The use of positive and negative reinforcement in the treatment of escape-maintained destructive behavior

Cathleen C. Piazza, Wayne W. Fisher, Gregory P. Hanley, Matthew L. Remick, Stephanie A. Contrucci, Tammera L. Aitken

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

65 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We identified 3 clients whose destructive behavior was sensitive to negative reinforcement (break from tasks) and positive reinforcement (access to tangible items, attention, or both). In an instructional context, we then evaluated the effects of reinforcing compliance with one, two, or all of these consequences (a break, tangible items, attention) when destructive behavior produced a break and when it did not (escape extinction). For 2 clients, destructive behavior decreased and compliance increased when compliance produced access to tangible items, even though destructive behavior resulted in a break. For 1 client, extinction was necessary to reduce destructive behavior and to increase compliance. Subsequently, when the schedule of reinforcement for compliance was faded for all clients, destructive behavior was lower and fading proceeded more rapidly when compliance produced multiple functional reinforcers (i.e., a break plus tangible items or attention) and destructive behavior was on extinction. The results are discussed in terms of the effects of relative reinforcement value and extinction on concurrent operants.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)279-298
Number of pages20
JournalJournal of applied behavior analysis
Volume30
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1997

Fingerprint

reinforcement
Compliance
Therapeutics
Reinforcement Schedule
Reinforcement (Psychology)
Reinforcement
Psychological Extinction
Extinction
Values

Keywords

  • Concurrent operants
  • Developmental disabilities
  • Escape
  • Functional analysis
  • Negative reinforcement
  • Positive reinforcement
  • Response covariation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Philosophy
  • Applied Psychology
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

The use of positive and negative reinforcement in the treatment of escape-maintained destructive behavior. / Piazza, Cathleen C.; Fisher, Wayne W.; Hanley, Gregory P.; Remick, Matthew L.; Contrucci, Stephanie A.; Aitken, Tammera L.

In: Journal of applied behavior analysis, Vol. 30, No. 2, 01.01.1997, p. 279-298.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Piazza, Cathleen C. ; Fisher, Wayne W. ; Hanley, Gregory P. ; Remick, Matthew L. ; Contrucci, Stephanie A. ; Aitken, Tammera L. / The use of positive and negative reinforcement in the treatment of escape-maintained destructive behavior. In: Journal of applied behavior analysis. 1997 ; Vol. 30, No. 2. pp. 279-298.
@article{976174817eb84cceb578d7851efe3c15,
title = "The use of positive and negative reinforcement in the treatment of escape-maintained destructive behavior",
abstract = "We identified 3 clients whose destructive behavior was sensitive to negative reinforcement (break from tasks) and positive reinforcement (access to tangible items, attention, or both). In an instructional context, we then evaluated the effects of reinforcing compliance with one, two, or all of these consequences (a break, tangible items, attention) when destructive behavior produced a break and when it did not (escape extinction). For 2 clients, destructive behavior decreased and compliance increased when compliance produced access to tangible items, even though destructive behavior resulted in a break. For 1 client, extinction was necessary to reduce destructive behavior and to increase compliance. Subsequently, when the schedule of reinforcement for compliance was faded for all clients, destructive behavior was lower and fading proceeded more rapidly when compliance produced multiple functional reinforcers (i.e., a break plus tangible items or attention) and destructive behavior was on extinction. The results are discussed in terms of the effects of relative reinforcement value and extinction on concurrent operants.",
keywords = "Concurrent operants, Developmental disabilities, Escape, Functional analysis, Negative reinforcement, Positive reinforcement, Response covariation",
author = "Piazza, {Cathleen C.} and Fisher, {Wayne W.} and Hanley, {Gregory P.} and Remick, {Matthew L.} and Contrucci, {Stephanie A.} and Aitken, {Tammera L.}",
year = "1997",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1901/jaba.1997.30-279",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "30",
pages = "279--298",
journal = "Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis",
issn = "0021-8855",
publisher = "Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The use of positive and negative reinforcement in the treatment of escape-maintained destructive behavior

AU - Piazza, Cathleen C.

AU - Fisher, Wayne W.

AU - Hanley, Gregory P.

AU - Remick, Matthew L.

AU - Contrucci, Stephanie A.

AU - Aitken, Tammera L.

PY - 1997/1/1

Y1 - 1997/1/1

N2 - We identified 3 clients whose destructive behavior was sensitive to negative reinforcement (break from tasks) and positive reinforcement (access to tangible items, attention, or both). In an instructional context, we then evaluated the effects of reinforcing compliance with one, two, or all of these consequences (a break, tangible items, attention) when destructive behavior produced a break and when it did not (escape extinction). For 2 clients, destructive behavior decreased and compliance increased when compliance produced access to tangible items, even though destructive behavior resulted in a break. For 1 client, extinction was necessary to reduce destructive behavior and to increase compliance. Subsequently, when the schedule of reinforcement for compliance was faded for all clients, destructive behavior was lower and fading proceeded more rapidly when compliance produced multiple functional reinforcers (i.e., a break plus tangible items or attention) and destructive behavior was on extinction. The results are discussed in terms of the effects of relative reinforcement value and extinction on concurrent operants.

AB - We identified 3 clients whose destructive behavior was sensitive to negative reinforcement (break from tasks) and positive reinforcement (access to tangible items, attention, or both). In an instructional context, we then evaluated the effects of reinforcing compliance with one, two, or all of these consequences (a break, tangible items, attention) when destructive behavior produced a break and when it did not (escape extinction). For 2 clients, destructive behavior decreased and compliance increased when compliance produced access to tangible items, even though destructive behavior resulted in a break. For 1 client, extinction was necessary to reduce destructive behavior and to increase compliance. Subsequently, when the schedule of reinforcement for compliance was faded for all clients, destructive behavior was lower and fading proceeded more rapidly when compliance produced multiple functional reinforcers (i.e., a break plus tangible items or attention) and destructive behavior was on extinction. The results are discussed in terms of the effects of relative reinforcement value and extinction on concurrent operants.

KW - Concurrent operants

KW - Developmental disabilities

KW - Escape

KW - Functional analysis

KW - Negative reinforcement

KW - Positive reinforcement

KW - Response covariation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031158481&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031158481&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-279

DO - 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-279

M3 - Article

C2 - 9210307

AN - SCOPUS:0031158481

VL - 30

SP - 279

EP - 298

JO - Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis

JF - Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis

SN - 0021-8855

IS - 2

ER -