increase the effectiveness of a lean schedule.     

Noncontingent reinforcement without extinction plus differential reinforcement of alternative behavior during treatment of problem behavior

The effects of noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) without extinction during treatment of problem behavior maintained by social positive reinforcement were evaluated for five individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. A continuous NCR schedule was gradually thinned to a fixed‐time 5‐min schedule. If problem behavior increased during NCR schedule thinning, a continuous NCR schedule was reinstated and NCR schedule thinning was repeated with differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) included. Results showed an immediate decrease in all participants’ problem behavior during continuous NCR, and problem behavior maintained at low levels during NCR schedule thinning for three participants. Problem behavior increased and maintained at higher rates during NCR schedule thinning for two other participants; however, the addition of DRA to the intervention resulted in decreased problem behavior and increased mands.     

NONCONTINGENT REINFORCEMENT AS TREATMENT FOR SEVERE PROBLEM BEHAVIOR: SOME PROCEDURAL VARIATIONS

Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) as a treatment for problem behavior has typically included (a) continuous access to reinforcers at the onset of treatment and (b) extinction. We extended research on NCR by conducting a three-phase preliminary investigation of these components. In Phase 1, a functional analysis showed that the problem behavior of 3 participants with developmental disabilities was maintained by tangible positive reinforcement. In Phase 2, treatment started with the initial NCR interval based on the latency to the first problem behavior during baseline. In Phase 3, treatment consisted of NCR without extinction to determine whether extinction was an essential treatment component. Results showed that the initial NCR schedule based on latency (Phase 2) and NCR without extinction (Phase 3) were effective for reducing rates of problem behavior compared with baseline. Findings are discussed regarding the initial schedule of reinforcement and extinction as components of NCR.     

Variable-time reinforcement schedules in the treatment of socially maintained problem behavior

Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) consists of delivering a reinforcer on a time-based schedule, independent of responding. Studies evaluating the effectiveness of NCR as treatment for problem behavior have used fixed-time (FT) schedules of reinforcement. In this study, the efficacy of NCR with variable-time (VT) schedules was evaluated by comparing the effects of VT and FT reinforcement schedules with 2 individuals who engaged in problem behavior maintained by positive reinforcement. Both FT and VT schedules were effective in reducing problem behavior. These findings suggest that VT schedules can be used to treat problem behavior maintained by social consequences.     

NONCONTINGENT REINFORCEMENT: A FURTHER EXAMINATION OF SCHEDULE EFFECTS DURING TREATMENT

We conducted 2 studies to determine whether dense and thin NCR schedules exert different influences over behavior and whether these influences change as dense schedules are thinned. In Study 1, we observed that thin as well as dense NCR schedules effectively decreased problem behavior exhibited by 3 individuals. In Study 2, we compared the effects of 2 NCR schedules in multielement designs, one with and the other without an extinction (EXT) component, while both schedules were thinned. Problem behavior remained low as the NCR schedule with EXT was thinned, but either (a) did not decrease initially or (b) subsequently increased as the NCR schedule without EXT was thinned. These results suggest that dense schedules of NCR decrease behavior by altering its motivating operation but that extinction occurs as the NCR schedule is thinned. The benefits and limitations of using dense or thin NCR schedules are discussed.     

THE ROLE OF ATTENTION IN THE TREATMENT OF ATTENTION-MAINTAINED SELF-INJURIOUS BEHAVIOR: NONCONTINGENT REINFORCEMENT AND DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF OTHER BEHAVIOR

Because there are potentially serious limitations to differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) (which is probably the most widely used treatment procedure for behavior problems), we examined an alternative procedure—noncontingent reinforcement (NCR). Three females with developmental disabilities, all of whom engaged in severe self-injurious behavior, participated. During a pretreatment functional analysis, each subject's self-injury was shown to be differentially sensitive to social attention as a maintaining consequence. Next, each subject was exposed to a DRO treatment and an NCR treatment. During DRO, attention was delivered contingent on the absence of self-injury for prespecified intervals. During NCR, attention was delivered on a fixed-time schedule that was not influenced by the subject's behavior. Results showed that both procedures were highly effective in reducing self-injury, probably because the functional reinforcer for self-injury was used during treatment. Furthermore, there was evidence that NCR attenuated several of the limitations of DRO. These results are particularly interesting in light of the long experimental history of NCR as a control rather than as a therapeutic procedure.     

The effects of noncontingent reinforcement on task disengagement following failure of differential reinforcement treatment

Following the failure of applications of differential reinforcement (DR), the effects of reinforcement delivered noncontingently (NCR) on task disengagement and task completion were evaluated within reversal designs for three children with autism spectrum disorder. In Experiment 1, we compared DR and NCR schedules that combined positive and negative reinforcement. In Experiment 2, we replicated the results of Experiment 1 and then evaluated NCR schedules composed solely of negative reinforcement and NCR schedules that combined negative reinforcement with high-or low-preferred stimuli. In Experiment 3, we further analyzed NCR schedules that included different types and qualities of positive reinforcement, but without the inclusion of negative reinforcement. The results showed that NCR schedules using positive reinforcers can be effective as a treatment for task disengagement, but the type and preference of the reinforcer can alter effectiveness. These results are interpreted in terms of the motivating operations associated with task disengagement.     

Effects of noncontingent reinforcement on problem behavior and stimulus engagement: the role of satiation, extinction, and alternative reinforcement

This study examined the effects of noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) with and without extinction on problem behavior and stimulus engagement (consumption of reinforcement) of 4 participants. Reductions in problem behavior using NCR have frequently been attributed to both satiation of the reinforcer and extinction. In the current study, aspects of the NCR treatment effects were difficult to explain based solely on either a satiation or an extinction account. Specifically, it was found that stimulus engagement remained high throughout the NCR treatment analysis, and that problem behavior was reduced to near-zero levels during NCR without extinction. The implications of these findings are discussed with respect to the satiation and extinction hypotheses frequently described in the applied literature. Findings from basic studies examining the effects of response-independent schedules are presented, and are used as the basis for a matching theory account of NCR-related effects. It is proposed that reductions in problem behavior observed during NCR interventions may be a function of the availability of alternative sources of reinforcement.     

NEGATIVE SIDE EFFECTS OF NONCONTINGENT REINFORCEMENT

Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) has emerged as a treatment package for severe behavior problems. Although concerns about potential side effects (such as incidental reinforcement) have been raised, there have been few reported negative side effects in published studies to date. In this article, we report an NCR treatment evaluation for severe aggression that produced (a) an extinction burst and (b) incidental reinforcement. These side effects were evaluated by examining within-session response patterns and response distributions. As a solution, a brief omission contingency was added to the reinforcement schedule. The omission contingency resulted in decreased aggression rates.     

Bridging the gap between laboratory and applied research on response-independent schedules

In 1948, Skinner described the behavior of pigeons under response-independent schedules as “superstitious,” and proposed that the responses were reinforced by contiguous, adventitious food deliveries. Subsequently, response-independent schedules have been of interest to both basic and applied researchers, first to understand the mechanisms involved, and later, as “noncontingent reinforcement” (NCR) to reduce undesirable behavior. However, the potential superstitious effects produced by these schedules have been challenged, with some researchers arguing that antecedent variables play a significant role. This paper examines the evidence for adventitious reinforcement from both laboratory and applied research, the results of which suggest that antecedent, nonoperant functions may be important in fully understanding the effects of NCR. We propose an applied-basic research synthesis, in which attention to potential nonoperant functions could provide a more complete understanding of response-independent schedules. We conclude with a summary of the applied implications of the nonoperant functions of NCR schedules.     

A COMPARISON OF NONCONTINGENT REINFORCEMENT AND SENSORY EXTINCTION AS TREATMENTS FOR SELF-INJURIOUS BEHAVIOR

We compared the effects of two treatments, noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) and sensory extinction (EXT), on the self-injurious behavior (SIB) exhibited by 3 individuals with developmental disabilities. Results of a functional analysis indicated that their SIB was not maintained by social reinforcement, as indicated by undifferentiated responding across assessment conditions or higher rates of responding in the alone condition. Prior to treatment, leisure probes were conducted to identify highly preferred items for use in the NCR condition, and equipment probes were conducted to identify devices that produced the greatest behavioral suppression for use in the EXT condition. Following baseline, treatment was implemented in a multiple baseline across subjects design, and the effects of NCR and EXT were compared in a multielement format. During NCR sessions, participants had continuous access to a highly preferred item. During EXT sessions, participants wore equipment (gloves or protective sleeves) that seemed to attenuate stimulation directly produced by their SIB, while still allowing the behavior to occur. Results indicated that both procedures were effective in reducing SIB, although NCR was associated with either more rapid or greater overall response suppression.     

A comparison of procedures for programming noncontingent reinforcement schedules

We compared two methods for programming and thinning noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) schedules during the treatment of self-injurious behavior (SIB). The participants were 3 individuals who had been diagnosed with mental retardation. Results of functional analyses indicated that all participants' SIB was maintained by positive reinforcement (i.e., access to attention or food). Following baseline, the effects of two NCR schedule-thinning procedures were compared in multielement designs. One schedule (fixed increment) was initially set at fixed-time 10-s reinforcer deliveries and was also thinned according to fixed-time intervals. The other schedule (adjusting IRT) was initially determined by participants' baseline interresponse times (IRTs) for SIB and was thinned based on IRTs observed during subsequent treatment sessions. Results indicated that both schedules were effective in initially reducing SIB and in maintaining response suppression as the schedules were thinned.     

RESPONDING MAINTAINED BY INTERMITTENT REINFORCEMENT: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE USE OF EXTINCTION WITH PROBLEM BEHAVIOR IN CLINICAL SETTINGS

Results of basic research have demonstrated that behavior maintained on an intermittent schedule of reinforcement (INT) will be extinguished more slowly than behavior maintained on a continuous schedule (CRF). Although these findings suggest that problem behaviors may be difficult to treat with extinction if they have been maintained on INT rather than on CRF schedules, few applied studies have examined this phenomenon with human behavior in clinical settings. The purpose of this study was to determine whether problem behavior maintained on CRF schedules would be extinguished more rapidly than behavior maintained on INT schedules. Three individuals diagnosed with profound mental retardation participated after results of pretreatment functional analyses had identified the sources of reinforcement that were maintaining their self-injury, aggression, or disruption. Subjects were exposed to extinction following baseline conditions with CRF or INT schedules alternated within reversal or multielement designs. Results suggested that problem behaviors may not be more difficult to treat with extinction if they have been maintained on INT rather than CRF schedules. However, switching from an INT to a CRF schedule prior to extinction may lower the baseline response rate as well as the total number of responses exhibited during extinction.     

AGGRESSION AS POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT IN MICE UNDER VARIOUS RATIO‐ AND TIME‐BASED REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULES

There is evidence suggesting aggression may be a positive reinforcer in many species. However, only a few studies have examined the characteristics of aggression as a positive reinforcer in mice. Four types of reinforcement schedules were examined in the current experiment using male Swiss CFW albino mice in a resident—intruder model of aggression as a positive reinforcer. A nose poke response on an operant conditioning panel was reinforced under fixed‐ratio (FR 8), fixed‐interval (FI 5‐min), progressive ratio (PR 2), or differential reinforcement of low rate behavior reinforcement schedules (DRL 40‐s and DRL 80‐s). In the FR conditions, nose pokes were maintained by aggression and extinguished when the aggression contingency was removed. There were long postreinforcement pauses followed by bursts of responses with short interresponse times (IRTs). In the FI conditions, nose pokes were maintained by aggression, occurred more frequently as the interval elapsed, and extinguished when the contingency was removed. In the PR conditions, nose pokes were maintained by aggression, postreinforcement pauses increased as the ratio requirement increased, and responding was extinguished when the aggression contingency was removed. In the DRL conditions, the nose poke rate decreased, while the proportional distributions of IRTs and postreinforcement pauses shifted toward longer durations as the DRL interval increased. However, most responses occurred before the minimum IRT interval elapsed, suggesting weak temporal control of behavior. Overall, the findings suggest aggression can be a positive reinforcer for nose poke responses in mice on ratio‐ and time‐based reinforcement schedules.     

DO CHILDREN PREFER CONTINGENCIES? AN EVALUATION OF THE EFFICACY OF AND PREFERENCE FOR CONTINGENT VERSUS NONCONTINGENT SOCIAL REINFORCEMENT DURING PLAY

Discovering whether children prefer reinforcement via a contingency or independent of their behavior is important considering the ubiquity of these programmed schedules of reinforcement. The current study evaluated the efficacy of and preference for social interaction within differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) and noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) schedules with typically developing children. Results showed that 7 of the 8 children preferred the DRA schedule; 1 child was indifferent. We also demonstrated a high degree of procedural fidelity, which suggested that preference is influenced by the presence of a contingency under which reinforcement can be obtained. These findings are discussed in terms of (a) the selection of reinforcement schedules in practice, (b) variables that influence children's preferences for contexts, and (c) the selection of experimental control procedures when evaluating the effects of reinforcement.     

ANALYSIS OF THE REINFORCEMENT AND EXTINCTION COMPONENTS IN DRO CONTINGENCIES WITH SELF-INJURY

Previous research has shown that self-injurious behavior (SIB) maintained by positive reinforcement may be reduced under differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior (DRO) contingencies. In this study, we conducted an analysis of the reinforcement and extinction components of DRO while treating the self-injury of 3 women with developmental disabilities. A functional analysis revealed that each subject's SIB was maintained by positive reinforcement in the form of attention. Subsequent reinforcer assessments identified preferred and nonpreferred stimuli for later use in conjunction with DRO. Results showed high rates of SIB for all 3 subjects during baseline, which persisted when DRO was implemented without the relevant extinction component (withholding of attention for SIB) for 2 of the subjects. Low rates of SIB were observed for all subjects when DRO plus extinction was implemented or when extinction was implemented alone, suggesting that extinction may be a critical component of DRO schedules.     

APPLIED IMPLICATIONS OF REINFORCEMENT HISTORY EFFECTS

Although the influence of reinforcement history is a theoretical focus of behavior analysis, the specific behavioral effects of reinforcement history have received relatively little attention in applied research and practice. We examined the potential effects of reinforcement history by reviewing nonhuman, human operant, and applied research and interpreted the findings in relation to possible applied significance. The focus is on reinforcement history effects in the context of reinforcement schedules commonly used either to strengthen behavior (e.g., interval schedules) or commonly used to decrease behavior (e.g., extinction).     

Examining the generality of children's preference for contingent reinforcement via extension to different responses, reinforcers, and schedules

Studies that have assessed whether children prefer contingent reinforcement (CR) or noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) have shown that they prefer CR. Preference for CR has, however, been evaluated only under continuous reinforcement (CRF) schedules. The prevalence of intermittent reinforcement (INT) warrants an evaluation of whether preference for CR persists as the schedule of reinforcement is thinned. In the current study, we evaluated 2 children's preference for contingent versus noncontingent delivery of highly preferred edible items for academic task completion under CRF and INT schedules. Children (a) preferred CR to NCR under the CRF schedule, (b) continued to prefer CR as the schedule of reinforcement became intermittent, and (c) exhibited a shift in preference from CR to NCR as the schedule became increasingly thin. These findings extend the generality of and provide one set of limits to the preference for CR. Applied implications, variables controlling preferences, and future research are discussed.