Effects of antecedent variables on disruptive behavior and accurate responding in young children in outpatient settings

The effects of manipulations of task variables on inaccurate responding and disruption were investigated with 3 children who engaged in noncompliance. With 2 children in an outpatient clinic, task directives were first manipulated to identify directives that guided accurate responding; then, additional dimensions of the task were manipulated to evaluate their influence on disruptive behavior. With a 3rd child, similar procedures were employed at school. Results showed one-step directives set the occasion for accurate responding and that other dimensions of the task (e.g., preference) functioned as motivating operations for negative reinforcement.     

Alternative response training, differential reinforcement of other behavior, and extinction in squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus)

In Experiment I, (a) extinction, (b) extinction plus reinforcement of a discrete alternative response, and (c) differential reinforcement of other behavior were each correlated with a different stimulus in a three-component multiple schedule. The alternative-response procedure more rapidly and completely suppressed behavior than did differential reinforcement of other behavior. Differential reinforcement of other behavior was slightly more effective than extinction alone. In Experiment II, reinforcement of specific alternative behavior during extinction and differential reinforcement of other behavior were used in two components, while one component continued to provide reinforcement for the original response. Once again, the alternative-response procedure was most effective in reducing responding as long as it remained in effect. However, the responding partially recovered when reinforcement for competing behavior was discontinued. In general, responding was less readily reduced by differential reinforcement of other behavior than by the specific alternative-response procedure.     

Reducing overselective stimulus control with differential observing responses

Overselective stimulus control refers to discriminative control in which the number of controlling stimuli is too limited for effective behavior. Experiment 1 included 22 special‐education students who exhibited overselective stimulus control on a two‐sample delayed matching task. An intervention added a compound identity matching opportunity within the sample observation period of the matching trials. The compound matching functioned as a differential observing response (DOR) in that high accuracy verified observation and discrimination of both sample stimuli. Nineteen participants learned to perform the DOR and two‐sample delayed matching accuracy increased substantially for 16 of them. When the DOR was completely withdrawn after 10 sessions, accuracy declined. In Experiment 2, a more gradual withdrawal of DOR requirements showed that highly accurate performance could be maintained with the DOR on only a proportion of trials for most participants. The results show that DOR training may lead to a general improvement in observing behavior.     

The establishment of stimulus control by instructions and by differential reinforcement

A repeated acquisition design was used to study the effects of instructions and differential reinforcement on the performance of complex chains by undergraduates. The chains required responding on a series of keys that corresponded to characters that appeared on a monitor. Each day, subjects performed a new chain in a learning session and later relearned the same chain in a test session. Experiment 1 replicated previous research by showing that instructional stimuli paired with the correct responses in the learning sessions, combined with differential reinforcement in both learning and test sessions, resulted in stimulus control by the characters in each link. Experiment 2 separated the effects of instructional stimuli and differential reinforcement, and showed that stimulus control by the characters could be established solely by differential reinforcement during the test sessions. Experiment 3 showed that when a rule specified the relation between learning and test sessions, some subjects performed accurately in the test sessions without exposure to any differential consequences. This rule apparently altered the stimulus control properties of the characters much as did differential reinforcement during testing. However, compared to differential reinforcement, the rule established stimulus control more quickly.     

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.     

Marking effects in instrumental performance on DRH schedules

Three experiments investigated the effect of presenting a brief stimulus after a response sequence on the rate of lever-pressing by rats on differential reinforcement of high rate (DRH) schedules. In Experiment 1 enhanced responding was produced by a visual stimulus presented during a 500-msec delay of reinforcement compared to a condition in which no stimulus was presented. In Experiment 2 rats responded on a multiple DRH DRH schedule in which the DRH contingency was reinforced on a 50% schedule in each component. Equivalent levels of responding occurred in the components when reinforcement was signalled in one component and when the signal was presented following the non-reinforced schedules in the other components. A further group of rats received the stimulus presented after non-reinforced schedules in one component but not at all in the other component; responding was enhanced in the former component relative to the latter component. In Experiment 3 brief stimuli presented after the completion of DRH components on a second-order VR (DRH) schedule elevated response rates irrespective of whether the signal was presented paired or unpaired with reinforcement. The present data support the view that a brief signal may serve to mark a response sequence in memory and facilitate instrumental performance.     

The effects of noncontingent reinforcement on task disengagement following failure of differential reinforcement treatment

Following the failure of applications of differential reinforcement (DR), the effects of reinforcement delivered noncontingently (NCR) on task disengagement and task completion were evaluated within reversal designs for three children with autism spectrum disorder. In Experiment 1, we compared DR and NCR schedules that combined positive and negative reinforcement. In Experiment 2, we replicated the results of Experiment 1 and then evaluated NCR schedules composed solely of negative reinforcement and NCR schedules that combined negative reinforcement with high-or low-preferred stimuli. In Experiment 3, we further analyzed NCR schedules that included different types and qualities of positive reinforcement, but without the inclusion of negative reinforcement. The results showed that NCR schedules using positive reinforcers can be effective as a treatment for task disengagement, but the type and preference of the reinforcer can alter effectiveness. These results are interpreted in terms of the motivating operations associated with task disengagement.     

RESISTANCE TO EXTINCTION AND RELAPSE IN COMBINED STIMULUS CONTEXTS

Reinforcing an alternative response in the same context as a target response reduces the rate of occurrence but increases the persistence of that target response. Applied researchers who use such techniques to decrease the rate of a target problem behavior risk inadvertently increasing the persistence of the same problem behavior. Behavioral momentum theory asserts that the increased persistence is a function of the alternative reinforcement enhancing the Pavlovian relation between the target stimulus context and reinforcement. A method showing promise for reducing the persistence‐enhancing effects of alternative reinforcement is to train the alternative response in a separate stimulus context before combining with the target stimulus in extinction. The present study replicated previous findings using pigeons by showing that combining an “alternative” richer VI schedule (96 reinforcers/ hr) with a “target” leaner VI schedule (24 reinforcers/hr) reduced resistance to extinction of target responding compared with concurrent training of the alternative and target responses (totaling 120 reinforcers/hr). We also found less relapse with a reinstatement procedure following extinction with separate‐context training, supporting previous findings that training conditions similarly influence both resistance to extinction and relapse. Finally, combining the alternative stimulus context was less disruptive to target responding previously trained in the concurrent schedule, relative to combining with the target response trained alone. Overall, the present findings suggest the technique of combining stimulus contexts associated with alternative responses with those associated with target responses disrupts target responding. Furthermore, the effectiveness of this disruption is a function of training context of reinforcement for target responding, consistent with assertions of behavioral momentum theory.     

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.     

Stimulus properties of conspecific behavior

Two experiments identified the conditions in which the behavior of one bird acquired discriminative control of the behavior of a second bird. The schedule-controlled behaviors of the “stimulus” bird were differentially correlated with the components of a multiple schedule according to which the pecking of an “experimental” bird produced food. In Experiment 1, three pairs of pigeons acquired a successive discrimination and two reversals with the conspecific stimuli. Experiment 2 included a control condition in which no systematic relationship existed between the conspecific stimuli and the component schedules. While differential responding during the components of the multiple schedule was again found when the conspecific stimuli were available, differential responding did not occur in the control condition. Test conditions included in the experiments indicated that (a) the differential responding was not dependent on the discriminative properties of reinforcement, (b) the pecking of the stimulus and experimental birds was temporally interrelated, (c) the visual conspecific stimuli were critical to the maintenance of the discrimination, and (d) the observed stimulus control immediately generalized to an unfamiliar conspecific.     

Control of responding by sounds of different quality: an evolutionary analysis.

Two experiments investigated the acquisition of discriminations between two acoustic stimuli of different quality (noise bursts vs. a 2-kHz pulsed signal) when features of the everyday environment were incorporated into the experiments. In Experiment 1, rats were trained, using food, to press a lever. Throughout all sessions, 5-s trials of noise bursts (the random stimulus) were presented, after variable intertrial intervals, through a remote speaker mounted outside the experimental enclosure. The noise burst occurred randomly with respect to reinforcement of lever pressing and had no programmed relationship to the animal's behavior. When lever pressing was established, the 2-kHz signal was presented through a speaker adjacent to the response lever according to a different set of variable intertrial intervals. A response in the presence of the 2-kHz signal terminated the trial and was reinforced. The 2-kHz signal acquired control of responding within the first few trials, whereas the random stimulus exerted no control of responding. In Experiment 2, rats were trained to press the lever in the presence of the 2-kHz signal presented through the adjacent speaker on a variable intertrial interval. After 14 sessions, 5-s trials of noise bursts (random stimulus) were presented through the remote speaker on the second variable intertrial interval. The random stimulus initially elicited exploratory behavior, which then rapidly declined. Subsequently, the random stimulus exerted no or weak control of responding. The introduction of the random stimulus had no effect on responding in the presence of the adjacent stimulus. In Experiments 3 and 4 the random stimulus was presented through the adjacent speaker, and the stimulus correlated with reinforcement was presented through the remote speaker. In both experiments, there was persistent control of responding by the random stimulus and slow development of control by the stimulus correlated with reinforcement. In Experiment 5, both stimuli were presented through the adjacent speaker. There was persistent control of responding by the random stimulus.     

“Generalized imitation” on a nonimitative task: Effects of modeling and task history

Two experiments investigated characteristic generalized imitation procedures on a nonimitative successive visual discrimination task. In Experiment I, no discriminative behavior was obtained though a number of procedures designed to enhance discrimination were employed. The introduction of a differential modeling procedure after nine or 10 sessions of nondifferential performance was ineffective in producing differential responding for three of four Ss. In the second experiment, the differential modeling procedure was introduced as an initial manipulation and was successful in establishing discriminative performance in all Ss. After several sessions of differential responding, the observation of a model performing nondifferentially was relatively ineffective in altering the pattern of responding. These results suggest (1) that modeling may be functional in altering a S's behavior depending on what point in the procedures the manipulation is introduced and (2) that certain procedural variables may define a functional response class characterized by the failure to develop discriminative responding.     

Resurgence following differential reinforcement of alternative behavior implemented with and without extinction

In the clinic, differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) often involves programming extinction for destructive behavior while reinforcing an alternative form of communication (e.g., a functional communication response); however, implementing extinction can be unsafe or impractical under some circumstances. Quantitative theories of resurgence (i.e., Behavioral Momentum Theory and Resurgence as Choice) predict differences in the efficacy of treatments that do and do not involve extinction of target responding when reinforcement conditions maintaining alternative responding worsen. We tested these predictions by examining resurgence following two DRA conditions in which we equated rates of reinforcement. In DRA without extinction, target and alternative behavior produced reinforcement. In DRA with extinction plus noncontingent reinforcement, only alternative behavior produced reinforcement. We conducted this study in a reverse-translation sequence, first with participants who engaged in destructive behavior (Experiment 1) and then in a laboratory setting with rats (Experiment 2). Across both experiments, we observed proportionally lower levels of target responding during and following the DRA condition that arranged extinction for the target response. However, levels of resurgence were similar following both arrangements.     

Social influence in pigeons (Columba livia): the role of differential reinforcement

Socially-influenced learning was studied in observer pigeons that observed a demonstrator in an adjacent chamber performing a target response comprising standing on a box and pecking a key 10 times. In Experiment 1 there was no evidence for social learning in the absence of reinforcement of the observer's behavior. When the target response was already established in the observer's repertoire, but was not differentially reinforced in relation to the demonstrator's behavior, rates of extinction were not influenced by the demonstrator's behavior (Experiment 2). Reinforcement of the observer's target response in the presence of the modeled target response, and not in its absence, resulted in control of the observer's responding by the behavior of the demonstrator (Experiments 3 and 4). This control was extended in Experiment 5 to deferred responses that occurred following a delay since the demonstrator's target responses. The acquisition of social influence depended on differential reinforcement of the observer's target response, with the demonstrator's target behavior serving as the explicit discriminative stimulus.     

Assessing the role of alternative response rates and reinforcer rates in resistance to extinction of target responding when combining stimuli

Studies of behavioral momentum reveal that reinforcing an alternative response in the presence of a target response reduces the rate of target responding but increases its persistence, relative to training the target response on its own. Because of the parallels between these studies and differential‐reinforcement techniques to reduce problem behavior in clinical settings, alternative techniques to reduce problem behavior without enhancing its persistence are being explored. One potential solution is to train an alternative response in a separate stimulus context from problem behavior before combining the alternative stimulus with the target stimulus. The present study assessed how differences in reinforcement contingencies and rate for alternative responding influenced resistance to extinction of target responding when combining alternative and target stimuli in pigeons. Across three experiments, alternative stimuli signaling a response–reinforcer dependency and greater reinforcer rates more effectively decreased the persistence of target responding when combining alternative and target stimuli within the same extinction tests, but not when compared across separate extinction tests. Overall, these findings reveal that differences in competition between alternative and target responding produced by contingencies of alternative reinforcement could influence the effectiveness of treating problem behavior through combining stimulus contexts.     

Reinforcement magnitude effects in first- and second-order conditioning of directed action

Three experiments investigated the effects of reinforcement magnitude on conditioned key pecking in pigeons. Experiment 1, which included between-groups and within-subject designs, yielded significant effects of unconditioned stimulus (US) magnitude on the within-conditioned stimulus (CS) distribution of key pecks and on choice behavior, but no effect on the overall rate of key pecking. Experiment 2 employed a larger US-magnitude difference in a within-subject design. This manipulation resulted in differential rates of key pecking as well as a significant choice effect and differential within-CS key-peck distributions. A second-order conditioning procedure was used in Experiment 3, in which diffuse, visual stimuli (S1's) served as Pavlovian reinforcers for two key-light S2's. The S1 previously paired with a large US was more effective in conditioning second-order key-peck behavior to an S2 than was the S1 paired with a small US. The results of these experiments demonstrate that the associative effects of US magnitude can be expressed in the strength of CS-directed motor responding. The distinctive within-CS key-peck distributions in first-order conditioning suggests an interaction between CS- and US-directed responses.     

Derived relational responding as generalized operant behavior

The major aim of the present study was to demonstrate that derived relational responding may be viewed as a form of generalized operant behavior. In Experiment 1, 4 subjects were divided into two conditions (2 in each condition). Using a two-comparison matching-to-sample procedure, all subjects were trained and tested for the formation of two combinatorially entailed relations. Subjects were trained and tested across multiple stimulus sets. Each set was composed of novel stimuli. Both Conditions 1 and 2 involved explicit performance-contingent feedback presented at the end of each block of test trials (i.e., delayed feedback). In Condition 1, feedback was accurate (consistent with the experimenter-designated relations) following exposure to the initial stimulus sets. When subjects' responding reached a predefined mastery criterion, the feedback then switched to inaccurate (not consistent with the experimenter-designated relations) until responding once again reached a predefined criterion. Condition 2 was similar to Condition 1, except that exposure to the initial stimulus sets was followed by inaccurate feedback and once the criterion was reached feedback switched to accurate. Once relational responding emerged and stabilized, response patterns on novel stimulus sets were controlled by the feedback delivered for previous stimulus sets. Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1, except that during Conditions 3 and 4 four comparison stimuli were employed during training and testing. Experiment 3 was similar to Condition 1 of Experiment 1, except that after the mastery criterion was reached for class-consistent responding, feedback alternated from accurate to inaccurate across each successive stimulus set. Experiment 4 involved two types of feedback, one type following tests for mutual entailment and the other type following tests for combinatorial entailment. Results from this experiment demonstrated that mutual and combinatorial entailment may be controlled independently by accurate and inaccurate feedback. Overall, the data support the suggestion, made by relational frame theory, that derived relational responding is a form of generalized operant behavior.     

Resistance to extinction following habituation to behaviourally disruptive novel stimuli

Three experiments tested the prediction, derived from generalized frustration theory (Amsel, 1972), that habituation to behaviourally disruptive stimuli increases resistance to extinction in the runway. In each experiment, rats received initial consistent reinforcement (CRF) training and then either continued CRF (Groups C), partial reinforcement (PRF) training (Groups P), or CRF accompanied by presentations of a novel tactile, tone, or obstacle stimulus (Groups D) in Experiments 1-3, respectively. PRF increased resistance to extinction whether non-reinforcement disrupted behaviour (Experiment 1) or not (Experiments 2 and 3). The tactile and obstacle stimuli very substantially disrupted behaviour, and the tone produced a modest disruption of behaviour. All subjects habituated to the disruptive effects of these stimuli, but Group D was not more resistant to extinction than Group C in any experiment. The results suggest that non-reinforcement has unique stimulus properties, a consequence of which is that habituation to other sources of disruptive stimulation does not promote responding to non-reinforcement in extinction.     

THE EFFECTS OF ECHOLALIA ON ACQUISITION AND GENERALIZATION OF RECEPTIVE LABELING IN AUTISTIC CHILDREN

This investigation, consisting of two experiments, was designed to assess the effects of autistic immediate echolalia on acquisition and generalization of receptive labeling tasks. Experiment 1 addressed whether autistic children could use their echolalia to facilitate acquisition. The results indicated that incorporating echolalia (echo of the requested object's label) into the task before manual response (handing the requested object to the experimenter) facilitated receptive labeling. Experiment 2 was designed to determine the effects of incorporating echolalia into task response on acquisition and subsequent generalization. These results indicated that echolalia facilitated generalization for echolalic autistic children but not for functionally mute autistic children. The results of the experiments are discussed in terms of stimulus control. Additionally, it is proposed that perhaps in certain cases, echolalia should not be eliminated, but used to advantage in receptive responding.     

Preference Assessment for Dimensions of Reinforcement to Inform Token Economies Targeting Problem Behavior

The purpose of the current two-experiment study was to examine the use of a preference assessment for dimensions of reinforcement to inform an effective token economy arrangement. Three participants diagnosed with developmental disabilities who engaged in negatively reinforced problem behavior participated in this study. During Experiment 1, a preference assessment for four dimensions of reinforcement (i.e., quality, immediacy, magnitude, and rate) occurred to inform a more- and less-preferred token economy arrangement. During Experiment 2, a treatment evaluation compared these two token economy arrangements. Results for all three participants showed lower rates of problem behavior under the more-preferred token economy arrangement compared to the less-preferred token economy arrangement. Rates of task completion were higher under the more-preferred token economy arrangement for one of the three participants. Results are discussed in terms of their practical implications for clinicians and educators implementing token economies to manage problem behavior.