Scholarlink

<p>High-probability instructional sequences (HPISs) have been well-researched and used by practitioners as an antecedent procedure to increase compliance with low-probability tasks. <i>However, in applied settings, practitioners sometimes use sequences consisting of high-probability (HP) instructions accompanied by reinforcers for compliance, without a subsequent low-probability instruction, as a consequence strategy during error correction or de-escalation of problem behavior.</i> The purpose of this study was to examine whether such HP-only sequences could function as reinforcers using a choice procedure. We used a reversal design to assess the reinforcing value of HP-only sequences under three conditions: (1) a preferred edible or potable delivered following compliance with each instruction; (2) praise following compliance with each instruction; and (3) no programmed consequence following compliance. Results indicated that the HP-only sequence with preferred items functioned as a reinforcer for both participants. The HP-only sequence with praise functioned as a reinforcer for the behavior of one participant, but not the other. When there was no programmed consequence for compliance, there were no clear effects on choice. Given that some practitioners use the HP-only sequences as a programmed consequence, the clinical implications of these findings are discussed.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Effects of High-Probability Instructional Sequences as a Programmed Consequence

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月19日

查看全文
  • Amy A. Stango,
  • Elbert Q. Blakely

摘要

High-probability instructional sequences (HPISs) have been well-researched and used by practitioners as an antecedent procedure to increase compliance with low-probability tasks. However, in applied settings, practitioners sometimes use sequences consisting of high-probability (HP) instructions accompanied by reinforcers for compliance, without a subsequent low-probability instruction, as a consequence strategy during error correction or de-escalation of problem behavior. The purpose of this study was to examine whether such HP-only sequences could function as reinforcers using a choice procedure. We used a reversal design to assess the reinforcing value of HP-only sequences under three conditions: (1) a preferred edible or potable delivered following compliance with each instruction; (2) praise following compliance with each instruction; and (3) no programmed consequence following compliance. Results indicated that the HP-only sequence with preferred items functioned as a reinforcer for both participants. The HP-only sequence with praise functioned as a reinforcer for the behavior of one participant, but not the other. When there was no programmed consequence for compliance, there were no clear effects on choice. Given that some practitioners use the HP-only sequences as a programmed consequence, the clinical implications of these findings are discussed.