Suppr超能文献

儿童更喜欢偶然性吗?在游戏中对偶然强化和非偶然强化的效果和偏好的评估。

Do children prefer contingencies? An evaluation of the efficacy of and preference for contingent versus noncontingent social reinforcement during play.

机构信息

University of Kansas, USA.

出版信息

J Appl Behav Anal. 2009 Fall;42(3):511-25. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2009.42-511.

Abstract

Discovering whether children prefer reinforcement via a contingency or independent of their behavior is important considering the ubiquity of these programmed schedules of reinforcement. The current study evaluated the efficacy of and preference for social interaction within differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) and noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) schedules with typically developing children. Results showed that 7 of the 8 children preferred the DRA schedule; 1 child was indifferent. We also demonstrated a high degree of procedural fidelity, which suggested that preference is influenced by the presence of a contingency under which reinforcement can be obtained. These findings are discussed in terms of (a) the selection of reinforcement schedules in practice, (b) variables that influence children's preferences for contexts, and (c) the selection of experimental control procedures when evaluating the effects of reinforcement.

摘要

考虑到这些有计划的强化安排的普遍性,了解儿童是否更喜欢通过偶然事件或独立于他们的行为得到强化是很重要的。本研究评估了在替代行为差别强化(DRA)和非关联强化(NCR)安排中社会互动的有效性和偏好与正常发育的儿童。结果表明,8 个孩子中有 7 个更喜欢 DRA 计划;1 个孩子漠不关心。我们还展示了高度的程序保真度,这表明偏好受到强化可以获得的条件的影响。这些发现从以下几个方面进行了讨论:(a)实践中强化计划的选择,(b)影响儿童对环境偏好的变量,以及(c)评估强化效果时实验控制程序的选择。

相似文献

5
Caregiver preference for reinforcement-based interventions for problem behavior maintained by positive reinforcement.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2016 Jun;49(2):215-27. doi: 10.1002/jaba.286. Epub 2016 Jan 21.
6
Competition between noncontingent and contingent reinforcement schedules during response acquisition.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2000 Summer;33(2):195-205. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2000.33-195.
7
Assessment of children's and caregivers' preferences for treatments for escape-maintained problem behavior.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2021 Jun;54(3):946-965. doi: 10.1002/jaba.817. Epub 2021 Mar 26.
8
A comparison of synchronous and noncontingent stimulus delivery on task engagement.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2023 Jun;56(3):664-673. doi: 10.1002/jaba.986. Epub 2023 Apr 19.
9
Nominally acceptable integrity failures negatively affect interventions involving intermittent reinforcement.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2022 Oct;55(4):1109-1123. doi: 10.1002/jaba.944. Epub 2022 Jul 12.
10
Evaluation of client preference for function-based treatment packages.
J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Fall;30(3):459-73. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-459.

引用本文的文献

1
Choice versus no choice: Practical considerations for increasing choices.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2025 Jan;58(1):100-117. doi: 10.1002/jaba.2920. Epub 2024 Nov 12.
2
Bridging the gap between laboratory and applied research on response-independent schedules.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2023 Jan;56(1):55-77. doi: 10.1002/jaba.965. Epub 2022 Nov 28.
3
Minimizing Escalation by Treating Dangerous Problem Behavior Within an Enhanced Choice Model.
Behav Anal Pract. 2021 Apr 28;15(1):219-242. doi: 10.1007/s40617-020-00548-2. eCollection 2022 Mar.
4
An Application of the Group-Oriented Concurrent-Chains Arrangement.
Behav Anal Pract. 2018 Sep 20;12(2):310-319. doi: 10.1007/s40617-018-00286-6. eCollection 2019 Jun.
5
Noncontingent reinforcement for the treatment of severe problem behavior: An analysis of 27 consecutive applications.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2017 Apr;50(2):357-376. doi: 10.1002/jaba.376. Epub 2017 Feb 8.
6
Contingency Enhances Sensitivity to Loss in a Gambling Task with Diminishing Returns.
Psychol Rec. 2016 Jun;66(2):301-308. doi: 10.1007/s40732-016-0172-5. Epub 2016 Feb 24.
7
Don'T wag the dog: extending the reach of applied behavior analysis.
Behav Anal. 2013 Spring;36(1):109-22. doi: 10.1007/BF03392294.
8
Modeling the effects of sensory reinforcers on behavioral persistence with alternative reinforcement.
J Exp Anal Behav. 2014 Sep;102(2):252-66. doi: 10.1002/jeab.103. Epub 2014 Aug 17.

本文引用的文献

1
The effect of contingency upon the appetitive conditioning of free-operant behavior.
J Exp Anal Behav. 1980 Nov;34(3):297-304. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1980.34-297.
2
3
Effects of teacher attention on study behavior.
J Appl Behav Anal. 1968 Spring;1(1):1-12. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1968.1-1.
4
A review of reinforcement control procedures.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2005 Summer;38(2):257-78. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2005.176-03.
5
Reinforcement schedule thinning following treatment with functional communication training.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2001 Spring;34(1):17-38. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2001.34-17.
6
Functional communication training using assistive devices: recruiting natural communities of reinforcement.
J Appl Behav Anal. 1999 Fall;32(3):247-67. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1999.32-247.
7
Evaluation of client preference for function-based treatment packages.
J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Fall;30(3):459-73. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-459.
8
Evaluation of the "control over reinforcement" component in functional communication training.
J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Summer;30(2):267-76; quiz 277. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-267.
9
Negative side effects of noncontingent reinforcement.
J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Spring;30(1):161-4. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-161.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验