Association for Behavior Analysis International

Experimentally manipulating antecedent and/or consequent variables has generally been conducted in analogue assessment conditions. In some individual clinical cases, the discriminative stimuli for problem behavior in the natural setting(s) may have unique stimulus control over such behavior. If this is the case, then a false negative may occur during an analogue assessment with one or more functions. Hence, in those particular cases, a method that would allow for an experimental manipulation in the natural setting(s) would be preferable. A technique termed trigger analysis (Rolider, 2003) requires a clinician to induce a hypothesized establishing operation (EO), with personnel in the natural target setting(s). The data collected can then provide the relative probability of the problem behavior (as well as latency data) across a number of inducements (trials) over time. In this tutorial, Dr. Cipani will illustrate such a procedure for use in natural context assessments. This assessment methodology can be enhanced by the observer providing a descriptive analysis of functional and nonfunctional behaviors under such EO inducements. By combining both the experimental (trigger analysis) and descriptive (behavioral description) methodologies, a clinician can obtain valuable information on the response class that produces the abolishing operation (AO), as well as an anecdotal analysis of behaviors which are currently ineffectual in abolishing the EO. This can then lead to a better understanding of the strength of alternate more desirable forms in the client’s repertoire (see Appendix A; Cipani & Schock, 2011 for an operant analysis of replacement behaviors). This information has implications for treatment design. A function-based classification system comprising 13 categories (Cipani & Schock, 2011) will be used to exemplify the procedures in this assessment method. In particular, Dr. Cipani will demonstrate how trigger analysis with behavioral description would apply to such functions as (A) access to attention or tangible reinforcers, and (B) escape and/or avoidance of unpleasant social situations, difficult tasks/assignments, or lengthy tasks assignments.

Psychologists, behavior analysts, graduate students, and anyone interested in trigger analysis.

Much is known about discriminative stimuli established using either reinforcing or aversive stimuli and about how these stimuli work as conditioned reinforcers or conditioned aversive stimuli. However, little is known about discriminative stimuli established using both reinforcing as well as aversive events. For this type of stimulus, it has been reported that the interaction between reinforcing and aversive events makes the discriminative function somewhat different from other discriminative stimuli (Hearst & Sidman, 1961). Karen Pryor (2002) called this phenomenon the Poisoned Cue. She suggested that a cue, or SD, that is established using both reinforcing and aversive events leads to the breakdown of the behavior preceding and following the cue. This may be because of an increase in avoidance behaviors and the uncertainty that exists regarding the consequence that will follow. The Poisoned Cue phenomenon is important because it reflects the majority of teaching situations in the real world. SDs in the real world are rarely taught with purely positive reinforcement or purely aversive consequences. This tutorial will present an experimental analysis of the Poisoned Cue, teach participants how to identify situations that involve Poisoned Cues, and discuss solutions for overcoming the effects of Poisoned Cues.

Some children with autism can learn to imitate a wide variety of functional responses. For example, many can be taught to imitate actions with objects, the play behavior of peers, and the social responses of others. Less well documented are strategies that teach children with autism under which conditions imitation is advantageous, and under which conditions it is not. In order for a child with autism to learn through observation, he must learn how to discriminate the contingencies applied to modeled responses. This presentation will outline an assessment protocol to identify prerequisites for observational learning and research directives to teach children with autism to selectively imitate by discriminating the consequences applied to another's responses. Video-taped examples will illustrate components of the assessment, and preliminary outcome data on several children with autism will be presented.

Psychologists, behavior analysts, graduate students, and anyone interested in the autism field.

The field of Applied Behavior Analysis has seen a recent increase in the amount research conducted related to the maintenance of treatment effects, relapse of problem behavior, and what basic behavior analysis has to say regarding these events. Dr. Ringdahl and his students and colleagues at Southern Illinois University and the University of Iowa have been investigating how behavioral momentum theory can be explored and used to inform the development of interventions for severe problem behavior exhibited by individuals with developmental disabilities, and used to evaluate the strength of these treatments. This tutorial will review basic behavioral findings related to the aforementioned areas. In addition, implications for practice will be discussed as they relate to the assessment and treatment of severe problem behavior. Data from recently published or presented applied research projects will be used to illustrate the direct link between basic findings and applied outcomes.