Skip to main content
Log in

Direct versus indirect response-reinforcer relationships in teaching autistic children

  • Published:
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One possibility suggested by the literature for maximizing the efficiency of behavior modification procedures concerns the relationship between target behaviors and their reinforcers. Therefore, in this experiment three severely autistic children were taught a total of six new target behaviors (in a multiple baseline design) employing two different response-reinforcer relationships: (1) those where the target behaviors were a direct part of the response chain required to procure a reinforcer (e.g., opening the lid of a container to obtain a food reward inside the container); and (2) those where the target behavior was an indirect part of the chain leading to the reinforcer (e.g., the therapist handing the child a food reward after the child had opened the lid of an empty container). In all cases, the results showed rapid acquisition only when the target behavior was a direct part of the chain leading to the reinforcer. The results are discussed in terms of several possible conceptualizations concerning efficient reinforcement contingencies, and in terms of their implications for teaching autistic children.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ferster, C. B. Arbitrary and natural reinforcement.Psychological Record, 1967,17, 341–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, G. R. The relation of secondary reinforcement to delayed reward in visual discrimination learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1948,38, 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, K. E. Color learning by honey bees under conditions of immediate and delayed reinforcement.Zeitschrift fur Tierpsychologie, 1971,29, 28–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewett, F. M. Teaching speech to an autistic child through operant conditioning.American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1965,35, 927–936.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. G., & Skinner, B. F.The analysis of behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, C. L. The goal gradient hypothesis and maze learning.Psychological Review, 1932,39, 25–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kazdin, A. E. The influence of behavior preceding a reinforced response on behavior change in the classroom.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1977,10, 299–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimble, G. A.Hilgard and Marquis' conditioning and learning (2nd ed.). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koegel, R. L., & Egel, A. L. Motivating autistic children.Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1979,88, 418–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koegel, R. L., Firestone, P. B., Kramme, K. W., & Dunlap, G. Increasing spontaneous play by suppressing self-stimulation in autistic children.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1974,7, 521–528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koegel, R. L., & Rincover, A. Treatment of psychotic children in a classroom environment: I. Learning in a large group.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1974,7, 45–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koegel, R. L., Russo, D. C., & Rincover, A. Assessing and training teachers in the generalized use of behavior modification with autistic children.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1977,10, 197–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovaas, O. I.The autistic child: Language development through behavior modification. New York: Irvington, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovaas, O. I., Berberich, J. P., Perloff, B. F., & Schaeffer, B. Acquisition of imitative speech in schizophrenic children.Science, 1966,151, 705–707.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovaas, O. I., Koegel, R. L., Simmons, J. Q., & Long, J. S. Some generalization and follow-up measures on autistic children in behavior therapy.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973,6, 131–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovaas, O. I., & Newsom, C. D. Behavior modification with psychotic children. In H. Leitenberg (Ed.),Handbook of behavior modification and behavior therapy. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovaas, O. I., Schreibman, L., & Koegel, R. L. A behavior modification approach to the treatment of autistic children.Journal of Autism and Childhood Schizophrenia, 1974,4, 111–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rincover, A. Variables affecting stimulus-fading and discriminative responding in psychotic children.Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1978,87, 541–553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rincover, A., & Koegel, R. L. Classroom treatment of autistic children: II. Individualized instruction in a group.Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 1977,5(2), 113–126. (a)

    Google Scholar 

  • Rincover, A., & Koegel, R. L. Research on the education of autistic children: Recent advances and future directions. In B. B. Lahey & A. E. Kazdin (Eds.),Advances in clinical child psychology (Vol. 1). New York: Plenum Press, 1977. (b)

    Google Scholar 

  • Rincover, A., Newsom, C. D., Lovaas, O. I., & Koegel, R. L. Some motivational properties of sensory stimulation in psychotic children.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1977,24, 312–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Risley, T. R., & Wolf, M. M. Establishing functional speech in echolalic children.Behaviour Research and Therapy, 1967,5, 73–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schreibman, L. Effects of within-stimulus and extra-stimulus prompting on discrimination learning in autistic children.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1975,8, 91–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schreibman, L., & Carr, E. G. Elimination of echolalic responding to questions through the training of a generalized verbal response.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1978,11(4), 453–463.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schreibman, L., & Koegel, R. L. A guideline for planning behavior modification programs for autistic children. In S. M. Turner, K. S. Calhoun, & H. E. Adams (Eds.),Handbook of clinical behavior therapy. New York: Wiley, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiroiwa, Y. Lever pulling response speed in children as a function of delay of reinforcement and incentive value.Japanese Psychological Research, 1975,17, 192–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, B. F.The role of the contrived reinforcer. Paper presented at the 10th annual Southern California Behavior Modification Conference, Los Angeles, 1979.

  • Spence, K. W.Behavior theory and conditioning. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1956.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This investigation was supported by U.S. Public Health Service Research Grants MH 28210 and MH 28231, and by U.S. Office of Education Research Grant G007802084 from the Bureau for the Education of the Handicapped. Portions of the results described in this article were discussed in a presentation at the 13th Annual AABT Convention in San Francisco, 1979. The authors are particularly grateful to Andrew Egel, Roberta Elman, Janis Costello, and Karen Britten, for their helpful comments, and to Jody Fisher and Gina Richman, for their assitance in the data collection.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Koegel, R.L., Williams, J.A. Direct versus indirect response-reinforcer relationships in teaching autistic children. J Abnorm Child Psychol 8, 537–547 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00916505

Download citation

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00916505

Keywords

Navigation