Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Behavior Modification
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gibbs, J. W.
Right arrow Articles by Luyben, P. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gibbs, J. W.
Right arrow Articles by Luyben, P. D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Treatment of Self-Injurious Behavior

Contingent Versus Noncontingent Positive Practice Overcorrection

Jeffrey W. Gibbs

Paul D. Luyben

Syracuse Developmental Center and State University College at Cortland

Positive practice has several components that may function within the procedure including the following: (1) the contingency aspect of the procedure, (2) the extensive reeducative practice of alternate, correct responses, and (3) the period of timeout from positive reinforcement. A single case reversal design was used to determine if the contingency component of positive practice was necessary to reduce the frequency of SIB. The results showed that positive practice was not effective when applied noncontingently but highly effective when administered contingently. Because practice alone was not sufficient to reduce the frequency of SIB, positive practice appears to be a punishment procedure. Also, because timeout is a component of contingent positive practice, it is still unclear whether or not time-out is a necessary component of positive practice.

Behavior Modification, Vol. 9, No. 1, 3-21 (1985)
DOI: 10.1177/01454455850091001
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Behav ModifHome page
J. L. Matson and S. V. LoVullo
A Review of Behavioral Treatments for Self-Injurious Behaviors of Persons With Autism Spectrum Disorders
Behav Modif, January 1, 2008; 32(1): 61 - 76.
[Abstract] [PDF]