↓ Skip to main content

Stimulus Fading and Response Elaboration in Differential Reinforcement for Alternative Behavior

Overview of attention for article published in Behavioral Interventions, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Stimulus Fading and Response Elaboration in Differential Reinforcement for Alternative Behavior
Published in
Behavioral Interventions, January 2015
DOI 10.1002/bin.1402
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kevin J. Schlichenmeyer, William V. Dube, Mariela Vargas-Irwin

Abstract

A hallmark of applied behavior analysis is the development of function-based interventions for problem behavior. A widely recommended function-based intervention is differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA), in which reinforcement is contingent upon socially acceptable alternatives to problem behavior (e.g., teaching communication skills). Typically, DRA is introduced under rich schedules of reinforcement. Although effective for initiating behavior change, rich schedules are often impractical in the natural setting. In this study, we evaluated the extent to which a stimulus fading program could be employed to elaborate alternative behavior (mands) in two individuals diagnosed with an Autism Spectrum Disorder. For both participants, problem behavior was reduced substantially upon implementation of the DRA procedure. Further, problem behavior rates remained low and mand rates decreased to more practical levels as the DRA behavioral requirements increased during the fading program. The fading approach demonstrated in this paper may be a useful component of intervention packages for clinicians.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 21%
Student > Master 6 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 14%
Other 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Other 5 18%
Unknown 4 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 50%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Unspecified 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 May 2016.
All research outputs
#7,609,587
of 12,177,962 outputs
Outputs from Behavioral Interventions
#108
of 154 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,949
of 277,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavioral Interventions
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,177,962 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 154 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,865 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.