Reduction of aggression evoked by sounds using noncontingent reinforcement and time‐out

Abstract

Some individuals with developmental disabilities engage in problem behavior to escape or avoid auditory stimuli. In this study, a 6-year-old boy with autism engaged in severe aggression in the presence of specific sounds. Following an assessment based on the procedures described by McCord, Iwata, Galensky, Ellingson, and Thomson (2001), we treated negatively reinforced behavior using noncontingent reinforcement and time-out from positive reinforcement in the absence of extinction. Treatment was effective in reducing aggression across multiple sounds.

Noncontingent reinforcement: Arbitrary versus maintaining reinforcers for escape‐maintained problem behavior

“…The present study replicates and extends previous research on NCR without extinction using arbitrary and maintaining reinforcers in the treatment of socially maintained problem behavior. Specifically, the findings extend research demonstrating that NCR without extinction using arbitrary reinforcers can be effective for treating escape‐maintained problem behavior (Dupuis et al, 2015; Ingvarsson et al, 2009; Lomas et al, 2010; Mevers et al, 2014; Wilder et al, 2005). A strength of the current study with respect to using arbitrary reinforcers is that the experimenters replicated the arbitrary reinforcer preassessment conducted by Fischer et al (1997) that provided evidence that the arbitrary reinforcers used during NCR were not functionally related to problem behavior.…”

“…Another procedural component of NCR that has been evaluated is the use of a reinforcer other than the maintaining reinforcer, sometimes referred to as an arbitrary reinforcer (e.g., the delivery of a preferred edible or leisure item). Although NCR typically involves delivery of the maintaining reinforcer identified in the functional analysis (e.g., Vollmer et al, 1995), researchers have evaluated NCR when an arbitrary reinforcer for social-positive reinforcement (Fischer et al, 1997;Ingvarsson et al, 2008) or for social-negative reinforcement (Dupuis et al, 2015;Ingvarsson et al, 2009;Lomas et al, 2010;Mevers et al, 2014;Wilder et al, 2005) is delivered. Fischer et al (1997) is a noteworthy example of an NCR evaluation using an arbitrary reinforcer because after conducting a functional analysis that showed that participants' problem behavior was maintained by social-positive reinforcement (attention or tangibles), the authors conducted an arbitrary reinforcer test that confirmed that preferred edibles were in fact arbitrary with respect to the function of problem behavior (i.e., the contingent delivery of these edibles did not result in increases in problem behavior).…”

Sound attenuation and preferred music in the treatment of problem behavior maintained by escape from noise

“…Treatments for problem behavior maintained by escape from noise have often included a stimulus‐fading component in which the volume of the aversive noise is altered (Dupuis et al, ; McCord et al, ). Although these interventions proved efficacious, it may not be possible to alter the stimulus properties of noise in the natural environment (e.g., noise at a football game).…”

“…Other treatments alter the MO by providing time‐based removal of the aversive stimuli altogether (noncontingent escape; e.g., Vollmer, Marcus, & Ringdahl, ). Although most research on negatively reinforced problem behavior has focused on task demands as the MO, other stimuli, such as loud noises, may also evoke problem behavior (Dupuis, Lerman, Tsami, & Shireman, ; McCord, Iwata, Galensky, Ellingson, & Thomson, ; O'Reilly, Lacey, & Lancioni, ).…”

Efeitos Do Número De Exemplares Sobre Aquisição E Generalidade De Desempenho Em Crianças Diagnosticadas Com Transtorno Do Espectro Do Autismo (Tea)

“…Em alguns casos, a generalização do desempenho para novos ambientes, pessoas ou estímulos ocorre na ausência de programação adicional (Correa Gómez, 2015;LeBlanc et al, 2003;Wacker, Berg, Berrie, & Swatta, 1985). Em outros casos, embora não haja uma programação formal para promover a generalização dos repertórios ensinados, os participantes são submetidos a constantes testes de generalização (Brodhead, Higbee, Gerencser, & Akers, 2016;Dupuis, Lerman, Tsami, & Shireman, 2015;Farber, Dube, & Dickson, 2016;Gruber & Poulson, 2016;Jeffries, Crosland, & Miltenberger, 2016). Adicionalmente, há relatos de estudos em que não houve programação formal para generalização e, quando testada, os resultados foram negativos (Austin & Tiger, 2015;Coelho, 1990;Hine, Ardoin, & Foster, 2015;Neef, Walters, & Egel, 1984;Shillingsburg, Kelley, Roane, Kisamore, & Brown, 2009).…”