Evaluation of response blocking and re-presentation in a competing stimulus assessment

Competing stimulus assessments (CSA) have been used to identify stimuli that are associated with reduced levels of problem behavior, presumably as a function of reinforcer competition. Following a standard CSA in which stimuli simply were made available, 2 more CSAs were conducted with additional components designed to enhance reinforcer competition: re-presentation of stimuli and response blocking for self-injury. The results obtained from each CSA were validated in an extended treatment analysis. The study illustrates how the effects of additional components designed to enhance reinforcer competition can be evaluated efficiently in the context of a CSA.     

Increasing item engagement and decreasing automatically reinforced problem behavior within a modified competing stimulus assessment

A competing stimulus assessment (CSA) is commonly used to identify leisure items for use in treatments designed to decrease automatically reinforced problem behavior. However, this type of assessment may not yield useful information if participants do not readily engage with leisure items. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a modified CSA that included additional treatment components (i.e., prompting, prompting plus differential reinforcement of alternative behavior). The modified CSA identified the treatment components and leisure items that were most effective for increasing leisure-item engagement and decreasing problem behavior for each participant. Modified CSA outcomes maintained during an extended treatment analysis in a natural setting and when intervention components were faded.     

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     

Competing stimulus assessments: A systematic review

The current review summarizes the literature on competing stimulus assessments (CSAs). CSAs are pretreatment assessments designed to systematically identify stimuli that reduce problem behavior (PB), ostensibly through reinforcer competition or substitution. We report on the participant characteristics, outcomes, and predictive validity of published CSAs that included (a) no-stimulus control trial(s), (b) test trials during which each stimulus was available singly and noncontingently, and (c) measurement of PB and stimulus engagement or contact. Results showed that CSAs have broad utility across a variety of topographies and functions of PB. In the majority of CSA applications for which extended analyses, or validations, were performed, stimuli shown to reduce PB during the CSA produced similar reductions during extended analysis. This was the case regardless of topography or function of PB, or whether the stimuli were assumed to be “matched” to the stimulation thought to be produced by PB. Implications for future research are discussed.     

Effects of idiosyncratic stimulus variables on functional analysis outcomes.

As the methods for the functional analysis of problem behavior have continued to develop, there has been a greater focus on the specificity of controlling variables, both antecedents and consequences. Accelerating research interest in the role of antecedents reveals that a large array of stimulus variables can influence the rate of problem behavior. Indeed, the variety of these stimuli is so great that it is sometimes possible to overlook specific stimulus variables during initial assessment. The present study shows that a failure to identify these very specific (idiosyncratic) stimulus variables is serious because their presence can systematically alter the outcomes of functional analyses that are designed to assess the motivation of problem behavior. Guidelines are therefore discussed concerning when to suspect that idiosyncratic stimuli might be acting to influence assessment data, thereby promoting a search for additional stimulus variables whose identification can aid in improving the design of functional analysis conditions.     

Preliminary investigation of a video-based stimulus preference assessment

Video clips may be an effective format for presenting complex stimuli in preference assessments. In this preliminary study, we evaluated the correspondence between preference hierarchies generated from preference assessments that included either toys or videos of the toys. The top-ranked item corresponded in both assessments for 5 of the 6 participants, and the top- and bottom-ranked items corresponded for 4 participants. The implications of these results for future research on video preference assessments 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.     

Promoting safety belt use among state employees: the effects of prompting and a stimulus-control intervention.

This study assessed the effects of dashboard stickers and signature sheets on safety belt use among occupants of state-owned vehicles in three Florida agencies. The stickers and signature sheets contained information regarding a regulation requiring safety belt use and a consequence of a 25% reduction in benefits for noncompliance if the driver were to become involved in an accident. Safety belt use significantly increased during the intervention phase in all three agencies and maintained variable but high levels for 5 months. In Agency 1 and Agency 2 (stickers plus signature sheets) safety belt use increased from averages of 10.8% and 9.4% during baseline to 57.4% and 47.0%, respectively, during intervention. In Agency 3 (stickers only) the rates of safety belt use averaged 9.7% during baseline and 38.0% during intervention. Some increases in private vehicle use were observed. A substantial reduction in workers'' compensation claim costs was shown for the target agencies with some reductions also shown in the nontarget agencies.     

Evaluation of an efficient method for training staff to implement stimulus preference assessments

We used a brief training procedure that incorporated feedback and role-play practice to train staff members to conduct stimulus preference assessments, and we used group-comparison methods to evaluate the effects of training. Staff members were trained to implement the multiple-stimulus-without-replacement assessment in a single session and the paired-stimulus method in another single session. In all 16 cases (2 assessments for 8 trainees), correct responding increased to over 80% accuracy; in 14 of those 16 cases, it increased to over 90% accuracy. Thus, training produced mastery-level performance in a single training session in almost all cases.     

Response competition and stimulus preference in the treatment of automatically reinforced behavior: a comparison

Clinicians are particularly challenged by the development of interventions for behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement because reinforcers that maintain the responses often cannot be directly observed or manipulated. Researchers have conducted either preference assessments or competing items assessments when developing effective treatments for behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement. However, interventions based on these assessments have not been directly compared. The current study evaluated procedures to make such a comparison. High-competition items resulted in greater reductions in vocal stereotypy than did high-preference items for a preschool boy with autism.     

Brief assessment and treatment of pica using differential reinforcement,response interruption and redirection,and competing stimuli

Pica is a life threating form of challenging behavior displayed by individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. In most cases, pica is maintained by automatic reinforcement. Common interventions for pica use some combination of response blocking, response interruption and redirection (RIRD), differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA), and noncontingent reinforcement with competing stimuli. However, there is need for additional research regarding DRA procedures that emphasize skills acquisition by teaching alternative behaviors that modify the established behavioral chain of pica responses that occur in the presence of non-edible stimuli. There is also a need to examine the generality of recent advances in competing stimulus assessment (CSA) methodologies—namely, the augmented-CSA (A-CSA)—to pica. Thus, the purpose of the present investigation was to systematically replicate and extend previous research for the assessment and treatment of pica in an individual with IDD. First, we conducted a functional analysis to identify environmental variables associated with pica. Next, taught Patrick a differential response (i.e., discard pica items in trash receptacle) to earn reinforcers in conjunction with a RIRD procedure. Finally, we conducted an A-CSA for pica. Overall, low rates of pica were maintained over time with a combination of these procedures, and treatment was generalized across settings and people.     

Toward a technology of derived stimulus relations: an analysis of articles published in the journal of applied behavior analysis, 1992-2009

Every article on stimulus equivalence or derived stimulus relations published in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis was evaluated in terms of characteristics that are relevant to the development of applied technologies: the type of participants, settings, procedure (automated vs. tabletop), stimuli, and stimulus sensory modality; types of relations targeted and emergent skills demonstrated by participants; and presence versus absence of evaluation of generalization and maintenance. In most respects, published reports suggested the possibility of applied technologies but left the difficult work of technology development to future investigations, suggestions for which are provided.     

An evaluation of differential reinforcement with stimulus fading as an intervention for medical compliance

Individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) often exhibit noncompliance during medical exams. One intervention used to address this concern is differential reinforcement. Although differential reinforcement includes extinction, it may not be feasible or safe to implement extinction during medical exams. In the current study, we evaluated differential reinforcement without extinction and differential reinforcement without extinction plus stimulus fading, for increasing compliance during routine medical exams exhibited by 4 individuals with ASD. An indirect assessment identified problematic medical procedures, and a functional analysis showed that participants' disruptive behavior was maintained by escape from medical tasks. Differential reinforcement without extinction was insufficient in increasing medical compliance with 3 of 4 participants. The addition of a modified stimulus fading procedure that involved gradually introducing smaller components of problematic exam steps was effective in increasing medical compliance with all exam steps.     

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.     

A replication of the response‐restriction preference assessment

We replicated the response‐restriction (RR) preference assessment and compared results in terms of preference hierarchies to those from free‐operant and multiple stimulus without replacement (MSWO) formats with six children with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs). We also assessed social validity of each format with teachers and clinicians who work with children with ASDs. Complete hierarchies were produced in four of 18 assessments and with MSWO and RR formats only. Results of the social validity assessment varied across raters, with each preference assessment format receiving the highest rating from at least one rater. Results are discussed in terms of practical recommendations and relative to the preference assessment literature as a whole.     

Use of a differential observing response to expand restricted stimulus control

This study extends previous work on the use of differential observing responses (DOR) to remediate atypically restricted stimulus control. A participant with autism had high matching-to-sample accuracy scores with printed words that had no letters in common (e.g., cat, lid, bug) but poor accuracy with words that had two letters in common (e.g., cat, can, car). In the DOR intervention, she matched the distinguishing letters of the overlapping words (e.g., t, n, r) immediately prior to matching the whole words. Accuracy scores improved, and accuracy remained high when DOR requirements were withdrawn.     

Parent‐conducted rapid assessment of attention types for the treatment of attention‐maintained problem behavior

When praise is not a reinforcer for alternative behavior in the treatment of attention‐maintained problem behavior, further pretreatment assessments are warranted to develop an effective treatment. The current study reports a replication of the pretreatment rapid assessment of attention types (RAAT) procedures, implemented by the parents of a 19‐year‐old female with attention‐maintained problem behavior. After administering staff and parent‐conducted RAATs, a parent‐implemented treatment, (a) produced clinically significant decreases in problem behavior, and (b) confirmed that the RAAT identified an attention‐type that served as a reinforcer for appropriate alternative behavior. This study extends the findings of Strohmeier et al. by reporting results of a parent‐conducted RAAT and treatment evaluation. The findings highlight the practical importance of pretreatment assessment of attention‐types, with emphasis on caregiver involvement, to develop effective treatments for attention‐maintained problem behavior.     

A comparison of preference‐assessment methods

In Study 1, we evaluated preference stability across 4 preference‐assessment methods for 6 individuals, 5 of whom had autism spectrum disorder and 1 of whom had traumatic brain injury. We also measured participants’ problem behavior as a corollary measure during all assessment methods. The highest mean correlation coefficients and Kendall rank coefficients of concordance across administrations were observed for the paired‐stimulus and multiple‐stimulus‐without‐replacement methods. Lower correspondence across administrations was observed for the free‐operant and response‐restriction methods. Although differentially higher levels of problem behavior did not occur with a single method, lower levels were consistently observed with the free‐operant method. During Study 2, we evaluated the implications of lower coefficients on reinforcer efficacy by comparing an initially identified and an immediately identified high‐preference stimulus in a reinforcer assessment. Initially identified and immediately identified high‐preference stimuli were equally effective reinforcers, suggesting that fluctuations in preference do not necessarily affect reinforcer efficacy in practice.