|
| Analysis of the Effects of Noncontingent Reinforcement on Rates of Behaviors Maintained by Automatic Reinforcement |
| Tuesday, June 1, 2004 |
| 9:00 AM–10:20 AM |
| Back Bay C |
| Area: AUT/EAB; Domain: Applied Research |
| Chair: Kelly A. Young (Crossroads Center for Children) |
| Discussant: Kelly A. Young (Crossroads Center for Children) |
| Abstract: Learning Objectives
Define noncontingent reinforcement and its advantages;
Describe how a schedule of thinning NCR can be defined;
Describe the results of three studies using NCR to eliminate self-stimulatory behaviors; |
| |
| The Effect of Noncontingent Reinforcement on Behaviors Maintained by Automatic Reinforcement |
| KAREN M. ATKINSON (Crossroads Center for Children), Carolyn Giaquinto (Crossroads Center for Children), Thomas L. Zane (The Sage Colleges), Helen Bloomer (Crossroads Center for Children) |
| Abstract: Noncontingent Reinforcement (NCR) procedures have been shown to decrease behaviors maintained by a variety of motivational factors. Self-stimulatory behaviors, maintained by automatic sensory input, are very difficult to eliminate. The purpose of this study was to investigate the extent to which NCR could decrease self-stimulation in a young child with autism. Using a reversal design, baseline data was first gathered, after which NCR procedures were implemented. Results will be discussed in terms of the effectiveness of NCR on this response class. |
| |
| A Comparison of Noncontingent Reinforcement Procedures using One or Multiple Reinforcing Stimuli |
| CAROLYN GIAQUINTO (Crossroads Center for Children), Thomas L. Zane (The Sage Colleges), Helen Bloomer (Crossroads Center for Children) |
| Abstract: Noncontingent Reinforcement (NCR) has been shown to decrease a variety of excessive behaviors. However, could its effectiveness be enhanced by providing multiple stimuli as opposed to just one, as traditionally occurs. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of providing two or more reinforcing stimuli on a noncontingent schedule. The comparison condition involved presenting only one NCR stimulus. The subject was a young child with autism and severe self-stimulatory behaviors maintained by automatic reinforcement. Results were explained in terms of the differential effectiveness of the two procedures. |
| |
| A Component Analysis of Noncontingent Reinforcement Procedures Used with Young Children with Autism |
| KARI ANNE DUNLOP (Crossroads Center for Children), Carolyn Giaquinto (Crossroads Center for Children), Thomas L. Zane (The Sage Colleges), Helen Bloomer (Crossroads Center for Children) |
| Abstract: Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) is an alternative to punitive procedures to decrease problematic behaviors. However, limited studies have been published concerning a component analysis of the myriad procedures associated with NCR. This study presents data on the effectiveness of different procedural components, including the use of stimuli related and unrelated to the maintaining motivational stimulus, rules for thinning the schedule or reinforcement, and the duration of presentation of the NCR stimulus. |
|
| |