Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 2, 2026
Three Laboratory Procedures for Assessing Different Manifestations of Impulsivity in Rats
Published on: March 17, 2019
Evaluation of fixed momentary dro schedules under signaled and unsignaled arrangements
Jennifer L Hammond1, Brian A Iwata, Jennifer N Fritz
1University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Abstract:
Fixed momentary schedules of differential reinforcement of other behavior (FM DRO) generally have been ineffective as treatment for problem behavior. Because most early research on FM DRO included presentation of a signal at the end of the DRO interval, it is unclear whether the limited effects of FM DRO were due to (a) the momentary response requirement of the schedule per se or (b) discrimination of the contingency made more salient by the signal. To separate these two potential influences, we compared the effects of signaled versus unsignaled FM DRO with 4 individuals with developmental disabilities whose problem behavior was maintained by social-positive reinforcement. During signaled FM DRO, the experimenter presented a visual stimulus 3 s prior to the end of the DRO interval and delivered reinforcement contingent on the absence of problem behavior at the second the interval elapsed. Unsignaled DRO was identical except that interval termination was not signaled. Results indicated that signaled FM DRO was effective in decreasing 2 subjects' problem behavior, whereas an unsignaled schedule was required for the remaining 2 subjects. These results suggest that the response requirement per se of FM DRO may not be problematic if it is not easily discriminated.
Insights
Fixed momentary differential reinforcement of other behavior (FM DRO) can be effective for problem behavior, but effectiveness depends on whether the schedule is signaled. Some individuals require signaled FM DRO, while others need unsignaled schedules.
Area of Science:
- Behavior Analysis
- Developmental Disabilities Research
- Applied Behavior Analysis
Background:
- Fixed momentary differential reinforcement of other behavior (FM DRO) has shown limited effectiveness in treating problem behavior.
- Previous research often included a signal at the end of the DRO interval, confounding the effects of the schedule itself versus signal discrimination.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate whether the effectiveness of FM DRO is influenced by the presence or absence of a signal preceding reinforcement delivery.
- To differentiate the impact of the momentary response requirement from the discriminability of the contingency.
Main Methods:
- Compared signaled and unsignaled FM DRO with four individuals with developmental disabilities exhibiting problem behavior maintained by social-positive reinforcement.
- In signaled FM DRO, a visual stimulus was presented 3 seconds before the interval ended.
- Unsignaled FM DRO lacked this preparatory visual stimulus.
Main Results:
- Signaled FM DRO effectively reduced problem behavior in two subjects.
- Unsignaled FM DRO was necessary to decrease problem behavior in the other two subjects.
- Individual differences in response to signaled versus unsignaled schedules were observed.
Conclusions:
- The momentary response requirement of FM DRO may not be inherently problematic.
- The discriminability of the reinforcement contingency, influenced by signals, plays a crucial role in treatment effectiveness.
- Tailoring the schedule's discriminability to individual needs is important for successful intervention.
