Analyzing the Reinforcement, Implementation, and Effects of Extinction Procedure for Behavior Intervention in a Child with Autism

Identification of Reinforcement

In the scenario involving James, a 5-year-old boy with autism who hits his peers to gain access to preferred toys, the reinforcement maintaining his behavior includes peer attention and access to toys. Peer attention serves as a social reinforcer when his peers react to his hitting behavior, while access to toys acts as a tangible reinforcer by granting him the desired items.

Implementation of Extinction Procedure

To address James’ hitting behavior effectively, an extinction procedure can be implemented. The plan should involve withholding both peer attention and access to toys immediately following instances of hitting. Steps for implementing the extinction procedure include:

1. Behavior Monitoring: Careful observation and documentation of each hitting incident to track progress.
2. Consistent Response: Ensuring that all peers and caregivers refrain from providing attention or giving toys when James hits.
3. Replacement Behavior: Teaching James alternative, socially appropriate ways to request toys or seek attention.
4. Reinforcing Prosocial Behavior: Providing positive reinforcement when James interacts with peers without hitting.

Prediction and Explanation of Short-term Effects

In the short term, implementing the extinction procedure may lead to an initial increase in the intensity of James’ hitting behavior, known as an extinction burst. He may exhibit emotional responses such as frustration or confusion due to the sudden lack of reinforcement for his actions. However, over time, as James realizes that hitting no longer yields the desired outcomes, the frequency and intensity of the behavior are expected to decrease.

Discussion of Potential Long-term Effects

Over the long term, consistent application of the extinction procedure is likely to result in a significant reduction or elimination of James’ hitting behavior. As he learns that hitting no longer leads to peer attention or access to toys, he may engage in alternative, more appropriate behaviors to meet his needs. Additionally, considerations of spontaneous recovery, where the behavior briefly resurfaces after a period of extinction, should be monitored and addressed through continued intervention and support.

Ethical Considerations

When implementing the extinction procedure for behavior intervention in a child with autism like James, several ethical considerations must be taken into account:

1. Potential Harm to Peers: Ensuring that peers are not put at risk of harm during the extinction process and providing support for their well-being.
2. Considerations of Informed Consent: Obtaining informed consent from parents or guardians regarding the intervention plan and its potential impact on James’ behavior and well-being.
3. Monitoring Emotional Responses: Being mindful of James’ emotional well-being during the extinction process and providing appropriate support and guidance to address any distress or confusion.

By addressing these ethical considerations and implementing the extinction procedure with sensitivity and care, it is possible to effectively reduce and manage challenging behaviors in children with autism while promoting their social and emotional development.

Through a thoughtful and comprehensive approach to behavior intervention, we can support children like James in overcoming behavioral challenges and fostering positive social interactions in their environment.