Functional communication training (FCT) is one of the most commonly prescribed interventions for the treatment of severe destructive behavior exhibited by individuals with intellectual disabilities. Although highly effective, FCT has been shown to fail in some cases when treatment is introduced into the child's typical environment. Basic and translational research on renewal provides a model for studying the relapse of destructive behavior following successful response to treatment in clinic settings using FCT. In the present study, we evaluated whether relapse of destructive behavior could be attributed to the discriminative control of the home context, which was historically correlated with reinforcement for destructive behavior. We implemented baseline contingencies in the home setting with caregivers acting as interventionists (i.e., Context A). We then implemented FCT in a treatment clinic with trained therapists (i.e., Context B). Finally, we introduced FCT in the home setting with caregivers implementing the treatment procedures (i.e., return to Context A). For three of four participants we observed the relapse of destructive behavior consistent with operant renewal. We discuss the implications of these findings with respect to strategies designed to promote generalization of FCT across settings during the treatment of severe destructive behavior.
Laboratory research has shown that when subjects are given a choice between fixed-ratio and bi-valued mixed-ratio schedules of reinforcement, preference typically emerges for the mixed-ratio schedule even with a larger ratio requirement. The current study sought to replicate and extend these findings to children's math problem completion. Using an ABCBC reversal design, four fourth-grade students were given the choice of completing addition problems reinforced on either a fixed-ratio 5 schedule or one of three mixed-ratio schedules; an equivalent mixed-ratio (1, 9) schedule, a mixed-ratio (1, 11) schedule with a 20% larger ratio requirement, and an equally lean mixed-ratio (5, 7) schedule without the small fixed-ratio 1 component. This was followed by a reversal back to the preceding phase in which preference for the mixed-ratio schedule had been observed, and a final reversal back to the mixed-ratio (5, 7) phase. Findings were consistent with previous research in that all children preferred the mixed-ratio (1, 9) schedule over the equivalent fixed-ratio 5 schedule. Preference persisted for the leaner mixed-ratio (1, 11) schedule for three of the four children. Indifference or preference for the fixed-ratio 5 alternative was observed in phases containing the mixed-ratio (5, 7) schedule. These results extend previous research on risky choice to children's math problem completion and highlight the importance of a small ratio component in the emergence of preference for bi-valued mixed-ratio schedules. Implications of these results for arranging reinforcement to increase children's academic responding are discussed.
This study examined whether experimental functional analyses (FAs) conducted by parents at home with coaching via telehealth would produce differentiated results, and compared these results to the functions identified from structured descriptive assessments (SDAs) also conducted by parents at home via telehealth. Four boys between the ages of 4-and 8-years old with intellectual and developmental disabilities and their parents participated. All assessments were conducted in the children's homes with their parents serving as intervention agents and with coaching from remote behavior therapists using videoconferencing technology. Parentimplemented FAs produced differentiated results for all 4 children in the study. Overall, analyzing antecedent-behavior (A-B) and behavior-consequence (B-C) relations from the SDA videos identified only half of the functions identified by the FAs. For children whose SDA results were differentiated, analyzing A-B relations correctly identified 4 of 5 functions. Analyzing B-C relations correctly identified 5 of 6 functions identified by the experimental FA, but overidentified attention for all children. Implications for conducting functional analyses and interpreting structured descriptive assessment via telehealth are discussed.
This study replicated previous basic research into the dynamics of choice and extended this analysis to children's behavior in a naturalistic setting. Two preschoolers with disabilities were observed interacting with their teachers at baseline and during an experimental analysis involving four pairs of concurrent variable-interval schedules of adult attention implemented by an experimenter. Each child was exposed to four experimental phases in which the relative reinforcer rates for on- and off-task behavior were 10:1, 1:1, 1:10, and reversed back to 10:1. The 10:1 phase was designed to mimic the same schedules and types of adult attention observed at baseline. We used the generalized matching equation to model steady-state behavior at the end of the transition phases and to evaluate changes in sensitivity at various points throughout the phases. Choice in transition was evaluated by plotting log behavior ratios by session, cumulated time on- and off-task and cumulated attention for on- and off-task behavior by session, and interreinforcer behavior ratios following different sequences of the first four reinforcer deliveries. The generalized matching equation accounted for a large proportion of variance in steady-state responding, sensitivity values increased steadily throughout the phases, patterns of choice in transition were similar to those reported in basic research, and interreinforcer preference generally shifted toward the just-reinforced alternative. These findings are consistent with previous basic research and support the generality of the dynamics of choice to children's on- and off-task behavior reinforced by adult attention.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.