Association for Behavior Analysis International

Behavioral economic methods are increasingly applied in various disciplines and areas of human and non-human research. Although these approaches have good support across populations and disciplines, relatively few researchers have extended this approach and perspective to assessments and interventions for individuals with developmental disabilities (e.g., autism). Such extensions are both timely and warranted for Behavior Analysts, as behavioral economic approaches have been particularly suited to evaluating complex response-reinforcer relationships under complex, real-world conditions. The papers invited for this symposium have been selected to provide a broad, scoping review of the current state of applied behavioral economics in assessments and interventions developed for individuals with developmental disabilities. Particular emphasis is based on the behavioral economic concept of demand and novel extensions of token economy procedures. The behavioral economic concept of demand is presented here in the context of individualized reinforcer assessments and functional communication training undergoing schedule thinning. Novel extensions of the token economy are also reviewed, evaluating the effects of loss aversion on responding.

Master's level behavior analysts

Methods for evaluating individual preference and choice are regularly included in Behavior Analytic research and practice. A variety of methods have been put forward to evaluate preference though these methods rarely evaluate choices under effortful, treatment-like conditions. A fundamental disconnect between these contexts invites the possibility that stimuli identified may not be preferred in treatment-like conditions and this can jeopardize the effectiveness of otherwise appropriate treatment. Recent attempts to address this disconnect have incorporated elements of Behavioral Economics. In this study, we systematically review the scope and range of Behavioral Economic procedures that have been formally evaluated in the literature. Studies were included in the review if Behavioral Economic elements were incorporated into assessments and interventions designed for individuals with developmental disabilities. Results indicated that the level of support for assessments and interventions incorporating Behavioral Economic elements is still emerging and additional research continues to be necessary.

Matching (Herrnstein, 1961) has been demonstrated with appetitive and aversive stimuli, including when appetitive and aversive stimuli are simultaneously presented (Farley & Fantino, 1978). Interestingly, in contexts where a single response produces both reinforcement and punishment, some research has demonstrated that a punisher subtracted more value than a reinforcer added (Rasmussen & Newland, 2008). We assessed the purported asymmetry of reinforcement and punishment for three individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID). We established tokens as reinforcers and evaluated the effects of simultaneous token gain and loss schedule in a progressive manner. Losses gradually became denser to identify a schedule at which the individual would not respond. Finally, we demonstrated that the loss contingency was directly responsible for the cessation of responding, as responding maintained when an equal density of reinforcement was available for gain without the loss contingency. Mixed findings were obtained; however, these results suggest that an asymmetry between punishment and reinforcement is present for some individuals with ID. Suggestions for future research and implications for practitioners will be discussed.