Recent Reinforcement‐schedule Research and Applied Behavior Analysis

Abstract

Reinforcement schedules are considered in relation to applied behavior analysis by examining several recent laboratory experiments with humans and other animals. The experiments are drawn from three areas of contemporary schedule research: behavioral history effects on schedule performance, the role of instructions in schedule performance of humans, and dynamic schedules of reinforcement. All of the experiments are discussed in relation to the role of behavioral history in current schedule performance. The paper concludes by extracting from the experiments some more general issues concerning reinforcement schedules in applied research and practice.

Shaping Academic Task Engagement With Percentile Schedules

“…more often resemble an ''art form'' than an established procedure (Galbicka, 1994;Lattal & Neef, 1996;Platt, 1973). The lack of precision observed in implementation of shaping techniques is avoidable given the development of quantitative methods of shaping such as the percentile schedule of reinforcement (Platt, 1973).…”

Improving Pragmatics in Nonverbal Children with Autism Using Melodic Based Communication Therapy

“…The use of reinforcers in behavioral interventions for this population in order to bring about change has been well established [27,34]. Other interventions such as Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA) and speechlanguage therapy have a long history of successfully employing the use of reinforcers with minimally verbal children [35,36].…”

Integrating Basic and Applied Research and the Utility of Lattal and Perone's Handbook of Research Methods in Human Operant Behavior

“…For example, assessment often makes use of such responses when trying to discern the strengths and weaknesses in a student's language and academic repertoire. Other candidates that might benefit from such basic research include the users of assistive technology and augmentative and alternative Table 1 The Chapters (Numbered) Are Listed As They Appear in Lattal and Perone's (1998) Hineline and Wacker (1993): preparedness, schedules, economics, delayed reinforcement, acquisition (b) Shull and Fuqua (1993): collateral effects, adjunctive behavior (c) Hayes and Hayes (1993): delayed reinforcement, acquisition (d) Iwata and Michael (1994): response deprivation, economics (e) Nevin and Mace (1994): behavioral momentum, resistance to change (f ) Lattal and Neef (1996): behavioral history, dynamic schedules 5. Choice and Self-Control (Mazur) (a) Hineline and Wacker (1993): preparedness, choice, delayed reinforcement, probability of reinforcement (b) Hayes and Hayes (1993): delayed reinforcement, conditioned reinforcement (c) Shull and Fuqua (1993): matching law, schedule-correlated stimuli (d) Iwata and Michael (1994): microeconomics, substitutability of reinforcers, generalized matching law, conditioned reinforcement, delay-reduction theory (e) Pierce and Epling (1995): choice, matching law, maximizing, concurrent schedules (f ) Lalli and Mauro (1995): unreliable reinforcement, conditioned reinforcement, delay reduction, delayed reinforcement 6.…”

“…Choice and Self-Control (Mazur) (a) Hineline and Wacker (1993): preparedness, choice, delayed reinforcement, probability of reinforcement (b) Hayes and Hayes (1993): delayed reinforcement, conditioned reinforcement (c) Shull and Fuqua (1993): matching law, schedule-correlated stimuli (d) Iwata and Michael (1994): microeconomics, substitutability of reinforcers, generalized matching law, conditioned reinforcement, delay-reduction theory (e) Pierce and Epling (1995): choice, matching law, maximizing, concurrent schedules (f ) Lalli and Mauro (1995): unreliable reinforcement, conditioned reinforcement, delay reduction, delayed reinforcement 6. Negative Reinforcement and Punishment (Crosbie) (a) Shull and Fuqua (1993): response cost (b) Friman and Poling (1995): response effort, response force, response requirement (c) Lattal and Neef (1996) Hineline and Wacker (1993): observing, delay of reinforcement, information, response effort (b) Shull and Fuqua (1993): choice, instructions, rule-governed behavior (c) Hayes and Hayes (1993): delayed consequences, verbal behavior (d) Lattal and Neef (1996): instructions 13. Taxonomy of Verbal Behavior (Catania) 14.…”

“…Research on the relation between verbal behavior and schedule performance is described and analyzed as well. With respect to application, Lattal and Neef (1996) acknowledged the importance of basic research on verbal behavior in their appraisal:…”