Repp A C, Felce D, Barton L E
Northern Illinois University, Dekalb 60115.
J Appl Behav Anal. 1988 Fall;21(3):281-9. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1988.21-281.
Stereotypic and self-injurious behaviors are common forms of maladaptive responding demonstrated by severely handicapped persons. Various review papers suggest that no single treatment procedure is universally effective. Although there may be many reasons for this finding, one could be that people engage in these behaviors for various reasons, and that procedures that are incompatible with the cause of the behavior are unlikely to be effective. These studies also suggest many hypotheses for the development and maintenance of these behaviors, three of which are the self-stimulation, positive reinforcement, and negative reinforcement hypotheses. The purpose of this paper was to determine whether one of these hypotheses could be matched to the cause of the behavior and used as an effective treatment procedure. We therefore compared one hypothesis with one other for 3 subjects in a three-phase study. During baseline, data were taken in two classrooms for each subject, and a judgement was made about the hypothesis most likely to be related to the cause of the behavior. During the second phase, a treatment based on that hypothesis was used in one classroom, and a treatment based on another hypothesis was used in the second classroom. During the third phase, the treatment that was most effective in the second phase was used in both classrooms. Results showed that a successful treatment program can be developed on an hypothesis of why the behavior occurred during baseline. Results are discussed in terms of supporting the argument that treatment programs should be based on a functional analysis of the behavior in its environmental context.
刻板行为和自伤行为是重度残障人士表现出的常见适应不良反应形式。各类综述文章表明，没有一种单一的治疗方法能普遍有效。尽管这一发现可能有诸多原因，但其中一个原因可能是，人们出于各种原因做出这些行为，而与行为原因不相符的治疗方法不太可能有效。这些研究还针对这些行为的产生和维持提出了许多假设，其中三个是自我刺激假设、正强化假设和负强化假设。本文的目的是确定这些假设中的一个是否能与行为原因相匹配，并用作一种有效的治疗方法。因此，在一项三阶段研究中，我们对3名受试者的一个假设与另一个假设进行了比较。在基线期，在两个教室为每个受试者收集数据，并对最有可能与行为原因相关的假设做出判断。在第二阶段，在一个教室采用基于该假设的治疗方法，在另一个教室采用基于另一个假设的治疗方法。在第三阶段，在两个教室都采用在第二阶段最有效的治疗方法。结果表明，可以基于行为在基线期发生原因的假设制定出成功的治疗方案。我们从支持治疗方案应基于对行为在其环境背景下进行功能分析这一观点的角度对结果进行了讨论。
