PS563Unit4discussion

Designing a Schedule of Reinforcement

For this discussion, begin by viewing the , which provides information on how to write a set of technological procedures for an intervention. After reviewing this activity, you will practice how to design and technologically outline a simple intervention using a basic schedule of reinforcement.

Refer to the client that you selected in your Unit 3 discussion. Youve already considered how prompting would play a role in this clients skill development. Now you will plan a simple intervention that uses reinforcement as part of this process. Provide the following for this weeks discussion:

• Reintroduce a client from one of your past discussions.
• Select a simple, evidence-based intervention to support the development of a desired behavior (this can be an antecedent or consequence intervention).
• Describe your intervention procedures technologically (i.e., in enough detail so that someone could implement your intervention), including how you will integrate your schedule of reinforcement. Provide a brief rationale to explain why you feel the type of schedule is most appropriate and how you determined the rate of reinforcement.
• Discuss how the matching law might play a role in how you design your intervention and reinforcement.

Unit 3 Discussion Client 3

Stimulus prompts and response prompts contrast on their point of influence on behavior. An antecedent stimulus, A, is altered by the stimulus prompt, S, to make the SD more salient, e.g. by adding a visual cue, enhancing salience, or putting materials in the right sequence. Response prompt is assistance provided by the instructor that elicits the desired response form, which is directly, e.g. a gesture, a motor model, or physical direction. Since prompts are capable of prompt dependency, the fading plan must be planned initially. Prompts are dissolved such that stimulus control shifts onto natural occurrences, and independent responses engage on more powerful reinforcement (Cooper et al., 2019).

In the case of Yara (7; autism) learning to brush her teeth, I would develop a task analysis and choose prompts with the help of the SWEEPS decision-making materials (Cowan et al., 2022). Based on the SWEEPS flowcharts and SWEEPS worksheet, common response prompt-fading options are organized to provide a potential to make uniform, data-driven teaching choices.

Examples of stimulus prompt are picture sequence at visual timer and positioning the toothbrush and toothpaste in the same starting position at every session. Response prompts might involve pointing to the next picture (gestural) or modeling circles of brushing (motor model), a short verbal cue (“small circles” and), where necessary, a partial or complete physical direction initiated. Correct responding would be followed by praise, short term tangible reinforcement in the case of low motivation.

Steps that are known to generate errors would be faded off in a most-to-least with delay (MTLD) schedule, and this would be in line with SWEEPS prompt-fading options (Cowan et al., 2022). In case of brush back teeth I would commence with full physical instructions, then slowly change to partial physical instructions, then motor instructions provided only after a delay of 2-5 s and finally to a point to the picture prompt and the timer. With improved accuracy, I would add delay and minimize any form of physical contact to a short start signal. The delay would be differentially reinforced as the independent responding and the next-least-faded prompt would be in contact without reprimand.

Prompt intrusiveness can also be minimized by modeling and observational learning: I would make short videos modeling a peer, real-time modelling in the mirror, and short trials of imitation on the most challenging movements and then I would run the entire chain (Cooper et al., 2019). Through the perspective of trauma-informed, prompting attempts should focus on predictability, choice, and assent, physical attempts should not be unexpected, and a clinician should advise withdrawal of assent and bring other options (Rajaraman et al., 2022). I would focus on stimulus prompts and modeling and employ the minimal intrusive response prompts required to make instruction safe and effective in case Yara had a trauma history or exhibited distress with proximity.

References

Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2019). Applied behavior analysis (3rd ed.). Pearson.

Cowan, L., & Lerman, D. (2021). Systematic Worksheet for the Evaluation of Effective Prompting Strategies (SWEEPS) (Unpublished supplemental materials).

Cowan, L. S., Lerman, D. C., Luck Berdeaux, K., Prell, A. H., & Chen, N. (2022). A decision-making tool for evaluating and selecting prompting strategies. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 16(2), 459474.

Rajaraman, A., Austin, J. L., Gover, H. C., Cammilleri, A. P., Donnelly, D. R., & Hanley, G. P. (2022). Toward trauma-informed applications of behavior analysis. *Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis