An Example of Discovery Research Involving the Transfer of Stimulus Control

Abstract

The initial purpose of the present study was to replicate procedures for teaching preschool children to recruit attention at appropriate times by having an experimenter signal the availability and unavailability of attention (i.e., arrange a multiple schedule involving reinforcement and extinction; Tiger & Hanley, 2004). Following the development of discriminated social responding, the schedule-correlated stimuli were removed (i.e., a mixed schedule of reinforcement was arranged). However, discriminated responding continued during these conditions. Further evaluation suggested that stimulus control over children's social responding had transferred from the schedule-correlated stimuli to the delivery of reinforcement. The effect of a history of reinforcement under multiple-schedule conditions on performance under mixed schedules was then replicated with 2 participants in a reversal design. These findings suggest that following experience with schedule-correlated stimuli, these stimuli may be removed with only modest disruption to discriminated responding.

The Effectiveness of and Preschoolers' Preferences for Variations of Multiple‐schedule Arrangements

“…Components were randomly alternated to minimize the potential that a temporal discrimination would develop (something that would be highly unlikely under typical classroom conditions). Further, individual components were brief to minimize the likelihood of the participant discriminating the operating contingencies independent of schedule-correlated stimuli (e.g., Tiger & Hanley, 2005). The order of these components was randomly determined prior to each session block, but was held constant across each session within a session block (i.e., the pattern of reinforcement and extinction components was identical across exposure to the three terminal links).…”

“…We determined the integrity of implementation of the independent variable by analyzing the correspondence between the number of social approaches emitted and the number of instances of attention delivery within reinforcement and extinction components of the multiple-schedule (S+/S2, S+) and mixed-schedule arrangements (Tiger & Hanley, 2005). During reinforcement components, the smaller of the two numbers were divided by the larger number.…”

Functional communication during signaled reinforcement and/or extinction

“…Schedule thinning is therefore often conducted following the initial demonstration of treatment effects. Although methods of schedule thinning have included the restriction of access to communication materials (e.g., Roane, Fisher, Sgro, Falcomata, & Pabico, 2004), delay-to-reinforcement (e.g., Hagopian et al, 1998), and fixed-interval schedules (e.g., Hanley, Iwata, Thompson, 2001), multiple schedules have received increasing attention as a way to thin schedules (e.g., Fisher et al, 1998;Hanley et al, 2001;Tiger & Hanley, 2004;Tiger & Hanley, 2005;Tiger, Hanley, & Heal, 2006;Sidener, Shabani, Carr, & Roland, 2006). Ferster and Skinner (1957) defined a multiple schedule as ''two or more alternating schedules of reinforcement with a different stimulus present during each' ' (p. 503).…”

“…Ferster and Skinner (1957) defined a multiple schedule as ''two or more alternating schedules of reinforcement with a different stimulus present during each' ' (p. 503). Several studies have effectively thinned FCT schedules by signaling both periods of reinforcement and extinction (e.g., Hanley et al, 2001;Tiger & Hanley, 2004;Tiger & Hanley, 2005;Sidener et al, 2006). For example, Hanley et al (2001) observed that multiple schedules, in which both reinforcement and extinction periods were associated with different stimuli, more effectively controlled collateral problem behavior than mixed schedules, in which neither period was signaled.…”

Multiple schedules in practical application: Research trends and implications for future investigation

“…That is, in addition to arranging periods in which reinforcement for a target behavior is available and unavailable (i.e., EXT), researchers have associated these periods with a variety of salient environmental stimuli to promote stimulus control. In particular, multiple schedules have been used (a) to promote stimulus control over high-rate appropriate behaviors (e.g., frequent requests for adult attention) in typically developing children (Cammilleri, Tiger, & Hanley, 2008; Tiger & Hanley, 2004, 2005; Vargo, Heal, Epperley, & Kooistra, 2014), (b) to teach individuals with intellectual disabilities who engage in severe problem behavior to request the putative reinforcer maintaining problem behavior only when the S D is present and to gradually tolerate longer periods in which the S D is absent (Betz, Fisher, Roane, Mintz, & Owen, 2013; Fisher, Kuhn, & Thompson, 1998; Hagopian, Toole, Long, Bowman, & Lieving, 2004; Hagopian, Contrucci Kuhn, Long, & Rush, 2005; Hanley, Iwata, & Thompson, 2001; Rooker, Jessel, Kurtz, & Hagopian, 2013), and (c) to signal periods of punishment in the treatment of severe problem behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement displayed by individuals with intellectual disabilities (Anderson, Doughty, Doughty, Williams, & Saunders, 2010; Doughty, Anderson, Doughty, Williams, & Saunders, 2007; Rollings & Baumeister, 1981). …”