An Analysis of Response-Blocking Parameters in the Prevention of Pica

Abstract

We manipulated two parameters of response blocking to reduce pica: (a) the criteria for initiating the procedure (either earlier or later in the response chain) and (b) the distance from which the procedure was initiated. Results suggested that response blocking may be effective only when implemented early in the chain and with near-perfect consistency. Further, additional treatment components may be required to eliminate all pica attempts.

Response Interruption and Differential Reinforcement of Alternative Behavior for the Treatment of Pica

“…For Lenney, data on the alternative response (i.e., discards) were collected when the room was baited; and for Stephanie, data on discards were collected for only 50% of the treatment sessions. Another potential limitation is that the current study did not control for or examine the effects of therapist proximity, which has been shown to affect the success of response blocking (McCord et al, ). In the current study, a caregiver was present at all times to monitor, block pica, redirect, and reinforce the alternative response.…”

“…The intervention was arranged so that picking up items signaled the availability of reinforcement for discarding items rather than ingesting them. In contrast to McCord et al (2005), the current study preserved the early link in the chain, and response blocking (and redirection) was implemented later in the chain in order to establish an alternative response as the later link (discarding or putting away potential pica items).…”

A comparison of positive and negative reinforcement for compliance to treat problem behavior maintained by escape

“…Typically, results of the functional analysis provide information for developing a treatment that both weakens the relation between problem behavior and its maintaining consequences and strengthens the relation between appropriate behavior and those same consequences (Mace, 1994). Function-based treatments have been developed for both socially reinforced behavior (e.g., Carr & Durand, 1985;Lalli, Casey, & Kates, 1995;Vollmer, Marcus, & Ringdahl, 1995) and automatically reinforced behavior (e.g., Fisher, Lindauer, Alterson, & Thompson, 1998;McCord, Grosser, Iwata, & Powers, 2005;Reid, Parson, Phillips, & Green, 1993). These treatments frequently involve using the reinforcer that had previously maintained problem behavior to subsequently strengthen appropriate behavior, such as communication or compliance.…”

Applied Behavior Analysis for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders

“…A third technique for implementing sensory extinction has been referred to as response blocking or response interruption McCord, Grosser, Iwata, & Powers, 2005;Reid, Parsons, Phillips, & Green, 1993;Smith, Russo, & Le, 1999) Reid et al implemented this technique with two individuals with profound mental retardation who engaged in stereotypic hand mouthing. This procedure involved the therapist placing their hand in front of the participant's mouth, preventing attempts at the response from reaching completion.…”