Literature DB >> 10738948

Response acquisition under direct and indirect contingencies of reinforcement.

R H Thompson1, B A Iwata.   

Abstract

We compared the effects of direct and indirect reinforcement contingencies on the performance of 6 individuals with profound developmental disabilities. Under both contingencies, completion of identical tasks (opening one of several types of containers) produced access to identical reinforcers. Under the direct contingency, the reinforcer was placed inside the container to be opened; under the indirect contingency, the therapist held the reinforcer and delivered it to the participant upon task completion. One participant immediately performed the task at 100% accuracy under both contingencies. Three participants showed either more immediate or larger improvements in performance under the direct contingency. The remaining 2 participants showed improved performance only under the direct reinforcement contingency. Data taken on the occurrence of "irrelevant" behaviors under the indirect contingency (e.g., reaching for the reinforcer instead of performing the task) provided some evidence that these behaviors may have interfered with task performance and that their occurrence was a function of differential stimulus control.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10738948      PMCID: PMC1284218          DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2000.33-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal        ISSN: 0021-8855


  9 in total

1.  Examination of ambiguous stimulus preferences with duration-based measures.

Authors:  I G DeLeon; B A Iwata; J Conners; M D Wallace
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1999

Review 2.  Empirically based methods to assess the preferences of individuals with severe disabilities.

Authors:  S Lohrmann-O'Rourke; D M Browder
Journal:  Am J Ment Retard       Date:  1998-09

3.  Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences.

Authors:  I G DeLeon; B A Iwata
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1996

4.  Assessing influential dimensions of reinforcers on choice in students with serious emotional disturbance.

Authors:  N A Neef; D Shade; M S Miller
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1994

5.  The negative side effects of reward.

Authors:  P D Balsam; A S Bondy
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1983

6.  Reinforcer variation: implications for motivating developmentally disabled children.

Authors:  A L Egel
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1981

7.  Establishing operations and reinforcement effects.

Authors:  T R Vollmer; B A Iwata
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1991

8.  Response-reinforcer relationships and improved learning in autistic children.

Authors:  J A Williams; R L Koegel; A L Egel
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1981

9.  Direct versus indirect response-reinforcer relationships in teaching autistic children.

Authors:  R L Koegel; J A Williams
Journal:  J Abnorm Child Psychol       Date:  1980-12
  9 in total
  4 in total

1.  Disruptive effects of contingent food on high-probability behavior.

Authors:  Michelle A Frank-Crawford; John C Borrero; Linda Nguyen; Yanerys Leon-Enriquez; Abbey B Carreau-Webster; Iser G DeLeon
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2012

2.  A quantitative review of overjustification effects in persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Authors:  Allison Levy; Iser G DeLeon; Catherine K Martinez; Nathalie Fernandez; Nicholas A Gage; Sigurdur Óli Sigurdsson; Michelle A Frank-Crawford
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2016-10-14

3.  An assessment of the efficiency of and child preference for forward and backward chaining.

Authors:  Sarah K Slocum; Jeffrey H Tiger
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2011

4.  Evaluating preschool children's preferences for motivational systems during instruction.

Authors:  Nicole A Heal; Gregory P Hanley
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2007
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.