非连续性强化程序的编程程序比较。
A comparison of procedures for programming noncontingent reinforcement schedules.
作者信息
Kahng S W, Iwata B A, DeLeon I G, Wallace M D
机构信息
Neurobehavioral Unit, Kennedy Krieger Institute and The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
出版信息
J Appl Behav Anal. 2000 Summer;33(2):223-31. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2000.33-223.
We compared two methods for programming and thinning noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) schedules during the treatment of self-injurious behavior (SIB). The participants were 3 individuals who had been diagnosed with mental retardation. Results of functional analyses indicated that all participants' SIB was maintained by positive reinforcement (i.e., access to attention or food). Following baseline, the effects of two NCR schedule-thinning procedures were compared in multielement designs. One schedule (fixed increment) was initially set at fixed-time 10-s reinforcer deliveries and was also thinned according to fixed-time intervals. The other schedule (adjusting IRT) was initially determined by participants' baseline interresponse times (IRTs) for SIB and was thinned based on IRTs observed during subsequent treatment sessions. Results indicated that both schedules were effective in initially reducing SIB and in maintaining response suppression as the schedules were thinned.
我们比较了两种在治疗自伤行为（SIB）期间安排和调整非连续性强化（NCR）程序的方法。参与者为3名被诊断患有智力障碍的个体。功能分析结果表明，所有参与者的自伤行为均由正强化（即获得关注或食物）维持。在基线期之后，在多因素设计中比较了两种NCR程序调整方法的效果。一种程序（固定增量）最初设定为每隔10秒给予一次强化物，并根据固定时间间隔进行调整。另一种程序（调整IRT）最初根据参与者自伤行为的基线反应间期（IRT）确定，并根据后续治疗阶段观察到的IRT进行调整。结果表明，两种程序在最初减少自伤行为以及在程序调整过程中维持反应抑制方面均有效。
Zotero 插件