- Applied Behavior Analysis Autism Core Knowledge Questions and Answers Flashcards

A practitioner is using a multiple-schedule to assess whether a behavior is maintained by positive reinforcement. During the S+ component, the target behavior occurs at a high rate, but during the S-delta component, it drops to near zero. The client then begins engaging in the target behavior during S-delta at rates comparable to S+. What is the most likely explanation for this phenomenon?

Answer: Stimulus generalization has occurred, weakening discriminative control

When a behavior that had been under tight discriminative control (occurring only during S+) begins occurring during S-delta at comparable rates, this indicates stimulus generalization — the client is no longer discriminating between the two stimulus conditions. The discriminative control has eroded, meaning the S+ and S-delta are being treated equivalently. Behavioral contrast would produce an increase during S+ when extinction is applied during S-, not a leveling of rates. The schedule type and conditioned reinforcer explanations do not account for the pattern described.

During a functional analysis, a child with autism shows elevated rates of self-injurious behavior (SIB) in the alone condition compared to all other conditions, including attention, demand, and play. However, the SIB in the alone condition is observed to be rhythmic, stereotyped, and associated with a calm affect. What is the most clinically precise interpretation?

Answer: The SIB is automatically reinforced, and the affect data suggest it may be positively reinforcing (sensory stimulation) rather than negatively reinforcing (pain attenuation)

Elevated rates in the alone condition with no social contingency indicate automatic reinforcement. The additional observation of rhythmic, stereotyped topography and calm affect is clinically meaningful: it suggests the behavior is producing pleasurable sensory stimulation (positive automatic reinforcement) rather than relieving pain or discomfort (negative automatic reinforcement). This distinction matters for treatment — competing stimuli interventions work better for positively automatically reinforced behavior. Affect and topographic data are legitimate supplementary sources when interpreting FA outcomes, and the alone condition does not systematically remove demands.

A BCBA is treating elopement in a 9-year-old with ASD using differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA). After 6 weeks, elopement has decreased by 80% in the clinic but has not generalized to the school setting. Which of the following modifications most directly addresses the failure of generalization?

Answer: Program common stimuli by training in settings that share salient features with the school environment

Programming common stimuli (Stokes & Baer, 1977) is the most direct strategy for addressing failure of generalization across settings. When behavior has been acquired in the clinic but does not transfer to school, the treatment environment and the generalization environment do not share enough controlling stimuli. Introducing stimuli from the school setting into training (or conducting sessions in the school) directly builds the stimulus control needed for generalization. Increasing clinic reinforcement density does not address the setting-specific stimulus control problem. Concurrent operants and punishment may have their uses but do not address the root cause of the generalization failure.

A practitioner implementing Pivotal Response Treatment (PRT) with a child with autism notices that the child initiates joint attention inconsistently. According to PRT's theoretical framework, which of the following best explains why targeting joint attention as a pivotal behavior is expected to produce collateral gains across untrained social skills?

Answer: Joint attention is a keystone behavior whose acquisition creates new learning opportunities that naturally reinforce diverse social initiations

In PRT, pivotal behaviors are defined as responses whose acquisition produces widespread, collateral improvements in other behaviors that were not directly trained. Joint attention functions as a keystone behavior because it fundamentally increases the child's contact with social learning opportunities — when a child references another person's gaze or point, they gain access to a richer stream of social and linguistic information that in turn reinforces and shapes a wide range of social behaviors. This differs from explaining gains through conditioned reinforcement, overselectivity reduction, or common stimuli, all of which are related concepts but are not the primary PRT explanation for the pivotal behavior mechanism.

A behavior analyst reviews data showing that a client's problem behavior has a bimodal distribution across the day — peaks at 9–10 AM and again at 2–3 PM — with near-zero rates in between. Staff report no obvious antecedent changes at those times. Which assessment strategy would yield the most temporally sensitive information about the motivating operations at play?

Answer: A conditional probability analysis of antecedent events stratified by time-of-day intervals

A conditional probability analysis stratified by time-of-day allows the analyst to calculate the probability of problem behavior given specific antecedent events separately for peak and off-peak intervals. This directly tests whether particular antecedents are more likely to precede behavior during peak times, pointing toward time-linked motivating operations (e.g., hunger before lunch, fatigue after exertion). A standard descriptive ABC collapses across time and would obscure the temporal pattern. Analogue FA sessions conducted at fixed times would not capture the naturalistic motivating operations driving the bimodal pattern unless specifically timed to match peaks. A preference assessment reveals reinforcer efficacy shifts but does not identify antecedent events triggering the behavior.

A BCBA is conducting a functional communication training (FCT) program for a child whose aggression is maintained by access to preferred tangibles. After the MAND response is established and aggression drops to near-zero, the treatment team wants to begin thinning the reinforcement schedule to improve practicality. Which schedule thinning approach minimizes the risk of resurgence of aggression?

Answer: Gradually thin the schedule using chained schedules that require progressively longer or more complex response sequences before reinforcement

Chained schedule thinning (also called schedule thinning via chained schedules or 'FCT with schedule thinning') gradually increases the response requirement by adding links to a chain (e.g., mand → wait → mand again → reinforcement), which preserves the discriminative stimulus context for reinforcement while systematically increasing the effort or delay. This approach is associated with lower rates of resurgence compared to abrupt schedule shifts because the reinforcement history for the MAND is maintained and the transition is gradual. Abrupt shifts to lean VR can precipitate resurgence of the extinguished problem behavior. Placing the MAND on extinction defeats the purpose of FCT. A DRO added to an FR for MAND does not address the systematic thinning needed and does not protect against resurgence during the lean schedule.