Premium
Person‐treatment interactions across nonaversive response‐deceleration procedures for self‐injury: A case study of effects and side effects
Author(s) -
Paisey Timothy J. H.,
Whitney Robert B.,
Moore Jack
Publication year - 1989
Publication title -
behavioral interventions
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.605
H-Index - 34
eISSN - 1099-078X
pISSN - 1072-0847
DOI - 10.1002/bin.2360040202
Subject(s) - psychology , reinforcement , intervention (counseling) , differential reinforcement , task (project management) , physical medicine and rehabilitation , audiology , developmental psychology , social psychology , medicine , psychiatry , management , economics
Three nominally nonaversive response‐deceleration treatment packages, “gentle teaching,” differential reinforcement of incompatible behavior plus interruption, and graduated guidance, were administered to two profoundly retarded men who exhibited topographically similar self‐injurious head‐hitting maintained under contrasting contingencies identified by functional analysis. Following No Demand and Instructional Demand baseline sessions, the three intervention packages were balanced across 18, 30‐minute analog training sessions and three trainers in each subject's prevocational setting, using a simple panel‐pressing task as the training objective. There were significant differences between the three packages in rates of target response suppression, effects on collateral behaviors, acquisition of panel pressing, and immediate post‐treatment carry‐over, both within and between subjects. It is concluded that both functional analysis and within‐subject treatment comparison may assist in identification of the least restrictive alternative in applied service settings, and that topographic similarity of self‐injury between subjects may not necessarily indicate selection of similar treatment packages.