The effectiveness of and preschoolers' preferences for variations of multiple-schedule arrangements.

Full Abstract

Multiple schedules of reinforcement have been used to teach children to recruit attention only when it is available, thereby minimizing disruptive requesting during instructional activities. This procedure involves alternating periods of continuous reinforcement (CRF) with periods of extinction and correlating each period with a distinct and continuous discriminative stimulus. The present study evaluated the effectiveness of and children's preferences for multiple schedules in which (a) two different stimuli, one correlated with reinforcement (S+) and another correlated with extinction (S-), were presented; (b) only an S+ was presented (i.e., no stimulus was correlated with extinction), and (c) neither an S+ nor an S- was presented (i.e., a mixed schedule). S+/S- and S+ arrangements were similarly effective for 7 children, but 3 preferred the S+/S- condition and 4 preferred the S+ condition. Correlational analyses suggested that children who responded more effectively given the S- (discrimination indexes were relatively high) preferred the S+/S- condition, whereas children who responded less effectively given the S- preferred the S+ condition. The implications of these findings for arranging multiple schedules for social responses are discussed.

Author information

Author/s: Tiger, Jeffrey H (JH); Hanley, Gregory P (GP); Heal, Nicole A (NA);

Affiliation: Center for Autism Spectrum Disorders, Munroe-Meyer Institute, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, 68198, USA. jtiger(-atsign-)unmc.edu

Journal and publication information

Publication Type: Journal Article

Journal: Journal of applied behavior analysis (J Appl Behav Anal), published in United States. (Language: eng)

Reference: 2006-; vol 39 (issue 4) : pp 475-88

Dates: Created 2007/01/22; Completed 2007/03/14; Revised 2008/11/20;

PMID: 17236348, status: MEDLINE (last retrieved date: 2/18/2009)

Sourced from the National Library of Medicine. Abstract text and other information may be subject to copyright.

External Links for this article
(including full text providers, if available):

Click Electronic Full-text Provider Links to see options for finding the electronic full text links to this article. Note there may be a subscription or fee required for access to the full text. See our FAQ for information on finding FREE full text articles.

This article may also be located in paper journal collections available in many libraries. Use the Journal and Publication Information above to find the full article.