FAQs

First, care should be taken to consider whether this strategy is helping to maintain problem behavior. If your son is attempting to terminate an ongoing activity by engaging in problem behavior, the strategy might be associated with release from that activity plus access to a desired activity. This is a dangerous combination in that it results in strengthening the probability of problem behavior while engaging in aversive activities. Consider having a functional behavioral assessment conducted. Further, it is always preferable to be able to anticipate activities that have a higher probability of association with problem behavior. Consider delivering the relaxing activity contingent on engagement rather than waiting until the learner becomes upset.

A “motivating operation” accounts for a condition that either increases or decreases the effectiveness of a consequence in increasing or decreasing the probability that a behavior will occur. They influence whether a person wants or does not want an event at a given moment, which helps explain a person’s behavior at a given point in time. For example, loud noises occurring when at the mall may affect the learner’s desire to leave the mall. This, in turn, may increase the probability of problem behavior occurring at the mall when it is noisy.

There could be many different plausible motivating operation interventions for any given event. For example, when a person becomes agitated when there are loud noises at the mall, wearing earphones with soothing music while shopping might be an option. Another option might be to go to the mall to shop during less peak and busy times. A third option might be to select a smaller strip mall where one travels outside periodically to escape noise.

First, it will be necessary to determine the function associated with the challenging behavior. This will require the implementation of a functional behavioral assessment. Generally, if the problem behavior is maintained by the action of others, interventionists would examine whether the learner engages in elopement to escape aversive activities, gain or maintain access to goods and services, or gain or maintain the attention of others. The intervention strategies for each of these may be somewhat different. In the case that the behavior is maintained by the attention received in following the learner during elopement, one strategy that has proven successful is the implementation of Non-contingent Reinforcement. In this strategy, the interventionist determines the length of time that can pass without attention prior to an elopement attempt. The interventionist then sets a schedule of delivering attention just under this amount of time. Because attention is on a schedule, it is not contingent on what the learner is doing. This intervention can demonstrate to the learner that dense attention is available without eloping. Once eloping has decreased, the interventionist can gradually increase the time in between attention delivery by implementing a signaled delay procedure (often referred to as tolerance for delay in the delivery of reinforcement). A complementary strategy is to also teach the learner a socially appropriate behavior to obtain the attention of others. Depending on the learner and their cognitive level that could involve teaching them to provide compliments, offer assistance or simply politely request attention. For example, “could you come here?”

It is likely that the learner continues to engage in this response because it is fairly often getting the learner what he or she wants. The solution to this problem is to teach the learner to use a more conventional alternative response. To ensure the quickest acquisition of the new response the interventionist should consider making the old strategy less effective. For example, delaying problem solution or access to desired event when the old behavior occurs and making access very fast when the prompted alternative response is used.

Many individuals are somewhat impulsive and not very patient particularly when it involves something that they want. One strategy involves teaching the learner to accept a brief delay prior to the delivery of the item. Please refer to the resource provided in question 5 to learn more about this procedure.

Interventionists may wish to consider several possibilities. First, it is possible that the outcomes that maintain screaming in school are different from the consequences that maintained it at home. Sorting that out will require a functional analysis to be completed at school. Secondly, it is possible that both screaming at home and at school occurred for the same reason. Perhaps at home the new behavior is being promptly reinforced while the old behavior (screaming) has been rendered less efficient as a result of parents’ actions (that is, perhaps they stopped delivering desired items contingent on screaming). If this is the case, it may only be necessary to work with school staff to ensure that they are not continuing to reinforce the screaming when it occurs.

A setting event is a variable that in and of itself does not serve as a direct cue to the learner that if they engage in problem behavior they are apt to be reinforced. Instead, it simply increases the probability that in the presence of a provoking stimulus problem behavior will occur. For example, assume that when a task demand is given to James there is about a 20% probability that he will engage in problem behavior. However, when his work environment is extremely noisy, the probability of problem behavior when given a task demand is much higher at 90%.

Because sometimes the setting event is present while other times it is absent, the behavior may appear to be very inconsistent to an observer.

Negative reinforcement involves the removal of an aversive event that is contingent on one’s production of a particular behavior. Some forms of problem behavior in which individuals engage can be somewhat embarrassing or even scary to those who work with a learner. For example, suppose that a learner is prepared to aggress when he does not get a cookie. If the learner does not get one and begins aggressing, the staff member may quickly learn that the easiest way to get the aggression to stop is to give the learner a cookie. In this example, staff produced the response to aggression of delivering a cookie that resulted in the termination of the aggression. The termination of aggression in this example is negative reinforcement. If this situation continues to play out the staff member may learn to deliver cookies because of the negative reinforcement that they obtain. Unfortunately, the staff members’ consequence will only strengthen the problem behavior making it even harder to decelerate.

Overusing communicative alternatives to problem behavior is not an uncommon challenge. One solution to this problem involves the use of competing schedules of reinforcement. The scenario that follows is an example of that strategy.

Interventionist Fred noticed that within 30 seconds of returning from a break John was requesting another. Because staff members were so happy about John’s decrease in problem behavior, they had been diligently reinforcing each break request. Fred decided to offer John a choice. John could either have a 30 second break whenever he wanted. Alternatively if he worked for 10 minutes he could take a 3-minute break that also gave him access to his favorite video game. It did not take John long to determine that he would prefer a longer break with video. By adjusting the value of breaks, it was possible to offer John a choice without getting into a power struggle that could have occurred if Fred simply said “no” to the break request.

A functional analysis is a controlled comparison of two or more variables that may be influencing the emission of problem behavior (For example, comparing when attention is delivered right after property destruction vs. no attention being delivered). In a functional analysis, this comparison would be replicated to demonstrate a causal relationship between the consequence and the problem behavior. A functional behavior assessment may or may not include a functional analysis. Typically a record review, interview assessment, a scatterplot, and an ABC analysis may be staples of a functional behavior assessment.

This is a tough one without applying the question to a specific learner. There are some instances where this information can be important. For example, if the challenging behavior is very severe (banging head on a table with enough force to cause a concussion), it may be important to know how often it is occurring compared to other milder forms. However, in many cases, data could be streamlined.

For example, assume that learner Kenny has three different reasonably mild forms of problem behavior that are used somewhat interchangeably to obtain the same outcome. It may be possible on most days in which data are being taken to collapse the forms into one category of problem behavior. Further, it may not be important to count instances. An interval of time might be set during which staff members are simply observing whether the behavior occurs during that interval of time. If it did occur they enter a plus on the data sheet for the first time interval. If it did not occur they enter a minus. This is called a partial interval recording session. Suppose that staff observed for ten 5-minute intervals. This is 50 possible intervals. If problem behavior occurred during 20 of those intervals the data could be summarized as 20 divided by 50 or during 40% of the intervals problem behavior occurred. In this data system, we don’t know exactly how many times the behavior occurred. However, we do have an estimate of its magnitude. For staff members, once a behavior occurs during an interval the recording period is complete and the staff member may direct his or her attention elsewhere.

First, you may want to consider taking one person at a time on an outing. When learners have challenges self-regulating their behavior, you are in somewhat of a no-win situation here. Secondly, if being able to postpone or accept a delay to reinforcement is an issue you may want to consider implementing a tolerance for delay procedure.

Punishment can result in rapid deceleration of a behavior. Unfortunately it has a wide number of side effects that are described below. Whenever punishment is applied it does not result in the learner’s best performance. Instead it tends to result in minimal participation. For example, when you get a speeding ticket, the ticket motivates you to go just slightly below or at the speed limit not safely below it. Secondly, you may only obey when you see an officer nearby (in other words punishment promotes limited maintenance and generalization). Punishment models negative behavior for the learner and others in the environment.

In setting up a schedule, it is important to implement some minor changes. With many learners when minor schedule changes are initiated it is helpful to make sure that the change involves increased reinforcement. For example, having the learner pick up a snack on the way to homework. This is a schedule change, but benefits the learner.

A useful strategy may be to teach individuals to use a daily schedule. A schedule helps an individual remember the sequence of activities that are to follow. Schedules can be either across activities (i.e. a daily schedule) or within activities (e.g. a list of the steps of an activity). An example of a within activity schedule might involve following a task analyzed set of picture instructions that lead to successfully microwaving popcorn.

If the individual is healthy, a functional assessment must be completed to explore the possibility that the problem beFirst the individual should have a thorough medical examination to determine that he/she does not have a medical condition or injury that could cause or contribute to the problem behavior. Common conditions include urinary tract infections, ear infections, strep throat, bad colds, hemorrhoids, and ear infections. This list, however, is only the tip of a possible iceberg of medical problems that might be related.

If the individual is healthy, a functional assessment must be completed to explore the possibility that the problem behavior could be produced in an effort to escape an activity or person, obtain or maintain access to goods and services, obtain/maintain access to an individual’s attention, or a combination of the preceding. To read more about a functional behavioral assessment see the linked information.havior could be produced in an effort to escape an activity or person, obtain or maintain access to goods and services, obtain/maintain access to an individual’s attention, or a combination of the preceding. To read more about a functional behavioral assessment see the linked information.