THE ROLE OF ATTENTION IN THE TREATMENT OF ATTENTION-MAINTAINED SELF-INJURIOUS BEHAVIOR: NONCONTINGENT REINFORCEMENT AND DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF OTHER BEHAVIOR

• Published in: Journal of applied behavior analysis Vol. 26; no. 1; pp. 9 - 21
• Main Authors: Vollmer, Timothy R., Iwata, Brian A., Zarcone, Jennifer R., Smith, Richard G., Mazaleski, Jodi L.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 1993; Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
• Subjects: Adult; Adults; Attention; Behavior disorders; Behavior Modification; Behavior Problems; Behavior Therapy - methods; Developmental Disabilities; differential reinforcement; Differential Reinforcement of Other Behaviors; Education of Intellectually Disabled; Female; Females; functional analysis; Humans; Injuries; Intervention; Noncontingent Reinforcement; Outcomes of Treatment; Positive Reinforcement; Psychology; Reinforcement Schedule; Residential Facilities; Self Destructive Behavior; Self Mutilation; self-injurious behavior; Self-Injurious Behavior - psychology; Self-Injurious Behavior - therapy; Severe Mental Retardation; Social Environment
• ISSN: 0021-8855; 1938-3703
• DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1993.26-9

Because there are potentially serious limitations to differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) (which is probably the most widely used treatment procedure for behavior problems), we examined an alternative procedure—noncontingent reinforcement (NCR). Three females with developmental disabilities, all of whom engaged in severe self‐injurious behavior, participated. During a pretreatment functional analysis, each subject's self‐injury was shown to be differentially sensitive to social attention as a maintaining consequence. Next, each subject was exposed to a DRO treatment and an NCR treatment. During DRO, attention was delivered contingent on the absence of self‐injury for prespecified intervals. During NCR, attention was delivered on a fixed‐time schedule that was not influenced by the subject's behavior. Results showed that both procedures were highly effective in reducing self‐injury, probably because the functional reinforcer for self‐injury was used during treatment. Furthermore, there was evidence that NCR attenuated several of the limitations of DRO. These results are particularly interesting in light of the long experimental history of NCR as a control rather than as a therapeutic procedure.