China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Theory and Practice of Behaviour Modification
Published in Cathy Laver-Bradbury, Margaret J.J. Thompson, Christopher Gale, Christine M. Hooper, Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 2021
Hannah Kovshoff, Jayne Muldowney
One of the most frequently observed methods of modifying behaviour involves the use of reinforcement. By definition, reinforcement is any consequence which, when it follows a behaviour, strengthens the probability of that behaviour re-occurring. Reinforcers can be primary, secondary or social. A primary reinforcer is an immediate, tangible reward (e.g. food, drink, toys and so on). A secondary reinforcer is a ‘means to an end’ form of reinforcement whereby the individual ‘earns’ tokens or money that can be exchanged for primary reinforcers. Social reinforcement includes smiling, praise and positive attention.
Psychology and Human Development EMIs
Published in Michael Reilly, Bangaru Raju, Extended Matching Items for the MRCPsych Part 1, 2018
Aversion.Covert sensitisation.Extinction.Flooding.Mowrer’s two-factor theory.Pavlov’s classical conditioning.Primary reinforcer.Reciprocal inhibition.Secondary reinforcer.Skinner’s operant conditioning.
The use of applied behavior analysis in traumatic brain injury rehabilitation
Published in Mark J. Ashley, David A. Hovda, Traumatic Brain Injury, 2017
Craig S. Persel, Chris H. Persel
There are two types of positive reinforcers: primary and secondary. Primary reinforcers do not require any type of special training to develop their value. Food and water are two examples of primary reinforcers. Secondary reinforcers have gained their value through learning. Examples of secondary reinforcers are praise and money. Secondary reinforcers can be developed by pairing them with a primary reinforcer; for example, if praise is not a reinforcer for a person and food is, food can be paired with praise during behavioral procedures until praise serves as a reinforcer. Food can then be discontinued as a reinforcer.
Emerging therapeutic targets for anorexia nervosa
Published in Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Targets, 2023
Disturbances in reward processing and reward system functioning are common in a range of different mental disorders, and they are also a characteristic for anorexia nervosa [23]. The focus on reward system functioning is closely intertwined with the framework of habit formation (see 2.2) which assumes deficits in reward learning as basis for maladaptive habit formation and the perpetuation of dysfunctional illness behavior, but on the other hand also with neuropsychological profiles as treatment targets, as a complex interplay of reward and cognitive control processes is supposed to contribute to anorexia nervosa [17]. Reward processing can be impaired in different stages of the reward processing cascade, including reward anticipation, experiencing and learning [35]. A reward-centered perspective on anorexia nervosa is specifically intriguing as food is a primary reinforcer and closely tied to reward system functioning.
Board certified behavior analysts and school fidelity of Applied Behavior Analysis services: qualitative findings
Published in International Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 2022
Several ideas have been proposed regarding why implementation fidelity and intervention integrity are not being met consistently. ABA is based upon technical language that can prevent successful implementation when jargon is used without ensuring that all trainees understand the terms being used (Cihon et al. 2016). Behaviorist perspectives, including the philosophies that underlie ABA, are often described as being at odds with humanistic perspectives (Shyman 2016). This has been cited by some as a primary reason that ABA procedures are not being carried out in schools, as some teachers and parents prefer more humanistic neurodiverse strategies over ABA, which they perceive as lacking in methodology that prioritizes student consent and choice (Pantazakos 2019). A pervading myth regarding ABA is that reinforcement is the same as bribing kids with candy, which is derived from the use of food as a primary reinforcer (Arntzen et al.2010). While food is sometimes used as reinforcement in ABA, reinforcement is by no means bribery or only the use of food as reinforcement.
Treatment of severe problem behaviour in children with autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disabilities
Published in International Review of Psychiatry, 2018
Eli T. Newcomb, Louis P. Hagopian
In some instances, reinforcement- and extinction-based procedures do not result in clinically meaningful changes to the problem behaviour. When this occurs, additional consequence-based procedures may be needed to achieve treatment goals and produce positive outcomes for the child, including the use of punishment. Timeout from reinforcement is a negative punishment-based procedure used for decreasing behaviour maintained by a socially mediated reinforcer. This procedure involves decreasing or eliminating the individual’s access to reinforcement for a pre-determined brief period of time (e.g. 30 s to 1 min) contingent on problem behaviour. It has been shown to be effective when withdrawing both functional (e.g. Durand & Carr, 1992) and non-functional reinforcers (e.g. Falcomata, Roane, Hovantez, Kettering, & Keeney, 2004). Timeout has been shown to be particularly effective when combined with other procedures aimed at teaching a replacement behaviour (Bean & Roberts, 1981). Another common punishment-based procedure is referred to as response cost; similar to timeout, it is a negative-punishment procedure. Different than timeout, response cost involves the loss of a specific amount of a reinforcer (as opposed to restricting reinforcer access for a specific amount of time) contingent on the occurrence of problem behaviour. Applications may include terminating a preferred activity, or access to a primary reinforcer; however, it is most often implemented in the context of a token economy (e.g. Iwata & Bailey, 1974; Reisinger, 1972). The difference between time out from reinforcement and response cost is subtle, but in either case it is critical to their success to ensure that the reinforcer can be effectively removed as soon as the problem behaviour occurs.