Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, Baltimore County.
Department of Behavioral Psychology, Kennedy Krieger Institute.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2021 Sep;54(4):1566-1585. doi: 10.1002/jaba.870. Epub 2021 Aug 3.
Contingent positive reinforcement has proven more effective in treating escape-maintained problem behavior than contingent negative reinforcement, particularly when problem behavior continues to produce escape. However, this research has overwhelmingly used distributed-reinforcement arrangements, where tasks and reinforcer access are interspersed throughout the work period. An alternative to interspersal involves allowing the individual to accumulate and then receive a larger quantity of reinforcement once work requirements are completed; this is known as an accumulated-reinforcement arrangement. The current study examined the efficacy of, and preference for positive (food) and negative (break) reinforcement contingencies delivered in accumulated and distributed arrangements in the treatment of escape-maintained problem behavior. In Experiment 1, accumulated break was preferred for 4 of 5 participants and accumulated food was preferred for 3 of 5. In Experiment 2, accumulated break was similarly effective to distributed break for 3 of 5 participants and accumulated and distributed food were equally effective for 4 participants.
条件性正强化在治疗逃避维持的问题行为方面已被证明比条件性负强化更有效，特别是当问题行为持续产生逃避时。然而，这项研究压倒性地使用了分布式强化安排，其中任务和强化物的获取在整个工作期间穿插进行。一种替代的分散方法是允许个体在完成工作要求后积累并随后获得更大数量的强化物；这被称为累积强化安排。本研究考察了在逃避维持的问题行为治疗中，以累积和分布式方式提供的正（食物）和负（休息）强化条件的效果和偏好。在实验 1 中，5 名参与者中有 4 名更喜欢累积休息，3 名参与者中有 3 名更喜欢累积食物。在实验 2 中，3 名参与者中累积休息与分布休息同样有效，4 名参与者中累积和分布食物同样有效。
