Effects of Multiple Schedules of Reinforcement on Appropriate Communication and Challenging Behaviors: A Meta-analysis

Muharib, Reem; Walker, Virginia L.; Alresheed, Fahad; Gerow, Stephanie

doi:10.1007/s10803-020-04569-2

Cited by 17 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Teams often used these schedules to maintain two or more distinct and context‐dependent patterns of appropriate responding (e.g., manding under some circumstances, compliance under others; cf. Lambert et al, 2016; Muharib et al, 2021) at both molecular (within session) and molar (between sessions or appointments) levels. Common functions of compound‐schedules arrangements at the BAC are listed in item B5 of Online Supplemental Materials.…”

Section: Bac Service Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Description and evaluation of a function‐informed and mechanisms‐based framework for treating challenging behavior

Lambert¹,

Copeland²,

Paranczak³

et al. 2022

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individualization and iterative design are essential components of the assessment and treatment of challenging behavior. Currently, there are few validated frameworks for engaging in iterative processes. Due to the nature of single-case design, empirically rigorous evaluations of decision-tree processes are particularly prohibitive. Notwithstanding, evaluations are needed. In this paper we first describe a function-informed and mechanisms-based (FIMB) framework for selecting treatment components employed by a university-based practicum experience designed to expose pre-service practitioners to a valid treatment process for challenging behavior. Then, we share a completed retrospective consecutive case series across a 6-year period in which we conducted a technique analysis to identify which procedures were most commonly selected in the practicum, and the impact of those choices on client outcomes. The results suggest that the model can be highly effective for some, but not all, cases. Implications are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Bac Service Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Description and evaluation of a function‐informed and mechanisms‐based framework for treating challenging behavior

Lambert¹,

Copeland²,

Paranczak³

et al. 2022

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this case, the trend of the intervention may be ignored by the Tau-U calculation, but is worth considering during visual analysis of data. Muharib et al (2020) meta-analyzed SCED studies of multiple schedules of reinforcement on appropriate communication and challenging behavior. The overall Tau-U estimated effect was 54% [CI 95 47%-60%] for challenging behavior and was 64% [CI 95 58%-70%] for communication, which can be interpreted as 54% and 64% of all pairwise comparisons across baseline and intervention were improved after adjusting for decreased pairwise comparisons and correcting for baseline trend.…”

Section: Tau and Tau-umentioning

confidence: 99%

Meta‐analyses and effect sizes in applied behavior analysis: A review and discussion

Dowdy¹,

Peltier

Tincani³

et al. 2021

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For more than four decades, researchers have used meta-analyses to synthesize data from multiple experimental studies often to draw conclusions that are not supported by individual studies. More recently, single-case experimental design (SCED) researchers have adopted meta-analysis techniques to answer research questions with data gleaned from SCED experiments. Metaanalyses enable researchers to answer questions regarding intervention efficacy, generality, and condition boundaries. Here we discuss meta-analysis techniques, the rationale for their adaptation with SCED studies, and current indices used to quantify the effect of SCED data in applied behavior analysis.

show abstract

“…Autistic individuals are indeed at greater risk of exhibiting dangerous challenging behavior (Adamek et al, 2011), which is likely to become a chronic concern that negatively impacts QoL in the absence of intervention (Chiang & Wineman, 2014). Although previous literature reviews have highlighted the efficacy of behavioral interventions like FCT (Ghaemmaghami et al, 2021) and certain procedural variations of RST (Hagopian et al, 2011; Muharib et al, 2019; Muharib, Walker, et al, 2021), none have focused on the effects of contingency-based delays in sustaining positive outcomes for autistic individuals and related disabilities.…”

Section: Conclusion and Implications For Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Jessel, Ingvarsson, Metras, Whipple, et al, 2018; Rose & Beaulieu, 2019). In addition, meta-analyses have been conducted evaluating specific procedural variations of RST (Muharib et al, 2019; Muharib, Walker, et al, 2021); however, there has yet to be a meta-analysis focusing on contingency-based delays. That may be due to the fact that many contingency-based procedures have only been recently developed within the past 10 years.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Contingency-based delay to reinforcement following functional communication training for autistic individuals: A multilevel meta-analysis

Muharib

Dowdy

Rajaraman

et al. 2021

Autism

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Functional communication training, an intervention for challenging behavior rooted in principles of applied behavior analysis, has copious empirical support dating back to the mid-1980s for autistic individuals. Recently, there has been a concerted effort to thin reinforcement delivery during functional communication training using contingency-based delays that, in turn, are designed to enhance practicality and feasibility while not compromising on efficacy. In this synthesis, we meta-analyzed the literature using log response ratio effect sizes to investigate (a) combined and across type effectiveness of contingency-based delays and (b) moderating variables that might impact intervention outcomes. Findings showed that contingency-based delays were effective for autistic individuals (log response ratio = −2.17; 95% CI = (−2.76, −1.58)) and most effective when the contingency incorporated positive reinforcement (log response ratio = −2.30; 95% CI = (−2.83, −1.78)). In addition, delay procedures that included differential reinforcement of alternative behavior were overall more effective (log response ratio = −2.13; 95% CI = (−2.72, −1.55)) than those that involved differential reinforcement of other behavior (log response ratio = −1.24; 95% CI = (−3.84, 1.37)). Noteworthy moderating variables found to impact contingency-based delay efficacy included the intervention dosage and the topography of behavior. We discuss these findings and highlight directions where additional empirical research is warranted to improve our understanding about contingency-based delays for autistic individuals. Lay abstract Functional communication training, an intervention for challenging behavior rooted in principles of applied behavior analysis, has copious empirical support dating back to the mid-1980s for autistic individuals. Recently, there has been a concerted effort to thin reinforcement delivery during functional communication training using contingency-based delays that, in turn, are designed to enhance practicality and feasibility while not compromising efficacy. In this synthesis, we meta-analyzed the literature base with the goal of investigating both combined and across type effectiveness of contingency-based delays. We also aimed to investigate moderating variables that might impact intervention outcomes. Findings showed that contingency-based delays were effective for individuals with an autism spectrum disorder diagnosis and most effective when the delay incorporated some form of positive reinforcement. In addition, differential reinforcement of alternative-based delays was overall more effective when compared to differential reinforcement of other behavior-based delays. Noteworthy moderating variables found to impact contingency-based delay efficacy included the intervention dosage and the topography of behavior. We discuss these findings and highlight directions where additional empirical research is warranted to improve our understanding about contingency-based delays for individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder.

show abstract

Effects of Multiple Schedules of Reinforcement on Appropriate Communication and Challenging Behaviors: A Meta-analysis

Cited by 17 publications

References 87 publications

Description and evaluation of a function‐informed and mechanisms‐based framework for treating challenging behavior

Description and evaluation of a function‐informed and mechanisms‐based framework for treating challenging behavior

Meta‐analyses and effect sizes in applied behavior analysis: A review and discussion

Contingency-based delay to reinforcement following functional communication training for autistic individuals: A multilevel meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About