Grand Valley State University - Differential …€¦ · Web viewAfter one week of implementation, the data showed that Claire was no longer hitting her peers during the first hour

B e h a v i o r a l I n t e r v e n t i o n s - D i f f e r e n t i a l R e i n f o r c e m e n t P a g e | 1

Behavioral Interventions

Differential Reinforcement

Differential Reinforcement: Introduction

Differential reinforcement is probably the most fundamental and most important principle in

applied behavior analysis (ABA). Interestingly, it is also one of the most misapplied. These

lectures will point out why differential reinforcement is basic to understanding ABA, how it is

often misapplied, and provide examples of how parents, teachers and others can use it to

effectively construct and support learning among students with autism spectrum disorders

(ASD).

Differential Reinforcement – What Is It?

It’s better to shape up the behavior than to ship out the student.

Let’s begin with an example.

Dana is a 12-year-old student with Asperger Syndrome attending the seventh grade at East

Middle School. Mr. Rollins, has developed a strategy to support Dana’s learning in his science

classroom. Each time Dana walks away from her group at the lab table, Mr. Rollins will escort

Dana back to the group. Each time Dana is working with her lab mates, she will receive a coupon

that she can “cash in” after class for a technology magazine she likes.

The purpose of his is to teach Dana to discriminate when she will receive reinforcement (that is,

the coupon) and when she will not. Mr. Rollins is using a strategy called differential


reinforcement. That is Dana will learn to tell the difference (will discriminate) between which

behaviors will get reinforcement and which behaviors will not.

Differential reinforcement means that reinforcement is provided for behaviors when these

behaviors occur at certain times and places, whereas reinforcement is not provided when the

behaviors do not occur during other times and places (Wolery & Fleming, in Bailey & Wolery,

1992). In our example above, Dana received differential reinforcement when she was working

with her lab mates, but no reinforcement during the times when she was away from her lab

mates.

Differential Reinforcement – Basic Principles

Introduction

Alan is 11 years old and attends Ridgewood Middle School. Although he likes science, he has

difficulty staying with his group and working on the lab assignments. In fact, Alan generally has

a lot of difficulty interacting with his peers throughout the day. His individualized education plan

(IEP) states “Alan needs to learn how to initiate and maintain conversation with his peers.” This

lesson will demonstrate a possible strategy to support Alan in these interactions.

1. What is differential reinforcement?

A basic principle in understanding differential reinforcement and how we learn in most situations

is the concept of discrimination. Basically, discrimination is a process for behaving one way in

one situation and behaving in a completely different way in another situation. Like the example

in Lesson 1 with Dana at East Middle School, discrimination involves understanding that certain

things and events occur in some situations (Dana receives a coupon only when she is with her


group) but do not occur in other situations (Dana does not receive a coupon when she is not with

her group). Thus discrimination is the ability to tell the difference between environmental events

(Alberto & Troutman, 1995).

Discrimination typically develops as a result of differential reinforcement. Most of the behaviors

we demonstrate in our daily lives are the result of differential reinforcement. We stop our car at

red lights and proceed through the intersection on green lights; we grab our umbrella before

going outside in the rain; we answer the phone when it is ringing; we initiate conversation with

those whom we wish to talk, and so on. Differential reinforcement is making the discrimination

regarding when reinforcement will be obtained (i.e., proceeding safely through an intersection at

a green light; remaining dry when we use an umbrella when its raining, etc.) and when

reinforcement will not be obtained (i.e., having an accident in the intersection if we proceed

through it on a red light, getting drenched if you forget your umbrella, etc.). Reinforcement for

Dana was in the form of coupons when she was working with her group. She only received the

coupons when she was working with her group..

In the example of Alan and his reluctance to engage his peer in conversation, we are going to use

a differential reinforcement procedure. Unlike Dana who received her coupons simply for

“working” with her peers (e.g., no specific behaviors were identified), Alan will receive

reinforcement (he will receive checkmarks as it has already been determined they are important

to him) only when he is engaged in specific conversation with his peers. That is, whenever Alan

is talking with his peers about the science lesson, he will receive a checkmark from his teacher.

When he is not in conversation with his peers (or the conversation is not about science), he will

not receive a checkmark.


The purpose of this procedure is to teach Alan what behaviors are “appropriate” and what

behaviors are not; that is, when he will receive his checkmark and when he will not. In the case

of the science group, the IEP determined that talking with his peers during the lab assignment is

an appropriate behavior. Thus, “talking with his peers during the lab assignment” has been

targeted as a specific behavior that will receive reinforcement. Unlike in Dana’s situation where

any behavior involving “working with her group” would receive reinforcement, in Alan’s case

only the specific behavior of talking with his lab mates would receive reinforcement.

In both situations, reinforcement was provided only when certain behaviors were performed and

not provided at other times when those behaviors were not performed. For example, whenever

Dana was away from her group, she received no reinforcement. Whenever Alan was not talking

with his lab mates, he received no checkmarks. Conversely, whenever Dana was with her peers

and working together on the assignment, she received her coupon. When Alan was talking with

his peers about the lab assignment, he received his checkmark.

The teachers in both classrooms had to set up a data collection system that monitored when each

student received reinforcement. In the two examples, each time the teacher saw the student

engaged in the desired behaviors, he would simply record on a piece of paper that the

reinforcement was given. Similarly, whenever the students engaged in the undesired behaviors

(walking away from the group or not engaging peers in conversation), the teacher would record

this on the same piece of paper.

What could go wrong?

When using differential reinforcement, it is vitally important to understand some very

fundamental things. First, it is important to have identified several reinforcers for the student (see


earlier lesson on Determining Reinforcers). Second, it is important to have identified the

behaviors you want to reinforce. In Alan’s situation, the behavior of “talking with his peers

during a lab assignment” had already been identified in his IEP. For Dana, “working with her

peers” was likewise defined earlier. In both cases, the teachers knew under what conditions

reinforcement would be provided, and under what conditions it would not be provided. Third, it

is important to identify how frequently the reinforcement will be provided. This is an important

decision, since a too frequent use of reinforcement will result in the student getting tired of the

reinforcement (satiation). In later lessons, we will explore the more complicated uses of

differential reinforcement.

Differential Reinforcement of Other Behavior (DRO)

In previous section, we cautioned that the too frequent use of reinforcement may lead to growing

tired of the reinforcement, resulting in a loss of reinforcement effectiveness (a situation known as

satiation). In some situations, it does not make sense to give reinforcement every time the desired

behavior occurs. Indeed, learning to perform a particular behavior requires that the behavior

often be performed in the absence of reinforcement. Thus, a critical aspect of teaching involves

arranging a schedule as to when to use of reinforcement and how often. There are three primary

methods to do this. This section teaches us about the first one.

Example:

Claire is a 4-year-old child who has a diagnosis of autism. She attends a preschool program

operated by the local school district. Every morning, Claire enters the classroom and for the first

half hour engages in solitary play with the instructional materials on the floor mat. After about

20 minutes and as the other children are playing, Claire often tries to take the materials the other


children are playing with. If they refuse to give them up, Claire hits them. She engages in this

behavior of hitting pretty routinely in the mornings. When it happens, Ms. Pucket, her teacher,

has to intervene and remove Claire to the other side of the classroom. This angers Claire and

causes her to engage in even more severe displays of hitting. Ms. Pucket and the classroom aides

don’t know what to do. They have tried giving her other materials. They have tired talking to her.

They have even tried having her play in the corner by herself. But Claire is intent on taking the

materials away from her peers.

What’s going on here?

In trying to explain Claire’s behavior, It may be that she is interested in her peers and wants to

interact with them, but does not have the necessary social skills to do so in a manner that the

other children find reinforcing. Or, maybe she does not know how to obtain new materials from

the shelves and sees the materials her peers are playing with as “reasonable” choices for her. At

this point in our analysis, all we know is (a) what she is doing, (b) how her peers respond, and (c)

what the teacher does both prior to and after Claire’s response of hitting.

1. Definition

Differential Reinforcement of Other Behavior (DRO) is a procedure where positive

reinforcement is provided only when the target behavior is not displayed for a specified period of

time. Thus, when using a DRO procedure, reinforcement is provided for the zero occurrence of

the target behavior (it is sometimes also called differential reinforcement of zero rates of

behavior.) In future lectures we will discuss differential procedures for the gradual reduction of

target behavior. But, in DRO, reinforcement is provided when there is no occurrence of the

undesired behavior for a specified period of time.


DRO is perhaps the simplest of all behavior reduction procedures. You are merely reinforcing

the absence of any misbehavior. All you do is determine whether or not the undesired target

behavior occurred during a specified interval of time. If it occurred, reinforcement is withheld. If

the target behavior did not occur, reinforcement is provided at the end of the designated interval.

In either case, DRO involves differential delivery of reinforcement for not displaying certain

predetermined target behaviors.

There are two advantages of using a DRO procedure:

1. It is easy for teachers to use in most classrooms and school settings.

2. You are working directly with the undesired target behavior by reinforcing its absence.

However, there are also two distinct disadvantages to using a DRO procedure:

1. DRO procedure is not designed to teach and/or increase any particular appropriate

behavior. It merely reinforces the absence of certain behaviors.

2. When using a classic DRO procedure, you run the risk of reinforcing undesired behaviors

since reinforcement is given at the end of an interval provided that the targeted undesired

behavior has not occurred. This leaves you open to reinforcing other types of

inappropriate behaviors.

2. Variations when using a DRO procedure

There are at least three variations to keep in mind when using DRO. First, reinforcement is made

contingent on the non-occurrence of the target behavior throughout the specified period of time.

For example, reinforcement is given only when Claire does not hit her peers during any 8-minute


period of time (see #3B below for determining how to specify this interval). In another example,

when using DRO for not getting out of his seat, John is told, “If you do not get out of your seat

during our English lesson (40 minutes long), you can be at the head of the lunch line.” If the

student meets this contingency (if Claire does not hit her peers, or if John does not get out of his

seat during English), the reinforcer will be given. Delivery of a reinforcer is made only after no

instances of the target behavior occur during the entire interval.

Second, in many instances, it is desirable to break down sessions into smaller intervals of time.

For example, it may be desirable to reinforce Claire every 5 minutes for not displaying the target

behavior of hitting. Similarly, we may want to reinforce John during the English lesson rather

than wait until the end of the period. Or, in the case of Dana in Lecture 1, the teacher provided

coupons to Dana (reinforcement) each time he saw her working with her peers during the science

lesson. In these situations, it may be wise to provide reinforcement during smaller intervals of

time within the period.

Third, the teacher may want to use DRO for completing specified academic work. For example,

if a student is completing an in-class writing assignment, the teacher may give a sticker or a

happy face on her paper only when it is handed in with no doodles (a pre-determined target

behavior).

3. How to use DRO effectively

Although DRO is a relatively simple procedure to use, there are four issues to consider to ensure

its effectiveness. All involve how often to schedule reinforcement.


A. Baseline data must be obtained not only to keep track of how often the target behavior is

occurring, but also to decide how often the DRO procedure should be scheduled.

Selection of a proper time interval is absolutely critical, and should be established by

collecting data and not set arbitrarily. During baseline, the time between responses of the

undesired behavior is recorded and a slightly smaller interval should be selected to

determine when to give the reinforcement.

For example, Claire’s teacher—Ms. Pucket—collected baseline data for three days. She

recorded the time of day when Claire entered the classroom and the time of day when she

hit the, on average, Claire went 15 minutes before she hit one of her peers. Thus, the

schedule for the DRO was set at every 8 minutes, an interval about half as short as the

average baseline level.

B. A criterion for increasing the DRO interval should be established. Suggestions include:

o Start at a small enough interval so that the student can earn more reinforcement

for not engaging in the target behavior than for displaying it. Typically, this

interval should be one half as short as the average baseline level.

o Lengthen the interval over time. This decision should be based upon the data

being collected indicating the success the student is having at each interval length.

C. Two other decisions need to be made prior to implementing a DRO:

o a. Whether to reset the DRO interval following a response occurrence or to wait

until the next scheduled interval, and


b. Whether to respond to the undesired behavior in any other way or just ignore it.

In Claire’s situation, the teacher clearly cannot ignore the hitting and, therefore, must respond in

some manner. This risk here is that Claire may be obtaining some reinforcement from the

teacher’s intervention, thus potentially minimizing the effectiveness of the DRO.

D. As noted above, one limitation of a DRO procedure is that if properly implemented, you

may inadvertently reinforce behaviors that are undesirable. For example, Claire may

scream first to get the attention of a peer. Or, she may knock over materials that a peer

was playing with. In either case, so long as she did not hit a peer, Claire would receive

reinforcement at the end of the specified interval. Thus, a fourth rule may apply.

E. A decision must be reached before the intervention is begun that outlines whether

reinforcement will be given regardless of which behaviors (other than the target) are

displayed, or whether reinforcement will be withheld when certain other inappropriate

behaviors occur during the interval.

In the above example, it may be determined ahead of time that any aggressive behaviors will

result in the interval being extended without reinforcement (see #3 above). So, if the target

behavior is “hitting,” and during the interval Claire pushes her peer, she would not receive

reinforcement during that interval. The problem is that Claire may not receive sufficient

reinforcement during the interval to allow discrimination to occur as to when and under what

condition she will receive reinforcement. Thus, the DRO procedure may lose its effect.


We will address this issue in the next lecture when we talk about using another differential

reinforcement procedure. Let us simplify it for Claire and assume that she does not display any

other inappropriate behaviors and that a DRO is still an effective intevention.

4. An implementation example

Using our example of Claire, let’s see if we can design a program using the considerations noted

above.

Since Ms. Pucket had already determined through her baseline data that on average, Claire

played for 15 minutes before she hit one of her peers, she had already set the DRO schedule to 8

minutes. That is, if Claire did not hit any of her peers during the first 15-minute period, she

would receive a reinforcer.

Now, prior to the start of the DRO, Ms. Pucket had to determine a powerful reinforcer to use.

She could not just randomly select a reinforcer, since she needed to know what Claire found

reinforcing. Using a reinforcement sampling technique, Ms. Pucket learned that stroking the

back of Claire’s neck was a very powerful reinforcer for her.

Ms. Pucket next had to determine when she could implement the procedure. Although a DRO

procedure is relatively easy to use, it does take some time. So Ms. Pucket looked at the

classroom schedule. She noted that during the first hour of the morning, and her classroom aide

were both in the classroom. By mid-morning, the aide took two children to the physical therapist

and therefore was not available. The aide returned just before lunch, so both were available for

the remainder of the day. Thus, the DRO procedure could be implemented during the first hour

of the morning, during lunch and for about one hour after lunch.


Next, Ms. Pucket made the classroom aide responsible for the DRO procedure. By assigning the

aide to implement the DRO, Ms. Pucket eliminated a common problem with this procedure:

inconsistent implementation. The aide kept track of the 8-minute interval by using her

wristwatch.

Then, Ms. Pucket made sure that Claire had available all the play materials she enjoyed. In this

way, Ms. Pucket maximized the opportunity for Claire to receive reinforcement every 8 minutes.

After one week of implementation, the data showed that Claire was no longer hitting her peers

during the first hour of the day. It also showed that she was receiving reinforcement (neck

strokes) every 8 minutes, for a total number of eight neck strokes in the first hour. However,

during mid-morning (when the aide was out of the classroom), the data showed that hitting

increased to a rate of about once every 22 minutes. While this was considered an improvement

over baseline (which showed hitting on average of once every 15 minutes), Ms. Pucket had to

find another approach during these times. Finally, during the 30-minute lunch period and for the

hour after lunch (when the aide had returned to the classroom), the data showed that, like in the

morning, hitting was eliminated. Again, Claire received neck strokes every 8 minutes during

these intervals, for a total of 12 neck strokes for the entire interval.

After the first week, Ms. Pucket increased the interval to 10 minutes, then 12 minutes, and then

15 minutes over the next three weeks. Claire responded beautifully, maintaining a zero level of

hitting throughout. However, she continued to demonstrate hitting during the time the aide was

out of the classroom, but at a much lower rate than baseline.

Ms. Pucket was pleased with these results, but was left with questions. What procedure could she

implement during the time the aide was out of the classroom? If hitting was an attempt by Claire


to engage—although unsuccessfully—in social interaction with her peers, what behaviors could

she teach her that would function as a successful interaction? We will learn the answers to these

questions in the next section.

5. A Summary

We have explored the use of differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) as a relatively

easy and effective tool for reducing and eliminating undesired target behaviors. We noted several

advantages of using DRO, including its ease of use and the fact that it allows us to work directly

with the undesired target behavior by reinforcing its absence. However, we also discussed

several drawbacks to the use of DRO procedure, including not teaching any specific appropriate

behavior and the possibility of reinforcing undesired behaviors. We next discussed variations in

using a DRO, including setting the interval length. Then we talked about four issues to consider

when planning to use a DRO procedure: (a) taking a baseline to establish interval length, (b)

using a pre-established criterion for increasing the interval length, (c) making some decision

rules about when and under what conditions which behaviors will be reinforced and (d) deciding

under what conditions the interval will be reset. An implementation example was discussed to

illustrate some of these principles in action. Questions posed at the end were left unanswered

until the next lecture on the use of differential reinforcement of incompatible behaviors.

Differential Reinforcement of Incompatible/Alternate Behaviors (DRI/DRA)

In previous section, we described a procedure for reducing undesired target behaviors using a

procedure called differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO). Although this is a useful

and relatively easy procedure, it has some drawbacks, for example, it does not teach the student

any specific appropriate behaviors, but, only reinforces the absence of particular undesired


behaviors. This can be referred to as a “behavior vacuum” where there is no functional,

competing behavior to learn. This lecture discusses the next level of intervention, which teaches

specific appropriate behaviors that “compete” with, or are incompatible with, the undesired

behaviors.

Example

Remember Alan? Alan continues to have a lot of difficulty with interacting with his peers. His

IEP states “Alan needs to learn how to initiate and maintain conversation with his peers.” An

earlier intervention using a DRO it helped Alan remain with his group more often. However, it

did not teach him how to interact with anyone. Ridgewood Middle School has an excellent

teacher in the eighth grade, who suggested to Alan’s teacher that he consider using a DRI

procedure. Rather than walking away from his group, Alan needed to be taught to initiate a

conversation with one of his peers. This behavior of “initiating conversation” would be

incompatible with “walking away” and would teach Alan a functional skill that could be used in

different settings.

1. What is DRI?

One surefire way to eliminate the possibility of developing a behavior vacuum (as when using a

DRO procedure) is to use differential reinforcement of incompatible behavior (DRI). As

described in our example above, DRI involves reinforcing behaviors that are physically

incompatible with the undesired target behavior. That is, a DRI provides reinforcement for

behaviors whose display makes it physically impossible to display of the inappropriate behavior.


When a DRI involves reinforcing alternative, desirable behaviors it is called differential

reinforcement of alternate behavior (DRA) because the procedure focuses on developing

behaviors that are offered as options or alternatives (though not always incompatible) to

responding in typical, though inappropriate, ways. Thus, DRA is slightly different from DRI. For

example, for out-of-seat behavior it would make sense to increase (to reinforce) the incompatible

behavior of in-seat behavior. This would be an example of DRI. But if we were also to reinforce

“raising one’s hand to reply to a teacher-directed request,” this would be an example of DRA.

While the latter is not incompatible with being out-of-seat, the reinforcement competes with it. In

either case, what you are trying to do with a DRI/DRA is to reinforce behaviors that make the

display of the undesired behavior virtually impossible. While this “incompatibility” is

fundamental to the DRI, “functionally alternative behaviors” are fundamental to the DRA. This

strength of the DRI is also its weakness, however. It is often difficult to identify behaviors that

are truly incompatible with the inappropriate behaviors.

The use of DRI/DRA permits you to exert the greatest amount of control over the undesired

target behavior without intervening directly on the undesired behavior. This control occurs

because the appropriate and inappropriate behavior cannot occur at the same time, since they are

physically and/or functionally incompatible. Thus, a DRI is really a combination of a DRO and a

DRA and represents a very powerful procedure for teaching new skills.

Examples of inappropriate vs. incompatible behaviors

Hand-in-mouth while sitting at the table vs. using fork and knife

Shouting loudly in class vs. quietly raising hand to speak


Removing clothes vs. keeping clothes on

Hitting peers vs. sharing/giving items they want

Talking about bizarre things vs. talking about current events

Keeping eyes on the teacher vs. looking out the window

Fighting with peers vs. walking away from peers

Picking nose vs. using a handkerchief to blow nose

2. How do you select an incompatible or functional alternative behavior?

a. Select behaviors that either competes with the undesired behavior or that are physically

incompatible with its display. It is sometimes difficult to identify behaviors that are truly

incompatible with the undesired target behavior. It such cases, continue the selection

process below.

b. Select behaviors that are already in the student’s response repertoire (often a difficult

task).

c. Select behavior(s) that can be maintained by the natural consequences in the

environment; that is, behaviors that serve a practical purpose and are exhibited and

reinforced by others within the natural environment.

d. Analyze the environment to determine whether the undesired behavior serves some

communicative function in the environment and select an alternative behavior that is

functionally equivalent to the undesired behavior. For example, signaling the need for a

break from work may be functionally equivalent to hitting the teacher. Both behaviors


terminate work. A DRA procedure would thus reinforce “signaling for a break” (i.e.,

signing BREAK) to suspend work whereas “hitting” would not result in reinforcement. In

this example, signaling for a break is functionally equivalent to hitting and thus, would be

an appropriate alternative behavior within a DRA paradigm.

e. Finally, reinforce selected alternative behavior at least as frequently (preferably at a

greater frequency) and as consistently as the undesired behavior; it should be obtained

with less effort, and be delivered with as short a delay between behavior and its reinforcer

as the undesired behavior.

3. Advantages of DRI and DRA

a. Approach to managing undesired and inappropriate behavior

b. Focuses on positive reinforcement to develop skills and appropriate behaviors (i.e., it

teaches a student what to do, not just what not to do.)

c. Have been used with a wide assortment of problem behaviors including self-injury, off-

task behaviors, anti-social and disruptive behaviors.

Differential Reinforcement of Lower/Higher Rates of Behavior (DRL/H)

Introduction

Similar to other procedures involving differential reinforcement (DRO, DRI, DRA), these

procedures involve differential application of reinforcement contingent upon the occurrence of

the undesired target behavior. However, unlike previous procedures, the use of DRL or DRH

establishes criteria for displaying the undesired behavior such that the undesired behaviors can


occur, but only at a specified rate. As you will see, allowing the undesired target behavior to

occur only at a specified rate has advantages not found using the other procedures.

Example

Peter is a seventh-grade student with Asperger Syndrome who is attending a general education

classroom at Monroe Middle School. His curriculum has been modified to allow him to

participate in a regular math class. However, when entering the classroom, Peter wanders around

the room, touching various items in the classroom. Besides, his vocalizations tend to distract

others in the class who typically seat themselves within 3 minutes of entering the room. By

comparison, Peter walks around the classroom for upwards of 15 minutes before sitting down.

Once seated, he is very attentive, takes copious notes and is no longer a distraction to his

classmates.

1. What is differential reinforcement of lower rate behaviors (DRL)?

DRL involves a schedule in which a reinforcer is given following a specified period of time

whereby the identified target behavior occurs at or below a prespecified level. It is typically used

to slowly reduce high rates of behavior. Thus, reinforcement is provided only when the number

of responses during a specified period of time is lower than a prescribed limit.

In our example above, Peter always walks around the room at the beginning of the class. His

teacher, Mr. Berber, has taken some baseline data and discovered that, on average, Peter sits

down after 13 minutes. He then establishes a DRL procedure whereby Peter is reinforced when

he sits down after 10 minutes. Gradually, Mr. Berber limits this time, in 1-minute increments, so


that by the end of 10 class periods, Peter receives reinforcement when he sits down within 3

minutes (the norm for the others in the class).

In this simple example, we see the use of DRL working to slowly gain control of Peter’s

behavior of walking around the classroom. However, no attempt is made to eliminate the

behavior immediately. This gradual reduction may be desirable, since many students with ASD

exhibit high rates of behaviors that have occurred for a long period of time and are well

ingrained into the child’s behavioral repertoire. By allowing the behavior to occur at a low rate,

the student gradually learns that alternative behaviors are reinforced by the absence of particular

undesired behaviors. Moreover, as in Peter’s situation, it is not desirable to totally eliminate the

behavior of walking around the classroom since this is a behavior also exhibited by his peers,

albeit at a lower rate. However, his behavior is problematic as it occurs at too high a frequency.

The goal of this procedure, then, is to gradually reduce the behavior to bring it into alignment

with what is typical for same-aged peers.

Example

Margie is a 19 year-old high school student with autism who attends a vocational program for

individuals with disabilities. At 11:30 a.m. each day, Margie walks to the local restaurant around

the corner and for two hours buses tables for the lunchtime crowd. It is part of her career

exploration program at the high school. Although she is capable of busing the trays to the

kitchen, she is constantly asking her job supervisor if she is doing a good job. In fact, baseline

data taken by her job coach indicated that in the two-hour period, Margie asked her supervisor 27

times whether she was doing a good job. Clearly, this frequency is too high and was impacting

upon her getting her work done.


MaryAnn, her job coach, arranged with the supervisor to respond to Margie’s requests for

feedback only at every 10-minute interval on the clock. That is, the supervisor would ignore

Margie’s requests if they occurred at any times other than at the 10-minute interval. Thus,

Margie could receive the desired feedback, but only when the clock was at a 10-minute interval

(i.e., 10, 20, 30, etc.). This reduced Margie’s requests to 12 per two-hour period. Over a period of

three weeks, the interval was lengthened by 10 minutes so that Margie could ask for feedback,

but only every 20 minutes. Requests were further reduced after the third week to a maximum of

six per two-hour period. This was seen as an acceptable level.

This is example of how a DRL can be applied to a work situation. Rather than totally eliminate

Margie’s requests, the DRL gradually reduced them to an acceptable level. Margie learned that

while she could ask for feedback on the job, it was only allowed periodically. The next evolution

in her program would be to permit requests only twice during the hour, and then after a time,

only once or twice in the entire two-hour period. The acceptable level of behavior (making

requests in Margie’s situation; walking around the classroom in Peter’s situation) is all based on

the agreed-upon level (criteria on) that will be in effect.

2. What is differential reinforcement of higher rate behavior (DRH)?

Sometimes individuals with ASD respond at a very low level or exhibit behaviors so infrequently

that responses are virtually nonexistent. For example, communicating with peers and teachers is

an accepted, if not required behavior in schools. Yet, many students with ASD do not initiate or

respond to the communicative interactions of others even though they possess adequate verbal

language abilities. Differential reinforcement of higher rate behavior (DRH) is a procedure in

which a reinforcer is given following a specified period of time whereby the identified targeted


behavior occurred at or above a prespecified level. As such, it is essentially the exact opposite of

a DRL, which reinforces behaviors that fall at or below a specified level. DRH attempts to

increase the rate of a particular behavior; DRL attempts to decrease the rate of a specific

behavior.

Example

Remember Dana in science class at East Middle School? Mr. Rollins has Dana staying with her

group of peers during the science lab as the DRO procedure worked very well. But he has not

been able to generate any interaction between her and her peers. Dana is capable of interacting

and, in fact, is quite social in the cafeteria. But during an academic lesson, she shuts up like a

clam. Mr. Rollins wants to use a DRH procedure that will reinforce Dana each time she initiates

or responds to a social bid toward or by her peers. When he took a baseline, revealed that Dana

doesn’t initiate any interactions during the science class. The baseline taken in the cafeteria

revealed a different pattern: Dana interacted five or more times during the 30-minute lunch

period. Thus, during the first week of the program, Mr. Rollins required Dana to initiate at least

five interactions with her peers during the 50-minute lab period and to respond to at least three

interactions by others during that same time.

A reflective analysis of this example: demonstrates that it is possible to increase a behavior

gradually over time using a systematic procedure known as DRH. Mr. Rollins used his data to

plan a realistic program for Dana using skills that she already possessed. Many children and

youth with ASD possess the necessary skills to perform certain behaviors or activities, but do not

demonstrate those skills in all settings where they could be used. This is largely an issue of

response generalization and can be used in a planned way to maximize student learning.



QuizLet’s see how much you have learned!

1. 1. A procedure whereby you reinforce the absence of a behavior after a specified period of time is called

A. differential reinforcement of lower rate behavior

B. differential reinforcement of other behavior

C. extinction

D. differential reinforcement of higher rate behavior

2. A main disadvantage of a DRI procedure is that

A. it is difficult to implement

B. it doesn’t focus on developing positive behaviors

C. it is often difficult to identify an incompatible behavior

D. there are no disadvantages

3. In using a DRO, baseline data should first be obtained in order to

A. comply with state and federal mandates

B. determine how effective the procedure has been


C. help determine the length of the initial reinforcement interval

D. determine the next series of changes in reinforcement

4. Mr. Jensen is reinforcing Paul with a DRO procedure for staying in his seat and it is working quite nicely. However, Paul is not very interactive any more, rarely asks questions, and generally just sits in his seat. To change this situation, you may suggest that Mr. Jensen try

A. a DRL procedure that targets question -asking

B. a DRA procedure that targets gathering materials

C. a DRH procedure that targets question- asking

D. none of the above

5. An important rule in establishing an effective DRO procedure is that the initial DRO interval should be:

A. exactly what the teacher and student agree it should be

B. consistent across all training sessions

C. exactly the same as the baseline interval

D. one half of the average baseline level

6. One of the major disadvantages of using a DRO procedure is


A. it doesn’t teach any particular behavior or skill

B. it is extremely difficult for teachers to use

C. it is difficult to identifying appropriate reinforcers

D. all of the above

7. When planning to implement a DRA procedure, what should you consider in selecting an appropriate incompatible behavior?

A. Whether the behavior is in the child’s repertoire

B. Whether the behavior selected will be naturally reinforced

C. Whether the behavior is functionally equivalent to the undesired behavior

D. All of the above

8. A procedure for increasing the display of infrequently occurring behaviors is called

A. Differential reinforcement of other behavior

B. Differential reinforcement of lower rate behavior

C. Differential reinforcement of higher rate behavior

D. Differential reinforcement of alternative behavior

9. An important consideration to remember in planning any differential reinforcement procedure is


A. always having sufficient reinforcers on hand

B. deciding whether and how to respond to any inappropriate behaviors

C. making sure you target an alternative behavior to teach

D. ensuring that the reinforcement interval equals baseline levels

10. It has been determined that John receives social reinforcers each time he shouts in class. The teacher wants to use a DRA procedure. What would be an appropriate alternative behavior?

A. Social reinforcement whenever he is not shouting

B. Social reinforcement whenever he is talking quietly

C. Social reinforcement provided on a set schedule contingent upon displaying no shouting

D. None of the above

References


Alberto, P. A., & Troutman, A. C. (1999). Applied behavior analysis for teachers (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall

Foxx, R. M. (1982). Increasing behaviors of severely retarded and autistic persons. Champaign, IL: Research Press.

Foxx, R. M. (1982). Decreasing behaviors of severely retarded and autistic persons. Champaign, IL: Research Press.

Horner, R. H., Dunlap, G., & Koegel, R. L. (1988). Generalization and maintenance: Lifestyle changes in applied settings. Baltimore: Paul Brookes.

Kaplan, J. S. (1995). Beyond behavior modification: A cognitive-behavioral approach to behavior management in the schools. (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-ED.

Kerr, M. M., & Nelson, C. M. (1998). Strategies for managing behavior problems in the classroom. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

LaVigna, G. W., & Donnellan, A. M. (1986). Alternatives to punishment: Solving behavior problems with non-aversive strategies. New York: Irvington Press.

Documents

Grand Valley State University - Differential …€¦ · Web viewAfter one week of implementation, the data showed that Claire was no longer hitting her peers during the first hour