WHAT MAKES EXTINCTION WORK - AN ANALYSIS OF PROCEDURAL FORM AND FUNCTION

We examined methods for determining how extinction should be applied t o different functions of self-injurious behavior (SIB). Assessment dat a indicated that the head banging of 3 children with developmental dis abilities was maintained by different reinforcement contingencies: One subject's SIB was positively reinforced by attention from adults, the 2nd subject's SIB was negatively reinforced by escape from educationa l tasks, and the 3rd subject's SIB appeared to be automatically reinfo rced or ''self-stimulatory'' in nature. Three functional variations of extinction-EXT (attention), EXT (escape), and EXT (sensory)-were eval ated, and each subject was exposed to at least two of these variations in reversal or multiple baseline designs. Reductions in SIB were obse rved only when implementation of ''extinction'' involved the discontin uation of reinforcement previously shown to be responsible for maintai ning the behavior. These results highlight important differences among treatment techniques based on the same behavioral principle (extincti on) when applied to topographically similar but functionally dissimila r responses, and further illustrate the practical implications of a fu nctional analysis of behavior disorders for designing, selecting, and classifying therapeutic interventions.