Management of hyperactive children through correspondence training procedures: A preliminary study

Abstract

This study examined the clinical effects of correspondence training procedures in the management of three hyperactive boys between the ages of seven and 10 years. Two subjects were intervened with the "reinforcement of corresponding reports" procedure: reports about the inhibition of hyperactivity (inattention and overactivity) were reinforced only if they corresponded with the actual inhibition of hyperactivity. The "reinforcement set up contingent upon promises" procedure was used with the third subject: the reinforcer was set up (or displayed) contingent on the patient's promises about the inhibition of hyperactivity in the immediate future, and delivered contingent upon fulfillment of the promise (actual inhibition of hyperactivity). These interventions were programmed in a multipie baseline design across two subjects and a multiple baseline design across two behaviors. A changing-criterion design was also used with all subjects: the nonoccurrence of hyperactivity had to be observed across a pre-established criterion level for the actual delivery of the reinforcer. Consistently higher levels of correspondence occurred during treatment, relative to baseline observations. The results also demonstrated the generalization and maintenance of treatment effects. The use of correspondence training as a potential alternative in the development of hyperactive children's self-control is discussed.

Clinical effects of correspondence training in the management of hyperactive children

“…In general, each correspondence training procedure produced substantial decreases in the level of hyperactivity, relative to baseline. The present study also replicated Paniagua's (1987) results involving three ADD-H children. In that study, two children were treated with the reinforcement of corresponding reports procedure and one child was intervened with the reinforcement set up on promise condition.…”

“…However, further research is needed in order to establish this training as an alternative treatment approach for ADD-H children. For example, the number of hyperactive children treated so far with correspondence training is relatively small (e.g., Paniagua, 1987;present study) in comparison with the number of ADD-H children treated with other traditional interventions (e.g., medication, behavior therapy, and cognitive-behavioral training). Further research is needed for purpose of replications of correspondence training with other ADD-H children before the clinical effects of such procedures are evaluated against other traditional interventions (e.g., drug therapy).…”

“…As noted by Paniagua ( 1987), the changing-criterion design facilitates the control of three variables in the treatment of ADD-H children. Several authors have noted that hyperactive children are characterized by their inclination to seek immediate gratification (Douglas, 1985).…”

“…Therefore, corresponding reports about past behaviors (inhibition of hyperactivity) and the fulfillment of that criterion level were required for the final delivery of the reinforcer (cf. Paniagua, 1987).…”

“…This procedure was used with Subject 1. During this phase, a tangible reinforcer (e.g., a small toy) was delivered contingent upon the child's reports about the inhibition of hyperactivity only if the following two points were observed: (1) The reinforcer was contingent upon cor-responding (true) reports (Risley & Hart, 1968;Paniagua, 1987); (2) the inhibition of hyperactivity had to be observed across a preestablished criterion level for the actual delivery of that reinforcer. Therefore, corresponding reports about past behaviors (inhibition of hyperactivity) and the fulfillment of that criterion level were required for the final delivery of the reinforcer (cf.…”