Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis logoLink to Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
. 2000 Winter;33(4):419–432. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2000.33-419

A method for identifying satiation versus extinction effects under noncontingent reinforcement schedules.

S W Kahng 1, B A Iwata 1, R H Thompson 1, G P Hanley 1
PMCID: PMC1284268  PMID: 11214020

Abstract

We evaluated one method for determining whether response suppression under noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) is a function of satiation or extinction. Three individuals with developmental disabilities who engaged in self-injurious behavior (SIB) or aggression participated. Results of functional analyses indicated that their problem behavior was maintained by social-positive reinforcement. NCR procedures, individualized for each participant, were implemented in a multiple baseline across subjects design and were associated with decreases in all participants' problem behavior. Identification of the mechanism by which NCR produced these effects was based on examination of cumulative records showing response patterns during and immediately following each NCR session. Satiation during NCR should lead to a temporary increase in responding during the post-NCR (extinction) period due to a transition from the availability to the unavailability of reinforcement (satiation to deprivation). Alternatively, extinction during NCR should reveal no increase in responding during the extinction period because the contingency for the problem behavior would remain unchanged and the transition from satiation to deprivation conditions would be irrelevant. Results suggested that the operative mechanisms of NCR were idiosyncratic across the 3 participants and appeared to change during treatment for 1 of the participants.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (158.5 KB).

Selected References

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

  1. Carr J. E., Bailey J. S., Ecott C. L., Lucker K. D., Weil T. M. On the effects of noncontingent delivery of differing magnitudes of reinforcement. J Appl Behav Anal. 1998 Fall;31(3):313–321. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1998.31-313. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. 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]
  3. 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]
  4. 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]
  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. Kahng S. W., Iwata B. A., DeLeon I. G., Wallace M. D. A comparison of procedures for programming noncontingent reinforcement schedules. J Appl Behav Anal. 2000 Summer;33(2):223–231. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2000.33-223. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. 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]
  8. Lerman D. C., Iwata B. A. Developing a technology for the use of operant extinction in clinical settings: an examination of basic and applied research. J Appl Behav Anal. 1996 Fall;29(3):345–385. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1996.29-345. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Mace F. C., Lalli J. S. Linking descriptive and experimental analyses in the treatment of bizarre speech. J Appl Behav Anal. 1991 Fall;24(3):553–562. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1991.24-553. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Marcus B. A., Vollmer T. R. Combining noncontingent reinforcement and differential reinforcement schedules as treatment for aberrant behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 1996 Spring;29(1):43–51. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1996.29-43. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Michael J. Distinguishing between discriminative and motivational functions of stimuli. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Jan;37(1):149–155. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.37-149. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. 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