The effects of topographically similar and dissimilar positive practice and a differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) procedure are compared in the management of an institutionalized retarded child's stereotypic finger-twirling. The child, who was enrolled in a self-contained special class, was observed during a 30-minute class period, 3 days a week for a total of 48 days. Topographically similar positive practice required hand movement training; dissimilar practice involved foot exercises, contingent upon each instance of observed finger-twirling. For the DRO procedure, the child was given a piece of a cookie contingent upon each 20-second time segment that excluded the target behavior. Using a multielement design, it was found that, although all experimental contingencies are superior to no treatment, the DRO procedure is more effective than either form of positive practice in reducing the behavior. Similarly, hand training is more effective than the foot movements. Several aspects of the findings and application of the multielement design in applied research are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AzrinN.H.KaplanS.J.FoxxR.M.Autism reversal: Eliminating stereotyped self-stimulation of retarded individuals. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1973, 78, 241–248.
2.
BarlowD.H.HayesS.C.Alternating treatments design: One strategy for comparing the effects of two treatments in a single subject. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1979, 12, 199–210.
3.
BaumeisterA.A.ForemanR.Effects of extinction of instrumental response on stereotyped body rocking in severe retardates. The Psychological Record, 1971, 21, 235–240.
4.
BerksonG.DavenportR.K.Jr.Stereotyped movements of mental defectives: I. Initial survey. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1962, 66, 849–852.
5.
BucherB.LovaasO.I.Use of aversive stimulation in behavior modification. In JonesM. R. (Ed.), Mini symposium on the prediction of behavior, 1967: Aversive stimulation. Coral Gables, Fla.: University of Miami Press, 1968.
6.
DokeL.A.EpsteinL.H.Oral overcorrection: Side effects and extended applications. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1975, 20, 496–511.
7.
EpsteinL.H.DokeL.A.SajwajT.SorrellS.RimmerB.Generality and side effects of overcorrection. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1974, 7, 26–31.
8.
FoxxR.M.AzrinN.H.Restitution: A method of eliminating aggressive behavior of retarded and brain damaged patients. Behavior Research and Therapy, 1972, 10, 15–27.
9.
FoxxR.M.AzrinN.H.The elimination of self-stimulating behavior by overcorrection. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973, 6, 1–14.
10.
GelfandD.M.HartmannD.P.Child behavior: Analysis and therapy. Elmsford, N.Y.: Pergamon, 1975.
11.
GuessD.RutherfordF.Experimental attempts to reduce stereotyping among blind retardates. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1967, 71, 984–986.
12.
HollisJ.H.Chlorpromazine: Direct measurement of differential behavior effects. Science, 1968, 159, 1487–1489.
13.
KissellR.C.WhitmannT.L.An examination of the direct and generalized effects of a playtraining and overcorrection procedure upon the self-stimulatory behavior of a profoundly retarded boy. AAESPH Review, 1977, 2, 131–146.
14.
LovaasO.I.SchaefferB.SimmonsJ.Q.Experimental studies in childhood schizophrenia: Building social behavior in autistic children by use of electric shock. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 1965, 1, 99–109.
15.
MantioneF.Reducing self-abuse in a severely retarded adolescent male through the use of positive reinforcement and fading. Special Children, 1976, 3, 32–38.
16.
MayJ.G.RisleyT.R.TwardoszS.FriedmanP.BijouS.WexlerD.Guidelines for the use of behavioral procedures in state programs for retarded persons. Arlington, Tex.: National Association for Retarded Citizens, 1975.
17.
MayhewG.L.HarrisF.C.Some negative side effects of a punishment procedure for stereotyped behavior. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychology, 1978, 9, 245–251.
18.
MulhernT.BaumeisterA.A.An experimental attempt to reduce a stereotyping by reinforcement procedures. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1969, 74, 69–74.
19.
MyersD.Extinction, DRO, and response-cost procedures for eliminating self-injurious behavior: A case study. Behavior Research and Therapy, 1975, 13, 189–191.
20.
NewmanR.WhortonD.SimpsonR.The modification of self-stimulating verbalizations in an autistic child through the use of an overcorrection procedure. AAESPH Review, 1977, 2, 157–163.
21.
OllendickT.H.MatsonJ.L.MartinJ.E.Effectiveness of hand overcorrection for topographically similar and dissimilar self-stimulatory behavior. Paper presented at the meeting of the Midwestern Association of Behavior Analysis, Chicago, 1977.
22.
RobertsP.IwataB.A.McSweenT.E.DesmondE.F.An analysis of overcorrection. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1977, 83, 588–594.
23.
RollingsJ.P.BaumeisterA.A.BaumeisterA.A.The use of overcorrection procedures to eliminate the stereotyped behaviors of retarded individuals: An analysis of collateral behaviors and generalization of suppressive effects. Behavior Modification, 1977, 1, 29–46.
24.
SewellE.McCoyJ.F.SewellW.R.Modification of an antagonistic social behavior using positive reinforcement for other behavior. The Psychological Record, 1973, 23, 499–504.
25.
StokesT.BaerD.An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1977, 10, 349–368.
26.
Sulzer-AzaroffB.MayerG.R.Applying behavior analysis procedures with children and youth. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1977.
27.
UlmannJ.D.Sulzer-AzaroffB.Multielement baseline design in educational research. In RampE.SempG. (Eds.), Behavior analysis: Areas of research and application. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1975.
28.
WellsK.C.ForehandR.HickeyK.GreenK.D.Effects of a procedure derived from the overcorrection principle on manipulated and nonmanipulated behaviors. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1977, 10, 679–687.
