Classroom applications of the disequilibrium model of reinforcement

The present study investigated applications of the disequilibrium model of reinforcement in typical classroom contexts with students perceived by their teachers as being difficult to motivate. The disequilibrium model states that reinforcing effects are produced when access to any response (task) is...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBehavioral interventions Vol. 18; no. 1; pp. 63 - 85
Main Authors Johnson, Jesse W., Munk, Dennis D., Van Laarhoven, Toni, Repp, Alan C., Dahlquist, Carol M.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Chichester, UK John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 01.02.2003
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:The present study investigated applications of the disequilibrium model of reinforcement in typical classroom contexts with students perceived by their teachers as being difficult to motivate. The disequilibrium model states that reinforcing effects are produced when access to any response (task) is constrained so that an individual cannot meet an (unconstrained) baseline level for that response (task). The implication of the model is that low‐probability (low‐preference) responses can be constrained and used as reinforcers, a seeming contradiction to the common practice of using a high‐probability response to reinforce increases in a low‐probability response. The present study investigated the effects of disequilibrium schedules of reinforcement with six students with several disabilities in classroom contexts. The specific research questions were (i) whether disequilibrium schedules would produce reinforcing effects if both the instrumental and contingent tasks were of moderate to low preference for the student; (ii) how effects of disequilibrium schedules would compare with those of a teacher‐generated contingency; and (iii) what effects disequilibrium schedules would have with students who engage in non‐task responding during the baseline period. Results suggest that disequilibrium schedules are effective when used with moderate to low‐preference tasks. Results of the comparison with teacher‐generated contingencies were mixed. Results do suggest that the presence of higher levels of non‐task responding during the baseline period may affect subsequent effectiveness of disequilibrium schedules calculated from the baseline. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Bibliography:ark:/67375/WNG-KZM0Q1P5-F
istex:0FEC34DFB52461E56AD1A77A5E75DAF0B446AE79
Office of Special Education, Department of Education - No. H023C40063
ArticleID:BIN126
ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:1072-0847
1099-078X
DOI:10.1002/bin.126