No description available.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether altering parameters of positive and negative reinforcement in identical ways could influence behavior maintained by each in different ways. Three undergraduate students participated in a series of assessments designed to identify preferred and aversive sounds with similar reinforcing values. Following reinforcer identification, we conducted parameter sensitivity assessments for both positive and negative reinforcers. Parameter manipulations influenced behavior in the same way across reinforcement processes for two participants. However, for one participant, the way in which parameter manipulations influenced behavior differed according to the reinforcement process. Our results suggest that, for at least some individuals, positive and negative sound reinforcement processes do not influence behavior in identical ways. Clinical and theoretical implications are discussed.

Reinforcer assessments have largely relied on the use of progressive ratio (PR) schedules to identify stimuli that function as reinforcers. PR schedules evaluate the reinforcing efficacy of a stimulus by measuring the number of responses produced in order to access a stimulus as the number of required responses increases. The current evaluation extends the literature on reinforcer assessments by measuring responding under a progressive force (PF) schedule, in addition to progressive ratio requirements. We compared responding under PR and PF schedules with two children with autism using a multielement design embedded within a reversal experimental design. Results were mixed and implications for further development of reinforcer assessment methods (particularly PF schedules) are discussed.