Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) is a possible alternative to differential reinforcement of other behaviors (DRO) that may operate through a similar mechanism. In the research, the participant's problem behaviors were maintained by automatic reinforcement or even multiply maintained. NCR is the method to intervene with the participant who had no clinical effect on using sensory integration therapy (SIT) to reduce problem behaviors in the previous study. The results showed that NCR is an effective way to decrease the problem behaviors without extinction burst.

Students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) have very poor long-term outcomes. Non-contingent reinforcement (NCR) has been used to successfully reduce problem behaviors. NCR is frequently used with populations with severe disabilities and in hospital settings using function based reinforcers. Very few studies have applied the use of NCR to EBD populations, and to students whose cognitive scores fall within the normal range. No studies have examined the use of preferred tangible reinforcers delivered non-contingently with participants with EBD or in classroom settings. This study measured the effects of delivering tangible reinforcers selected through preference assessments on the disruptive and on-task behaviors of three students with EBD in the classroom setting. Results indicate the use of preferred tangibles delivered on a fixed-schedule can be effective in reducing disruptive behavior in the classroom without reducing on-task behaviors, and may, in fact, be effective in increasing on-task behaviors in the classroom.

Stereotypic behavior is often observed in children diagnosed with an Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Stereotypy can inhibit skill acquisition by leading to inaccuracy on task performance and/or slower task completion (e.g., Koegel & Covert, 1972; Morrison & Rosales-Ruiz, 1997). Several studies have demonstrated that access to preferred matched stimulation leads to a reduction of vocal stereotypical behavior (e.g., Lanovaz, Rapp, & Ferguson, 2012). However, it is paramount that treatments not only be effective in decreasing the problem behavior, but do so without further inhibiting academic progress. The current study evaluated the effects of matched stimulation (i.e., music) on vocal stereotypy and acquisition of novel skills. Non-contingent access to music decreased levels of vocal stereotypy across participants and did not hinder mastery of discrimination skills. In addition, noncontingent access to music had only a minor impact on the participant’s latency to perform mastered tasks.

Functional analysis procedures were used to assess and treat multiple topographies of self-injurious behavior exhibited by an individual. An experimental functional analysis indicated that one topography, hand biting, appeared to be maintained by social positive reinforcement in the form of delivery of tangible items. The analysis also provided evidence that a second form of self-injury, skin picking, was automatically reinforced. To treat positively reinforced hand biting, access to a preferred tangible was arranged contingent on the omission of biting for a prespecified time interval. Hand biting was nearly eliminated, and low rates were maintained as the schedule of reinforcement was thinned to 10 min. Competing stimulus assessments identified that magazines effectively suppressed all occurrences of skin picking; therefore, noncontingent access to magazines was implemented. Using a combination of multielement and multiple baseline designs, we were able to demonstrate that the two topographies of self-injury were maintained by independent reinforcement contingencies and that interventions corresponding to each topography and function effectively treated both behaviors.

Ten experimentally naive children between the ages of six and eight served in three generalized imitation experiments using symbolic models. Subjects were presented videotaped behaviors to imitate via closed circuit television, and their responses were mechanically defined, recorded, and reinforced in an effort to control social influences from the presence of the experimenter. In Experiment 1, imitation of three behaviors was reinforced and imitation of a fourth behavior was never reinforced for four subjects. Two other subjects received noncontingent reinforcement. The following independent variables were tested: (1) the presence and absence of an experimenter, (2) instructions to "Do that," and (3) contingent and noncontingent reinforcement. Results of Experiment 1 demonstrated the apparatus could be used to produce and maintain generalized imitation, even in the absence of the experimenter, so long as differential reinforcement was available. ''Do that'' instructions were not necessary, and the presence of the experimenter served to maintain imitation when contingent reinforcement was not available. In Experiment 2, four subjects produced generalized imitation in the absence of both a n experimenter and any instructions with two reinforced and two nonreinforced imitations. Using the same four subjects in Experiment 3, congruent, incongruent, and "Do what you want" instructions given before sessions demonstrated that instructions could override the effect of reinforcers or produce differential responding in most subjects. When given a choice to imitate or not imitate, subjects continued generalized imitation. The data tend to support the theory that imitation is itself a response class, and the effect of instructions is to divide that response class into a class of imitated responses and a class of instruction-following responses. The influence of instructions, even in the absence of an adult experimenter, was obvious.