Translational Research to Inform Interventions for Challenging Behavior

Translational Research to Inform Interventions for Severe Challenging Behavior for Individuals With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities

This project is meant to identify relations between the reinforcement histories of 80 adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) and the prevalence of extinction bursts. Extinction bursts, or temporary increases in rates and intensities of behavior during extinction, often preclude the inclusion of extinction in intervention packages meant to suppress severe challenging behavior, despite the fact that extinction is often necessary to generate therapeutic outcomes. Study results will provide insight into how researchers can enhance interventions for the severe challenging behavior of individuals with IDD while mitigating the undesirable collateral effects (i.e., extinction bursts) of therapeutic action (i.e., extinction). Expanded access to study results will be made available to those who inquire after all data have been obtained and analyzed.

The Goal of this project is to identify mechanisms responsible for bursts, and to facilitate strategic extensions toward discovery for treatments of challenging behavior. AIM 1: In the service of this goal, the investigators aim to evaluate the accuracy of an efficient alternative to demand-curve analysis (i.e., progressive ratio reinforcer analysis) in quantifying reinforcer value (i.e., Pmax). AIM 2: Investigators also aim to evaluate the utility of manipulating baseline reinforcement parameters for controlling bursts when those manipulations are informed by the results of demand-curve analysis.

behavioral sciences, reinforcement schedule, motivation, economics, behavioral, developmental disability, intellectual disability, problem behavior, extinction bursts

The investigators will enroll 80 adults with developmental disabilities in a low-stakes translational investigation employing a 2x2 factorial, crossed, and randomized matched blocks design, with batched randomization logic. Procedures will include: (a) matching participants within batches according to progressive ratio reinforcer analysis results, and (b) randomly assigning participants to one of four experimental conditions to determine whether information about reinforcer value can be used to set baseline parameters that either promote or eliminate bursts during extinction.

Participants will be randomized to one of four baseline reinforcement conditions. They will not be informed of which condition they have been assigned to, or why they have been assigned to it.

Pre-extinction baseline unit price for the programmed reinforcer will be its Pmax, minus one half of the distance between its Pmax and its breakpoint. Extinction will be introduced at the beginning of the relevant appointment, before within-appointment reinforcer consumption has had an opportunity to approximate demand.

Pre-extinction baseline unit price for the programmed reinforcer will be its Pmax, minus one half of the distance between its Pmax and its breakpoint. Extinction will be introduced at the end of the relevant appointment, after within-appointment reinforcer consumption has approximated demand.

Pre-extinction baseline unit price for the programmed reinforcer will be its Pmax, plus one half of the distance between its Pmax and its breakpoint. Extinction will be introduced at the beginning of the relevant appointment, before within-appointment reinforcer consumption has had an opportunity to approximate demand.

Pre-extinction baseline unit price for the programmed reinforcer will be its Pmax, plus one half of the distance between its Pmax and its breakpoint. Extinction will be introduced at the end of the relevant appointment, after within-appointment reinforcer consumption has approximated demand.

This analysis is designed to determine the degree to which relative price, and the timing of extinction, interact to increase or abate responding during extinction (thereby highlighting mechanisms of control).

This term describes the highest rate of responding observed during extinction and will be depicted as a proportion of baseline. For example, assuming the mean rate of responding during the final three sessions of baseline is 3 responses per minute (i.e., [2.8 rpm + 3.2 rpm + 3 rpm] / 3 = 3 rpm), and the highest rate of responding during a single session of extinction is 3.4 rpm, then peak response rate for this hypothetical individual would be 1.13 (i.e., 3.4 / 3 = 1.13). This value will serve as the primary dependent variable for each participant in all between-groups comparisons in our data-analysis plan.

Reinforcement schedule which preceded the last obtained reinforcer prior to response cessation during progressive-ratio reinforcer analysis. Often used as a proxy measure to establish reinforcer value.

This term describes the number of reinforcers obtained prior to response cessation during progress fixed-ratio reinforcer analysis. Often used as a proxy measure to establish reinforcer value.

This term describes the unit price that produces the highest target-response output during progressive fixed-ratio reinforcer analysis.

This term describes the latency from session onset to delivery of the first programmed reinforcer during progressive fixed-ratio reinforcer analysis.

In addition to between-groups differences in peak-response rate (primary dependent variable), the investigators will also compare between-groups differences in the number of sessions required to achieve response elimination during extinction.

The investigators will measure the total duration of reinforcer-analysis sessions (in seconds) to establish baseline-session parameters.

Inclusion Criteria: Participants must be older than 18. Participants must have a developmental disability (unconstrained to specific diagnoses). Participants must be able to correctly manipulate all items used in the study. Participants must consent (or assent, when relevant) to procedures prior to and throughout the study. Exclusion Criteria: Participants younger than 18. Participants without disabilities. Participants who cannot correctly manipulate items used in the study. Participants who do not consent (or assent, when relevant) to participation.

Peer-reviewed published empirical reports will follow CONSORT reporting guidelines, as well as other principles of rigor and transparency highlighted through the Equator network (https://www.equator-network.org/).

Study protocol, SAP, & ICF will be submitted within 12 months of study completion and will be made available indefinitely. Complete reports will be submitted for peer review within 12 months of study completion.