Increasing response variability in children with autism spectrum disorder using lag schedules of reinforcement

Murray, Clodagh; Healy, Olive

doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2013.08.004

“…Variability is a dimension of operant behavior that can be reinforced and brought under discriminative stimulus control (Page & Neuringer, ). The effects of reinforcement schedules selective for operant variability (i.e., variant responding) have been demonstrated across multiple species, including rats, pigeons (for a review, refer to Neuringer, ), and humans (Miller & Neuringer, ; Murray & Healy, ; Stokes et al, ; Stokes, ; Stokes & Balsam, ; Stokes & Harrison, ; Stokes et al, ; for a review related to ASD treatment, refer to Wolf et al, ). One procedure useful for increasing operant variability is a lag schedule of reinforcement.…”

Section: Effects Of Lag Schedules and Response Blocking On Variant Fomentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Lag Schedules and Response Blocking on Variant Food Consumption by a Girl with Autism

Silbaugh

¹

,

Wingate

²

,

Falcomata

³

2016

Behavioral Interventions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food selectivity by individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is often viewed in the behavioral literature as a problem with compliance and treated accordingly. However, when viewed as a problem with invariance, it may be appropriate to treat the problem by using procedures that increase variant food consumption. Lag schedules of reinforcement have been shown to increase variability in verbal and play behavior of children with ASD. Therefore, we attempted to evaluate the effects of a lag schedule of positive reinforcement on variant food consumption by a girl with ASD and food selectivity. Ultimately, a lack of baseline variability in consumption precluded an evaluation of the programmed lag schedule but suggested that a discovery research approach may be informative. Thus, additional treatment components were added and evaluated in a component analysis. Response blocking of invariant consumption appeared to establish a lag schedule of reinforcement that increased variability and variety in food consumption, which was maintained across changes in the value of the lag schedule. Some potential behavioral processes responsible for the effects and implications for future research are discussed. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

“…U-value is a measure of uncertainty first reported in a paper on the analysis of serial dependencies in response chains by Miller and Frick (1949). While other measures of variability exist, such as autocorrelations (Maes 2003), conditional probability (Machado 1992;Stokes 1995) and Markov Chain analysis (Machado, 1992;1993;1997), U-value has been most commonly used in studies to assess the level of variability in responses where frequencies of the responses or response categories can be measured (e.g., Souza et al 2010;Denney and Neuringer 1998;Doolan and Bizo 2013;Grunow and Neuringer 2002;Hopkinson and Neuringer 2003;Maes 2003;Murray and Healy 2013;Neuringer 2002;Neuringer and Huntley 1991;Page and Neuringer 1985;Ross and Neuringer 2002;Stokes 1995;and Ward et al 2008). One of the advantages of using U-value as a measure of variability is that within experiments, it could be used to show the effects of contingent and non-contingent reinforcement on overall response variability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Analysis of U-Value as a Measure of Variability

Kong

¹

,

McEwan

²

,

Bizo

³

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The variability in behavior has frequently been assessed using a measure known as the U-value. Of concern in the present paper were the limits and constraints on U-value as a measure of variability. The relation between the U-value and aspects of variability was examined using three sets of simulated data. Our analysis demonstrates that the U-value as a measure of variability on its own fails to capture repetitive patterns in the sequence of responding. The U-value was shown to reflect the evenness of the distributions of responses across the categories/options used; however, when the number of categories actually used by the participant differed from the total number available, the relation between U-values and the number of categories allocated with responses was shown to be non-linear. It was also shown that the same value of U can represent different levels of evenness in response distributions over categories, depending on the number of categories/options actually used. These constraints and limitations are discussed in relation to how researchers might report on behavioral variability.

show abstract

“…While other measures of variability exist, such as autocorrelations (Maes 2003), conditional probability (Machado 1992;Stokes 1995) and Markov Chain analysis (Machado, 1992;1993;1997), U-value has been most commonly used in studies to assess the level of variability in responses where frequencies of the responses or response categories can be measured (e.g., Souza et al 2010;Denney and Neuringer 1998;Doolan and Bizo 2013;Grunow and Neuringer 2002;Hopkinson and Neuringer 2003;Maes 2003;Murray and Healy 2013;Neuringer 2002;Neuringer and Huntley 1991;Page and Neuringer 1985;Ross and Neuringer 2002;Stokes 1995;and Ward et al 2008). One of the advantages of using U-value as a measure of variability is that within experiments, it could be used to show the effects of contingent and non-contingent reinforcement on overall response variability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selective attention in dairy cattle

Blackmore

¹

,

Temple

²

,

Foster

³

2016

Behavioural Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The variability in behavior has frequently been assessed using a measure known as the U-value. Of concern in the present paper were the limits and constraints on U-value as a measure of variability. The relation between the U-value and aspects of variability was examined using three sets of simulated data. Our analysis demonstrates that the U-value as a measure of variability on its own fails to capture repetitive patterns in the sequence of responding. The U-value was shown to reflect the evenness of the distributions of responses across the categories/options used; however, when the number of categories actually used by the participant differed from the total number available, the relation between U-values and the number of categories allocated with responses was shown to be non-linear. It was also shown that the same value of U can represent different levels of evenness in response distributions over categories, depending on the number of categories/options actually used. These constraints and limitations are discussed in relation to how researchers might report on behavioral variability. Keywords behavioral variability; measure of variability; stereotypy; U-value ANALYSIS OF U-VALUE

show abstract

Increasing response variability in children with autism spectrum disorder using lag schedules of reinforcement

Cited by 9 publications

References 12 publications

Effects of Lag Schedules and Response Blocking on Variant Food Consumption by a Girl with Autism

Effects of Lag Schedules and Response Blocking on Variant Food Consumption by a Girl with Autism

An Analysis of U-Value as a Measure of Variability

Selective attention in dairy cattle

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About