A Comparison of Edible, Social, and No Contrived Reinforcement on the Acquisition of a Behavior Chain

Reinforcement is used by applied behavior analysts to increase the future frequency of responding. Finding effective reinforcers is important to increase the frequency of behavior. Not all people learn with the same type of reinforcers. Some people can be taught skills using conditioned reinforcers such as grades or parental praise after a report card is sent home. For people with learning disabilities, learning with direct and immediate reinforcers are often necessary. When developing schedules of reinforcement as part of a skill acquisition program, consideration should be given to the type of reinforcers that are comparatively more effective, whether it be social or edible reinforcers. The unanswered question is: can the learner master the task without programmed reinforcement and does past learning history have an effect on skill acquisition? The purpose of the current study was to determine the comparative effects of edible, social, and no programmed reinforcement on the acquisition of behavior chains. Three LegoRTM constructs were compared in an alternating treatments design. Each construct was associated with either with an edible reinforcer, a social reinforcer, or no contrived reinforcer delivery contingent upon completion of the training steps of a behavior chain. An alternating treatments design was implemented to compare the three constructs which were taught to two participants. The results do not indicate any one type of reinforcer as a more effective reinforcer to use with the acquisition of a behavior chain. All two participants, however, did learn each construct. Practitioners should choose reinforcers carefully using reinforcer assessments, and evaluate the most appropriate reinforcer for the task being taught.