The Modification and Maintenance of Time Spent Attending Using Social Reinforcement, Token Reinforcement and Response Cost in an Applied Restaurant Setting

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate a series of program variables used to modify the time a subject spent attending in an experimental restaurant setting. Selective behaviors of a mildly retarded. female young adult were evaluated, based on combinations of three treatment variables (social reinforcement, token reinforcement and response cost) in modifying the time spent attending to task. Further, the addition of an intermittent schedule of cost contingency, delayed token exchange, delayed performance feedback. and a final weekly pay check were evaluated, and resulting levels of response maintenance were investigated. Combinations of social reinforcement, tokens and response cost were found less effective in increasing percent of time spent attending to task than were simultaneous application of all treatment variables. Relationships were established between maintenance of appropriate attending behavior and the selective withdrawal of both token reinforcement and cost contingency. Data collected suggested that an intermittent schedule of response cost, weekly token exchanges. minimal feedback on performance earning and weekly checks. in that order, were effective in maintaining response gains. Follow-up measures indicated that treatment gains were maintained after all contingencies were removed. Limitations of the present investigation and future areas of research were outlined.Descriptors: Response cost, token economy. social reinforcement. response maintenance. mentally retarded. vocational training.

Toward a Methodology of Withdrawal Designs for the Assessment of Response Maintenance

“…That is, each component is withdrawn sequentially in consecutive experimental phases. This particular design has been reported by investigators using the multiple-baseline (Sowers et al, 1980) and reversal designs (O'Brien, Bugle, & Azrin, 1972;Rusch, Connis, & Sowers, 1979). For example, Sowers et al (1980) modified the time management behavior of three mentally retarded adults by introducing, in a multiplebaseline design, a three-component treatment package consisting of pre-instruction, instructional feedback, and a time card following baseline measures.…”

“…Withdrawing each of the two treatment components, one at a time, appeared to have either resulted in the resident's failure to discriminate between absence or presence of stimuli being manipulated by the investigators or, more likely, the resident's failure to rely on assistance once eating was acquired. Rusch et al (1979) sequentially withdrew treatment components after assessing the combined effects of praise, tokens, and response cost on increasing a single adult's time spent working in a restaurant setting in an ABABCBC design (see Table 1). The investigators initially wished to determine the effects of using prompts and contingent praise (A), prompts and praise plus tokens (B), and, finally, prompts, praise and tokens plus response cost (C) upon work output.…”

“…Two limitations central to the use of the sequentialwithdrawal design deserve consideration. First, studies such as Sowers et al (1980), O'Brien et al (1972, and Rusch et al (1979) provide no demonstration that the sequential-withdrawal method was necessary for response maintenance. It is quite possible that each individual's behavior in the Sowers et al (1980) study and the Rusch et al (1979) study may have been maintained with a complete withdrawal, i.e., a complete withdrawal of all components following acquisition training.…”

“…The major limitation of the O'Brien et al (1972) as well as the Rusch et al (1979) studies was the decision to use one treatment versus another to maintain behavior after acquisition training. As noted in Table 1, following the combined manual guidance and interruptionextinction and the third return to baseline the interruption-extinction procedure was retained in favor of the manual guidance procedure in the O'Brien et al study.…”

Unemployment Among Handicapped Youth

“…Frank Rusch and his colleagues have investigated behavioral training of work and work-related skills including acquisition of selected work skills (Schutz, Joste, Rusch, & Lamson, 1980), time-telling (Sowers, Rusch, Connis, & Cummings, 1980), time on-task on job (Rusch, Connis, & Sowers, 1979), reducing inappropriate self-stimulating behaviors (Rusch, Weithers, Menchetti, & Schutz, 1980), as well as selected communication training (Karlan & Rusch, 1982). Two major processes are involved: (a) behavioral training of skills and (b) advocacy on behalf of the student at the job site.…”