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.     

Using pretreatment and posttreatment assessments to enhance and evaluate existing treatment packages.

Pretreatment assessment data were used to enhance an existing treatment package to reduce aggression and to increase positive social interactions between a young boy and his peers. Based on the results of pretreatment assessments, additional reinforcement (differential reinforcement of alternative behavior with adult attention) and punishment (performing a nonpreferred task during time-out) components were added to an existing nonresetting differential reinforcement of other behavior (access to peers unless aggression occurred) plus time-out procedure. A posttreatment component analysis of the additional treatment components indicated that the reinforcement component facilitated positive social interactions and the punishment component suppressed aggression towards peers.     

DRO contingencies: an analysis of variable-momentary schedules.

We conducted several comparative analyses to determine the relative effectiveness of variable-momentary differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior (VM DRO) schedules. Three individuals who had been diagnosed with mental retardation participated. Results of functional analyses indicated that their self-injurious behavior (SIB) was maintained by social-positive reinforcement. Two individuals participated in a two-stage comparative analysis within multielement and multiple baseline designs. Fixed-interval (FI) and variable-interval (VI) DRO were compared in the first stage; VI DRO and VM DRO were compared in the second. All three schedules effectively reduced the participants' SIB. Treatment for the 3rd individual was conducted in a reversal design to examine the effects of VM DRO when it was implemented in isolation, and results indicated that the procedure was effective in reducing SIB. These findings suggest that VM DRO schedules may represent attractive alternatives to traditional FI schedules because momentary schedules do not require continuous monitoring and may result in higher rates of reinforcement.     

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 delayed reinforcement on infant vocalization rate.

Three previous studies have failed to demonstrate conditioning in infants using a 3-s delay of reinforcement. The effects of a delayed reinforcement schedule on vocalization rates therefore were explored in a single-subject repeated-reversal experimental design for 3 4- to 6-month-old normally developing infants. Each infant received delayed social reinforcement from his or her parent for vocalizing. The comparison condition was a schedule of differential reinforcement of behavior other than vocalizations to control for elicitation by social stimulation. An operant level of infant vocalizations was the initial condition, after which the differential reinforcement schedule was implemented in an across-subjects multiple baseline design. Infants' vocalization rates increased above levels measured during differential reinforcement following onset of the delayed reinforcement condition. Also, vocalization rates decreased during differential reinforcement compared to operant levels. The successful use of delayed reinforcement schedules with infants in this study, as opposed to others, is discussed in terms of procedural differences among them.