Operant Conditioning

RESPONDENT CONDITIONING Stimulus Behavior Adapted from Dr. Blair Lloyd Adapted from Dr. Blair Lloyd OPERANT CONDITIONING Behavior Stimulus Operant Conditioning • Behavior is lawful • There is a reciprocal interaction and functional relationship between behavior and the environment • These relationships are not always easily discerned • Basic behavioral principles describe these relationships B.F. Skinner’s Work • Expanded study of behavior to operant behavior • Operant Behavior: Any behavior whose future frequency is determined primarily by its history of consequences Operant Conditioning • Refers to the process and selective effects of consequences on behavior • Reinforcing consequences following the response increase its future frequency; and • Aversive consequences following the response decrease its future frequency. What is Behavior? • Behavior: A muscular, glandular, or neuro-electrical activity • Any activity a person does is behavior Dead Person Test If a dead person can do it, it is not behavior! Drinking? Thinking? A neuron firing in the brain? Screaming? Saying “Hi mommy” Laying Down Reinforcement Two Types of Reinforcement • Positive Reinforcement: The presentation of a stimulus immediately after a behavior occurs that results in an increase in future frequency of that behavior Positive Reinforcement - Example Positive Reinforcement - Example Antecedent Behavior Consequence Baby has not attention from Mom Baby cries Baby has attention from Mom ABC’s of Behavior Antecedent Behavior Consequence What happens before the behavior? Whose behavior are we interested in? What are they doing? What happens after the behavior? Example – Roommate • Your roommate loves tea, and you really want him to start cleaning up the table after he eats (he usually leaves dishes out). Every time he cleans the table after eating you ask if you can brew him some tea. Over time he puts his dishes away after eating more often. EXAMPLE – ROOMMATE Antecedent Behavior Roommate has no Tea Roommate cleans dishes Consequence Roommate has tea Example – Gym Selfies • While you are working out, you take a gym selfie and post it on Instagram. You immediately start getting a lot of likes on that picture. In the future, you take more gym selfies when you go to the gym. Example – Gym Selfies Antecedent Behavior Consequence You have No Likes Post Gym Selfie You get Likes Reinforcers • If behavior increases = It’s a reinforcer! • Don’t know if something is a reinforcer until we see what happens to the future frequency of behavior! • Reinforcers are not always “good” or “positive” things • Things that one person may find unpleasant can be reinforcers for other people Two Types of Reinforcement • Positive Reinforcement: The presentation of a stimulus immediately after a behavior occurs that results in an increase in future frequency of that behavior • Negative Reinforcement: The removal of an aversive stimulus immediately after a behavior occurs that results in an increase in future frequency of that behavior Aversive Stimulus • A stimulus that increases the future frequency of a response that its removal (termination) follows Aversive Stimuli • Aversive stimuli are not necessarily “bad” • But, most things that are harmful or considered “bad” are aversive to most humans • Fire • Poisons • Electric shock Example – Unacceptable Behavior • Anytime that Jimmy is presented a task, he begins to tantrum. Jimmy cries, screams, and throws himself on the floor. He is very disruptive. His teachers immediately send him out of the room. In the future, Jimmy tantrums when presented with a task. Example – Unacceptable Behavior Antecedent Behavior Consequence Task Presented (Aversive) Jimmy tantrums Task Removed Example – Seatbelt • Nicole gets into her brand car and starts to drive. She immediately hears the annoying beeping sound. She puts on her seatbelt and the beeping stops. In the future, Nicole remembers to put on her seatbelt before she starts to drive Example – Seatbelt Antecedent/Before Behavior Consequence/After Beeping Noise (Aversive) Put seatbelt No Beeping Noise Positive and Negative Reinforcement • Positive and negative DO NOT mean “good” or “bad” • Positive = Presentation • Negative = Removal • Both result in an increase in Presentation behavior! Removal Increase Positive Reinforcement Negative Reinforcement Dr. Rios asks her cat Dinah for a high-five. Immediately Dinah gives a high-five, Dr. Rios gives her a treat. In the future, Dinah will give her owner a high-five when asked. Positive OR Negative Reinforcement? Jessie is in bed trying to go to sleep but she can’t. She pulls out her phone and begins scrolling through Instagram posts. While scrolling, Jessie immediately sees funny cat videos, inspiration for cute outfits by influencers, and updates on what her friends are doing. In the future, Jessie will scroll through Instagram. Positive OR Negative Reinforcement? Maria is at Target with her Mom. They walk past the candy isle and she sees M&M’s (her favorite!). Maria asks for the M&M’s but her Mom says no. Maria begins to cry and scream and even starts to hit her Mom. Her Mom is so embarrassed by what is happening so she decides to give Maria the M&M’s so that Maria will stop crying. In the future, whenever Maria cries, her Mom gives her what she wants. • Positive OR Negative Reinforcement? • You are walking to class and you run into a chatty person. They go on and on and it makes you late for class! The next day, you see the same person but this time you put your headphones on. It works! The person does not talk to you and you are on time to class. In the future, you put on your headphones more often when walking to class. • Positive OR Negative Reinforcement? • Your nephew swings the bat for the first time and hits his very first baseball. You clap and say “yay!” • Positive OR Negative Reinforcement? Is this Bribery? PUNISHMENT Punisher • Punisher: A stimulus whose presentation immediately following a behavior decreases the future frequency of that behavior • Again, punishers are not necessarily “bad” • We determine something is a punisher after we see its effects on future behavior • If the stimulus decreases future frequency of behavior, we can then say the stimulus is a punisher Two Types of Punishment • Positive Punishment: The presentation of a stimulus (aversive) immediately after a behavior occurs that results in an decrease in future frequency of that behavior Positive Punishment • Not defined by actions of person delivering the consequences nor the nature of those consequences • Defined by effect on future behavior • Presentation of punishers often evoke behaviors that are incompatible with behavior being punished. • These initially potentially suppressive effects do not mean punishment has occurred à must still look at future frequency (beyond current episode). Example • You are at a music festival and you have to use the bathroom. You go into a portable bathroom and immediately smell the awful smell. You get out of the portable bathroom. In the future when you are at a music festival, you do not go into the portable bathrooms. Example – Music Festival Antecedent No awful smell in your nose Behavior Consequence You go into the portable bathroom Awful smell in your nose Example • Jenny is driving 10 miles over the speed limit on Abercorn. Immediately Jenny gets pulled over and gets a ticket. In the future, Jenny does not speed when she is on Abercorn. Example – Speeding Antecedent Behavior Consequence Jenny has no speeding ticket Jenny goes 10 miles above the speed limit Jenny gets a speeding ticket Two Types of Punishment • Positive Punishment: The presentation of a stimulus (aversive) immediately after a behavior occurs that results in an decrease in future frequency of that behavior • Negative Punishment: The removal of a stimulus (reinforcer) immediately after a behavior occurs that results in an decrease in future frequency of that behavior Example – Getting Grounded • Jackie goes out with her friends and stays out past her curfew. Her parents are so upset so they take away her car keys for a week. In the future, Jackie does not stay out late. Example- Getting Grounded Antecedent Behavior Consequence Jackie has keys to car Jackie comes home late Jackie does not have keys to car Example – Calling Out • Janet’s teacher told her that she needed to raise her hand to answer a question or she would lose points for the day. The teacher asked a question and Janet shouted the answer before any of the other kids had a chance to raise their hand. Janet’s teacher immediately took away 10 points. In the future, Janet’s calling out decreases. Example- Getting Grounded Antecedent Behavior Consequence Janet has 10 points Janet calls out Janet does not have 10 points Increase Decrease Positive Reinforcement Positive Punishment Negative Reinforcement Negative Punishment Presentation Removal • Zuly goes out with her friends to a new Chinese food restaurant. Zuly tries the orange chicken. Immediately after eating the orange chicken, Zuly gets sick. In the future, Zuly does not eat the orange chicken from the restaurant. For Zuly’s eating Chinese food behavior, what is happening? • Positive OR Negative Punishment? • Joe goes to River Street at night. As soon as he takes one step he immediately gets eaten alive by a bunch of mosquitos! The bites hurt and are very itchy for three days. In the future, Joe does not go on River Street. For Joe’s going to River street behavior, what is happening? • Positive OR Negative Punishment? • Jackie is late to class one day. Jackie’s professor is so upset, she tells Jackie that she will lose all participation points for the day. In the future, Jackie is not late for class. For Jackie’s coming to class late behavior, what is happening? • Positive OR Negative Punishment? • Armando’s wife has a huge party in their home. After the party, the house is a huge mess. Armando is so upset, he makes his wife sleep on the couch (i.e., his wife loses her comfy bed). In the future, Armando’s wife stops throwing parties. For the wife’s party throwing behavior, what is happening? • Positive OR Negative Punishment? • Sarah is very disruptive in school. Her teacher is so upset, she sends her to the principle’s office. The next day, Sarah continues to be disruptive. • Positive OR Negative Punishment? JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS 1994227,197-209 NUMBEP. 2 (summER 1994) TOWARD A FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS OF SELF-INJURY BRIAN A. IWATA, MICHAEL F. DORSEY, KEITH J. SUIFER, KENNETH E. BAUMAN, AND GINA S. RICHMAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS 2003, 36, 205–219 NUMBER 2 (SUMMER 2003) THE JOHN F. KENNEDY INSTITUTE AND THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS AND TREATMENT OF SELF-INJURIOUS BEHAVIOR IN YOUNG CHILDREN: A SUMMARY OF 30 CASES This study describes the use of an operant methodology to assess functional relationships between self-injury and specific environmental events. The self-injurious behaviors of nine developmentally disabled subjects were observed during periods of brief, repeated exposure to a series of analogue PATRICIA F. KURTZ, MICHELLE D. CHIN, JOHN M. HUETE, conditions. Each condition differed along one or more of the following dimensions: (1) play materials RACHEL S. F. TARBOX, JULIA T. O’CONNOR, (present vs absent), (2) experimenter demands (high vs low), and (3) social attention (absent vs THEODOSIA R. PACLAWSKYJ, AND KARENA S. RUSH noncontingent vs contingent). Results showed a great deal of both between and within-subject variability. However, in six of the nine subjects, higher levels of self-injury were consistently associated KENNEDY KRIEGER INSTITUTE AND with a specific stimulus condition, suggesting that within-subject variability was a function of JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE distinct features of the social and/or physical environment. These data are discussed in light of previously suggested hypotheses for the motivation of self-injury, with particular emphasis on their implications for the selection of suitable treatments. The assessment and treatment of self-injurious behavior (SIB) has received much attention in the literature; however, few studies have focused on early intervention for this behavior. In the current study, functional analyses with developmentally appropriate modifications were conducted in an outpatient clinic with 30 children (aged 10 months to 4 years 11 The description, incidence and damaging effects ing principles (Bachman, 1972; Baumeister months) to &assess SIB and problem behavior in its early stages. The reported mean age of self-injury, as well as numerous attempts to con- Rollings, 1976; Frankel & Simmons, of1976; SIB Johnonset was 17 months, and head banging was the most prevalent topography. trol it, have been repeatedly documented in the son & Baumeister, 1978; Romanczyk Functional & Goren,analyses identified sources of reinforcement for SIB in 62.1% of cases; with literature. Self-injury is a bizarre and often chronic 1975; Schroeder, Schroeder, Rojahn,the&inclusion Mulick, of all forms of problem behavior, sources of reinforcement were identified for 87.5% of cases. Function-based treatments were developed for 24 cases, with funcform of aberrant behavior, the etiology of which is 1981; Smolev, 1971). However, sometional mixedcommunication findtraining prescribed most often (70.8% of cases). Implications of at best poorly understood. It poses serious risks to ings have been noted with almost all of the bethese findings for the development of early intervention programs for SIB are discussed. those who engage in the behavior, and it represents havioral interventions. For example, although a DESCRIPTORS: caregivers, development, functional analysis, self-injurious behavior a formidable challenge to those who are responsible for treating it. Most of the research on self-injury over the past 15 years has focused on discovering means for its effective elimination. The greatest success has been found using methods based on operant condition- number of studies have shown that the reinforcement of incompatible or other behavior (DRI/ DRO) reduced self-injury (Allen & Harris, 1966; Self-injurious (SIB) is a serious, early identification and treatment of SIB. 1976; behavior LoFrankel, Moss, Schofield, & Simmons, chronic problem vaas, Freitag, Gold, & Kassorla, 1965; Tarpley &affecting approximately SIB occurs in typically developing and de10% to 14% individuals with mental re- velopmentally delayed infants, toddlers, and Schroeder, 1979), others have reported poorof results