Reinforcer Variation in a Token Economy

We evaluated whether generalized conditioned reinforcers mitigate the effects of satiation with an individual with intellectual disabilities. Previous research indicates that generalized conditioned reinforcers are not sensitive to satiation effects. However, this effect has not been investigated on varying classes of backup reinforcers. First, we established a highly preferred (HP) edible as a reinforcer. Then, we provided presession access to the HP edible, and, in a multi‐element comparison, the participant could either earn tokens for only the HP edible, for edibles that were similar to the HP edible, for edibles that were dissimilar to the HP edible, or earn no tokens. A decreasing trend in responding for the HP edible was observed following presession access. Furthermore, the participant completed the task at a high rate when backup reinforcers were dissimilar to the HP edible. Results suggest that varying the classes of stimuli that are used as backup reinforcers may increase the effectiveness of generalized conditioned reinforcers. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Using progressive ratio schedules to evaluate tokens as generalized conditioned reinforcers

The properties of operant reinforcers are dynamic and dependent on a number of variables, such as schedule and effort. There has been sparse research on the generalized conditioned properties of token reinforcement. We evaluated leisure items, edible items, and tokens using a progressive ratio schedule with three children with diagnoses of ASD and developmental delays. The highest break points occurred during the token reinforcement condition for two out of three participants, but response rates tended to be higher with edibles. We then evaluated the effects of presession access to edibles on the break points of edible items and tokens with two participants. Break points decreased only in the edible reinforcement condition, and the participants chose to work for leisure items rather than edibles when presession access to edibles was in place. These findings suggest that the tokens functioned as generalized conditioned reinforcers.     

THE LIMITS AND MOTIVATING POTENTIAL OF SENSORY STIMULI AS REINFORCERS FOR AUTISTIC CHILDREN

This study investigated the reinforcing properties, limits, and motivating potentials of sensory stimuli with autistic children. In the first phase of the study, four intellectually retarded autistic children were exposed to three different types of sensory stimulation (vibration, music, and strobe light) as well as edible and social reinforcers for ten-second intervals contingent upon six simple bar pressing responses. In the second phase, the same events were used as reinforcers for correct responses in learning object labels. The results indicated that: (a) sensory stimuli can be used effectively as reinforcers to maintain high, durable rates of responding in a simple pressing task; (b) ranked preferences for sensory stimuli revealed a unique configuration of responding for each child; and (c) sensory stimuli have motivating potentials comparable to those of the traditional food and social reinforcers even when training receptive language tasks.     

Non‐generalized and generalized conditioned reinforcers: establishment and validation

Conditioned reinforcers, or tokens, are frequently used in clinical settings; however, little applied research has focused on establishing and validating their effectiveness. Following pairing of a novel token with an edible reinforcer in the present study, preference and reinforcer assessments verified that the tokens functioned as conditioned reinforcers. Results indicated that the tokens were established as conditioned reinforcers that matched the reinforcer value of the primary reinforcers with which they had been paired. The effects of motivating operations (MOs) on the effectiveness of these conditioned reinforcers were then evaluated. Conditioned reinforcer effectiveness decreased during satiation conditions. Subsequently it was found that increasing the number of backup reinforcers with which the token was paired resulted in the effectiveness maintaining during satiation conditions. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

SENSORY EXTINCTION AND SENSORY REINFORCEMENT PRINCIPLES FOR PROGRAMMING MULTIPLE ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR CHANGE

The role of sensory reinforcement was examined in programming multiple treatment gains in self-stimulation and spontaneous play for developmentally disabled children. Two phases were planned. First, we attempted to identify reinforcers maintaining self-stimulation. Sensory Extinction procedures were implemented in which auditory, proprioceptive, or visual sensory consequences of self-stimulatory behavior were systematically removed and reintroduced in a reversal design. When self-stimulation was decreased or eliminated as a result of removing one of these sensory consequences, the functional sensory consequence was designated as a child's preferred sensory reinforcer. In Phase 2, we assessed whether children would play selectively with toys producing the preferred kind of sensory stimulation. The results showed the following. (1) Self-stimulatory behavior was found to be maintained by sensory reinforcement. When the sensory reinforcer was removed, self-stimulation extinguished. (2) The sensory reinforcers identified for self-stimulatory behavior also served as reinforcers for new, appropriate toy play. (3) The multiple treatment gains observed appeared to be relatively durable in the absence of external reinforcers for play or restraints on self-stimulation. These results illustrate one instance in which multiple behavior change may be programmed in a predictable, lawful fashion by using “natural communities of sensory reinforcement.”     

Self-control in mentally retarded adolescents: choice as a function of amount and delay of reinforcement.

Three severely mentally retarded adolescents were studied under discrete-trial procedures in which a choice was arranged between edible reinforcers that differed in magnitude and, in some conditions, delay. In the absence of delays the larger reinforcer was consistently chosen. Under conditions in which the smaller reinforcer was not delayed, increasing the delay to delivery of the larger reinforcer decreased the percentage of trials in which that reinforcer was chosen. All subjects directed the majority of choice responses to the smaller reinforcer when the larger reinforcer was sufficiently delayed, although the value at which this occurred differed across subjects. Under conditions in which the larger reinforcer initially was sufficiently delayed to result in preference for the smaller one, progressively increasing in 5-s increments the delay to both reinforcers increased percentage of trials with the larger reinforcer chosen. At sufficiently long delays, 2 of the subjects consistently chose the larger, but more delayed, reinforcer, and the 3rd subject chose that reinforcer on half of the trials. These results are consistent with the findings of prior studies in which adult humans responded to terminate noise and pigeons responded to produce food.     

Establishing praise as a conditioned reinforcer: Pairing with one versus multiple reinforcers

Praise and other forms of attention may not function as reinforcers for the behavior of children with autism. Previous research demonstrated that contingently pairing praise with reinforcers (response stimulus) can establish praise as a conditioned reinforcer. We evaluated a procedure for establishing praise as a generalized conditioned reinforcer (pair praise with four reinforcers) and compared it with a procedure to establish praise as a conditioned reinforcer (pair praise with one reinforcer). We compared the two conditions in a reversal design with “praise” and “no programmed consequence” conditions rapidly alternated after pairing phases. With three out of five participants with autism, responding in the “pair‐with‐four” condition showed higher levels of responding or more increasing trends compared with that in “pair‐with‐one” condition. We also replicated previous contingent pairing research with two participants in a multiple baseline across participants design. A limitation was the absence of manipulating motivating operations in assessing the efficacy of praise as a generalized conditioned reinforcer. Nevertheless, these data contribute to the research on establishing praise as a reinforcer, and we recommend directions for future research.     

TOO MUCH REINFORCEMENT,TOO LITTLE BEHAVIOR: ASSESSING TASK INTERSPERSAL PROCEDURES IN CONJUNCTION WITH DIFFERENT REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULES WITH AUTISTIC CHILDREN

Task interspersal procedures have been quite effective in increasing autistic children's motivation to learn. These procedures have typically demonstrated that the inclusion of reinforced maintenance tasks (previously learned tasks) increases responding to new acquisition tasks because more reinforcers, in general, are available. However, studies have not specifically addressed the effects of various schedules of reinforcement, used in conjunction with task interspersal procedures, upon response acquisition. In the present study, a multiple baseline design across subjects was used to assess different reinforcement schedules. Five autistic children participated in learning sessions, during which trials of an acquisition task were interspersed with trials of three maintenance tasks. Correct responses to acquisition tasks were continuously reinforced throughout all conditions, while the reinforcement schedule for competent performance of maintenance tasks differed systematically. Results indicated that all children learned the new tasks when food reinforcers were presented only for acquisition tasks. Results are discussed in terms of behavioral contrast and improving the effectiveness of motivation-enhancing procedures for autistic children.     

DIFFERENTIAL RESPONSE PATTERNS TO THE CONTROL CONDITION BETWEEN TWO PROCEDURES TO ASSESS SOCIAL REINFORCERS FOR CHILDREN WITH AUTISM

Historically, reinforcer assessment procedures focus primarily on identifying nonsocial reinforcers (e.g., tangibles and edibles). Far less empirical attention has been allocated to the systematic identification of social consequences that function as reinforcers. This discrepancy is problematic given that social consequences are commonly incorporated into behavioral treatment programs without systematic evaluation of their efficacy. In this study, two methodologies (a single operant and a concurrent choice) were used to assess social reinforcers for children with autism. Results highlighted differences in response allocation to the control condition between procedures. Specifically, responding occurred in the control condition of the single‐operant procedure but not in the concurrent‐operant procedure. These differences highlight the need for further evaluation of procedures to assess social reinforcers. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

ESTABLISHING OPERATIONS AND REINFORCEMENT EFFECTS

Positive reinforcement procedures have had a major impact on educational programs for the developmentally disabled; nevertheless, variation in reinforcer effectiveness both within and across individuals is a common phenomenon. This study examined one class of variables—establishing operations—that might influence the effectiveness of reinforcers. Five developmentally disabled adult males participated. Responding on one of two motor tasks—switch closure or block placement—was assessed during baseline, satiation, and deprivation conditions with respect to three classes of consequences: small food items, music, and social praise. Deprivation and satiation conditions were constructed so as not to alter significantly the normal course of events in a subject's day. For example, food deprivation entailed scheduling sessions just prior to a subject's regular lunch, and social deprivation involved limiting a subject's access to social interaction for 15 minutes, during which time the subject had access to an assortment of other activities. Results showed that each stimulus class functioned as reinforcement with different degrees of effectiveness during satiation versus deprivation conditions. These results are discussed in light of previous research on enhancement of reinforcer efficacy as well as the assessment and identification of functional reinforcers, and implications are presented for future research and client habilitation.     

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.     

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.     

Resistance to extinction in the steady state and in transition

Three experiments with pigeons explored the constancy of reinforcer omission during extinction conjectured by rate estimation theory. Experiment 1 arranged 3-component multiple variable-interval (VI) schedules with a mixture of food and extinction trials within each session. Reinforcers omitted to an extinction criterion increased with food-trial reinforcer rate. Experiment 2 arranged 3-component multiple VI schedules where components differed in rate or number of reinforcers. Resistance to extinction depended on the training reinforcer rate but not on the number of reinforcers omitted. Experiment 3 replicated the partial-reinforcement extinction effect within subjects in a discrete-trial procedure and found that more reinforcers were omitted in continuous- than in partial-reinforcement trials. A model of extinction based on behavioral momentum theory accounted for all the data.     

REINFORCER VARIATION: IMPLICATIONS FOR MOTIVATING DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED CHILDREN

Motivating developmentally disabled children to participate in educational activities can be very difficult. This is especially true for children diagnosed autistic. Because there is some evidence to suggest that stimulus variation may influence motivation, the present study investigated the effects of constant vs. varied reinforcer presentation on correct responding and on-task behavior. Results from a reversal design showed declining trends in both correct responding and on-task behavior when the same reinforcer was consistently presented, whereas, varying the reinforcers produced significantly improved and stable responding. The results are discussed in relation to the literature on stimulus variation and its effects on responsivity.     

The effects of constant vs varied reinforcer presentation on responding by autistic children

The autistic child's characteristic lack of motivation can create considerable problems for educators. Since there is some evidence that stimulus variation may influence motivation, this study was designed to assess the differential effects of constant vs varied reinforcer presentation. Specifically, two questions were addressed: (1) Would there be any differences in the total number of responses emitted by autistic children when the reinforcer was held constant as opposed to varied; and (2) would there be any differences in the interresponse interval for constant vs varied reinforcer presentation? The results clearly demonstrated that the children in this investigation made significantly more and faster responses when the reinforcer presentation was varied as opposed to constant. The results are discussed in terms of the effects of stimulus variation on satiation and implications for teachers of autistic children.     

Fixed-ratio pausing: Joint effects of past reinforcer magnitude and stimuli correlated with upcoming magnitude

Pigeons responded on fixed-ratio schedules ending in small or large reinforcers (grain presentations of different duration) interspersed within each session. In mixed-schedule conditions, the response key was lit with a single color throughout the session, and pausing was directly related to the past reinforcer (longer pauses after large reinforcers than after small ones). In multiple-schedule conditions, different colors accompanied the ratios ending in small and large reinforcers, and pausing was affected by the upcoming reinforcer as well as the past one. Pauses were shorter before large reinforcers than before small ones, but they continued to be longer after large reinforcers than after small ones. The influence of the past reinforcer was modulated by the magnitude of the upcoming reinforcer; in the presence of the stimulus before the small reinforcer, the effect of the past reinforcer was enhanced relative to its effect in the stimulus before the large reinforcer. These results show that pausing between ratios is jointly determined by two competing factors: past conditions of reinforcement and stimuli correlated with upcoming conditions.     

Substitutability between conditioned and primary reinforcers in discrimination acquisition.

Rats and pigeons were trained on a series of reversals of a conditional simultaneous discrimination. The percentage of reinforcement for correct trials was varied across reversals. When nonreinforced correct trials produced the same feedback as incorrect trials, the number of errors to reach an acquisition criterion was greater for smaller percentages of reinforcement, but the number of reinforcers required was either approximately constant or smaller for the smaller percentages. When a stimulus paired with food (the conditioned reinforcer) was added on nonreinforced correct trials, both measures were substantially decreased. When the same stimulus was presented, but without a history of food pairing, learning rate was similar to when no stimulus was presented on nonreinforced trials. The results provide direct evidence that conditioned reinforcers may substitute, although imperfectly, for a primary reinforcer, and that pairing with the primary reinforcer is a necessary condition for such substitutability to occur.     

RESPONSE-REINFORCER RELATIONSHIPS AND IMPROVED LEARNING IN AUTISTIC CHILDREN

In order to affect more rapid response acquisition for autistic children, researchers have recently begun to investigate the functional relationships of reinforcers to other components of the operant conditioning paradigm. Previous research suggested that functional relationships between target behaviors and reinforcers might be especially effective. For example, locating a reward inside a container might be a more efficient way to teach a child to open the container than by handing the child a reward for opening an empty container. The present experiment assessed, within a multiple baseline design, the possibility of improving autistic children's learning by changing arbitrary response-reinforcer relationships (while holding target behaviors and reinforcers constant) so that the target behaviors became functional (i.e., a direct part of the response chain required for the child to procure the reinforcer). The results showed that: (1) arranging functional response-reinforcer relationships produced immediate improvement in the children's learning, and resulted in rapid acquisition of criterion level responding; and (2) high levels of correct responding initially produced by functional response-reinforcer relationships were continued even when previously ineffective arbitrary response-reinforcer conditions were reinstated. The results are discussed in terms of understanding and improving autistic children's learning.     

Some motivational properties of sensory stimulation in psychotic children

The purpose of this experiment was to assess the reinforcing properties of sensory stimulation for autistic children. Three different types of sensory stimulation were used: music, visual flickering stimulation (e.g., strobe light), and visual movement (e.g., windshield wiper). In a given session, one of the three kinds of sensory stimulation was presented for 5 sec contingent upon the children's bar pressing (FR5). In Phase I, which was designed to assess the differential reinforcement value of these events, four children participated in sessions with each of the sensory events. In Phase II, designed to assess variables influencing the maintenance of responding for the sensory events, two children continued to participate in sessions with their preferred sensory event until satiation occurred. The results showed the following: (1) Sensory events could be used as reinforcing stimuli to produce a high rate of responding which was relatively durable over time: (2) the reinforcement function of the sensory events was idiosyncratic across children. with one child preferring one kind of sensory event, and another child preferring a different kind; (3) there was substantial variability in daily response rates: and (4) when a child satiated on a particular sensory event, a relatively small change in the sensory event was sufficient to recover a high rate of responding. The results of this study suggest that sensory reinforcers can profitably be used in behavior therapy with autistic children.