Hagopian Louis P, Rooker Griffin W, Zarcone Jennifer R, Bonner Andrew C, Arevalo Alexander R
The Kennedy Krieger Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.
The Kennedy Krieger Institute, University of Maryland Baltimore County.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2017 Jan;50(1):48-66. doi: 10.1002/jaba.368. Epub 2016 Dec 29.
Hagopian, Rooker, and Zarcone (2015) evaluated a model for subtyping automatically reinforced self-injurious behavior (SIB) based on its sensitivity to changes in functional analysis conditions and the presence of self-restraint. The current study tested the generality of the model by applying it to all datasets of automatically reinforced SIB published from 1982 to 2015. We identified 49 datasets that included sufficient data to permit subtyping. Similar to the original study, Subtype-1 SIB was generally amenable to treatment using reinforcement alone, whereas Subtype-2 SIB was not. Conclusions could not be drawn about Subtype-3 SIB due to the small number of datasets. Nevertheless, the findings support the generality of the model and suggest that sensitivity of SIB to disruption by alternative reinforcement is an important dimension of automatically reinforced SIB. Findings also suggest that automatically reinforced SIB should no longer be considered a single category and that additional research is needed to better understand and treat Subtype-2 SIB.
哈戈皮安、鲁克和扎尔科内(2015年)评估了一种根据自动强化的自伤行为(SIB)对功能分析条件变化的敏感性以及自我约束的存在情况进行亚型分类的模型。本研究通过将该模型应用于1982年至2015年发表的所有自动强化SIB数据集来检验其普遍性。我们识别出49个包含足够数据以进行亚型分类的数据集。与原始研究相似,1型SIB通常仅使用强化手段就易于治疗,而2型SIB则不然。由于数据集数量较少,无法得出关于3型SIB的结论。尽管如此,研究结果支持了该模型的普遍性,并表明SIB对替代强化干扰的敏感性是自动强化SIB的一个重要维度。研究结果还表明,不应再将自动强化的SIB视为单一类别,需要进行更多研究以更好地理解和治疗2型SIB。