Stereotypic behavior of mentally retarded adults adjunctive to a positive reinforcement schedule

J of App Behav Analysis

1997

The behavior of 4 adolescents with severe or profound mental retardation was evaluated in the presence of four sets of materials during periods of unstructured leisure activity. Functional engagement with the materials, stereotypic engagement with the materials, stereotypy without interaction with the materials, and other aberrant behaviors were recorded. Across a series of experimental conditions, the number of sets of materials was reduced from four to one by eliminating the set most frequently manipulated in each preceeding condition. In the final condition, four sets of materials were again made available for manipulation. The procedures replicated Green and Striefel's (1988) response-restriction analysis of the activity preferences and play behaviors of children with autism. In general, the results of the present experiment replicate those of Green and Striefel in that reallocation of responding was idiosyncratic and unpredictable as sets of materials were removed. Nevertheless, the results provided insight into how responding might be reallocated if it were restricted through behavioral interventions rather than by restriction of access. Thus, the results are discussed with respect to how response-restriction analyses may be useful in identifying topographies of behavior that could be included in differential reinforcement contigencies that are designed to affect stereotypic behavior and in the selection and arrangement of environmental stimuli to minimize the presence of evokers of stereotypy.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Response‐restriction Analysis of Stereotypy in Adolescents With Mental Retardation: Implications for Applied Behavior Analysis

McEntee

J of App Behav Analysis

1997

“…The patterns of behavioral allocation to off-task and aberrant behaviors under VI and FR without the organizer reported here are similar to previously reported results. Wieseler, Hanson, Chamberlain, and Thompson (1988) reported relatively low work rates and high rates of stereotypy under a fixed-interval schedule of reinforcement. As the duration of the interval increased, stereotypy increased in the same proportion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interaction of Reinforcement Schedules, a Behavioral Prosthesis, and Work-Related Behavior in Adults With Mental Retardation

McEntee

Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis

2005

The effects of variable-interval (VI) and fixed-ratio (FR) schedules of reinforcement for work-related behavior and an organizer for the work materials (behavioral prosthesis) were evaluated with 3 adults with severe or profound mental retardation. The participants had been recommended for study because of high rates of off-task and aberrant behavior in their daily vocational training programs. For 2 participants, VI and FR schedules resulted in the same outcome: more aberrant behavior than on-task and off-task behavior combined. The FR schedule nearly eliminated emission of aberrant and off-task behavior by the 3rd participant. Combining the behavioral prosthesis with FR reinforcement (FR+O) increased the proportion of time spent in on-task behavior by all participants under certain FR schedule parameters. Second-by-second analyses of the observation records revealed that FR schedules reduced off-task and aberrant behavior during work sequences (i.e., ratio runs), and FR+O led to a further reduction of these behaviors during postreinforcement pauses. Overall, the results show how organizer and schedule parameters can be adjusted to produce an optimized balance between productivity and reinforcement while undesirable behavior is minimized.

J of App Behav Analysis

“…Nevertheless, the results of research on human adjunctive behavior reported elsewhere suggest that a variety of responses, induding drinking (Porter, Brown, & Goldsmith, 1982), eating (Fallon, Allen, & Butler, 1979), fidgeting (Clarke et al, 1977), pacing (Muller, Crow, & Cheney, 1979), smoking (Cherek & Brauchi, 1981), grooming (Granger, Porter, & Christoph, 1984), and vocalization (Porter et al, 1982), appear to occur as adjunctive behavior in some subjects. Fewer studies have examined problem behaviors of individuals with developmental disabilities as potential adjunctive behaviors (Emerson & Howard, 1992;Scherer & Sanger, 1981;Wieseler, Hanson, Chamberlain, & Thompson, 1988).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Stereotypic and Self‐injurious Behavior as Adjunctive Responses

Lerman

Iwata

Zarcone

et al. 1994

Certain responses of both humans and nonhumans appear to be maintained indirectly by intermittent reinforcement schedules and have been referred to collectively as adjunctive behavior. Although basic research has examined adjunctive behavior extensively, relatively few studies have been conducted with humans, particularly those with developmental disabilities who often engage in frequent and varied stereotypic behavior. This study assessed possible adjunctive characteristics ofself-injurious and stereotypic behaviors using a multielement design containing two types of control conditions. Four subjects who engaged in both self-injurious behavior and stereotypy participated after variables maintaining their self-injury were identified via functional analyses. Each day, subjects were exposed to three 15-min sessions in random order: (a) noncontingent presentation of food on a fixed-time schedule (e.g., FT 30 s), (b) a massed-reinforcement (food) control, and (c) a no-reinforcement control. A variety of fixed-time schedules were examined during different experimental phases. Results of this preliminary study suggested that self-injury was not induced by intermittent reinforcement schedules, whereas the stereotypic behavior of some individuals showed characteristics of adjunctive behavior. The importance of research on adjunctive behavior and suggestions for future studies are discussed.DESCRIPTORS: adjunctive behavior, functional analysis, self-injurious behavior, stereotypic behavior, schedule-induced behavior Results of basic research on adjunctive or schedule-induced behavior1 indicate that certain responses in nonhumans increase in frequency when exposed to intermittent reinforcement. These behaviors are not maintained directly by the reinforcement contingency but may have reinforcing properties themselves, and the value of these automatic consequences appears to increase in the