Association for Behavior Analysis International

One of the principles of applied behavior analysis is the provision of reinforcement. Researchers have shown that reinforcement based procedures can be effective in decreasing a wide variety of aberrant behaviors and can be utilized to increase appropriate behaviors. This symposium will present three papers that evaluate different components of reinforcement based procedures for individuals diagnosed with autism. The first paper evaluated the effectiveness of a differential reinforcement procedure in increasing rates of responding for children diagnosed with autism. The second paper compared the use of a paired preference assessment to teachers using in-the-moment reinforcer analysis to increase the rate of responding for individuals diagnosed with autism. The final paper compared the use of a paired preference assessment to teachers using in-the-moment reinforcer analysis to increase expressive labeling for individuals diagnosed with autism. The results of these presentations will be thoroughly discussed, as well as ideas for future research and clinical implications.

Differential reinforcement procedures are commonly implemented as part of comprehensive programming for individuals diagnosed with autism. Differential reinforcement is utilized both to decrease aberrant behaviors and to increase pro-social behaviors. Despite differential reinforcement being a commonly implemented procedure, it is not known what effect differential reinforcement has on increasing the rates of responding for high functioning individuals with autism as compared to lower functioning individuals diagnosed with autism. The purpose of this study was to compare rates of responding on a simple sorting task for individuals who were diagnosed with autism and were either considered higher functioning or lower functioning. Using an alternating treatment design, participants were evaluated on their rates of sorting chips during a differential reinforcement condition, a constant reinforcement condition, and an extinction condition. An analysis of the rates of responding across each participant and across participants considered higher functioning as compared to participants considered lower functioning were conducted. Results, future research, and clinical implications will be discussed.

The systematic use of reinforcers is an essential component of behavioral intervention for individuals diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Today, rigorous and formal preference assessments, including paired-preference assessments, are widely conducted to help determine which items to use as reinforcers during intervention. Although paired-preference assessments are widely used, there is no experimental evidence examining whether extensive advanced sampling actually produces high rates of responding compared to in-the-moment analysis of reinforcer effects. The present study compared the rate of responding on a simple sorting task when participants were provided items that were determined as preferred during an extensive paired preference assessment versus a teacher selecting items based on in-the-moment analysis of reinforcer effects. The researchers utilized an alternating treatment design and the results indicated no clear difference in the rate of responding, but there were clear differences in terms of efficiency. Ideas for future research and clinical implications will be discussed.

The systematic use of reinforcers is an essential component of behavioral intervention for individuals diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Today, rigorous and formal preference assessments, including paired-preference assessments, are widely conducted to help determine which items to use as reinforcers during intervention. Although paired-preference assessments are widely used, there is no experimental evidence examining whether extensive advanced sampling actually produces high rates of acquisition of new tasks, as compared to in-the-moment analysis of reinforcer effects. The present study compared participants' rates of learning expressive labeling tasks in a condition where teachers utilized only reinforcers as determined by formal paired preference assessments to a second condition where teachers utilized in-the-moment analysis of reinforcers. The results showed that both conditions resulted in participants learning the targeted skills; however, the in-the-moment analysis condition was more efficient, resulted in better maintenance, and resulted in higher rates of responding. Clinical implications and ideas for future research will be discussed.