Johnson Kate A, Vladescu Jason C, Kodak Tiffany, Sidener Tina M
Caldwell University.
University of Wisconsin Milwaukee.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2017 Apr;50(2):290-303. doi: 10.1002/jaba.372. Epub 2017 Jan 19.
Differential reinforcement procedures may promote unprompted correct responding, resulting in a quicker transfer of stimulus control than nondifferential reinforcement. Recent studies that have compared reinforcement arrangements have found that the most effective arrangement may differ across participants. The current study conducted an assessment of differential reinforcement arrangements (i.e., quality, schedule, and magnitude) and nondifferential reinforcement to identify the most effective arrangement for each participant. The assessment phase showed that the quality arrangement was the most efficient for all participants during auditory-visual matching. Next, a validation phase was conducted to evaluate whether the assessment would predict the most effective arrangement across multiple skills. The results from the assessment phase were validated for all participants for the same skill. However, the results were only validated for one participant during the other skills (i.e., tact and intraverbal). The results are discussed in light of previous research and future areas of research.
差别强化程序可能会促进自发的正确反应，从而比非差别强化更快地实现刺激控制的转移。最近比较强化安排的研究发现，最有效的安排可能因参与者而异。本研究对差别强化安排（即质量、时间表和幅度）和非差别强化进行了评估，以确定对每个参与者最有效的安排。评估阶段表明，在视听匹配过程中，质量安排对所有参与者来说是最有效的。接下来，进行了一个验证阶段，以评估该评估是否能预测多种技能中最有效的安排。评估阶段的结果在同一技能上对所有参与者都得到了验证。然而，在其他技能（即触觉和对话）中，结果仅在一名参与者身上得到了验证。将根据先前的研究和未来的研究领域对结果进行讨论。
