Language preference and reinforcing efficacy of praise in bilingual children with disabilities

We conducted a stimulus preference assessment to identify preference for praise delivered in English versus Spanish for bilingual students. Next, a concurrent-operant reinforcer assessment was used to evaluate the reinforcer efficacy of praise in each language. Participants showed limited to no preference for one language over another. One participant showed a slight preference for Spanish praise and Spanish praise functioned as a slightly more potent reinforcer. If a participant did not prefer a specific language of praise (i.e., undifferentiated preference or equal percentage of approaches), both languages were considered to be similarly reinforcing.     

A COMPARISON OF TWO PAIRING PROCEDURES TO ESTABLISH PRAISE AS A REINFORCER

Some individuals with intellectual disabilities do not respond to praise as a reinforcer, which may limit their ability to learn. We evaluated 2 procedures (stimulus pairing and response—stimulus pairing), both of which involved pairing previously neutral praise statements with preferred edible items, to determine their usefulness in establishing praise as a reinforcer. Results of Study 1 indicated that stimulus pairing was not effective in conditioning praise as a reinforcer for 3 of 4 subjects; results were inconclusive for the 4th subject. Results of Study 2 indicated that response—stimulus pairing was effective in conditioning praise as a reinforcer for 4 of 8 subjects. After conditioning, praise also increased the occurrence of additional target responses for these 4 subjects.     

Effects of neutral and enthusiastic praise on the rate of discrimination acquisition

Previous research has shown that praise is an effective reinforcer; however, few researchers have evaluated whether qualitative differences in praise affect responding. The purpose of the current study was to compare the effects of neutral, enthusiastic, and no praise on the rate of matching‐to‐sample acquisition during discrete‐trial training with adults diagnosed with autism and an intellectual disability. In addition, we evaluated preference for neutral, enthusiastic, and no praise. All three participants acquired responses slightly faster during the enthusiastic praise condition. Preference assessment results showed that one participant preferred enthusiastic praise, whereas the two other participants showed indiscriminate selections.     

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.     

THE INFLUENCE OF BEHAVIOR PRECEDING A REINFORCED RESPONSE ON BEHAVIOR CHANGE IN THE CLASSROOM1

The influence of behavior that immediately precedes a reinforced target response on the effectiveness of a reinforcement contingency was examined in two experiments with mentally retarded children in a special-education classroom. Two reinforcement schedules were examined in each experiment. For each schedule, a prespecified period of attentive behavior served as the target response. The schedules differed in whether inattentive or attentive behavior was required immediately to precede the target response. These schedules were examined with one child in a simultaneous treatment design using praise as the reinforcer (Experiment I), and with two children in separate reversal designs using tokens as the reinforcer (Experiment II). While attentive behavior increased under each schedule, the increase was greater when attentive rather than inattentive behavior preceded the reinforced response. The results indicated that the effect of a contingency may be determined not only by the specific response reinforced but also by the behavior that immediately precedes that response.     

“The Group Knobe Effect”: evidence that people intuitively attribute agency and responsibility to groups

In the current paper, we present and discuss a series of experiments in which we investigated people’s willingness to ascribe intentions, as well as blame and praise, to groups. The experiments draw upon the so-called “Knobe Effect”. Knobe [2003. “Intentional action and side effects in ordinary language.” Analysis 63: 190–194] found that the positiveness or negativeness of side-effects of actions influences people’s assessment of whether those side-effects were brought about intentionally, and also that people are more willing to assign blame for negative side-effects of actions than they are to assign praise for positive side-effect of actions. Building upon this research, we found evidence that the positiveness or negativeness of side-effects of group actions influences people’s willingness to attribute intentions to groups (Experiment 1a), and that people are more willing to assign blame to groups for negative side-effects of actions than they are to assign praise to groups for positive side-effects of actions (Experiment 1b). We also found evidence (Experiments 2a, 2b, 3 and 4) that the “Group Knobe Effect” persists even when intentions and blame/praise are attributed to groups non-distributively, indicating that people tend not to think of group intentions and group blame/praise in distributive terms. We conclude that the folk are collectivist about group intentions, and also about the blameworthiness and praiseworthiness of groups.     

A comparison of displacement and reinforcer potency for typically developing children

Previous researchers found that individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities tend to prefer edible over leisure stimuli, although leisure stimuli may still function as reinforcers. We replicated and extended previous research in a 2-part experiment with typically developing children. In Experiment 1, we evaluated 15 children's preference for leisure and edible stimuli. Five of 15 participants preferred edible over leisure stimuli, 3 of 15 participants preferred leisure over edible stimuli, and the remaining 7 of 15 participants did not show a preference for a stimulus class. In Experiment 2, we compared the reinforcer potency of the top-ranked stimulus from each class with 7 of the 8 participants who showed displacement of one stimulus class. Four of 7 participants allocated more responding to the task associated with the top-ranked stimulus and 3 of 7 participants showed no differences in responding to the task regardless of the stimulus rank.     

Self-Control and Impulsiveness in Adult Human Females: Effects of Food Preferences

Two experiments explored the effects of food preferences on humans’ choice in a self-control paradigm. Reinforcers consisted of programmed periods of access time to drinking juice during the experimental session. Experiment 1 used 14 adult women and Experiment 2 used 9 adult women. In Experiment 1, the women demonstrated significantly less sensitivity to reinforcer amount relative to sensitivity to reinforcer delay (a measure of self-control) when they reported a higher preference for the juice received as the less delayed, smaller reinforcer than for the juice received as the more delayed, larger reinforcer. Conversely in Experiment 2, the women demonstrated significantly more sensitivity to reinforcer amount relative to sensitivity to reinforcer delay when they reported a higher preference for the juice received as the more delayed, larger reinforcer than for the juice received as the less delayed, smaller reinforcer. Together, the results show that participants’ food preferences can influence self-control for food reinforcers.     

Self-control and choice in humans: Effects of video game playing as a positive reinforcer

Participants chose between reinforcement schedules differing in delay of reinforcement (interval between a choice response and onset of a video game) and/or amount of reinforcement (duration of access to the game). Experiment 1 showed that immediate reinforcement was preferred to delayed reinforcement with amount of reinforcement held constant, and a large reinforcer was preferred to a small reinforcer when both were obtainable immediately. Imposing a delay before the large reinforcer produced a preference for the immediate, small reinforcer in 40% of participants. This suggested a limited degree of “impulsivity.” In Experiment 2, unequal delays were extended by equal intervals, the amounts being kept equal. Preference for the shorter delay decreased, an effect that presumably makes possible the “preference reversal” phenomenon in studies of self-control. Overall, the results demonstrate that video game playing can produce useful, systematic data when used as a positive reinforcer for choice behavior in humans.     

EVALUATION OF A BRIEF STIMULUS PREFERENCE ASSESSMENT

We evaluated the utility of a brief (5-min) stimulus preference assessment for individuals with developmental disabilities. Participants had noncontingent (free) access to an array of stimuli and could interact with any of the stimuli at any time. Stimuli were never withdrawn or withheld from the participants during a 5-min session. In Experiment 1, the brief preference assessment was conducted for 10 participants to identify differentially preferred stimuli, and reinforcer assessments were conducted to test the reinforcing efficacy of those stimuli identified as highly preferred. In Experiment 2, a comparison was conducted between the brief preference assessment and a commonly used paired-stimulus preference assessment. Collectively, results demonstrated that the brief preference assessment identified stimuli that functioned as reinforcers for a simple operant response, identified preferred stimuli that were differentially effective as reinforcers compared to nonpreferred stimuli, was associated with fewer problem behaviors, and required less time to complete than a commonly used paired-stimulus preference assessment.     

Sensitivity to reinforcer duration in a self-control procedure

In a concurrent-chains procedure, pigeons' responses on left and right keys were followed by reinforcers of different durations at different delays following the choice responses. Three pairs of reinforcer delays were arranged in each session, and reinforcer durations were varied over conditions. In Experiment 1 reinforcer delays were unequal, and in Experiment 2 reinforcer delays were equal. In Experiment 1 preference reversal was demonstrated in that an immediate short reinforcer was chosen more frequently than a longer reinforcer delayed 6 s from the choice, whereas the longer reinforcer was chosen more frequently when delays to both reinforcers were lengthened. In both experiments, choice responding was more sensitive to variations in reinforcer duration at overall longer reinforcer delays than at overall shorter reinforcer delays, independently of whether fixed-interval or variable-interval schedules were arranged in the choice phase. We concluded that preference reversal results from a change in sensitivity of choice responding to ratios of reinforcer duration as the delays to both reinforcers are lengthened.     

Evaluation of absolute and relative reinforcer value using progressive-ratio schedules

We evaluated behavior exhibited by individuals with developmental disabilities using progressive-ratio (PR) schedules. High- and low-preference stimuli were determined based on the results of a paired-stimulus preference assessment and were evaluated in subsequent reinforcer and PR assessments using concurrent and single schedules of presentation. In Experiment 1, results showed that for 2 of 3 participants, stimuli determined to be low-preference functioned as reinforcers when evaluated independent of high-preference stimuli. Further, the results from Experiment 2 showed that low-preference stimuli also functioned as reinforcers under gradually increasing PR requirements. Results suggest that for cases in which a high-preference stimulus is unavailable or impractical, the contingent delivery of relatively less preferred stimuli may maintain appropriate behavior, even as schedule requirements increase.     

Some effects of praise during the escape condition of the functional analysis

Many researchers provide praise for complying with demands during the escape condition of the functional analysis (FA). However, praise may function as a reinforcer for some individuals which may reduce the aversiveness of task presentation or increase behavior that competes with problem behavior (e.g., compliance with demands). In general, this may result in lower or less stable levels of problem behavior and decrease the efficiency of the FA. Thus, the purpose of the current study was to evaluate some effects of praise on the rate of problem behavior and compliance during the escape condition of the FA in children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. We found that praise did not affect the rate of problem behavior but did increase compliance in three of five subjects. The results of the study and implications for the assessment of problem behavior are discussed.     

Evaluating the predictive validity of a single stimulus engagement preference assessment.

Most preference assessments require individuals to choose among two or more stimuli. More recently, the duration of engagement with items has been used as an index of preference. In the current study, the predictive validity of a single stimulus engagement (SSE) preference assessment was evaluated with 4 individuals. Stimuli were presented singly for a brief period while engagement with that stimulus was recorded. Although SSE preference rankings closely matched paired stimulus preference assessment rankings for only 2 of the 4 participants, relative preference rankings based on duration of engagement predicted relative reinforcer effectiveness for all participants in a subsequent concurrent‐schedule reinforcer assessment. The SSE procedure took less time to administer than the paired stimulus procedure but produced less stable preference rankings across administrations. The SSE procedure may be appropriate for individuals who have difficulty selecting one stimulus from among two or more stimuli, and it may be well suited for evaluating activities that are difficult to present in a paired stimulus format.     

Effects of enthusiastic and non-enthusiastic voice in praise on the behavior of children with autism and typically developing children

Behavioral intervention manuals for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) commonly recommend that praise should be delivered in an enthusiastic tone of voice. Only a few studies, however, have explicitly tested this assumption, and results have been mixed. This study therefore compared the effects of enthusiastic and non-enthusiastic tone of voice in praise on the behavior of children with ASD. We also examined how typically developing (TD) children responded to enthusiastic and non-enthusiastic praise. Participants were 21 children with ASD matched on developmental age with the chronological age of 20 TD children. The effects of enthusiastic and non-enthusiastic praise were assessed using an application on a tablet computer designed to isolate tone of voice as a variable in vocally delivered praise. Two buttons produced the same six praise statements, one with an enthusiastic tone of voice and one with a neutral tone of voice. Results showed that the children with ASD, on average, allocated more responding to the square on the tablet computer producing enthusiastic praise as compared to the square producing non-enthusiastic praise. In addition, higher rates of responding to non-enthusiastic praise correlated positively with higher IQ, suggesting that non-enthusiastic praise was more effective for children with ASD with higher cognitive scores. The TD children, in contrast, did not allocate more responding to either the squares, suggesting that tone of voice in praise was not an important variable for the behavior of TD children.     

Sensitivity of time allocation to an overall reinforcer rate feedback function in concurrent interval schedules

Six pigeons were trained on concurrent variable-interval schedules in which feedback functions arranged that the overall reinforcer rate either (a) was independent of preference, (b) decreased with increasing absolute preference, or (c) increased with increasing absolute preference. In Experiment 1, the reinforcer rate in an interreinforcement interval was determined by the absolute time-allocation ratio in the previous interval. When arranged reinforcer ratios were varied, there was no evidence of control over preference by overall reinforcer rate. In Experiment 2, the feedback function arranged that reinforcer rates were an inverse function of absolute preference, and window durations were fixed times. In Phase 1, using schedules that provided a four-to-one reinforcer ratio, the window duration was decreased from 20 s to 5 s over four conditions. Then, in Phases 2 and 3, the arranged reinforcer ratios were varied. In Phase 2, the reinforcer rate in the current 5-s time window was determined by preference in the previous 5-s window, and in Phase 3, the window durations were 20 s. Again, there was no indication of control by obtained overall reinforcer rate. These data call into question theories that suggest that the process underlying matching is one of maximizing overall reinforcer rates, or that preference in concurrent aperiodic schedules is controlled to any extent by overall reinforcer rate. They also question the notion that concurrent-schedule preference is controlled by molecular maximizing.     

A comparison of picture and GIF-based preference assessments for social interaction

Researchers have recently begun to evaluate video-based preference assessments; however, only two studies have evaluated the efficacy of this preference assessment modality in assessing preference for social interactions. Four individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder who could not match pictures or graphic-interchange-format images (GIFs) of social interactions to in vivo interaction participated. We compared picture and GIF-based paired-stimulus preference assessments for social interaction and evaluated the preference assessment hierarchies by conducting a concurrent-operant reinforcer assessment including all social interactions. The GIF-based preference assessment produced similar hierarchies to the reinforcer assessment for all participants, whereas the picture-based preference assessments produced similar hierarchies to the reinforcer assessment for 2 of 4 subjects. Additionally, we conducted a modality preference assessment in which we evaluated participants' preference for viewing GIFs or pictures of social interactions, and found that 3 out of 4 subjects displayed a preference for GIFs.     

The Roles of Praise and Social Comparison Information in the Experience of Pride

Abstract

The authors examined the roles of social comparisons, publicity of success, and praise on the experience of pride in an experiment in which college students successfully completed a timed intelligence task in private and later received 1 of 4 types of feedback from the experimenter: no feedback (private), mere public acknowledgment of completion, general praise containing both a public and an evaluative component, or praise containing explicit comparison information. Half of the participants also received written normative information suggesting they performed at a high level. Participants then completed a number of dependent measures, including a key measure of pride. Overall, results suggest that the public aspect of a performance, together with the superior standing suggested by any praise accompanying this publicity, is important in the experience of pride.     

Choice between delayed reinforcers in a discrete-trials schedule: The effect of deprivation level

Choice between two reinforcers differing in magnitude and delay was investigated in rats using a discrete-trials schedule in which the two reinforcers were associated with two levers (A and B); in each session 5 free-choice trials (A and B both available) were interspersed among 44 forced-choice trials (A alone, 22 trials; B alone, 22 trials). In Experiment 1, preference for the more concentrated of two sucrose solutions declined as the delay to that reinforcer was progressively increased. In Experiment 2, progressively increasing the delay to both reinforcers by the same amount resulted in a shift in preference away from the less concentrated solution. In Experiment 3, it was found that the decline in preference for the more concentrated solution as a function of the delay to that reinforcer was steeper when the rats were maintained at 90% than when they were maintained at 80% of their free-feeding body weights. This effect of deprivation level on choice is inconsistent with some current models of “self-control”.