A review of environmental enrichment as treatment for problem behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement

Abstract

We reviewed studies that used environmental enrichment as treatment for problem behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement. A search of behavior analytic journals produced 71 publications with a total of 265 applications of environmental enrichment used alone or in conjunction with alternative behavior manipulations (e.g., prompting, reinforcement) and problem behavior manipulations (e.g., blocking, restraint). Environmental enrichment, as a sole intervention, was efficacious in 41% of the sample. Alternative behavior manipulations, problem behavior manipulations, and a combination of both improved the overall efficacy of environmental enrichment. We discuss factors that may influence the efficacy of environmental enrichment, current trends in research on this topic, and implications for both practitioners and researchers.

Competing stimulus assessments: A systematic review

“…It was also compared across stimuli the authors characterized as “matched/unmatched,” stimulus type (food vs. nonfood), and functional classes of PB. For each CSA application, we also identified the percentage of stimuli assessed that produced a greater than 80% reduction in PB, which is a commonly used criterion of treatment efficacy in reviews of behavioral research (e.g., Gover et al, 2019; Kahng et al, 2002; Kurtz et al, 2003; Rooker et al, 2013). Both percentages were compared to the variables reported in Tables 1 and 2 (i.e., participant characteristics and CSA method, respectively).…”

“…Over the last two decades, CSAs have become a frequently used pretreatment assessment for a variety of topographies of automatically maintained PB (Gover et al, 2019; Rooker et al, 2018), and their use has been extended to the treatment of socially maintained PB. These CSAs are similar to those of automatically maintained PB, except social reinforcers are provided contingent on PB during all test and control trials.…”

“…Additionally, recent reviews indicate that treatments involving noncontingent reinforcement for automatically maintained PB are more effective when stimuli are identified by a CSA than when identified by a preference assessment (e.g., Gover et al, 2019; Rooker et al, 2018). Yet, this finding also indicates that preference assessments continue to be used to identify stimuli to be delivered noncontingently during PB treatment.…”

Developing a treatment for hand‐clapping maintained by automatic reinforcement using sensory analysis, noncontingent reinforcement, and thinning

“…While interventions using noncontingent access to items are often successful alone, for some subjects, it is necessary to combine noncontingent access to items with a procedure designed to implement sensory extinction, such as blocking, protective equipment, or redirection (Gover, Fahmie, & McKeown, 2019; Rooker, Bonner, Dillon, & Zarcone, 2018). For example, Roscoe et al found substantial decreases in problem behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement when they presented subjects with noncontingent access to leisure items as a sole treatment component for only 7 of 14 subjects.…”

The stability of function of automatically reinforced vocal stereotypy over time

“…Thus, it is sometimes not possible to place the behavior on extinction or readily prescribe a function‐based treatment. Instead, interventions such as environmental enrichment (i.e., noncontingent access to preferred items), response blocking, or response interruption and redirection are commonly used to reduce the occurrence of automatically reinforced behavior (Gover, Fahmie, & McKeown, ; Martinez & Betz, ; Saini et al, ).…”