Effects of adjusting DRO schedules on the reduction of stereotypic vocalizations in children with autism

Abstract

The reduction of stereotypic behavior is important for individuals with developmental disabilities because it may interfere with learning new skills. A common procedure used to reduce stereotypic behavior is differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO). A DRO schedule is a procedure in which reinforcement is delivered given the absence of a target response for a period of time. Although DRO schedules have been shown to be effective in reducing a variety of stereotypic behavior, empirical studies have not yet determined the most effective way to thin the reinforcement schedule. The current study examined the extent to which the relationship between the inter-response time (IRT) and the DRO requirement affects the reduction of stereotypic behavior. Results of the current study showed the DRO requirement that was set to the 25th percentile of the IRT distribution was more effective in reducing stereotypic behavior when compared with a DRO requirement set to the 95th percentile of the IRT distribution.

Effects of Noncontingent Music on Vocal Stereotypy and Toy Manipulation in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorders

“…In the case of vocal stereotypy, matched stimulation typically involves continuous access to stimuli that produce auditory stimulation. When compared with other interventions for vocal stereotypy such as differential reinforcement of other behaviors (e.g., Rozenblat, Brown, Brown, Reeve, & Reeve, 2009;Taylor, Hoch, & Weissman, 2005) and response interruption and redirection (e.g., Ahearn, Clark, MacDonald, & Chung, 2007;Miguel, Clark, Tereshko, & Ahearn, 2009), a potential advantage of providing matched stimulation is that the procedures do not require the undivided attention of a trainer. When compared with other interventions for vocal stereotypy such as differential reinforcement of other behaviors (e.g., Rozenblat, Brown, Brown, Reeve, & Reeve, 2009;Taylor, Hoch, & Weissman, 2005) and response interruption and redirection (e.g., Ahearn, Clark, MacDonald, & Chung, 2007;Miguel, Clark, Tereshko, & Ahearn, 2009), a potential advantage of providing matched stimulation is that the procedures do not require the undivided attention of a trainer.…”

“…For example, Saylor et al (2012) have shown that providing noncontingent access to music may decrease engagement in vocal stereotypy in children with autism. When compared with other interventions for vocal stereotypy such as differential reinforcement of other behaviors (e.g., Rozenblat, Brown, Brown, Reeve, & Reeve, 2009;Taylor, Hoch, & Weissman, 2005) and response interruption and redirection (e.g., Ahearn, Clark, MacDonald, & Chung, 2007;Miguel, Clark, Tereshko, & Ahearn, 2009), a potential advantage of providing matched stimulation is that the procedures do not require the undivided attention of a trainer. Thus, the intervention is well-suited for free periods (e.g., breaks and play periods) during which the trainer may need to attend to other tasks.…”

Immediate and subsequent effects of differential reinforcement of other behavior and noncontingent matched stimulation on stereotypy

“…Researchers have shown that the noncontingent delivery of a stimulus that putatively matches the sensory product of stereotypy (i.e., noncontingent matched stimulation [NMS]) and the delivery of a reinforcer for the nonoccurrence of stereotypy (i.e., differential reinforcement of other behavior [DRO]) are both effective procedures to reduce the occurrence of stereotypic behavior (e.g., Patel, Carr, Kim, Robles, & Eastridge, 2000; Piazza, Adelinis, Hanley, Goh, & Delia, 2000; Rapp, 2007; Rozenblat, Brown, Brown, Reeve, & Reeve, 2009). However, current research is limited insofar as few studies have contrasted the relative effectiveness of the two treatments for reducing stereotypy.…”

“…That is, clinicians may need to use denser schedules to reduce the behavior in individuals who display very high levels of stereotypy. For example, Rozenblat et al (2009) have shown that the DRO interval may need to be as short as 1 s to reduce vocal stereotypy in children with autism. If dense schedules are required, the clinical utility of DRO and NMS is somewhat compromised because the implementation of treatment may interfere with the occurrence of socially acceptable behaviors (e.g., listening to instructions, completing tasks).…”

The Effects of Using a Conditioned Stimulus to Cue DRO Schedules

“…Differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) is an intervention used successfully to reduce problem behavior such as self‐injury and motor stereotypy (Beare, Severson, & Brandt, ), stereotypic vocalizations (Rozenblat, Brown, Brown, Reeve, & Reeve, ), and verbal perseverations (Rehfeldt & Chambers, ). Arguably, DRO procedures require the participant to make complex discriminations.…”