Skip to main content
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis logoLink to Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
. 2000 Summer;33(2):223–231. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2000.33-223

A comparison of procedures for programming noncontingent reinforcement schedules.

S W Kahng 1, B A Iwata 1, I G DeLeon 1, M D Wallace 1
PMCID: PMC1284240  PMID: 10885529

Abstract

We compared two methods for programming and thinning noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) schedules during the treatment of self-injurious behavior (SIB). The participants were 3 individuals who had been diagnosed with mental retardation. Results of functional analyses indicated that all participants' SIB was maintained by positive reinforcement (i.e., access to attention or food). Following baseline, the effects of two NCR schedule-thinning procedures were compared in multielement designs. One schedule (fixed increment) was initially set at fixed-time 10-s reinforcer deliveries and was also thinned according to fixed-time intervals. The other schedule (adjusting IRT) was initially determined by participants' baseline interresponse times (IRTs) for SIB and was thinned based on IRTs observed during subsequent treatment sessions. Results indicated that both schedules were effective in initially reducing SIB and in maintaining response suppression as the schedules were thinned.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (114.4 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Fischer S. M., Iwata B. A., Mazaleski J. L. Noncontingent delivery of arbitrary reinforcers as treatment for self-injurious behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Summer;30(2):239–249. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-239. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Goh H. L., Iwata B. A., DeLeon I. G. Competition between noncontingent and contingent reinforcement schedules during response acquisition. J Appl Behav Anal. 2000 Summer;33(2):195–205. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2000.33-195. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Hagopian L. P., Fisher W. W., Legacy S. M. Schedule effects of noncontingent reinforcement on attention-maintained destructive behavior in identical quadruplets. J Appl Behav Anal. 1994 Summer;27(2):317–325. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-317. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Hanley G. P., Piazza C. C., Fisher W. W. Noncontingent presentation of attention and alternative stimuli in the treatment of attention-maintained destructive behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Summer;30(2):229–237. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Iwata B. A., Dorsey M. F., Slifer K. J., Bauman K. E., Richman G. S. Toward a functional analysis of self-injury. J Appl Behav Anal. 1994 Summer;27(2):197–209. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-197. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Lalli J. S., Casey S. D., Kates K. Noncontingent reinforcement as treatment for severe problem behavior: some procedural variations. J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Spring;30(1):127–137. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-127. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Vollmer T. R., Iwata B. A., Zarcone J. R., Smith R. G., Mazaleski J. L. The role of attention in the treatment of attention-maintained self-injurious behavior: noncontingent reinforcement and differential reinforcement of other behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 1993 Spring;26(1):9–21. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1993.26-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis are provided here courtesy of Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

RESOURCES