Problem Behavior is Predictable and Preventable Timothy R. - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
problem behavior is predictable and preventable
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Problem Behavior is Predictable and Preventable Timothy R. - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dec 10, 2023 119 likes •632 views

Problem Behavior is Predictable and Preventable Timothy R. Vollmer, Ph.D. Department of Psychology University of Florida Overview I will make a case that at least five groups of evidence strongly support the notion that problem behavior is

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Timothy R. Vollmer, Ph.D. Department of Psychology University of Florida

Problem Behavior is Predictable and Preventable

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Overview

I will make a case that at least five groups of evidence strongly support the notion that problem behavior is predictable and orderly.

  • The first group of evidence comes from research on the functional analysis of behavior.
  • The second group of evidence comes from research on the matching law.
  • The third group of evidence comes from research on extinction.
  • The fourth group of evidence comes from research on noncontingent reinforcement.
  • The fifth group of evidence comes from research on differential reinforcement.

I will close by suggesting how the predictability and orderly nature of problem behavior leads to more effective behavioral interventions. That is, they are preventable.

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Behavior Disorders/Problem Behavior

  • Self-injurious Behavior (SIB)
  • Aggression
  • Property Destruction
  • Tantrums
  • Severe stereotypic behavior
  • Classroom disruptive behavior
slide-4
SLIDE 4
slide-5
SLIDE 5

Operant Functions of Behavior Disorders

  • Socially mediated positive reinforcement
  • Socially mediated negative reinforcement
  • Automatic positive or negative reinforcement
slide-6
SLIDE 6

Examples of socially mediated positive reinforcement maintaining problem behavior

  • Attention in the form of comfort statements
  • Attention in the form of proximity
  • Attention in the form of reprimands
  • Attention in the form of social interaction
  • Tangible items such as preferred toys, food

items, drinks, videos, computers, etc.

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Examples of socially mediated negative reinforcement

  • Escape or avoidance of instructional activity

(includes reduced duration of instructional activity)

  • Escape or avoidance of self-care or daily living

routines

  • Escape or avoidance of aversive sounds or

situations

slide-8
SLIDE 8

George

Sessions

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 1 2 3

Attention Escape

Athens & Vollmer, 2010

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Functional Analysis Results: Social Positive Reinforcement-Tangible

Vollmer et al. (1999)

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Functional Analysis Results: Social Negative Reinforcement-Escape

Vollmer et al. (1995)

slide-11
SLIDE 11
slide-12
SLIDE 12

The Matching Law

  • In a concurrent arrangement, the relative rate of
  • ne response alternative will essentially “match”

the relative rate of reinforcement available for that response alternative.

slide-13
SLIDE 13

VI 2 Min VI 1 Min

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Herrnstein, 1961

Proportion of Responses on Key A Proportion of Reinforcement for Key A

Matching in Pigeon Key Pecks

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Proportion of 3 pt shots Proportion of Reinforcement for 3 pt shots

Bourret & Vollmer, 2000

Matching in College Basketball: 2 and 3 point shots

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Borrero & Vollmer, 2002

Matching in Child Problem Behavior

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Averages

Borrero et al.,2010

slide-18
SLIDE 18
slide-19
SLIDE 19

NCR Treatment

Vollmer et al., 1993

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Treatment-NCE

slide-21
SLIDE 21

10 20 30 40 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 20 40 60 80 100

BL

Percentage of Compliance Evan

Instructional Fading Compliance Problem Behavior

1 2 3 4 5

Rate of Problem Behavior

slide-22
SLIDE 22
slide-23
SLIDE 23

BRIAN A. IWATA et 4a.

50 . 40 . 30. 20.

10. 0. 50.

40 . 30 . 20.

10 . 0. 50 . 40 .

30 . 20.

10 . O.

50 .

40

.

30, 20.

10. 0. 50 40. 30 , 20. 10

  • EXTINCTION + PHYSICAL GUIDANCE

LU

z

  • I

u

U

z

ul

LU

IL

10

20 30

40

50

40

SESSIONS

Figure 2. Percentage of 10-s intervals of SIB and percentage of trials of compliance across subjects and experimental conditions in Study 2.

20

  • I

U-

z

In

'U

I- mu

U.

0I

Iwata et al. 1990

slide-24
SLIDE 24
slide-25
SLIDE 25

Vollmer et al. (1999)

Differential Reinforcement

  • Reinforcement of some specific form of appropriate

behavior while minimizing reinforcement of problem behavior.

slide-26
SLIDE 26
slide-27
SLIDE 27

What does it all mean for treatment and intervention?

  • Problem behavior is sometimes what behavior

analysts call “choice” (defined shortly).

  • Differential reinforcement involves essentially

“stacking the deck” in favor of appropriate behavior.

  • This approach can be easily remembered by the

simple rule of thumb: Maximize/Minimize (to be discussed).

slide-28
SLIDE 28

What do Behavior Analysts mean by “choice”?

  • Allocation of responding on two or more

response alternatives.

  • Each alternative is associated with some

schedule of reinforcement, punishment, or both.

  • Allocation of responding is governed by the
  • utcome of responding (consequences to

behavior).

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Other factors influencing response allocation

  • Quality of reinforcement
  • Magnitude/duration of reinforcement
  • Delay to reinforcement
  • Response effort
  • Punishment
slide-30
SLIDE 30

Quality

  • Tastes good
  • 6 slices
  • 15 minute delivery
  • Friendly staff
  • Delicious!!!
  • 6 slices
  • 15 minute delivery
  • Friendly staff
slide-31
SLIDE 31

Magnitude

  • Delicious
  • 6 slices
  • 15 minute delivery
  • Friendly staff
  • Delicious
  • 12 slices (2 for 1 deal)
  • 15 minute delivery
  • Friendly staff
slide-32
SLIDE 32

Delay

  • Delicious
  • 6 slices
  • 15 minute delivery
  • Friendly staff
  • Delicious
  • 6 slices
  • 30 minute delivery
  • Friendly staff
slide-33
SLIDE 33

Response Effort

  • Delicious
  • 6 slices
  • 25 min delivery
  • Friendly staff
  • Delicious
  • 6 slices
  • No delivery (it takes 25 minutes to

pick it up and get back home)

  • Friendly staff
slide-34
SLIDE 34

Punishment

  • Delicious
  • 6 slices
  • 15 minute delivery
  • Rude and angry staff
  • Delicious
  • 6 slices
  • 15 minute delivery
  • Friendly staff
slide-35
SLIDE 35

Borrero et al. (2005)

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Differential Reinforcement of Alternative Behavior (DRA)

  • DRA is essentially a concurrent schedule.
  • Baseline circumstances (reinforcement schedules)

usually favor problematic behavior.

  • Treatment circumstances represent schedules that favor

appropriate behavior.

  • Ideally, Extinction vs. Reinforcement.
  • However, there are circumstances when extinction is not

possible or practical.

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Examples of factors influencing the application of extinction schedule

  • Treatment integrity failures.
  • Legal or ethical requirement to block attention-

maintained self-injury or aggression.

  • Automatic reinforcement.
  • Large and/or fast individuals may produce

escape even if we attempt escape extinction.

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Differential Attention Baseline example

Aggressive Behavior Appropriate Behavior Probability of Attention 1.0 0.2 Delay to Attention Quality of Attention Duration of Attention

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Differential Attention Baseline example

Aggressive Behavior Appropriate Behavior Probability of Attention 1.0 0.2 Delay to Attention < 3 sec

  • n average > 20 sec

Quality of Attention Duration of Attention

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Differential Attention Baseline example

Aggressive Behavior Appropriate Behavior Probability of Attention 1.0 0.2 Delay to Attention < 3 sec

  • n average > 20 sec

Quality of Attention Verbal and Physical Attention Brief Verbal Attention Duration of Attention

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Differential Attention Baseline example

Aggressive Behavior Appropriate Behavior Probability of Attention 1.0 0.2 Delay to Attention < 3 sec

  • n average > 20 sec

Quality of Attention Verbal and Physical Attention Brief Verbal Attention Duration of Attention > 20 sec < 3 sec

slide-42
SLIDE 42

Differential Attention Solution

Aggressive Behavior Appropriate Behavior Probability of Attention 1.0 1.0 Delay to Attention Quality of Attention Duration of Attention

slide-43
SLIDE 43

Differential Attention Solution

Aggressive Behavior Appropriate Behavior Probability of Attention 1.0 1.0 Delay to Attention < 3 sec < 3 sec Quality of Attention Duration of Attention

slide-44
SLIDE 44

Differential Attention Solution

Aggressive Behavior Appropriate Behavior Probability of Attention 1.0 1.0 Delay to Attention < 3 sec < 3 sec Quality of Attention Physical Attention Verbal and Physical Attention Duration of Attention

slide-45
SLIDE 45

Differential Attention Solution

Aggressive Behavior Appropriate Behavior Probability of Attention 1.0 1.0 Delay to Attention < 3 sec < 3 sec Quality of Attention Physical Attention Verbal and Physical Attention Duration of Attention < 10 sec Ø 20 sec

slide-46
SLIDE 46

George

Sessions

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 1 2 3

Attention Escape

Athens & Vollmer, 2010 Responses per Min Sessions Greg

slide-47
SLIDE 47

Responses per Min Sessions Athens & Vollmer, 2010 Greg

slide-48
SLIDE 48

Using Differential Reinforcement

  • Maximize reinforcement for appropriate

behavior.

  • Present only the minimal amount of

reinforcement necessary for inappropriate behavior; when possible, this would be none at all.

  • Just remember this rule of thumb:

Maximize/Minimize

slide-49
SLIDE 49

Summary

  • Problem behavior is often predictable and orderly
  • Specific sources of motivation and reinforcement can be identified via

behavioral assessment

  • Problem behavior conforms to principles of the “matching law.”
  • Problem behavior goes away when the reinforcers are presented for free.
  • Problem behavior goes away when it is no longer reinforced.
  • New behavior can be shaped to replace problem behavior by using

differential reinforcement.

  • These facts lead to a logical approach to behavioral intervention that is

empirically based and confirmed as effective in the research literature.

  • Problem behavior is preventable.