Recent advances in applied research on DRO procedures

Differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) schedules are used to decrease the overall rate of, but not eliminate, a target response. Two variations of DRL, spaced-responding and full-session, exist. Preliminary comparative analyses suggest that the two schedules function differently when unsignaled. We compared response rates under these two DRL variations with and without signals. In Experiment 1, five preschool students played a game in which points were earned under DRL schedules. In some sessions, a stimulus signaled when responses would be reinforced (S+) or not reinforced (S-). In others, only an S-was present. Signals (S+/S-) facilitated and maintained responding in both types of DRL schedules. In Experiment 2, we modified the signals with five different preschoolers. Instead of an S-only, we did not present any signals. Elimination and high variability of the target response were observed with the S-only and absence of S +/S-, respectively. Signaled DRL schedules are recommended for application.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of signals in two variations of differential‐reinforcement‐of‐low‐rate procedures

Becraft

Borrero

Davis

et al. 2018

“…The DRO contingency has been proposed to reduce responding through several different processes (see Jessel & Ingvarsson, 2016 for a review), including, as the name suggests, the adventitious reinforcement of other behavior (Harman, 1973;Jessel, Borrero, & Becraft, 2015;Reynolds, 1961;Zeiler, 1970). The adventitious reinforcement hypothesis states that DRO schedules increase any response that immediately precedes the delivery of the reinforcers, resulting in the replacement of the target response.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of adventitious reinforcement during differential reinforcement of other behavior: A systematic replication

Rey

Betz

Sleiman

et al. 2020

Differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) is commonly used to decrease problem behavior by presenting reinforcers contingent upon the absence of a target response. Although it is well demonstrated that DROs decrease response rates, the processes producing these decreases are not well understood. The present study systematically replicated previous research assessing whether adventitious reinforcement of alternative behavior contributes to the effectiveness of DRO. We presented university students with two options on a computer and reinforced target responding on a variable-ratio schedule. Next, we compared decreases in target-response rates and any increases in alternative responding during DRO schedules versus yoked variable-time schedules or extinction probes. DRO schedules resulted in the lowest target-response rate and highest alternative-response rate. These findings generally provide some support for the adventitious reinforcement of "other" behavior.

“…Further, contrast arrangements with DRO may yield information regarding the behavioral process responsible for behavior reduction. In a recent review of literature on DRO, Jessel and Ingvarsson ( ) described four processes or mechanisms implicated in DRO, one of which includes punishment. Some research (e.g., Rasmussen & Newland, ) suggests that behavior is influenced to a larger degree by aversive events than appetitive events.…”

Section: Research On Behavioral Contrastmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioral contrast: Research and areas for investigation

Boyle

Hoffmann

Lambert

2018

Behavioral contrast occurs when a change in reinforcement rate in one context results in a change in behavior in the opposite direction in an unchanged context. Despite decades of study by basic researchers, behavioral contrast has remained largely an unstudied phenomenon among applied researchers. The purpose of this paper is to occasion translational and applied research on behavioral contrast with the aim of predicting and controlling socially significant behavior in unchanged contexts. We present a brief history of contrast and related definitions, review research with human and nonhuman subjects, and suggest future directions for applied and translational researchers.