Negative Reinforcement
What is Negative Reinforcement?
As with the section on positive reinforcement we have provided a few definitions of negative reinforcement:
As with the section on positive reinforcement we have provided a few definitions of negative reinforcement:
- A negative reinforcement contingency is one in which the occurrence of a response produces the removal, termination, reduction, or postponement a stimulus, which leads to an increase in the future occurrence of that response. (Cooper, Heron, and Heward, 2007).
- Negative reinforcement is a contingency where an ongoing stimulus or event is removed (or prevented) by some response (operant) and the rate of responding increases (Pierce and Chaney, 2008)
- A procedure involving the termination of a stimulus immediately following responding that results in an increase in some aspect of the response class over baseline levels. (Johnson and Pennypacker, 2009).
There are TWO major behavioral outcomes that can occur with the use of negative reinforcement:
Discriminated Avoidance: A contingency in which responding in the presence of a signal prevents the onset of a stimulus from which escape is a reinforcer. (Copper, Heron, Heward, 2007).
***Overall, avoidance is thought of as being a proactive response because the organism is doing something to prevent the occurrence/presentation of the aversive stimulus instead of waiting for it to be presented and then responding.***
2. Escape: A behavior that terminates an aversive stimulus. Escape behavior is often classified as a reactive
response because the organism waits for the presentation of the aversive stimulus and then reacts (or
responds) to terminate (or get away from) the aversive stimulus.
Types of Negative Reinforcers:
There are two types or classes of negative reinforcers:
Negative Reinforcement vs. Positive Reinforcement:
Negative reinforcement is different from positive reinforcement in that identifying the context of negative reinforcement can be slightly more tricky than identifying the context of positive reinforcement. With negative reinforcers equal emphasis must be place on the antecedent event (Establishing Operation: EO) as well as on the reinforcing consequence because as soon as the behavior occurs, the negative reinforcer may be gone and cannot be observed. Defining the establishing operation (EO) can prove to be difficult with children with autism who have limited communication skills and are unable to tell you, as the therapist, they are coming into contact with aversive stimulation. These children often engage in other behaviors like tantrums, aggression, elopement, and/or self-injurious behavior (SIB). It is always important to analyze every aspect of a four-term contingency in order to isolate particular aspects of the contingency that serve as aversive stimulation for a child.
Negative Reinforcement Effectiveness:
As with positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement has things to keep in mind in order to ensure that a given negative reinforcement procedure is effective:
Concerns with Negative Reinforcement:
There are concerns that come along with negative reinforcement, especially when working with child with autism. Ideally, instructional procedures have been designed in such a way that maintains high levels of on-task behaviors and in turn leads to increased rates of learning. Unfortunately there are circumstances in which the presentation of demands function as the establishing operation (EO) for escape behavior due to the repetitiveness or difficultly of the demands. The early forms of escape may include mild forms of disruption or lack of attention. In situations where positive reinforcement is not producing optimum levels of compliance, escape attempts may continue and often lead to more severe forms of problem behavior. Research has suggested that escape from demands is a common source of negative reinforcement for self-injurous behavior (SIB), aggression, and property destruction.
For more information about negative reinforcement please refer to the following website links and research articles:
- Avoidance: A contingency in which a response prevents or postpones the presentation of a stimulus (Cooper, Heron, and Heward, 2007). In other words, an avoidance response prevents or delays the onset of some event or consequence from occurring. Eventually, the presentation of the stimulus will occur and the organism theoretically cannot stop the stimulus presentation from occurring all together.
Discriminated Avoidance: A contingency in which responding in the presence of a signal prevents the onset of a stimulus from which escape is a reinforcer. (Copper, Heron, Heward, 2007).
***Overall, avoidance is thought of as being a proactive response because the organism is doing something to prevent the occurrence/presentation of the aversive stimulus instead of waiting for it to be presented and then responding.***
2. Escape: A behavior that terminates an aversive stimulus. Escape behavior is often classified as a reactive
response because the organism waits for the presentation of the aversive stimulus and then reacts (or
responds) to terminate (or get away from) the aversive stimulus.
Types of Negative Reinforcers:
There are two types or classes of negative reinforcers:
- Unconditioned Negative Reinforcers: A stimulus or group of stimuli whose removal strengthens behavior without prior learning. Some examples include, shock, loud noise, pain, intense light, and extreme temperatures
- Conditioned Negative Reinforcers: Stimuli that have been paired with unconditioned negative reinforcers. Examples of conditioned negative reinforcers include, reprimands, parental nagging, etc.
Negative Reinforcement vs. Positive Reinforcement:
Negative reinforcement is different from positive reinforcement in that identifying the context of negative reinforcement can be slightly more tricky than identifying the context of positive reinforcement. With negative reinforcers equal emphasis must be place on the antecedent event (Establishing Operation: EO) as well as on the reinforcing consequence because as soon as the behavior occurs, the negative reinforcer may be gone and cannot be observed. Defining the establishing operation (EO) can prove to be difficult with children with autism who have limited communication skills and are unable to tell you, as the therapist, they are coming into contact with aversive stimulation. These children often engage in other behaviors like tantrums, aggression, elopement, and/or self-injurious behavior (SIB). It is always important to analyze every aspect of a four-term contingency in order to isolate particular aspects of the contingency that serve as aversive stimulation for a child.
Negative Reinforcement Effectiveness:
As with positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement has things to keep in mind in order to ensure that a given negative reinforcement procedure is effective:
- Immediate Change: The stimulus change immediately follows the occurrence of the target response. That is to say, the aversive stimulus immediately ends following the occurrence of the target response.
- Large Magnitude: The magnitude of reinforcement is large in regards to the difference in stimulation present before and after the response occurs.
- Occurrence of the target response consistently results in escape from or postponement of the establishing operation (EO).
- Reinforcement for competing (non-target) responses is unavailable. The individual cannot escape or avoid negative reinforcement with behaviors other than the target response.
Concerns with Negative Reinforcement:
There are concerns that come along with negative reinforcement, especially when working with child with autism. Ideally, instructional procedures have been designed in such a way that maintains high levels of on-task behaviors and in turn leads to increased rates of learning. Unfortunately there are circumstances in which the presentation of demands function as the establishing operation (EO) for escape behavior due to the repetitiveness or difficultly of the demands. The early forms of escape may include mild forms of disruption or lack of attention. In situations where positive reinforcement is not producing optimum levels of compliance, escape attempts may continue and often lead to more severe forms of problem behavior. Research has suggested that escape from demands is a common source of negative reinforcement for self-injurous behavior (SIB), aggression, and property destruction.
For more information about negative reinforcement please refer to the following website links and research articles: