Biomedical subjects

B A Shore

Publications and source records attributed to B A Shore.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed1995

An analysis of the reinforcing properties of hand mouthing.

Hand mouthing often has been described as a stereotypic response that is maintained by nonsocial (automatic) reinforcement; however, data supporting this conclusion can be found in relatively few studies. This series of studies presents an experimental analysis of conditions associated with the maintenance of hand mouthing. In Experiment 1, a functional analysis was conducted for 12 individuals who engaged in chronic hand mouthing, to determine whether the behavior is usually maintained independent of social contingencies. Results obtained for 10 subjects were consistent with an automatic reinforcement hypothesis; the remaining 2 subjects' hand mouthing was maintained by social-positive reinforcement. Based on these results, Experiment 2 was designed to identify the specific reinforcing properties of hand mouthing. Each of 4 subjects was provided with a toy that substituted for hand mouthing, and preference for a specific topography of toy manipulation (hand-toy contact or mouth-toy contact) was measured. Results indicated that hand stimulation was the predominant reinforcer for all subjects. Experiment 3 provided an extension of Experiment 2 in that the same responses were measured across a variety of toys presented to each of 5 subjects. Results again indicated that hand stimulation was the predominant reinforcer for all subjects. Implications of these results are discussed with relevance to treatment.

Adult↗

PubMed1995

Pyramidal staff training in the extension of treatment for severe behavior disorders.

We implemented a pyramidal training procedure for staff working with individuals who exhibited self-injurious behavior (SIB), aggression, and disruption. Two adults with developmental disabilities and their direct-care staff and supervisors participated. Following successful treatment by the experimenters, two types of baselines were conducted with the clients and their direct-care staff. During an initial baseline, the staff implemented preexisting procedures. Staff members then received instruction on the new treatment procedures using training methods common throughout the institution, and data were collected during this "post-in-service" baseline. Experimenters then taught unit supervisors to implement treatment, collect and interpret data, and provide similar instructions and feedback to the staff members. The supervisor training was implemented in a multiple baseline design across subjects (clients and direct-care staff). Results showed little change following in-service training but noticeable improvements in direct-care staff behaviors and corresponding decreases in the clients' inappropriate behavior following the pyramidal training intervention with supervisors. Six additional clients (along with their direct-care staff and supervisors) participated in pre- and posttreatment replication designs, and their results provided additional support for the efficacy of the supervisor training procedures.

Activities of Daily Living↗

PubMed1995

Effects of subject- versus experimenter-selected reinforcers on the behavior of individuals with profound developmental disabilities.

Results from a number of studies have shown that individuals with profound developmental disabilities often show differential approach behavior to stimuli presented in a variety of formats, and that such behavior is a reasonably good predictor of reinforcement effects when these "preferred" stimuli are used subsequently in a contingent arrangement. Recent data suggest that reinforcement effects may be enhanced further by allowing individuals to select, just prior to training sessions, which (of several) preferred stimuli would be used as reinforcers, but whether this method is superior to one based on selection by a teacher or therapist has not been adequately addressed. We compared the effects of these two methods of reinforcer selection on rates of responding on a free-operant task, using stimuli previously identified as potential reinforcers. Results obtained with 4 subjects indicated little or no difference in reinforcement effects when stimuli were selected by subjects rather than experimenters. Implications of these results with respect to choice and its relation to reinforcement are discussed.

Adult↗

PubMed1994

A sequential, test-control methodology for conducting functional analyses of self-injurious behavior.

Multielement and reversal designs used to identify maintaining variables for behavior disorders such as self-injury have several potential limitations, including interaction effects (multielement), inefficiency (reversal), and lack of a continuous control (reversal). This article describes a methodology that minimizes these problems yet captures the best features of both designs. This design consists of several phases implemented in a sequential (A-B-C) fashion, as in the reversal design. However, each phase consists of two conditions, a test and a control, presented concurrently in a multielement format. Five subjects' self-injury was assessed using both the multielement design and the sequential, test-control (or pairwise) design. Results for two subjects indicated that the multielement design produced clear assessment outcomes, and similar findings were obtained using the pairwise design. For two other subjects, the multielement assessments were somewhat undifferentiated, and clearer results were obtained using the pairwise design. The fifth subject's self-injury showed cyclical patterns using both assessment techniques. Benefits and limitations of the sequential assessment methodology are discussed.

Adult↗

PubMed1994

The functions of self-injurious behavior: an experimental-epidemiological analysis.

Data are summarized from 152 single-subject analyses of the reinforcing functions of self-injurious behavior (SIB). Individuals with developmental disabilities referred for assessment and/or treatment over an 11-year period were exposed to a series of conditions in which the effects of antecedent and consequent events on SIB were examined systematically by way of multielement, reversal, or combined designs. Data were collected during approximately 4,000 experimental sessions (1,000 hr), with the length of assessment for individuals ranging from 8 to 66 sessions (M = 26.2) conducted over 2 to 16.5 hr (M = 6.5). Differential or uniformly high responding was observed in 145 (95.4%) of the cases. Social-negative reinforcement (escape from task demands or other sources of aversive stimulation) accounted for 58 cases, which was the largest proportion of the sample (38.1%). Social-positive reinforcement (either attention or access to food or materials) accounted for 40 (26.3%) of the cases, automatic (sensory) reinforcement accounted for 39 (25.7%), and multiple controlling variables accounted for 8 (5.3%). Seven sets of data (4.6%) showed either cyclical or inconsistent patterns of responding that were uninterpretable. Overall results indicated that functional analysis methodologies are extremely effective in identifying the environmental determinants of SIB on an individual basis and, subsequently, in guiding the process of treatment selection. Furthermore, an accumulation of assessment data from such analyses across a large number of individuals provides perhaps the most rigorous approach to an epidemiological study of behavioral function.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1994

Assessing and programming generalized behavioral reduction across multiple stimulus parameters.

Generalization across three stimulus parameters was examined for 5 individuals whose self-injurious behavior was maintained by escape from task demands. Prior to treatment, three stimulus parameters (therapist, setting, and demands) were systematically varied across baseline sessions. These variables were held constant during treatment, which consisted of escape extinction. When treatment was completed, three novel stimulus parameters were probed. If the rate of self-injury was high during this probe, treatment was reimplemented with one new stimulus parameter (the other two were the same as in the original treatment condition). Following this second treatment, another probe with three novel stimuli was conducted. If the rate of self-injury was again high, treatment was implemented again while a second stimulus parameter was changed. This sequence continued until generalization was observed across the three parameters. Results showed idiosyncratic differences in generalization. The behavior of 2 subjects showed complete generalization during the first novel probe. A 3rd subject's behavior showed generalization following treatment across two stimulus parameters (setting and therapist). The behavior of the 2 remaining subjects showed a complete lack of generalization across the three parameters; both subjects required training for novelty by randomly varying the stimulus parameters for a substantial number of sessions.

Adult↗