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.     

Assessment and treatment of elopement: a replication and extension

The current investigation replicated and extended the assessment and treatment methodology of elopement. The environmental variables that maintained elopement were identified in each case, and successful treatments were implemented for the 3 participants in settings that were similar to those in which elopement occurred.     

EFFECTIVENESS OF FUNCTIONAL COMMUNICATION TRAINING WITH AND WITHOUT EXTINCTION AND PUNISHMENT: A SUMMARY OF 21 INPATIENT CASES

Functional communication training (FCT) is a frequently used treatment for reducing problem behavior exhibited by individuals with developmental disabilities. Once the operant function of problem behavior is identified by a functional analysis, the client is taught to emit an appropriate communicative response to obtain the reinforcer that is responsible for behavioral maintenance. Studies on FCT have typically used small numbers of participants, have reported primarily on clients for whom FCT was successful, and have varied with respect to their use of other treatment components. The main purposes of the present study were to evaluate the efficacy of FCT for treating severe problem behavior in a relatively large sample of individuals with mental retardation (N = 21) and to determine the contribution of extinction and punishment components to FCT treatment packages. FCT with extinction was effective in reducing problem behavior for the majority of clients and resulted in at least a 90% reduction in problem behavior in nearly half the applications. However, when demand or delay-to-reinforcement fading was added to FCT with extinction, treatment efficacy was reduced in about one half of the applications. FCT with punishment (both with and without fading) resulted in at least a 90% reduction in problem behavior for every case in which it was applied.     

Enhancing the effects of extinction on attention-maintained behavior through noncontingent delivery of attention or stimuli identified via a competing stimulus assessment

Recent research has shown that the noncontingent delivery of competing stimuli can effectively reduce rates of destructive behavior maintained by social-positive reinforcement, even when the contingency for destructive behavior remains intact. It may be useful, therefore, to have a systematic means for predicting which reinforcers do and do not compete successfully with the reinforcer that is maintaining destructive behavior. In the present study, we conducted a brief competing stimulus assessment in which noncontingent access to a variety of tangible stimuli (one toy per trial) was superimposed on a fixed-ratio 1 schedule of attention for destructive behavior for individuals whose behavior was found to be reinforced by attention during a functional analysis. Tangible stimuli that resulted in the lowest rates of destructive behavior and highest percentages of engagement during the competing stimulus assessment were subsequently used in a noncontingent tangible items plus extinction treatment package and were compared to noncontingent attention plus extinction and extinction alone. Results indicated that both treatments resulted in greater reductions in the target behavior than did extinction alone and suggested that the competing stimulus assessment may be helpful in predicting stimuli that can enhance the effects of extinction when noncontingent attention is unavailable. DESCRIPTORS: Attention-maintained problem behavior, competing stimuli, extinction, functional analysis, noncontingent reinforcement     

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.     

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 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.     

Functional analyses and treatment of precursor behavior

Functional analysis has been demonstrated to be an effective method to identify environmental variables that maintain problem behavior. However, there are cases when conducting functional analyses of severe problem behavior may be contraindicated. The current study applied functional analysis procedures to a class of behavior that preceded severe problem behavior (precursor behavior) and evaluated treatments based on the outcomes of the functional analyses of precursor behavior. Responding for all participants was differentiated during the functional analyses, and individualized treatments eliminated precursor behavior. These results suggest that functional analysis of precursor behavior may offer an alternative, indirect method to assess the operant function of severe problem behavior.     

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.