A brief assessment of pica

Abstract

The settings and procedures described in published studies focused on assessing and treating pica may not be relatable or feasible for all practitioners. This brief report demonstrates a successful replication of modified methods for assessing and treating a 16-year-old diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder who engaged in pica. The study 1042 -Behavioral Interventions.

Brief assessment and treatment of pica using differential reinforcement, response interruption and redirection, and competing stimuli

“…Similar to Morris et al. (2021), contingency reversals were not implemented within our pica treatment evaluation. Our rationale was threefold.…”

“…Finally, an A-CSA was conducted to identify stimuli that effectively compete with pica. Similar to Morris et al (2021), contingency reversals were not implemented within our pica treatment evaluation. Our rationale was threefold.…”

“…The form of the alternative response evaluated in these studies differed considerably. For example, Morris et al (2021) taught an individual with IDD to mand for high-preferred food items (i.e., beef jerky) and subsequently used delay schedules to gradually thin the schedule of reinforcement while maintaining low rates of pica. Alternatively, Hagopian, Rooker et al (2011) taught two individuals with IDD to pick up and discard pica items in trash receptacles in exchange for preferred food items and attention.…”

“…Additionally, physical blocking of high‐rate pica responses may not feasible for caregivers or may result in additional topographies of problem behavior such as self‐injury or aggression (e.g., Lerman et al., 1999). Recent research has demonstrated the efficacy of using response interruption and redirection procedures (RIRD; Ahearn et al., 2007) in conjunction with differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) to decrease pica in individuals with IDD (Hagopian, Rooker et al., 2011; Morris et al., 2021; Schmidt et al., 2017). These methods provide the individual with an alternative response to produce reinforcement (typically, edible items) while also physically blocking reinforcement that may occur when the individual engages in pica.…”

“…For example, Morris et al. (2021) taught an individual with IDD to mand for high‐preferred food items (i.e., beef jerky) and subsequently used delay schedules to gradually thin the schedule of reinforcement while maintaining low rates of pica. Alternatively, Hagopian, Rooker et al.…”