Differential Reinforcement Of Other Behavior Procedure Research Articles

Rules and Statements of Reinforcer Loss in Differential Reinforcement of Other Behavior.

Providing a rule regarding consequences for behavior can increase the efficacy of differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) procedures in the treatment of severe problem behavior (Watts, Wilder, Gregory, Leon, and Ditzian, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46, 680-684, 2013). The purpose of the current study was to replicate and extend the literature on DRO procedures by evaluating the efficacy of rules and statements of reinforcer loss (SRL) in the treatment of severe problem behavior. Conditions included baseline, no rule DRO, rule DRO, and rule DRO with SRL. For 2 of 3 participants, neither the no rule DRO nor the rule DRO condition reduced problem behavior. The rule DRO with SRL condition produced a substantial decrease in problem behavior for all participants, suggesting that a consequent rule enhances the efficacy of DRO. The current study extends the literature on DRO procedures by providing data on nontargeted ("other") behavior. An increase in other behavior was observed for 2 participants.

Comparing resetting to non‐resetting DRO procedures to reduce stereotypy in a child with autism

We compared a resetting to a non‐resetting differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) procedure to reduce stereotypy exhibited by young boy with autism. During the resetting DRO, a reinforcer was delivered contingent upon the absence of stereotypy during the DRO interval. If stereotypy occurred, the DRO interval was immediately reset. The non‐resetting DRO procedure was identical, except that contingent upon stereotypy, the DRO interval continued until it expired; a new DRO interval then began. Results indicate that the DRO procedures were equally effective to reduce stereotypy, but the participant preferred the resetting DRO procedure.

Recent advances in applied research on DRO procedures.

Differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) has been applied to reduce problem behavior in various forms across different populations. We review DRO research from the last 5 years, with a focus on studies that enhance our understanding of the underlying mechanisms of DRO. We also discuss implications for practitioners and applied researchers.

Improving in-kennel presentation of shelter dogs through response-dependent and response-independent treat delivery.

In a sequence of studies, we evaluated 2 behavioral interventions designed to decrease undesirable in-kennel behaviors of shelter dogs. In Experiment 1, we compared the efficacy of a simple pairing of person with food (response-independent treat delivery) to an increasing interval differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior (DRO) procedure and a control condition. Both procedures decreased the median percentage of undesirable behavior from baseline (88.13%, interquartile range [IQR] = 52.78% and 66.43%, IQR = 89.06% respectively), and the control condition increased behavior by 15.13% (IQR = 32.08%), H(2) = 6.49, p = .039. In Experiment 2, we assessed the efficacy of a response-independent procedure on the whole shelter population. We found a 68% decrease from baseline in the number of dogs that behaved undesirably (U = -4.16, p < .001). Our results suggest that a response-independent procedure is equivalent in efficacy to a DRO procedure to decrease undesirable in-kennel behavior of shelter dogs.

The Effects of Using a Conditioned Stimulus to Cue DRO Schedules

A reversal design was used to examine the effects of a differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) procedure and the presence of a stimulus (i.e., a bracelet), conditioned via discrimination training, on reducing socially maintained non‐contextual vocalizations in an adolescent girl with autism. Initially, a functional analysis determined that non‐contextual vocalizations were maintained by social attention. Then, discrimination training was used to establish the presence of the bracelet as a discriminative stimulus for the absence of vocalizations. Specifically, when the bracelet was on, non‐contextual vocalizations were interrupted, and edible reinforcement was provided for the absence of vocalizations. When the bracelet was off, vocalizations were not interrupted and the teacher provided social attention to the participant (i.e., reciprocated conversation with the participant about the topic). During intervention, a DRO procedure was used. The participant was presented with the bracelet, a timer set for a specified interval, and the instruction to work quietly. If vocalizations did not occur for the entire duration of the interval, the bracelet was removed and the learner was given the opportunity to engage in vocalizations. The DRO interval was systematically increased throughout the intervention. Results are discussed in terms of discrimination training as an effective addition to differential reinforcement procedure. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.

Evaluation and Treatment of Socially Inappropriate Stereotypy

The purpose of this case example was to evaluate the use of differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) for decreasing stereotypy maintained by automatic reinforcement exhibited by a 9 year-old girl diagnosed with Pervasive Developmental Disorder and an intellectual disability. The target behavior was a socially inappropriate form of stereotypy. The assessment and treatment consisted of four phases: (1) a competing items assessment, (2) an antecedent analysis, (3) a forced choice assessment, and (4) an evaluation of a DRO procedure. We provided access to a reinforcer contingent on the absence of stereotypy for a prespecified amount of time. The reinforcer was preferred and competed with stereotypy. Results demonstrated the DRO procedure to be effective in reducing stereotypy.

CONTEXTUAL CONTROL OF PROBLEM BEHAVIOR IN STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES

We investigated the impact of contextual variation on the effectiveness of two interventions. The problem behavior of 2 students with severe disabilities was analyzed across two contexts (task and leisure). Effects of differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) and time-out procedures were examined in the two contexts. Results indicated that in the task context the DRO procedure effectively reduced the problem behavior and increased task performance, whereas the time-out procedure was ineffective. In addition, rate of correct task performance increased during DRO relative to baseline and time-out. In contrast, in the leisure context, the time-out procedure effectively reduced the same problem behavior and the DRO procedure was ineffective. The results are discussed in terms of contextual control of problem behavior and alternative strategies for the design of DRO procedures.

Factors affecting the conditioned reinforcing strength of stimuli in differential reinforcement of other behavior and fixed-time schedules

In an experiment that investigated the effects of a low-rate response requirement on the strength of conditioned reinforcing stimuli, pigeons’ observing responses (treadle presses) produced stimuli associated with either a short (10-sec) or a long (30-sec) schedule component. Naive pigeons were exposed to a mixed schedule with two differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) components, which were later replaced by fixed-time (FT) components. Differ- ential observing behavior was not maintained during the DRO procedure, but preference was demonstrated for the shortest FT component stimulus. Fantino’s delay-reduction hypothesis was supported. However, the absence of differential observing under the DRO procedure suggests that either the low-rate response requirement or the lack of specific stimuli that unambiguously predict reinforcement delivery interfered with the establishment of the schedule stimuli as conditioned reinforcers.

Controlling Childhood Rumination through Differential Reinforcement of other Behavior

Rumination is a rare behavior disorder of childhood involving regurgitation of food which is then ejected or reswallowed. The present study investigated the control of rumination through use of a positive reinforcer (a mixture of honey and water) delivered on a differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) schedule. The subject was a 26-month-old girl who had lost 50% of body weight through rumination. DRO was used as part of a multifaceted treatment program which also included, at different phases, punishment and time out from positive reinforcement. Evaluation of treatment components via a single-subject experimental design with withdrawals indicated the DRO procedure exerted powerful controlling effects over rumination. Transfer of control to social consequences was attempted through use of time out with punishment. The subject's weight increased over her 69-day hospitalization from 7.1 kg. to 11 kg. A 10-month followup revealed continued weight gain and suppression of rumination. Possible limitations to generalizability of findings, particularly previous experience with punishment, are discussed as are advantages of DRO in the management of this behavior problem.

Suppression of self-stimulation: three alternative strategies.

Four boys with autistic-like behavior were treated for self-stimulatory behavior with three different treatment procedures--time out, differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO), and overcorrection. All four boys showed a rapid response to the overcorrection procedure. Three boys demonstrated some evidence of decrement in responding with time-out. During the DRO procedure, one showed a modest decrease, two showed no change, but one exhibited a consistent increase in responding under this condition. A multiple baseline applied to one of the subjects failed to reveal any generalization of suppression from one setting to another. A strong but not perfect relationship was found between a frequency and a duration measure of self-stimulation. There was some evidence of negative side effects for one boy during overcorrection and for another during time-out. None of these negative side effects was enduring. There was also some indirect evidence that overcorrection facilitated appropriate play.