The effects of reinforcement magnitude on skill acquisition for children with autism

Abstract

We examined the effects of reinforcement magnitude on skill acquisition during discrete-trial training. After conducting a magnitude preference assessment, we compared acquisition during conditions with large and small magnitudes of edible reinforcement to a praise-only condition. Although all participants showed a preference for the large-magnitude reinforcer, preference did not predict the magnitude that produced the fastest skill acquisition.

A Preliminary Analysis of Mastery Criterion Level: Effects on Response Maintenance

“…Recently, there have been several studies that have examined components of discrete trial instruction, such as the distribution of trials across sessions (Haq & Kodak, 2015), intertrial intervals (Majdalany et al, 2014), reinforcer magnitude (Paden & Kodak, 2015), the distributions of trials and reinforcers (Kocher et al, 2015;Ward-Horner, Cengher, Ross, & Fienup, 2017), and delays to reinforcement (Majdalany, Wilder, Smeltz, & Lipschultz, 2016). With no prior research evaluating the effects of mastery criterion with children with developmental disabilities, this study joins these studies in elucidating an important aspect of discrete trial instruction that affects skill acquisition outcomes.…”

Effects of stimulus presentation order during auditory–visual conditional discrimination training for children with autism spectrum disorder

“…The trial‐initiation response could be considered an observing response in that it increases the likelihood that the participant will make sensory contact with the first stimulus presented. It should be noted, however, that it is fairly common practice not to require an observing response or differential observing response in applied studies that target auditory–visual conditional discriminations for participants with autism spectrum disorder (e.g., Carey & Bourret, ; Carp et al, ; Delfs et al, ; Dittlinger & Lerman, ; Fisher et al, ; Haq et al, ; McGhan & Lerman, ; Paden & Kodak, ). Moreover, recent applied research did not demonstrate consistently superior auditory–visual conditional discrimination acquisition in a condition that required a differential observing response relative to a condition that did not (Vedora, Barry, & Ward‐Horner, ).…”

“…A third antecedent stimulus presentation format, the simultaneous presentation procedure, involves presenting the sample and comparison stimuli at the same time. Multiple applied studies have employed this procedure (e.g., Cividini‐Motta & Ahearn, ; Fisher, Pawich, Dickes, Paden, & Toussaint, ; Hausman, Ingvarsson, & Kahng, ; Paden & Kodak, ; Slocum, Miller, & Tiger, ; Sy & Vollmer, ; Walker & Rehfeldt, ).…”

Comparing skill acquisition under varying onsets of differential reinforcement: A preliminary analysis

“…Once a participant demonstrated unprompted correct responding during 50% or more of trials for two consecutive sessions, the experimenter implemented differential reinforcement during the subsequent session. That is, the experimenter delivered the edible amount plus praise following unprompted correct responses, and a lower quality, smaller magnitude, or leaner schedule of reinforcement was provided for prompted correct responses (e.g., Carroll et al, ; Paden & Kodak, ; Toussaint, Kodak, & Vladescu, ). Control . Sessions followed the same procedures as baseline.…”