Functional analysis of aberrant behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement: assessments of specific sensory reinforcers.

The purpose of this study was to develop a systematic functional assessment package for aberrant behaviors maintained by nonsocial (automatic) reinforcement. The assessment package included four components: (1) functional analysis, (2) antecedent assessment of specific automatic reinforcement sources, (3) stimulus preference assessment, and (4) treatment evaluation. Functional analysis data indicated automatic reinforcement functions of the stereotypy exhibited by a 10-year-old male and the self-injury (SIB) exhibited by a 30-year-old male. Antecedent assessments of sensory classes indicated that auditory stimulation and tactile stimulation were associated with stereotypy and SIB, respectively. A multiple-stimulus-without-replacement procedure was conducted with each participant to identify the most- and least-preferred stimuli within the identified sensory classes. In an attempt to validate the assessment package for each participant, a DRO procedure was implemented using a reversal design with a multielement component. DRO procedures using stimuli within the targeted sensory classes were successful in eliminating the aberrant behaviors of both participants. The results are discussed in the context of improving the methodology for assessing and treating automatically reinforced behaviors.

[1]  B. Iwata,et al.  TOWARD A FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS OF SELF‐INJURY , 1994 .

[2]  R. M. Schell,et al.  Treatment of self-injury by providing alternate sensory activities , 1982 .

[3]  A. Repp,et al.  Reducing inappropriate behaviors in classrooms and in individual sessions through DRO schedules of reinforcement. , 1976, Mental retardation.

[4]  R. G. Smith,et al.  An analysis of the reinforcing properties of hand mouthing. , 1995, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[5]  Effects of noncontingent sensory reinforcement on stereotypic behaviors in a child with posttraumatic neurological impairment. , 1994, Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry.

[6]  J. Sigafoos,et al.  Noncontingent Application Versus Contingent Removal of Tactile Stimulation: Effects on Self-injury in a Young Boy with Multiple Disabilities , 1995, Behaviour Change.

[7]  J. Sprague,et al.  The effect of noncontingent sensory reinforcement, contingent sensory reinforcement, and response interruption on stereotypical and self-injurious behavior. , 1997, Research in developmental disabilities.

[8]  T. Vollmer,et al.  AN ANALOGUE EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ENRICHMENT: THE ROLE OF STIMULUS PREFERENCE , 1997 .

[9]  W. Fisher,et al.  Functional analysis and treatment of cigarette pica. , 1996, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[10]  A. Rincover,et al.  Sensory Extinction: A procedure for eliminating self-stimulatory behavior in developmentally disabled children , 1978, Journal of abnormal child psychology.

[11]  C. Kennedy,et al.  Functional analysis and treatment of eye poking. , 1995, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[12]  B. Iwata,et al.  Reduction of eye gouging using a response interruption procedure. , 1984, Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry.

[13]  W. Fisher,et al.  Treatment of pica through multiple analyses of its reinforcing functions. , 1998, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[14]  B. Iwata,et al.  Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences. , 1996, Journal of applied behavior analysis.