1992
DOI: 10.1002/bin.2360070502
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The acquisition of stimulus control of compliance and participation during an ADL routine

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

1996
1996
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the presence of a behavior-consequence contingency, the probability of a response may be increased or decreased by establishing operations (EOs) that momentarily alter the reinforcing effectiveness of that consequence (Michael, 1982). For example, negatively reinforced destructive behavior may be less likely to occur during tasks that can be completed easily or successfully than during those that cannot be completed with a high level of accuracy or success (e.g., Cameron, Ainsleigh, & Bird, 1992).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the presence of a behavior-consequence contingency, the probability of a response may be increased or decreased by establishing operations (EOs) that momentarily alter the reinforcing effectiveness of that consequence (Michael, 1982). For example, negatively reinforced destructive behavior may be less likely to occur during tasks that can be completed easily or successfully than during those that cannot be completed with a high level of accuracy or success (e.g., Cameron, Ainsleigh, & Bird, 1992).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In summary, stimulus control approaches capitalize on already existing behavior contingencies as the focus of training and treatment, and they are receiving increased clinical application for persons with developmental disabilities (Cameron, Ainsleigh, & Bird, 1992;Luiselli, 1994). The limitations of this case study notwithstanding, stimulus control and transfer methods are suited uniquely to promote, or set the occasion for, responses that do not occur within appropriate contexts.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, this approach is impractical for teaching children with autism because failure to present instructional demands virtually eliminates learning opportunities. As a result, several studies have shown that it is possible to alter the demands and then re-introduce them along a variety of dimensions including task difficulty (Cameron, Ainsleigh, & Bird, 1992;Weeks & Gaylord-Ross, 1981), number of low probability requests (Ducharme & Worling, 1994), response effort Richman, Wacker, & Winborn, 2001;Wacker et al, 1990;Weld & Evans, 1990) and number or rate of instructional trials (Kennedy, 1994;Pace, Iwata, Cowdery, Andree, & McIntyre, 1993;Zarcone, Iwata, Smith, Mazaleski, & Lerman, 1994;Zarcone, Iwata, Vollmer, Jagtiani, Smith, & Mazaleski, 1993). For example, Pace et al (1993) used a combination of extinction and fading instructional demands to reduce escape-motivated problem behaviors.…”
Section: Stimulus Demand Fadingmentioning
confidence: 99%