Examination of the Influence of Contingency on Changes in Reinforcer Value

Abstract

This study examined how the amount of effort required to produce a reinforcer influenced subsequent preference for, and strength of, that reinforcer in 7 individuals with intellectual disabilities. Preference assessments identified four moderately preferred stimuli for each participant, and progressive-ratio (PR) analyses indexed reinforcer strength. Stimuli were then assigned to one of four conditions for 4 weeks: fixed-ratio (FR) 1 schedule, escalating FR schedule, yoked noncontingent (NCR) delivery, and restricted access. Preference assessments and PR schedules were then repeated to examine changes in selection percentages and PR break points. Selection percentages decreased for all NCR stimuli but increased for most of the restricted stimuli. There were no systematic changes in selection percentages for either of the contingent stimuli. Break points increased, on average, for all conditions, but the increase was highest for the restricted stimuli and lowest for the NCR stimuli. These results are discussed in relation to recent basic research addressing the influence of effort on stimulus value.

Examining the reinforcing value of stimuli within social and non-social contexts in children with and without high-functioning autism

“…PR schedules have been used for decades in basic research to gauge relative reinforcer effectiveness and have been used increasingly in applied settings as a means to determine the potency of reinforcers for children with ASD and other developmental disabilities (e.g. DeLeon et al, 2009, 2011; Francisco et al, 2008; Glover et al, 2008; Kenzer et al, 2013; Tiger et al, 2010). The procedure yields a break point (BP) as a measure of reinforcer efficacy , defined as the extent to which an individual will work to gain access a stimulus.…”

Contingency Enhances Sensitivity to Loss in a Gambling Task with Diminishing Returns

“…Relative to the initial assessments, the item delivered contingently to each individual increased in value (higher breakpoint) whereas the item delivered noncontingently decreased in value (lower breakpoint). Extending this research, DeLeon and colleagues (2011) investigated the effects of several types of contingency on reinforcer value. Stimuli identified as moderately preferred were evaluated in terms of relative preference and breakpoints before and after being subjected to one of several conditions for 4 weeks.…”

Editorial

“…Translational behavior analysis has often taken one of three overlapping forms. In the first, the generality of basic processes is demonstrated in clinical populations (e.g., Ahearn, Clark, Gardenier, Chung, & Dube, 2003;Borrero et al, 2010;DeLeon et al, 2011). While this form may not be as widely appreciated as others, it can be critical when failures to translate reveal potentially important differences between the laboratory and other settings.…”