Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:33:53.140Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Selective Suppression of a Stereotypy in an Autistic Child: A Stimulus Control Approach*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 June 2009

Thomas S. Woods
Thomas S. Woods
Affiliation:
The Laurel House Society, The University of British Columbia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This study tested the hypothesis that operant response suppression strategies function more effectively when predetermined stimulus context variables are explicitly manipulated as “intervention facilitators”. Specifically, the self-stimulatory “book flipping” behaviours of a young autistic child were subjected to a brief immobilization contingency both in the presence and the absence of a contrived Sd stimulus comparison factor. An ABCBC multiple baseline across settings analysis of the subject's self-stimulatory responding under these conditions revealed a clear enhancement of response suppression effects when the above stimulus control feature was incorporated into the strategy. Results are discussed in light of contextual vs. absolute criteria for defining behaviour as undesirable, and the implications of stimulus control knowledge for suppression programming in general are explored.

Type
Research Article
Information
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , July 1983 , pp. 235 - 248
Copyright
Copyright © British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M. and Risley, T. R. (1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 1, 91–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bailey, J.Sand Bostow, D. E. (1979). Research Methods in Applied Behavior Analysis. Tallahassee, Florida: J. S. Bailey.Google Scholar
Bellack, A. and Hersen, M. (1977). Behavior Modification: An Introductory Text. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bitgood, S. C., Crowe, M. J., Suarez, Y. and Peters, R. D. (1980). Immobilisation: effects and side effects on stereotyped behavior in children. Behavior Modification 4, 187–208.Google Scholar
Bucher, B. D. and Lovaas, O. I. (1968). The use of aversive stimulation in behavior modification. In Miami Symposium on the Prediction of Behavior. 1967: Aversive Stimulation, Jones, M. R. (Ed.), Coral Gables, Florida: University of Miami Press.Google Scholar
Catania, A. C. (1979). Learning. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.Google Scholar
Foxx, R. M. and Azrin, N. H. (1973). The elimination of autistic self-stimulatory behavior by overcorrection. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 6, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall, R. V. (1971). Behavior Modification: The Measurement of Behavior (Managing Behavior Series. V.I). Lawrence, Kansas: H and H Enterprises.Google Scholar
Hawkins, R. F. and Dotson, V. A. (1975). Reliability scores that delude: an Alice in Wonderland trip through the misleading characteristics of interobserver agreement scores in interval recording. In Behavior Analysis: Areas of Research and Application. Ramp, E. and Semb, G. (Eds), Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Hersen, M. and Barlow, D. (1976). Single Case Experimental Designs. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Kantor, J. R. (1959). Interbehavioral Psychology. Granville, Ohio: Principia Press.Google Scholar
Kazdin, W. E. (1972). Response cost: the removal of conditioned reinforcers for therapeutic change. Behavior Therapy 3, 533–546.Google Scholar
Kazdin, A. E. (1977). The Token Economy: An Evaluative Review. New York: Plenum press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koegel, R. L. and Covert, A. (1972). The relationship of self-stimulation to learning in autistic children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 5, 381–387.Google Scholar
Koegel, R. L. and Rincover, A. (1977). Research on the difference between generalization and maintenance in extra-therapy responding. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 10, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koegel, R. L.Firestone, P., Kramme, K. and Dunlap, G. (1974). Increasing spontaneous play by supressing self-stimulation in autistic children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 7, 521–528.Google Scholar
LaVigna, G. W. and Donnellan-Walsh, A. (1976). Alternatives to the use of punishment in the school setting.Paper presented at the 8th Annual Southern California Conference on Behavior Modification, California State University,Los Angeles, California,October, 1976. (Available from Dr Anne Donnellan, Department of Behavioral Disabilities, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, 53705.)Google Scholar
Lovaas, O. I., Schaeffer, B. and Simmons, J. Q. (1965). Building social behavior in autistic children by use of electric shock. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality 1, 99–109.Google Scholar
Michael, J. L. (1980). Distinguishing between discriminative and motivational functions of stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 37, 149–155.Google Scholar
Redd, W. H. (1970). Generalization of adults' stimulus control of children's behavior. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 9, 286–296.Google Scholar
Rilling, M. (1977). Stimulus control and inhibitory processes. In Handbook of Operant Behavior, Honig, W. K. and Staddon, J. E. R. (Eds), Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Risley, T. R. (1968). Effects and side effects of punishing the autistic behaviors of a deviant child. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 1, 21–35.Google Scholar
Skinner, B. F. (1974). About Behaviorism. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Springer, B., Brown, T. and Duncan, P. K. (1981). Current measurement in applied behavior analysis. The Behavior Analyst 4, 19–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Terrace, H. S. (1966). Stimulus control. In Operant Behavior: Areas of Research and Application. Honig, W. K. (Ed.), New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Wahler, R. G. and Fox, J. (1981). Setting events in applied behavior analysis: toward a conceptual and methodological expansion. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 14 327–338.Google Scholar
Woods, T. S. (1978). Behavior modification and the autistic child. B. C. Journal of Special Education 2, 339–350.Google Scholar
Woods, T. S. (1980). Bringing autistic self-stimulatory behavior under Sδ stimulus control. B. C. Journal of Special Education 4, 61–70.Google Scholar
Woods, T. S. (1981). The development of stimulus control as a behavior management technique.Paper presented at the Research Forum of the 59th International Conference of the Council for Exceptional Children,New York, New York:April, 1981. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 109 787.)Google Scholar
Woods, T. S. (1982). Generality in the verbal tacting of autistic children as a function of “naturalness” in antecedent control.Paper presented at the Conference on Behavior Analysis in Education, Ohio State University,Columbus, Ohio,September 1982.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.