The role of signals in two variations of differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate procedures

Temporal regulation of children with autism spectrum disorder exposed to a differential-reinforcement-of low-rates schedule

This study investigated temporal adjustment of children with autism spectrum disorder under a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rates (DRL) schedule. Sixteen participants, aged 3.2 to 7 years, were exposed to two conditions, DRL 5 s and DRL 20 s. Children participated in 7 sessions in each condition, except for 1 participant who attained the adjustment criteria in the DRL 5-s schedule. Temporal adjustment was measured with the proportion of reinforced interresponse times (IRTs) and the mean IRT. The operant response was a press on a touch screen and the reinforcers were cartoons. IQ and receptive language were measured prior to the DRL sessions. Results showed that the mean proportion of reinforced IRTs was slightly higher in the DRL 5-s schedule. The mean IRT was above the IRT requirement in both conditions. However, substantial individual variability was observed. Children with higher IQ and receptive language scores presented a greater proportion of reinforced IRTs in both conditions. Moreover, participants who adjusted their responses to the DRL 5-s schedule were more likely to adjust responding to the DRL 20-s schedule. This suggests that some children might be more sensitive to reinforcement contingencies than others. This study points at future research in the field of timing in children.

Differential reinforcement-of-low-rate procedures: A systematic replication with students with autism spectrum disorder

Becraft, Borrero, Davis, Mendres-Smith, and Castillo (2018) studied the effects of two different types of DRL schedules (full session and spaced responding) under 2 sets of stimulus conditions (with and without signals). Reduced rates of responding maintained under both types of DRL schedules, when signals were included. The present study represents a replication of procedures by Becraft et al. involving learners with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The results replicated those of Becraft et al. in that responding in both full-session and spaced-responding DRL schedules was low, but not eliminated. These results provide preliminary evidence to suggest that children with ASD are responsive to signals in DRL arrangements, which may set the stage for evaluation of signaled DRL arrangements for socially significant response forms.

Differential Reinforcement of Low Rate Schedules Reduce Severe Problem Behavior

Differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) schedules are reinforcement contingencies designed to reduce response rates. A common variation of the DRL arrangement is known as full-session DRL ( f-DRL), in which a reinforcer is presented at the end of an interval if the response rate during that interval is below a predetermined criterion. Prior human operant research involving arbitrary mouse clicks has shown that the f-DRL is likely to reduce target responding to near zero rates. Similarly, applied research has shown that the f-DRL is likely to reduce minimally disruptive classroom behavior. There are, however, relatively few successful applications of the f-DRL to severe forms of problem behavior (e.g., self-injurious behavior). Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine the effects of f-DRL on the severe problem behavior of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. For four participants, the f-DRL reduced severe problem behavior by clinically significant levels. Furthermore, results of a contingency strength analysis showed a strong negative contingency strength between target responding and reinforcer delivery for all participants.