PAiring ~ Non Contingent Reinforcment

August 10, 2002

Has anyone noticed, when using pairing or non contingent reinforcment

, to gain instructional control, with a child with a long history of

negative reinforcment when demands were placed, has worsened the

situation?

DO you think this is possible. ?

Is there a chance that the process doesnt " work " for particular

children who are very keen on " taking advantage or running the roost? "

Especially when many are trying to use " minimal use of extinction by

placing little or no demands " .

And when one tries to place the easiest demands the child

automatically " catches on " on and becomes task avoidant or resorts to

automatic reinforcment (self stimm) even with the easiest demand with

errorless learning and it become inevitable to require an extinction

procedure?

A child who one has been " pairing with " for a long period of time and

when they try to morph into some intensive teaching is immediatly met

with resistance.

I know if it is unevitable then one must use extinction, and then

evaluate WHY the child hasnt paired You , the learning enviorment with

a improving set of reinforcing conditions.

Can it be the child may possibly never find " working " in an intensive

situation better than Self stimm or esacape?

Have you worked with children like this before?

If so what did you do, what have you been doing and have you been

finding that you have to inevitably be doing extinction procedure to

get learning done?

Would love to hear your experience with the " hard to motivate child "

www.elija.org

August 10, 2002

Dear ,

With some children (probably most children), it is inevitable that you will use

an extinction procedure & probably use it many times. I think the idea is that

you don't want it to be the only procedure used. We always want to go with the

positive and use reinforcement as much as possible to increase the appropriate

behavior while at the same time using procedures to decrease the inappropriate

behavior. While it would be great if only the positive procedures were needed,

it is not realistic.

I am currently working with a student that I started consulting for in April

2001. When I first met this child, he would tantrum at even a suggestion of a

demand and wouldn't allow us to even physically prompt correct answers to gain

access to reinforcers. His therapist (only had one at the time) spent 4 months

pairing herself and working up to " table work " . This is not to say she didn't

do any work with him. During the 4 months he learned the receptive and

expressive labels of all of the Stages Language Builder Cards and he started

spontaneously using one word mands to name just the major accomplishments.

During the 4 months, there were many times during a session where the therapist

had to use the extinction procedure. It comes up less often now but it is still

used occasionally with this particular therapist. New therapists have to be

indoctrinated :0) He works mostly at the table now and has more than half of

his ABLLS grids filled in (he started at about 25%).

Hope this story was helpful.

Sincerely,

e Quinby

[ ] PAiring ~ Non Contingent Reinforcment