An Experimental Analysis of Negative Reinforcement Contingencies for Adult‐delivered Reprimands

Abstract

Seven adults participated in simulated teaching sessions with an experimenter who role played as a student with developmental disabilities. The experimenter engaged in problem behavior and either (a) terminated problem behavior contingent on participant reprimands (negative reinforcement) or (b) did not terminate problem behavior contingent on reprimands (extinction). Results suggested that reprimands were sensitive to negative reinforcement in the form of the immediate cessation of problem behavior. These preliminary findings support role play as a potentially viable laboratory model for analyzing behaviors of typical adults.

Contingency analysis of caregiver behavior: Implications for parent training and future directions

“…These studies suggest that we do not need to have parents interact with their own children to learn about their behavioral sensitivity to child behavior. Results were consistent with descriptive studies of parentchild interactions that involved infant crying (Bruzek et al, 2009;David & Appell, 1961;Thompson et al, 2011) and child problem behavior (Addison & Lerman, 2009;Miller et al, 2010;Sloman et al, 2005). Some types of child proxies even offer advantageous features.…”

“…Researchers interested in contributing to this growing literature should consider the value of both descriptive and experimental methods of investigation. Research on child problem behavior and reprimands is a good example of how experimenters identified a possible negative reinforcement contingency provided by child problem behavior for parent behavior (Addison & Lerman, 2009; Sloman et al, ) and then experimentally demonstrated this relation in a follow‐up study (Miller et al, ). Because the descriptive studies observed adult–child interactions under more typical conditions, those data increase the plausibility that the results of the experiment map onto naturally occurring parent–child interactions (Baer, ).…”

“…Researchers have also included child proxies in studies to isolate and manipulate aspects of child behavior that provide reinforcement contingencies for parent behavior. In the existing literature, child substitutes include adult confederates (Miller et al, ), apparatuses (Berberich, ; Mulhern & Passman, 1979), and infant simulations (Bruzek et al, ; Thompson et al, ). These studies suggest that we do not need to have parents interact with their own children to learn about their behavioral sensitivity to child behavior.…”

“…They found that reprimands were commonly preceded by higher frequencies of problem behavior and followed by decreases in problem behavior. By experimentally manipulating problem behavior in a simulated teaching scenario, Miller, Lerman, and Fritz (2010) demonstrated that problem behavior could provide a negative reinforcement contingency for reprimands. Participants were instructed to teach skills (e.g., matching colors) to an adult confederate acting as a child.…”

A laboratory model for evaluating relapse of undesirable caregiver behavior

“…Support for this interpretation comes from a variety of sources. For example, when a caregiver delivers reprimands in response to their child's destructive behavior, and the reprimands act as an abolishing operation that results in the temporary cessation of destructive behavior, that temporary reprieve from the child's destructive behavior can function as negative reinforcement and increase the future probability of caregiver reprimands (Miller, Lerman, & Fritz, ; Sloman et al, ). In addition, teachers tend to respond incorrectly (e.g., by providing attention or escape) following increases in child destructive behavior (Addison & Lerman, ).…”