A comparison of response cost and differential reinforcement of other behavior to reduce disruptive behavior in a preschool classroom

This study investigated the effectiveness of response cost and differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) in reducing the disruptive behaviors of 25 children in a preschool classroom. Using an alternating treatments design, disruptive behavior was reduced when the participants earned tokens for the absence of disruptive behavior (DRO) or lost tokens for the occurrence of disruptive behavior (response cost). Initially, DRO was more successful in reducing the number of disruptive behaviors; however, over time, response cost proved to be more effective.     

Evaluating the role of contingency in differentially reinforced tic suppression

The current study evaluated the effects of tokens delivered on differential reinforcement of zero-rate behavior (DRO) schedules or noncontingently on tic suppression in 4 children with tics. Tic frequency was lower in 3 of 4 children when tokens were delivered contingent on the absence of tics than when tokens were delivered noncontingently.     

Self-management of a DRO procedure by three students with autism

Three students with autism were taught to self-manage a DRO program to reduce their disruptive behavior. During baseline conditions, all students showed high rates of disruptive behavior (either out-of-seat or nail-flicking). Students were taught to self-manage a DRO program during external reinforcement and prompted self-management conditions. Student gains were maintained during unprompted self-management and follow-up conditions. ©1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

REDUCING AGGRESSIVE AND SELF-INJURIOUS BEHAVIOR OF INSTITUTIONALIZED RETARDED CHILDREN THROUGH REINFORCEMENT OF OTHER BEHAVIORS1

Aggressive and self-injurious behaviors of four retarded children were reduced by combining various techniques with the differential reinforcement of other behaviors (DRO). In one study, aggressive responses of a severely retarded child were reduced when DRO was combined with a 30-sec timeout. In a second study, various aggressive classroom behaviors were reduced when the child was told “no” for an inappropriate response but earned puzzle pieces for periods of time when inappropriate responses did not occur. Exchangeable tokens were given to a third subject for every 15 min in which aggressive responding did not occur, while each inappropriate response resulted in the loss of all tokens accrued. Responding was decreased to a level far below baseline. For a fourth child, self-injurious responses were followed by “no”, and intervals of time in which no self-injurious responding occurred earned candy. The rate of this behavior reduced significantly. In each case, the DRO procedure combined with the other techniques proved to be manageable for the teacher and successful in reducing the inappropriate behavior.     

A Comparison of Function-Based Differential Reinforcement Interventions for Children Engaging in Disruptive Classroom Behavior

This study provides a direct comparison of differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) and differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA). Participants included three children in center-based classrooms referred for functional assessments due to disruptive classroom behavior. Functional assessments included interviews and brief functional analyses. An alternating treatments design was used to evaluate the relative effectiveness of function-based DRO and DRA interventions. Results indicated that both intervention procedures effectively reduced disruptive behavior, but the DRA procedure consistently resulted in greater reductions in disruptive behavior across all participants. Results are discussed in terms of directions for future functional assessment and intervention research as well as implications for applied practice.     

Use of a token economy to eliminate excessive inappropriate social behavior in an adult with developmental disabilities

Adults with developmental disabilities frequently have both deficits in appropriate social skills and excesses in inappropriate social behavior (Matson, LeBlanc, & Weinheimer, 1999). Typically, published treatment studies have focused on social skills training procedures that teach and promote the use of new social behaviors. However, only a few studies have focused on management of existing social behaviors that are problematic because they occur excessively or in an inappropriate context (Wright, Herzog, & Seymour, 1992). The current study focuses on management of three types of inappropriate social behavior in a 26‐year‐old male with moderate mental retardation: inappropriate social interactions, inappropriate sexual behavior, and verbal aggression. A token economy with response cost procedure was implemented using a DRO interval as the basis for earning tokens. Using a multiple‐baseline design across behaviors, each of the three types of inappropriate social behavior was successfully treated. After demonstrating the success of the procedure, the DRO interval was increased while maintaining the reductions in inappropriate social behaviors. Appropriate behaviors such as initiating conversation, shaking hands, etc maintained throughout the intervention. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Peer and college-student tutoring as reinforcement in a token economy

Eighteen second-grade children initially received feedback in the form of nonredeemable tokens for reducing their disruptive classroom behavior. Four types of tutoring were then introduced in a Latin Square Design: noncontingent tutoring from fifth-grade peers, contingent peer tutoring, noncontingent college tutoring, and contingent college tutoring. No significant difference was found in the level of disruptive behavior of those children tutored by fifth-grade peers or college students, but contingent tutoring was significantly effective in reducing disruptive classroom behavior.     

Relative efficacy of two token economy procedures for decreasing the disruptive classroom behavior of retarded children

Numerous studies have demonstrated that disruptive classroom behavior can be decreased by delivering tokens contingent upon periods of time during which children do not engage in it or by removing tokens contingent upon its occurrence. To date, the best controlled of these studies have consistently reported the two procedures to be equally effective. However, in these studies, token contingencies have been combined with instructions regarding the contingencies. The present study compared these two procedures when no instructions were given regarding the token contingencies. Token delivery was not effective in decreasing disruptive behavior in any of the children, while a combination of token delivery and removal was effective for three of four children. The results suggest that the combined procedure may be effective with certain populations that are not readily controlled by instructions.     

Maintenance of appropriate behavior in a token program

Following a baseline period, a token reinforcement program was instituted in three resource-room classes for very disruptive children where the children spent 1 hour per day. The only reinforcers used in the token program were those available to any classroom teacher, viz., free time in an activity area. The effects of the token program were evaluated in the three resource-room classes as well as in the homerooms of all students participating in the resource-room program. Following 4 months of the token program, a return to baseline was made in one resource classroom. As assessed by standard classroom observations, the token program was effective in reducing disruptive behavior in all three resource-room classes; and when it was withdrawn in one resource-room class, the disruptive behavior remained at a very low level in the resource room. Ratings by teachers in the homerooms showed a significant reduction in disruptive behavior, but recordings by homeroom observers showed no such reduction. Possible reasons for maintenance of low rates of disruptive behavior after withdrawal of tokens were discussed in terms of the type of reinforcers used.     

Delivering alternative reinforcement in a distinct context reduces its counter‐therapeutic effects on relapse

Delivery of alternative reinforcers in the presence of stimuli previously associated with reinforcement for target behavior increases the susceptibility of target behavior to relapse. To explore contingencies that might mitigate this counter‐therapeutic effect, we trained pigeons on a procedure that entailed extinction of previously reinforced target‐key pecking, access to a distinct stimulus context contingently on refraining from target behavior (differential‐reinforcement‐of‐other‐behavior; DRO), and reinforcement of alternative‐key pecks (differential‐reinforcement of alternative behavior; DRA) in that context. This DRO‐DRA treatment was compared with standard DRA in successive conditions, counterbalanced across pigeons. Target behavior extinguished more rapidly in the Standard‐DRA condition. When alternative reinforcement was discontinued, however, there was less resurgence after DRO‐DRA than after Standard DRA. In a third condition, the DRO contingency was suspended so that the former DRA stimuli were not presented (DRO‐NAC), and resurgence was greater than in the Standard‐DRA and DRO‐DRA conditions. Reinstatement produced by response‐independent reinforcers was small and similar across conditions. Subsequent reacquisition of target‐key pecking under baseline reinforcement conditions was faster following DRO‐NAC than Standard‐DRA or DRO‐DRA. These findings suggest that DRO‐DRA might serve as a useful method in clinical settings for reducing problem behavior while minimizing the threat of posttreatment relapse.     

A comparison of differential reinforcement and noncontingent reinforcement for the treatment of a child's multiply controlled problem behavior

Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) and differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) with escape as the reinforcer were evaluated after an initial functional analysis indicated the problem behaviors exhibited by a 7 year old child were maintained by escape. When NCR and DRO did not decrease the problem behaviors, a second functional analysis was conducted and showed that the behaviors were maintained by attention and escape. DRO with attention and escape as reinforcers was compared to NCR with attention and escape as reinforcers for the treatment of the child's multiply controlled behavior problems. Results showed that DRO and NCR were both effective at reducing the problem behavior to low levels and increasing compliance. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

An experimental approach to the reduction of overactive behavior

An operant, differential reinforcement procedure (DRO) was employed in a playroom setting for the purpose of controlling overactivity. Six overactive, mentally retarded children, aged 8–13 yr were first observed individually for a period of 8 days in the playroom in order to obtain a baseline performance on a specially constructed check-list of hyperactive behavior. Following this, the conditioning phase began under a fixed schedule of reinforcement with tokens as the reinforcing agents (later to be exchanged for candy). A fading-out phase was instituted after the 30-day conditioning period in order to maintain resistance to extinction at a higher level. Post-conditioning observations were then made. It was conclusively shown that the disturbed, hyperactive behavior came under stimulus control with “grasshopper” play decreasing substantially during the latter part of conditioning and extinction periods.     

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.     

Evaluation of fixed momentary dro schedules under signaled and unsignaled arrangements

Fixed momentary schedules of differential reinforcement of other behavior (FM DRO) generally have been ineffective as treatment for problem behavior. Because most early research on FM DRO included presentation of a signal at the end of the DRO interval, it is unclear whether the limited effects of FM DRO were due to (a) the momentary response requirement of the schedule per se or (b) discrimination of the contingency made more salient by the signal. To separate these two potential influences, we compared the effects of signaled versus unsignaled FM DRO with 4 individuals with developmental disabilities whose problem behavior was maintained by social-positive reinforcement. During signaled FM DRO, the experimenter presented a visual stimulus 3 s prior to the end of the DRO interval and delivered reinforcement contingent on the absence of problem behavior at the second the interval elapsed. Unsignaled DRO was identical except that interval termination was not signaled. Results indicated that signaled FM DRO was effective in decreasing 2 subjects' problem behavior, whereas an unsignaled schedule was required for the remaining 2 subjects. These results suggest that the response requirement per se of FM DRO may not be problematic if it is not easily discriminated.     

MAINTENANCE OF THERAPEUTIC CHANGE BY MOMENTARY DRO

Differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) involves delivery of reinforcement at the end of an interval during which the target behavior has not occurred. Momentary DRO, however, is a procedure in which reinforcement is delivered if a response did not occur at the end of an interval. We examined the extent to which momentary DRO maintained suppression, following initial treatment with whole-interval DRO, of nine retarded students' maladaptive behavior. Results indicate that momentary DRO maintained response suppression comparable to that obtained by whole-interval DRO.     

Reward, cost, and self-evaluation procedures for disruptive adolescents in a psychiatric hospital school

Sixteen pupils in a psychiatric hospital were assigned to two tutorial reading classes and balanced on six pupil characteristics and teacher preferences for the children. The effects of reward and cost procedures in a token program were assessed using both within- and between-subject comparisons in the following phases: (1) Baseline; (2) Token I, teacher evaluated and reinforced children for appropriate behavior; (3) Withdrawal of Tokens; (4) Token II, same as Token I; (5) Token III, same as Token I and II, but switched order of class meeting time; and (6) Self-Evaluation, students rated their own behavior and received prizes based on their rating, rather than the teacher's rating. The token program was markedly successful in reducing disruptive behavior and in increasing reading skills in both the Reward and Cost Classes, but there were no significant differences in the effects of the reward versus the cost procedure. While cost may be seen as a punishment procedure, there were no adverse side effects observed in the Cost Class at any time when the token program was in effect. The order of the classes was unrelated to the level of disruptive behavior or academic progress. The Self-Evaluative Phase, in which the students rated their own behavior, was included as an alternative to the abrupt withdrawal of tokens. In this phase, disruptive behavior remained at the previous low level.     

Immediate and subsequent effects of differential reinforcement of other behavior and noncontingent matched stimulation on stereotypy

A three‐component multiple‐schedule and brief reversals were used to examine the effects of differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) and noncontingent matched stimulation (NMS) on the automatically reinforced mouthing of a child with autism. Both DRO and NMS decreased immediate engagement in mouthing, but NMS produced larger reductions in the behavior. Furthermore, NMS produced subsequent effects (i.e., when the treatment was withdrawn) similar to those of prior access, whereas DRO marginally increased subsequent engagement in mouthing. The results suggest that NMS was a functionally matched intervention for mouthing. Implications for the assessment and treatment of stereotypy and applications for future research are discussed. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A COMPARISON OF TWO PROCEDURES FOR PROGRAMMING THE DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF OTHER BEHAVIORS

The relative effectiveness of two methods of programming DRO schedules of reinforcement was examined in two experiments. In these two methods, reinforcement is delivered if inappropriate responding is not occurring (a) at the end of an interval (momentary DRO), or (b) throughout the entire interval (whole-interval DRO). In Experiment 1, the effects of these schedules on disruptive responding of three retarded students were assessed in a multiple-baseline design. For two students, the momentary schedule occurred first and was ineffective, whereas the whole interval that followed was effective; for the third student, the whole-interval schedule occurred first and was effective, and reduced responding was maintained under the momentary schedule. In Experiment 2, baseline and the two DRO schedules were each presented in random order each day to one student in an alternating treatments design. The momentary DRO schedule reduced responding, but the whole-interval schedule was more effective.     

Comparing resetting to non‐resetting DRO procedures to reduce stereotypy in a child with autism

We compared a resetting to a non‐resetting differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) procedure to reduce stereotypy exhibited by young boy with autism. During the resetting DRO, a reinforcer was delivered contingent upon the absence of stereotypy during the DRO interval. If stereotypy occurred, the DRO interval was immediately reset. The non‐resetting DRO procedure was identical, except that contingent upon stereotypy, the DRO interval continued until it expired; a new DRO interval then began. Results indicate that the DRO procedures were equally effective to reduce stereotypy, but the participant preferred the resetting DRO procedure.     

Reducing stereotyped behavior using momentary dro: An experimental analysis

Momentary DRO, a little-used variant of DRO, was compared with a more traditional DRO procedure in the reduction of stereotyped behavior displayed by five subjects with severe mental retardation. Momentary DRO appeared to be more effective than the traditional procedure for three subjects, less effective for one subjects and to increase the stereotyped behavior of the final subject above baseline levels, These findings are discussed in relation to response covariation effects, treatment maintenance and case of implementation.