Advertisement

Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Examining the Effectiveness of a Variable Momentary Differential Reinforcement of Other Behavior Procedure on Reduction and Maintenance of Problem Behavior

  • 2 Accesses

Abstract

Purpose of Review

To evaluate the effectiveness of variable-momentary differential reinforcement of other behavior (VM DRO) schedules in the reduction and maintenance of problem behavior. Specifically, will VM DRO be effective in reducing severe problem behavior for two children diagnosed with developmental disorders (DD)?

Recent Findings

Differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) has been demonstrated to be effective in reducing severe problem behavior for decades. However, recent manipulations to the schedule of delivery have led to advancements in DRO. Indicatively, VM DRO has been an effective intervention for automatically reinforced as well as social-positive maintained behavior for individuals with developmental disabilities. There is a dearth of research on variable- and fixed-momentary DRO schedules for individuals with DD; therefore, more examinations may be necessary.

Summary

Two case studies of individuals who had been diagnosed with developmental disabilities were reviewed. Functional analyses were conducted and indicated that problem behavior for both participants was maintained by social-positive reinforcement. VM DRO was effective at reducing one participant’s problem behavior. Fixed interval differential reinforcement of other behavior (FI DRO) was effective at reducing the other participant’s problem behavior. Findings suggest that VM DRO may not be effective at reducing problem behavior for all individuals and that outcomes may be idiosyncratic.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.

    Lennox DB, Miltenberger RG, Spengler P, Erfanian N. Decelerative treatment practices with persons who have mental retardation: a review of five years of the literature. Am J Ment Retard. 1988;92(6):492–501.

  2. 2.

    Vollmer TR, Iwata BA, Zarcone JR, Smith RG, Mazaleski JL. The role of attention in the treatment of attention-maintained self-injurious behavior: noncontingent reinforcement and differential reinforcement of other behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 1993;26(1):9–21. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1993.26-9.

  3. 3.

    Boe RB. Economical procedures for the reduction of aggression in a residential setting. Ment Retard. 1977;15(5):25–8.

  4. 4.

    Repp AC, Barton LE, Brulle AR. A comparison of two procedures for programming the differential reinforcement of other behaviors. J Appl Behav Anal. 1983;16(4):435–45. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1983.16-435.

  5. 5.

    Barton LE, Brulle AR, Repp AC. Maintenance of therapeutic change by momentary DRO. J Appl Behav Anal. 1986;19(3):277–82. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1986.19-277.

  6. 6.

    •• Lindberg JS, Iwata BA, Kahng S, DeLeon IG. DRO contingencies: an analysis of variable-momentary schedules. J Appl Behav Anal. 1999;32(2):123–36. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1999.32-123This study compares the relative effectiveness of a variable-momentary DRO schedule with fixed-interval DRO and variable-interval DRO schedules.

  7. 7.

    • Toussaint KA, Tiger JH. Reducing covert self-injurious behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement through a variable momentary DRO procedure. J Appl Behav Anal. 2012;45(1):179–84. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-179This study demonstrates that a variable-momentary DRO schedule may be uniquely suited to the treatment of covert behaviors due to the nature of the procedure and lack of observation required.

  8. 8.

    Bullock CE, Fisher WW, Hagopian LP. Description and validation of a computerized behavioral data program: “BDataPro”. Behav Anal. 2017;10:1–11.

  9. 9.

    DeLeon IG, Iwata BA. Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences. J Appl Behav Anal. 1996;29:519–32. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1996.29-519.

  10. 10.

    Iwata BA, Dorsey MF, Slifer KJ, Bauman KE, Richman GS. Toward a functional analysis of self-injury. J Appl Behav Anal. 1994;27(2):197–209. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1994.27-197.

  11. 11.

    • Thomason-Sassi JL, Iwata BA, Neidert PL, Roscoe EM. Response latency as an index of response strength during functional analyses of problem behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 2011;44(1):51–67. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2011.44-51This study demonstrates that a latency-based variation of a standard functional analysis can be used to determine the function of behavior.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Casey J. Clay.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Intellectual Disability

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hamilton, K.M., Clay, C.J. & Kahng, S. Examining the Effectiveness of a Variable Momentary Differential Reinforcement of Other Behavior Procedure on Reduction and Maintenance of Problem Behavior. Curr Dev Disord Rep (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40474-020-00185-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Differential reinforcement of other behavior
  • Functional analysis
  • Behavior reduction
  • Self-injurious behavior