Association for Behavior Analysis International

Attention has been shown as an effective reinforcer for problem behavior (e.g., Iwata et al., 1982/1994; Kodak et al., 2007) and appropriate behavior (e.g., Clay et al., 2013; Nuernberger et al., 2012). Additionally, various types of attention (i.e., eye contact, praise, physical, conversation, and reprimands) affect an individual's responding differentially. In recent years, researchers have begun to evaluate preferences for different types of attention (Clay et al.; Kelley et al., 2014; Nuernberger et al.). These researchers also evaluated the reinforcer efficacy of different types of attention and shown differentiated preference hierarchies and level of responding during reinforcer assessments. It is also likely that participants have preferences for different adults, and these preferences may be due to the type of attention provided by that adult in conjunction with the child’s preference for different types of attention. This talk will explain the different methods for evaluating preference for different types of attention, the reinforcing efficacy of different types of attention, and how different types of attention may or may not affect a child’s preference for a specific teacher or clinician.

Praise, a form of attention that indicates approval, can be used in multiple settings to increase appropriate behavior. Praise is a nonintrusive and relatively simple intervention technique that is often more socially acceptable when compared to other procedures such as the delivery of edible items. Because praise may be used as a reinforcer in a variety of settings, and is usually a component within treatment packages, some researchers have examined praise in isolation. There are variables which may affect the efficacy of praise as a reinforcer, one being content or type of praise. General praise is defined as a declarative statement that does not specify the target behavior (e.g. “Good job!”); whereas, behavior-specific praise explicitly describes the target behavior (e.g., “Good job sorting!”). This study focused on evaluating the relative reinforcing efficacy of general and behavior-specific praise on rates of correct responses on a maintenance task in typically developing preschool children. The results indicated that all participants showed higher levels of correct responding during both praise conditions, as compared to control conditions. Although there were a few limitations, the results of this study replicate previous research and extend this literature base by including a new population.

Various types of attention (i.e., praise, physical, and conversation) may affect an individual's responding differentially, similar to the effects of different types of edible items. Previous researchers have evaluated rates of behavior when different types of attention are delivered, and shown differentiated preference hierarchies and levels of responding during reinforcer assessments; however, the researchers delivering the attention types were kept constant throughout these studies. Previous researchers have shown qualitative differences in types of attention and consistent effects of types of attention delivered across researchers. The purpose of the current study was to replicate and extend previous research by evaluating the preferences for and reinforcing efficacy of different types of attention (i.e., praise, physical, and conversation) across multiple researchers. The results presented include “matches” for high-preferred attention types and strongest reinforcer per child with each researcher. The role of using social reinforcers across different adults or researchers, and future research in this area, are also discussed.