A handful of studies have examined the utility of progressive ratio schedules (PRs) of reinforcement in treatment development and treatment efficacy. The current case study explored the utility of PRs as an assessment tool to inform a differential reinforcement treatment package. A PRs assessment was used to identify the breaking point of a functional communicative response before and after treatment. The breaking point was used as the initial reinforcement schedule during treatment. Following treatment, the communicative response increased during a posttest PRs assessment, suggesting the efficacy of the treatment package.Keywords Behavior analysis . Progressive ratio schedule . Differential reinforcement . Behavioral assessment A progressive ratio (PR) schedule of reinforcement is defined by an increasing response requirement for reinforcer delivery over successive sessions (DeLeon et al. 1997), or trial-by-trial basis within a single session (Hodos 1961;Roane 2008). For instance, when a child emits a predetermined number of responses (e.g., hand raising five times in a classroom), a reinforcer is delivered (e.g., teacher calls on child). After delivery of the reinforcer, subsequent response requirements can increase a variety of ways, including stepwise (e.g., increasing the number of responses from 5 to 6, then 7, then 8, and so forth), algorithmic (e.g., additively or geometrically), response topography (e.g., specific target response either occurs or stops occurring), session-termination criteria (e.g., specific amount of time elapses between responses, or after a total amount of time elapses within the session), and the amount of reinforces delivered (see also Roane, 2008 for similar overview). Stepwise increases in response requirements have been useful in identifying preference for stimuli used as reinforcers across increased response requirements (Tustin 1994;DeLeon et al. 1997), and reinforcer efficacy across differentiated response requirements (Roane et al. 2001).Clinical applications of PR schedules of reinforcement can also be effective during treatment development. Identification of schedule effects can be useful for clinicians to determine relative reinforcement schedules for both problem and replacement behaviors. For example, DeLeon et al. (2000) used a PR schedule to directly inform the development of a treatment for aggression (set on a PR schedule of reinforcement ranging from 1 to 20 responses per requirement for reinforcer delivery) and functional communication (set on a fixed ratio 1 reinforcement schedule). When reinforcement schedules were equally probable, both aggression and mands were emitted equally. However, frequency of mands exceeded aggression when the reinforcement schedules were unequal (FR1 to FR20 for mands and aggression, respectively).While PR schedules have been used to identify relative probability of one response over a second response, to date, minimal research has shown how PRs can be used to inform treatment and the extent to which treatment can Implications...
The current case study explored the clinical utility of a stimulus avoidance assessment during relaxation training with an adult with an autism spectrum disorder. A multiple stimulus without replacement procedure was implemented with aversive events to identify an aversive situation hierarchy. Aversive events were then systematically presented during the analogue phase of relaxation training across low, medium, and highly aversive events. Results support a clinical utility of using stimulus assessments to inform relaxation training, while suggesting further modifications to relaxation training protocols for generalization of skills.Keywords Relaxation training . Stimulus assessment . Autism . Behavior analysis Integrative stress reduction techniques emphasize nonjudgmental focus on an individual's awareness of internal states and the relationship between internal experiences relative to environmental changes. Examples include mindfulness meditation (Kabat-Zinn et al. 1992), relaxation skills training (Manzoni et al. 2008), and a combination of mindfulnessbased self-control interventions (Singh et al. 2003). These approaches can reduce physical aggression in individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (Singh et al. 2011) and intellectual disabilities (Singh et al. 2003).There is currently a substantial body of research demonstrating behavior change following informally developed graduated exposure interventions (Hayes 2004) and mindfulnessbased relaxation training (see Baer 2003 for review). However, little is known about the clinical utility of using in vivo (or analogue) exposure during relaxation training for promoting the generalization of skills. Similarly, no research has been conducted to date that has used a systematic assessment to identify antecedents that evoke problem behavior. While preference (DeLeon and Iwata 1996), reinforcer (Northup et al. 1996) and punisher assessments (Fisher et al. 1994) are common behavior analytic assessments useful for informing treatment; no research has been conducted using stimulus avoidance assessments to inform antecedent-based treatment interventions. Therefore, the purpose of the current case study was to determine (a) if a stimulus avoidance assessment would be effective in identifying a hierarchy of events that evoke problem behavior, (b) the extent to which the identified stimuli would assist with skill building during relaxation training, and (c) the extent that trained skills would persist during naturalistic (or unpredicted) events.Chris was a 29-year-old Caucasian male with autism receiving in home 24 h direct care services from a behavioral service agency in the Midwest. Chris was ambulatory and sporadically participated in daily living activities with staff assistance. He was prescribed trileptal and propranolol for his behavioral compulsions and outbursts throughout the duration of the study. Behavior analytic sessions were conducted by the first and second authors one to two times a week for 5 months. Problem behaviors were identified by ...
Different combinations of immediate and delayed consequences differentially affect choice. Basic research has found that nonhuman animals are more likely to choose an alternative that produces an immediate reinforcer that is followed by a delayed punisher as the delay to punishment increases. The purpose of the current effort was to examine the choices of three individuals with autism when they were given the choice between receiving a larger amount of preferred food followed by a mild, delayed verbal punisher and a smaller amount of the preferred food. A secondary purpose was to determine whether signal presence and duration would affect the efficacy of the punisher (i.e., whether children would be more likely to select the smaller reward that was not followed by a delayed punisher). Results were idiosyncratic across children and highlight the need to evaluate choice under multiple arrangements.
To date, there is a paucity of research conducting natural language processing (NLP) on the open-ended responses of behavior rating scales. Using three NLP lexicons for sentiment analysis of the open-ended responses of the Behavior Assessment System for Children-Third Edition, the researchers discovered a moderately positive correlation between the human composite rating and the sentiment score using each of the lexicons for strengths comments and a slightly positive correlation for the concerns comments made by guardians and teachers. In addition, the researchers found that as the word count increased for open-ended responses regarding the child’s strengths, there was a greater positive sentiment rating. Conversely, as word count increased for open-ended responses regarding child concerns, the human raters scored comments more negatively. The authors offer a proof-of-concept to use NLP-based sentiment analysis of open-ended comments to complement other data for clinical decision making.
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
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.