Further Evaluation of Reinforcer Magnitude Effects in Noncontingent Schedules

Ecott, Cheryl L.; Foate, Beth Ann L.; Taylor, Barry R.; Critchfield, Thomas S.

doi:10.1901/jaba.1999.32-529

Cited by 5 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is a recent trend in applied behavior analysis to study basic reinforcement processes using arbitrary responses (e.g., Carr et al, 1998;Ecott et al, 1999;Vollmer & Iwata, 1991). Although it may seem obvious that such arbitrary responses are maintained by the programmed reinforcers being tested, we have seen numerous cases in which responding on a seemingly incidental task (e.g., button pressing) is maintained independent of programmed reinforcement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Carr, Bailey, Ecott, Lucker, and Weil (1998) used an arbitrary block-placement response to evaluate the effects of reinforcer magnitude during FT schedules. Ecott, Foate, Taylor, and Critchfield (1999) also used arbitrary responses to evaluate FT effects. However, the reinforcer that maintained the arbitrary response was not demonstrated in either study.…”

Section: Fixed-time Schedule Effects Asmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is possible that block placement, for example, was maintained by instructions (implied or explicit) or by automatic reinforcement (e.g., response completion), and the reinforcer delivered during FT, therefore, was not related to baseline performance. To compare FT effects using arbitrary response preparations to treatment research using FT schedules, the reinforcer for baseline responding should be clearly identified (Ecott et al, 1999). The reason for this is that FT schedules, when used as treatment, usually involve delivering the reinforcer that had previously maintained problem behavior (e.g., Vollmer, Iwata, Zarcone, Smith, & Mazaleski, 1993).…”

Section: Fixed-time Schedule Effects Asmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Fixed‐time Schedule Effects as a Function of Baseline Reinforcement Rate

Ringdahl

Vollmer

Borrero

et al. 2001

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using an arbitrary response, we evaluated fixed-time (FT) schedules that were either similar or dissimilar to a baseline (response-dependent) reinforcement schedule and extinction. Results suggested that both FT schedules and extinction resulted in decreased responding. However, FT schedules were more effective in reducing response rates if the FT reinforcer rate was dissimilar to baseline reinforcer rates. Possible reasons for this difference were evaluated with data analysis methods designed to identify adventitious response-reinforcer relations.DESCRIPTORS: noncontingent reinforcement, fixed-time schedules, developmental disabilities A time-based schedule is defined as a schedule during which the reinforcer is delivered response independently on either a periodical (fixed-time, FT) or an aperiodical (variable-time, VT) schedule (Marr & Zeiler, 1974). Because time-based schedules disrupt response-reinforcer relations, the effects can be similar to extinction (Catania, 1969). That is, reinforcement depends on a contingency, and when FT or VT is implemented following a reinforcement baseline, a previously existing contingency is disrupted. However, procedurally, time-based schedules This study was conducted as part of the first author's dissertation at Louisiana State University. The research was conducted during an internship at Children's Seashore House in Philadelphia. We thank Carrie Wright and Christina Vorndran for their assistance with data collection.Address correspondence to Joel E. Ringdahl, University Hospital School, 100 Hawkins Dr. Room 349, Iowa City, Iowa 52242-1011 (E-mail: joel-ringdahl@ uiowa.edu).are distinguished from extinction in that the reinforcer is not withheld.Further analysis of time-based schedules is needed for at least two reasons. First, factors responsible for the relation between timebased schedules and response reduction have not been clearly identified. For example, some laboratory research has shown that extinction is more effective than time-based schedules in reducing response rates (e.g., Lattal, 1972;Rescorla & Skucy, 1969). Conversely, there is evidence that under some circumstances FT schedules reduce response rates more effectively than extinction . In a study with nonhumans, Rescorla and Skucy found both VT and extinction resulted in decreased response rates, but extinction resulted in more immediate and larger decreases in behavior. Similarly, Lattal showed that FT and VT schedules following fixed-interval (FI) and variable-interval (VI) reinforcement sched-

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fixed-time Schedule Effects Asmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fixed-time Schedule Effects Asmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fixed‐time Schedule Effects as a Function of Baseline Reinforcement Rate

Ringdahl

Vollmer

Borrero

et al. 2001

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, it is possible that the difference between small-and largemagnitude reinforcers was a functional one for participants in the Carr et al (1998) study but not for participants in the Ecott et al (1999) and Wilder et al (2001) studies. Although Carr et al and Wilder et al did not compare small-and large-magnitude reinforcers during CR conditions, Ecott et al did and observed similar rates of responding.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Reinforcer Consumption and Magnitude on Response Rates During Noncontingent Reinforcement

Roscoe

Iwata

Rand

2003

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Results of previous research on the effects of noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) have been inconsistent when magnitude of reinforcement was manipulated. We attempted to clarify the influence of NCR magnitude by including additional controls. In Study 1, we examined the effects of reinforcer consumption time by comparing the same magnitude of NCR when session time was and was not corrected to account for reinforcer consumption. Lower response rates were observed when session time was not corrected, indicating that reinforcer consumption can suppress response rates. In Study 2, we first selected varying reinforcer magnitudes (small, medium, and large) on the basis of corrected response rates observed during a contingent reinforcement condition and then compared the effects of these magnitudes during NCR. One participant exhibited lower response rates when large-magnitude reinforcers were delivered; the other ceased responding altogether even when small-magnitude reinforcers were delivered. We also compared the effects of the same NCR magnitude (medium) during 10-min and 30-min sessions. Lower response rates were observed during 30-min sessions, indicating that the number of reinforcers consumed across a session can have the same effect as the number consumed per reinforcer delivery. These findings indicate that, even when response rate is corrected to account for reinforcer consumption, larger magnitudes of NCR (defined on either a per-delivery or per-session basis) result in lower response rates than do smaller magnitudes.

show abstract

“…For another participant, rates of responding were similar under the smalland medium-magnitude conditions but higher under both of these conditions relative to the large-magnitude condition. Results of other applied studies, however, indicate that reinforcement magnitude may not substantially influence responding in single-operant arrangements (e.g., Ecott, Foate, Taylor, & Critchfield, 1999;Lerman, Kelley, Vorndran, Kuhn, & LaRue, 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 92%

The Effects of Reinforcement Magnitude on Functional Analysis Outcomes

Volkert

Lerman

Vorndran

2005

Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The duration or magnitude of reinforcement has varied and often appears to have been selected arbitrarily in functional analysis research. Few studies have evaluated the effects of reinforcement magnitude on problem behavior, even though basic findings indicate that this parameter may affect response rates during functional analyses. In the current study, 6 children with autism or developmental disabilities who engaged in severe problem behavior were exposed to three separate functional analyses, each of which varied in reinforcement magnitude. Results of these functional analyses were compared to determine if a particular reinforcement magnitude was associated with the most conclusive outcomes. In most cases, the same conclusion about the functions of problem behavior was drawn regardless of the reinforcement magnitude.

show abstract

Further Evaluation of Reinforcer Magnitude Effects in Noncontingent Schedules

Cited by 5 publications

References 3 publications

Fixed‐time Schedule Effects as a Function of Baseline Reinforcement Rate

Fixed‐time Schedule Effects as a Function of Baseline Reinforcement Rate

Effects of Reinforcer Consumption and Magnitude on Response Rates During Noncontingent Reinforcement

The Effects of Reinforcement Magnitude on Functional Analysis Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About