|
| Influence of Basic Research on Human Operant Behavior |
| Monday, May 31, 2004 |
| 9:00 AM–10:20 AM |
| Constitution B |
| Area: DDA/AUT; Domain: Applied Research |
| Chair: Joel Eric Ringdahl (University of Iowa) |
| Discussant: Richard G. Smith (University of North Texas) |
| Abstract: . |
| |
| A Laboratory Model to Study DRO and NCR |
| CLAIRE C. ST. PETER (University of Florida), Timothy R. Vollmer (University of Florida) |
| Abstract: Applied behavior analysts commonly use differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) and fixed time (FT) schedules as a treatment for behavior disorders. However, DRO schedules may be difficult for caretakers to implement in the natural environment. The high effort involved in the implementation of DRO may lead to long-term deteriorations in treatment integrity or failure to adhere to the treatment plan. Conversely, easily implemented treatment schedules, such as fixed time reinforcer delivery (FT), may not be effective at the terminal schedule value unless gradually introduced. To address some of these issues, we developed a new method for studying the effects of DRO and FT schedules on behavior, using a human operant preparation. We first established that points alone would function as a reinforcer for college students, and that schedule control could be obtained using our preparation. We then showed that behavior change occurred faster and more reliably when changes in schedule were signaled. Finally, we examined the impact of treatment integrity failures on responding under DRO and FT schedules of reinforcement. |
| |
| Reinforcement Delay Fading during Differential Reinforcement of Mands: The Effects of Signals on Response Maintenance |
| MICHAEL E. KELLEY (Marcus Institute), Dorothea C. Lerman (Louisiana State University), Wayne W. Fisher (Marcus Institute), Henry S. Roane (Marcus Institute), Alyson Hovanetz (Marcus Institute) |
| Abstract: Results of basic research suggest that providing signals during delays to reinforcement may attenuate decrements in responding. In the current study, we evaluated the extent to which providing signals during delay fading affected responding in the context of differential reinforcement of mands. Three individuals were exposed to gradually increasing signaled and unsignaled reinforcement delays in multielement and/or reversal designs. Results for 2 of 3 participants suggested that the presence of signals facilitated response maintenance under delayed reinforcement. |
| |
| Evaluation of Negative Reinforcer Magnitude in the Treatment of Escape Maintained Aberrant Behaviors |
| JASON M. STRICKER (University of Iowa), Joel Eric Ringdahl (University of Iowa), Nathan Call (Marcus Institute), Niamh P. O'Kane (Arlington Developmental Center) |
| Abstract: The treatment of problem behavior maintained by negative reinforcement continues to be an important area of research related to individuals with developmental disabilities. In the current study, different reinforcement schedules were analyzed for participants diagnosed with moderate to severe mental retardation who displayed aggression or self-injurious behavior (SIB) maintained by negative reinforcement (i.e., escape from tasks). For each participant, varying fixed-ratio schedules of task completion and break length (e.g., FR1 with a 1 minute break versus FR10 with a 10 minute break) were examined within a multielement design. Interobserver agreement was collected for at least 20% of all sessions and agreement scores averaged above 80% for all participants. During treatment, significant reductions in target behaviors were observed for all participants when compared to rates of aggression and SIB during the escape condition of the respective functional analyses. However, no discriminable differences were observed between FR1 versus FR10 schedules of reinforcement. Results will be discussed in terms of behavioral economic theory and schedules of reinforcement. |
|
| |