Utilizing a home‐based parent training approach in the treatment of food selectivity

Abstract

Evaluating effects of utilizing parents as therapists for treating behavior problems has become increasingly important in the dissemination and practice of applied behavior analysis. However, home-based parent training approaches have been underused in treating feeding problems. In this study, mothers were trained to implement differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) combined with non-removal of the spoon and demand fading for the treatment of their childrens' food selectivity. The procedures were highly effective and generalization to untargeted foods was observed. Parent procedural integrity and parent collected interobserver agreement (IOA) data remain high throughout the study. This study also demonstrated an effective method for systematically decreasing reinforcement magnitude and schedules in an effort to mimic traditional reinforcer delivery such as intermittently providing a dessert at the end of the meal. Finally, this study successfully increased a demand fading ratio of 50-150% without noticeable side effects.

Assessment and Treatment of Feeding Problems among Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders

“…The child was able to eat age-appropriate portions of the novel foods targeted by the intervention by the end of treatment and in follow-up. Using the same procedures, Najdowski and his colleagues replicated their 2003 study using the same intervention to treat three children with food selectivity, two children with ASD and one child with typical development (Najdowski et al 2010). In this later study, they again found parents were able to successfully implement the procedures and demonstrated the effectiveness of a more efficient method of reducing reinforcement than used in their previous work.…”

A component analysis of a parent‐conducted multi‐component treatment for food selectivity

“…Parents were trained to conduct baseline, treatment, generalization probes, and follow‐up sessions according to procedures described by Najdowski et al (2010). As mentioned previously, training criteria consisted of two consecutive sessions of baseline performed with at least 90% accuracy.…”

“…Najdowski, Wallace, Reagon, Penrod, Higbee, and Tarbox (2010) addressed some of the limitations described in the aforementioned studies. Specifically, the magnitude of reinforcement was greater; participants received an entire plate of high‐preferred foods contingent on initially accepting only one bite of non‐preferred food, and participants in this study exhibited food selectivity versus total food refusal.…”

A comparison of simultaneous versus sequential presentation of novel foods in the treatment of food selectivity

“…Initially, HPFs were delivered on a FR 1 schedule. Following three consecutive meals with at least 80% consumption of NPFs without expulsion, the bite requirement was increased by approximately 150% of the previous requirement as described by Najdowski, Wallace, Reagon, Penrod, Higbee, and Tarbox (2010). For both Emilio and Kevin, schedule requirements were increased according to the following sequence: FR 1, FR 3, FR 7, and FR 21.…”