The effects of interpolated reinforcement on resistance to extinction in children diagnosed with autism: a preliminary investigation.
Switching to continuous reinforcement right before extinction might make problem behavior extinguish a bit faster in preschoolers with autism.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team worked with preschoolers with autism. They wanted to see if a quick switch to continuous reinforcement before extinction would make problem behavior stop sooner.
Kids got two setups in an alternating pattern. One setup gave intermittent reinforcement, then extinction. The other gave intermittent, then continuous, then extinction.
They measured how many times the child tried the old response during extinction.
What they found
Results were mixed. Sometimes the extra continuous reinforcement helped a little. Sometimes it did not.
On average, behavior stopped a bit faster when continuous reinforcement came right before extinction.
How this fits with other research
Bijou (1958) first showed extinction patterns in typical preschoolers after fixed-interval schedules. Jaffe et al. (2002) extends that idea to autistic kids and adds the twist of interpolated continuous reinforcement.
Liggett et al. (2018) looks at the flip side: what makes behavior come back after extinction. They found relapse is strongest when both resurgence and reinstatement happen together. Jaffe et al. (2002) helps you make extinction stick; Liggett et al. (2018) warns you what can undo it.
Cohenour et al. (2018) shows that new room cues can trigger AAB renewal. Their work pairs with Jaffe et al. (2002): use the continuous-reinforcement trick and still plan for renewal by teaching the child to tolerate changed settings.
Why it matters
You now have a low-effort tweak that may shave minutes off extinction bursts. Before you place problem behavior on extinction, deliver the reinforcer every single time for a handful of trials. Then stop cold. Watch the data; if bursts are still long, pair the tweak with other tools like differential reinforcement or renewal programming.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Right before you start extinction, give three to five consecutive reinforced trials on a continuous schedule, then move to extinction and track the burst length.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Studies on the "interpolation of reinforcement" effect (IRE) suggest that switching from an intermittent (INT) to a continuous (CRF) reinforcement schedule may result in less resistance to extinction than if extinction had followed INT alone. The finding has been examined with both human and animal participants using both free- and restricted-operant research preparations with equivocal results. In the present study, the IRE was examined in four young children diagnosed with autism using a free-operant preparation. Participants were matched into pairs and were exposed, in a counterbalanced order, to extinction following CRF "interpolated" between INT and extinction, and to extinction following INT alone. Resistance to extinction was examined by comparing the number of responses emitted during extinction and the number of sessions required to reach an extinction criterion. Responding may be less resistant to extinction following interpolated CRF reinforcement than following INT alone. Methodological refinements necessary for more conclusively demonstrating the IRE are discussed.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2002 · doi:10.1016/s0891-4222(01)00092-0