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.     

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.     

Effects of reinforcer consumption and magnitude on response rates during noncontingent reinforcement

Results of previous research on the effects of noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) have been inconsistent when magnitude of reinforcement was manipulated. We attempted to clarify the influence of NCR magnitude by including additional controls. In Study 1, we examined the effects of reinforcer consumption time by comparing the same magnitude of NCR when session time was and was not corrected to account for reinforcer consumption. Lower response rates were observed when session time was not corrected, indicating that reinforcer consumption can suppress response rates. In Study 2, we first selected varying reinforcer magnitudes (small, medium, and large) on the basis of corrected response rates observed during a contingent reinforcement condition and then compared the effects of these magnitudes during NCR. One participant exhibited lower response rates when large-magnitude reinforcers were delivered; the other ceased responding altogether even when small-magnitude reinforcers were delivered. We also compared the effects of the same NCR magnitude (medium) during 10-min and 30-min sessions. Lower response rates were observed during 30-min sessions, indicating that the number of reinforcers consumed across a session can have the same effect as the number consumed per reinforcer delivery. These findings indicate that, even when response rate is corrected to account for reinforcer consumption, larger magnitudes of NCR (defined on either a per-delivery or per-session basis) result in lower response rates than do smaller magnitudes.     

NONCONTINGENT DELIVERY OF ARBITRARY REINFORCERS AS TREATMENT FOR SELF-INJURIOUS BEHAVIOR

Results of recent research have shown that noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) can be effective in reducing the frequency of behavior problems. In typical NCR applications, the reinforcer that is responsible for behavioral maintenance (as demonstrated through a functional analysis) no longer follows occurrences of the target behavior but instead is delivered according to a time-based schedule. Thus, it is unclear if NCR would be effective if the target behavior continued to be reinforced or if arbitrary reinforcers (i.e., those irrelevant to behavioral maintenance) were substituted for the maintaining reinforcers in the NCR procedure. In this study, 2 individuals whose self-injurious behavior (SIB) was maintained by positive reinforcement were exposed to conditions in which arbitrary and maintaining reinforcers were withheld and were delivered either contingently or noncontingently. Results indicated that noncontingent delivery of arbitrary reinforcers was effective in reducing SIB even though occurrences of SIB produced access to the maintaining reinforcer. These results suggest that (a) arbitrary reinforcers may sometimes be substituted for maintaining reinforcers, (b) an important component of NCR procedures is alteration of a behavior's establishing operation, and (c) NCR with arbitrary reinforcers might therefore be effective when maintaining reinforcers cannot be identified or withheld during the course of treatment.     

A method for identifying satiation versus extinction effects under noncontingent reinforcement schedules

We evaluated one method for determining whether response suppression under noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) is a function of satiation or extinction. Three individuals with developmental disabilities who engaged in self-injurious behavior (SIB) or aggression participated. Results of functional analyses indicated that their problem behavior was maintained by social-positive reinforcement. NCR procedures, individualized for each participant, were implemented in a multiple baseline across subjects design and were associated with decreases in all participants' problem behavior. Identification of the mechanism by which NCR produced these effects was based on examination of cumulative records showing response patterns during and immediately following each NCR session. Satiation during NCR should lead to a temporary increase in responding during the post-NCR (extinction) period due to a transition from the availability to the unavailability of reinforcement (satiation to deprivation). Alternatively, extinction during NCR should reveal no increase in responding during the extinction period because the contingency for the problem behavior would remain unchanged and the transition from satiation to deprivation conditions would be irrelevant. Results suggested that the operative mechanisms of NCR were idiosyncratic across the 3 participants and appeared to change during treatment for 1 of the participants.     

AN ANALYSIS OF REINFORCER SUBSTITUTABILITY USING OBJECT MANIPULATION AND SELF-INJURY AS COMPETING RESPONSES

The concept of reinforcer substitutability proposes a continuum of interactions among reinforcers in a given situation. At one end of this continuum, reinforcers are substitutable, with one reinforcer being readily traded for another. We conducted an analysis of reinforcers that were substitutable with those produced by self-injurious behavior (SIB). Three individuals with profound developmental disabilities, whose SIB appeared to be maintained by automatic reinforcement, participated. Results of three experiments showed that (a) object manipulation and SIB were inversely related when leisure materials and SIB were concurrently available, with participants showing almost complete preference for object manipulation; (b) attempts to reduce SIB using the preferred objects as reinforcers in differential reinforcement contingencies were unsuccessful for all 3 participants; and (c) participants' preferences for SIB or object manipulation systematically changed when reinforcer cost (the amount of effort required to obtain the object) was varied. Results of the three experiments illustrate the importance of examining interactions among concurrently available reinforcers when conducting reinforcer assessments.     

Effects of increased response effort on self-injury and object manipulation as competing responses

We evaluated the effects of a response-effort intervention on the occurrence of self-injurious hand mouthing and a competing response (object manipulation) with 4 individuals who had profound developmental disabilities. During Phase 1, results of functional analyses showed that all participants engaged in high levels of hand mouthing in the absence of social contingencies, suggesting that the behavior was maintained by automatic reinforcement. In Phase 2, preferred leisure items were identified for participants during assessments in which duration of leisure item manipulation was used as the index of preference. In Phase 3, participants were observed to engage in high levels of hand mouthing and in varying levels of object manipulation when they had free access to their most preferred leisure items during baseline. The effects of increased response effort on hand mouthing and object manipulation were then evaluated in mixed multiple baseline and reversal designs. The response-effort condition was identical to baseline, except that participants wore soft, flexible sleeves that increased resistance for elbow flexion but still enabled participants to engage in hand mouthing. Results showed consistent decreases in SIB and increases in object manipulation during the response-effort condition for all participants. These results suggested that a less preferred reinforcer (produced by object manipulation) may substitute for a more highly preferred reinforcer (produced by hand mouthing) when response effort for hand mouthing was increased. DESCRIPTORS: self-injurious behavior, automatic reinforcement, reinforcer substitutability, response effort     

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.     

EVALUATION OF THE “CONTROL OVER REINFORCEMENT” COMPONENT IN FUNCTIONAL COMMUNICATION TRAINING

The effectiveness of functional communication training (FCT) as a treatment for behavior disorders has been attributed to a number of variables, one of which is the individual's ability to exert control over the delivery of reinforcement. We evaluated this component of FCT by exposing individuals to conditions in which their behavior either did or did not affect the delivery of reinforcement. Three adults with mental retardation who engaged in self-injurious behavior (SIB) participated. Following a functional analysis of their SIB, the effects of FCT were compared to those of noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) in a multielement design. The amount of reinforcement during both conditions was equated by yoking the schedule of reinforcement during NCR sessions to that in effect during FCT sessions. Results indicated that FCT and NCR were equally effective in reducing the SIB of all participants and suggest that control over reinforcement delivery may not affect the degree to which FCT produces behavioral suppression. However, a different benefit of FCT was evident in the results: More consistent increases in the alternative response were observed during the FCT condition than during the NCR condition.     

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

Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) is a commonly used treatment for severe problem behavior displayed by individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The current study sought to extend the literature by reporting outcomes achieved with 27 consecutive applications of NCR as the primary treatment for severe problem behavior. All applications of NCR were included regardless of treatment outcome to minimize selection bias favoring successful cases. Participants ranged in age from 5 to 33 years. We analyzed the results across behavioral function and with regard to the use of functional versus alternative reinforcers. NCR effectively treated problem behavior maintained by social reinforcement in 14 of 15 applications, using either the functional reinforcer or alternative reinforcers. When we implemented NCR to treat problem behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement, we often had to add other treatment components to produce clinically significant effects (five of nine applications). Results provide information on the effectiveness and limitations of NCR as treatment for severe problem behavior.     

Motivational influences on performance maintained by food reinforcement

In Study 1, we examined the independent effects of reinforcer consumption during sessions and meal consumption prior to sessions on performance maintained by food reinforcement. Nine individuals with developmental disabilities participated. On alternate days, a preferred edible item was delivered during (a) seven sessions conducted before lunch (repeated-reinforcement condition) versus (b) one session each conducted before and after lunch (pre- and postmeal conditions). Results for 7 of 9 participants showed decreased response rates across sessions in the repeated-reinforcement condition; results for 3 of 9 participants showed decreased rates during postmeal relative to premeal conditions. Two participants who did not show a decrement in responding during either comparison participated in Study 2, in which reinforcer consumption during sessions, combined with meal consumption prior to sessions, also had no effect on their performance. In Study 3, we determined whether (a) choice of reinforcers, (b) increased break time between sessions, (c) varied reinforcers, or (d) intermittent reinforcement schedules mitigated the satiation effects observed for the 7 participants in Study 1. Presession choice of reinforcers resulted in maintained performance for 2 of 6 participants exposed to this condition. Varied reinforcement resulted in maintained performance for only 1 of 5 participants exposed to this condition. Neither the increased break between sessions nor the intermittent reinforcement schedule was effective in maintaining performance for the participants who were exposed to these conditions.     

The efficacy of noncontingent reinforcement as treatment for automatically reinforced stereotypy

Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR), in the form of continuous access to preferred leisure items, has recently been reported as a successful treatment for automatically reinforced aberrant behavior. However, previous research has shown that the outcome of such procedures can be compromised under certain circumstances, such as when the response effort required to access leisure items is increased. The purpose of the current study was to assess the efficacy of two variations of NCR as treatment for automatically reinforced stereotypy. In the first phase of the study, functional analyses revealed that the stereotypy of three individuals with developmental disabilities was maintained independent of social consequences. A sensory class assessment was then conducted to identify the specific sensory products that appeared to maintain the behaviors. Finally, we evaluated the effects of NCR (using stimuli identified in the previous assessments) under two conditions. In the first condition, the leisure item was made freely available, by placing it on the table in front of the participant. In the other condition, an experimenter prompted the participant to interact with the leisure item at the beginning of the session. The results indicated that NCR successfully competed with stereotypy only when participants were prompted to interact with the leisure item. These findings are discussed in the context of developing NCR interventions for automatically reinforced aberrant behavior. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.     

The combined effects of noncontingent reinforcement and punishment on the reduction of rumination

The current study extends the literature on the assessment and treatment of rumination through the evaluation of a combined reinforcement‐ and punishment‐based intervention. The study included a single participant with a history of rumination maintained by automatic reinforcement, as identified via a functional analysis. Both noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) with preferred edible items and punishment, in the form of a facial screen, were implemented separately to evaluate their independent effects on the occurrence of rumination. The final treatment package included both NCR and punishment procedures. Implementation of the combined treatment resulted in a 96.5% reduction in rumination relative to baseline. Procedural modifications and integrity errors also were evaluated.     

Individual and combined effects of noncontingent reinforcement and response blocking on automatically reinforced problem behavior

Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) and response blocking are 2 common interventions for problem behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement. We implemented NCR and blocking with 1 boy and found this combined intervention to be effective at decreasing high rates of automatically reinforced pica. With another child, we compared the effects of blocking alone to the combined intervention. With the third child, we compared NCR alone and blocking alone to the combined intervention. Results showed that the combined intervention was effective at reducing automatically reinforced problem behavior while moderate to high levels of item engagement maintained. When evaluated individually, neither NCR nor blocking was sufficient to reduce problem behavior to clinically significant levels.     

MULTICOMPONENT ASSESSMENT AND TREATMENT OF CIGARETTE PICA

We conducted a multicomponent assessment and treatment for 4 individuals who engaged in cigarette pica. During Phase 1, three stimulus preference assessments were conducted to identify (a) the reinforcing component of the cigarette, (b) potential alternative reinforcers that may be used during treatment, and (c) whether the alternative reinforcer would compete effectively with cigarettes. Results were successful in identifying the reinforcing component of the cigarette and suggested the feasibility of using alternative reinforcers during treatment to eliminate cigarette pica. During Phase 2, the effects of two treatment procedures were evaluated. Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) with the alternative edible reinforcer reduced the pica of 2 of the participants, but effects were not maintained when the initial dense schedule of NCR was thinned. Subsequently, differential reinforcement of alternative behavior with the alternative edible reinforcer was effective in reducing pica for 3 participants. An evaluation of nine treatment procedures failed to identify an effective intervention for the remaining participant; consequently, preventive measures were designed to minimize occurrences of cigarette pica.     

Unsignaled delay of reinforcement, relative time, and resistance to change

Two experiments with pigeons examined the effects of unsignaled, nonresetting delays of reinforcement on responding maintained by different reinforcement rates. In Experiment 1, 3-s unsignaled delays were introduced into each component of a multiple variable-interval (VI) 15-s VI 90-s VI 540-s schedule. When considered as a proportion of the preceding immediate reinforcement baseline, responding was decreased similarly for the three multiple-schedule components in both the first six and last six sessions of exposure to the delay. In addition, the relation between response rates and reinforcement rates was altered such that both parameters of the single-response version of the matching law (i.e., k and Re) were decreased. Experiment 2 examined the effects of unsignaled delays ranging from 0.5 s to 8.0 s on responding maintained by a multiple VI 20-s VI 120-s schedule of reinforcement. Response rates in both components increased with brief unsignaled delays and decreased with longer delays. As in Experiment 1, response rates as a proportion of baseline were affected similarly for the two components in both the first six and last six sessions of exposure to the delay. Unlike delays imposed between two stimulus events, the effects of delays between responses and reinforcers do not appear to be attenuated when the average time between reinforcers is longer. In addition, the disruptions produced by unsignaled delays appear to be inconsistent with the general finding that responding maintained by higher rates of reinforcement is less resistant to change.     

Persistence during and resurgence following noncontingent reinforcement implemented with and without extinction

Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) is typically implemented with extinction (EXT) for destructive behavior reinforced by social consequences and without EXT for destructive behavior reinforced by sensory consequences. Behavioral momentum theory (BMT) predicts that responding will be more persistent, and treatment relapse in the form of response resurgence more likely, when NCR is implemented without EXT due to the greater overall rate of reinforcement associated with this intervention. We used an analogue arrangement to test these predictions of BMT by comparing NCR implemented with and without EXT. For two of three participants, we observed more immediate reductions in responding during NCR without EXT. However, for all participants, NCR without EXT produced greater resurgence than NCR with EXT when we discontinued all reinforcers during an EXT Only phase, although there was variability in response patterns across and within participants. Implications for treatment of destructive behavior using NCR are discussed.