Preference for and Efficacy of Accumulated and Distributed Response–Reinforcer Arrangements During Skill Acquisition
We evaluated preference for and efficacy of distributed and accumulated response–reinforcer arrangements during discrete-trial teaching for unmastered tasks. During the distributed arrangement, participants received 30-s access to a reinforcer after each correct response. During accumulated arrangements, access was accrued throughout the work period and delivered in its entirety upon completion of the work requirement. Accumulated arrangements were assessed with and without the use of tokens. In Experiment 1, four of five participants preferred one of the accumulated arrangements and preference remained unchanged across mastered and unmastered tasks for all five participants. Four individuals participated in Experiment 2 and we conducted replications with new target stimuli with three of these individuals (for a total of seven analyses). Target stimuli were mastered more quickly and session durations were, on average, shorter in one of the accumulated arrangements in six of the seven analyses. Partial correspondence between preference and measures of efficacy and efficiency was obtained for two of the three individuals for whom both experiments were conducted. These results support prior research, indicating that many learners with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities prefer accumulated reinforcement and that accumulated arrangements can be as effective and as efficient as distributed arrangements in teaching new skills.
KeywordsAccumulated reinforcement Acquisition Discrete-trial teaching Distributed reinforcement Preference Tokens
This research was conducted as part of the first author’s requirements for a doctoral degree in Applied Developmental Psychology at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. We would like to thank Andrew Bonner, Anita Louie, Elizabeth Nudelman, and Rashanique Reese for their assistance with data collection and analysis.
- Carroll, R. A., Kodak, T., & Adolf, K. J. (2016). Effect of delayed reinforcement on skill acquisition during discrete-trial instruction: Implications for treatment-integrity errors in academic settings. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49, 176–181. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.268.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- DeLeon, I. G., Chase, J. A., Frank-Crawford, M. A., Carreau-Webster, A. B., Triggs, M., Bullock, C. E., et al. (2014). Distributed and accumulated reinforcement arrangements: Evaluations of efficacy and preference. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 47, 293–313. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.116.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Grindle, C. F., & Remington, B. (2002). Discrete-trial training for autistic children when reward is delayed: A comparison of conditioned cue value and response marking. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 187–190. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2002.35-187.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Gutierrez, A., Hale, M. N., O’Brien, H. A., Fischer, A. J., Durocher, J. S., & Alessandri, M. (2009). Evaluating the effectiveness of two commonly used discrete trial procedures for teaching receptive discrimination to young children with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 3, 630–638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2008.12.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Mudford, O. C., Martin, N. T., Hui, J. K. Y., & Taylor, S. A. (2009). Assessing observer accuracy in continuous recording of rate and duration: Three algorithms compared. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42, 527–539. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2009.42-527.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Ward-Horner, J. C., Cengher, M., Ross, R. K., & Fienup, D. M. (2017a). Arranging response requirements and the distribution of reinforcers: A brief review of preference and performance outcomes. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 50, 181–185. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.350.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ward-Horner, J. C., Muehlberger, A. O., Vedora, J., & Ross, R. K. (2017b). Effects of reinforcer magnitude and quality on preference for response-reinforcer arrangements in young children with autism. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 10, 183–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-017-0185-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar