Normal and Abnormal Repetitive Stereotyped Behaviours

Berkson, Gershon; Gallagher, Richard J.

doi:10.1007/978-94-009-4462-6_12

Cited by 18 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite this characteristic resilience to different environmental conditions, some rhesus monkeys, particularly those housed in individual cages, develop abnormal patterns of behavior [Bayne et al, 1992]. Abnormal behavior in this species often takes the form of stereotypic behavior, i.e., repetitive, frequently idiosyncratic, highly ritualized actions that do not serve any apparent biological purpose [Berkson, 1983;Ridley & Baker, 1982]. Stereotypies can be divided into whole-body motions and self-directed responses.…”

Section: Behavioral Pathology In Macaquesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Self‐injurious behavior in rhesus monkeys: New insights into its etiology, physiology, and treatment

Novak

2003

American J Primatol

188

172

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-injurious behavior (SIB) is a significant human health problem frequently associated with profound intellectual disabilities, genetic diseases, and psychiatric conditions. However, it also occurs in subclinical populations and appears to be on the rise in adolescents and young adults. SIB is also seen in a small percentage of nonhuman primates that injure themselves through biting. We have begun to characterize SIB in rhesus monkeys to identify some of the risk factors associated with this disorder, and to determine the parallels with the human condition. In our study population, 14% of individually housed monkeys (the vast majority of which are males) have a veterinary record for self-inflicted wounding. Wounding is rare, but self-directed biting is common. SIB can be elicited during aggressive altercations and may be associated with husbandry events. Some monkeys appear to be more vulnerable to acquiring SIB. This increased vulnerability is associated with certain social experiences in the first 2 years of life and with exposure to a larger number of moderately stressful events as compared to controls. Monkeys with SIB also have a dysregulation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, indicated by a blunted cortisol response to mild stressors. Our findings suggest that SIB may be a coping strategy to reduce arousal. Biting appears to rapidly lower an escalating heart rate. The potentially reinforcing effects of SIB may account for the failure of some treatment regimens. These findings are compared to studies of SIB in humans, and concordances are identified.

show abstract

Section: Behavioral Pathology In Macaquesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Self‐injurious behavior in rhesus monkeys: New insights into its etiology, physiology, and treatment

Novak

2003

American J Primatol

188

172

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although often topographically similar to selfstimulatory behaviors in humans, these behaviors may be functionally different (cf. Berkson, 1967Berkson, , 1983. It may be more productive to focus on another salient characteristic of self-stimulatory behaviors, their perceptual consequences, as proposed in this paper.…”

Section: Alternative Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The merits and limitations of these accounts have been discussed by recent reviewers (Berkson, 1983;Lewis & Baumeister, 1982;Newsom, Carr, & Lovaas, 1979;Romanczyk, Kistner, & Plienis, 1982). However, two concepts require a closer look than they have previously received because they seem to be alternatives to the theory presented here.…”

Section: Alternative Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Loud noise may show inexplicable sex differences, increasing rocking in males and decreasing rocking in females . Physical restraint fails to increase subsequent rocking if the arms and hands are left free (Higenbottam & Chow, 1975) (Berkson, 1983). Arousal modulation theories derive from the concept that organisms strive to maintain an optimal level of arousal or stimulation (Duffy, 1962;Hebb, 1955;Leuba, 1955).…”

Section: Alternative Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Self‐stimulatory Behavior and Perceptual Reinforcement

Lovaas¹,

Newsom²,

Hickman³

1987

J of App Behav Analysis

313

198

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-stimulatory behavior is repetitive, stereotyped, functionally autonomous behavior seen in both normal and developmentally disabled populations, yet no satisfactory theory of its development and major characteristics has previously been offered. We present here a detailed hypothesis of the acquisition and maintenance of self-stimulatory behavior, proposing that the behaviors are operant responses whose reinforcers are automatically produced interoceptive and exteroceptive perceptual consequences. The concept of perceptual stimuli and reinforcers, the durability of self-stimulatory behaviors, the sensory extinction effect, the inverse relationship between self-stimulatory and other behaviors, the blocking effect of self-stimulatory behavior on new learning, and response substitution effects are discussed in terms of the hypothesis. Support for the hypothesis from the areas of sensory reinforcement and sensory deprivation is also reviewed. Psychologists and ethologists, who have been studying these behaviors for some time, have referred to them as "abnormal stereotyped acts," "mannerisms," "motility disturbances," "ritualistic acts," "rhythmic habit patterns," "blindisms," or "autisms" (e.g., Baumeister & Forehand, 1973;Berkson, 1967;Mitchell & Etches, 1977 (Lovaas, Varni, Koegel, & Lorsch, 1977) despite our discouragement of it. Other unexpected and elaborate repertoires also developed during treatment, such as obsession with numbers, compulsive arrangement of letters, and frequent assembly and reassembly of the same jigsaw puzzle (Epstein, Taubman, & Lovaas, 1985). The children who made the largest gains in treatment were also the ones who emerged with the largest repertoire of such "personally contributed" behaviors.To date, no comprehensive theory of self-stimulatory behavior in the developmentally disabled has been proposed. Most theorizing in this area has consisted of unelaborated accounts of specific experimental results, often focusing on body-rock-46 SELF-STIMULATORY BEHAVIOR ing as the "prototypical" self-stimulatory behavior. As a result, Baumeister (1978) found it necessary to create a five-way classification scheme simply to impose some order on the many different accounts, noting that none explained very many findings. The purpose of this paper is to present in some detail the hypothesis that self-stimulatory behavior is operant behavior that is maintained automatically by the reinforcing perceptual stimuli that it produces. This hypothesis will be used to explain the acquisition of representative behaviors and the etiology of self-stimulatory behavior in developmentally disabled persons, as well as certain prominent characteristics of self-stimulatory behavior. Empirical support for this hypothesis is offered from relevant areas of research. The Discussion considers two representative alternative theories and describes implications of our hypothesis for the treatment of developmentally disabled persons and the understanding of apparently related behaviors in other populations. PERCEPTUAL REINFO...

show abstract

“…Despite the harm that it causes (Tate & Baroff, 1966), the self-injurious behaviour (SIB) of people with developmental (Baumeister,1978;Turner, 1999b) or sensory disorders (Baumeister & Forhand, 1973;Berkson, 1983, Brambring, 1992Troster, Brambring & Beelmann, 1991) has little in common with the self-mutilation observed in psychotic persons (Alderman, 1997;Briere & Gil, 1998;Favazza, 1996) or the willful self-harm of suicidal persons or those whose self-harming behaviour has a social meaning (Baroff, 1974;Schroeder et al, 1978). As Matson et al (1997) noted, the SIB of people with developmental disorders is frequently rhythmic and repetitive, that is, it closely resembles the repetitive and stereotyped movements (SM) that are a defining characteristic of autism (American Psychiatric Association, 2000;Schopler, 1995) and are common among persons with an intellectual or sensory disability (Murdoch, 1996;Rojahn & Sisson, 1990;Troster, Brambring & Beelmann, 1991).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%