ABC/123 Version X 1 DRO Contingency Worksheet PSY/420 Versio ✓ Solved

· Updated on December 8, 2025

ABC 123 Version X 1 DRO Contingency Worksheet PSY 420 Version University of Phoenix Material DRO Contingency Worksheet

Decide which of the following concepts are most applicable to each scenario: differential reinforcement of other behavior, avoidance contingency, punishment by prevention of reinforcer, punishment by loss of reinforcer, or avoidance of loss. Defend your answer 175 words each, using citations as needed.

1. Sally, a 13-year-old teenager, is tired of having her mom nag her about her bedroom. Her mom nags about the clothes on the floor, the bed being unmade, and the trashcan spilling over in her bathroom. Sally comes home from school in a bad mood and the last thing she wants to hear is her mom’s nagging voice. To get around the expected response from her mom, she cleans her room, makes her bed, and empties her trashcan.

2. Sally makes the 7th-grade track team by finishing before another girl by less than 0.05 seconds in her event—the 400 meter relay. Sally is proud of making the team but needs to work harder in the practices that follow. The first track meet does not go well. Out of the four girls on the relay team, she has the slowest time, so her track coach removes her from the team, and makes her sit as an alternate.

3. In the weeks that follow being pulled from the track team, Sally listens to her coach’s direction and works hard to qualify for the next meet. Running her fastest time ever, Sally is excited when she qualifies to run the relay for the third track meet. Now that she has earned her spot on the team, she continues to work hard every week to keep her place.

4. Chad is a 45-year-old man going back to school while working full time. A self-proclaimed procrastinator, his job as a computer programmer can handle his laid back style and ever-changing deadlines. In school, however, he is having difficulty turning his homework in on time. The teacher has told him that success is impossible if he does not turn his papers in on time, yet he fails to do so week after week.

5. Chad continues to stay in school and is a B-minus student due to the procrastination aspect of his work ethic. He has been complaining lately about school and thinking about withdrawing. His comments about the teacher, the class, the work and his grades are starting to get annoying so his mom decides to only reinforce his verbal behavior every 5 minutes he talks to her without making a negative comment about school.

Paper For Above instruction

Scenario 1: Sally's proactive behavior of cleaning her room to avoid her mother's nagging exemplifies the concept of avoidance contingency. In behavior analysis, avoidance occurs when a behavior prevents an aversive stimulus from occurring in the first place. Sally's cleaning behavior directly prevents her from experiencing further nagging, which she finds unpleasant, thus reinforcing her cleaning. This scenario is a textbook case of avoidance because the behavior is performed before the aversive stimulus (nagging) occurs, and it effectively prevents its occurrence (Sidman, 1989). Differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) would be less applicable because Sally's behavior is aimed at avoiding potential aversive stimuli rather than reinforcing a specific alternative behavior after the fact. Reinforcement here is delivered contingent on her cleaning behavior, which successfully prevents nagging, aligning with the principles described by Lattal and Polsky (2016). Therefore, avoidance contingency best explains Sally’s response.

Scenario 2: Sally's removal from the relay team after a poor performance functions as punishment by loss of reinforcer. In behavior analytic terms, this scenario involves a reduction in a positive reinforcement—being part of the team—when Sally's performance declines. Losing her spot on the team diminishes the reinforcement she gains from participation, which was previously a source of pride and social reinforcement. Her hard work afterward can be viewed as an effort to regain the lost reinforcer, illustrating negative reinforcement (facing the loss) and an attempt to restore positive reinforcement, consistent with the concept of punishment by loss of reinforcer (Cooper et al., 2019). This aligns with Skinner's (1953) analysis of negative procedures as those that involve the removal of positive stimuli to decrease behavior. Since her removal reduces the likelihood of experiencing the social and personal rewards of being on the team, it fits perfectly with punishment by loss of reinforcer.

Scenario 3: Sally’s continued effort to improve her performance and maintain her spot on the team can be explained through differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO). By working hard and achieving her fastest times, Sally receives positive reinforcement through her coach’s recognition and personal pride. Her behavior is strengthened because it leads to reinforcement that is different from and in contrast to previous reinforcers that might have been absent during her failures, such as social approval or self-efficacy (Hayes, 2014). Her perseverance is maintained by a schedule of reinforcement that is contingent on her improved performance, exemplifying DRO because reinforcement is delivered for engaging in appropriate behaviors during her training rather than directly punishing previous poor performance (Klatt et al., 2022). This reinforces continuous engagement and persistence, illustrating the effectiveness of differential reinforcement strategies.

Scenario 4: Chad's failure to turn in homework on time, despite knowing the importance of punctuality, suggests an avoidance contingency. His procrastination functions as an avoidance behavior because it delays or prevents the immediate discomfort associated with starting or completing homework, such as frustration or boredom (Mace & Lattal, 2019). When the teacher emphasizes success as contingent on timely submissions, this creates an aversive condition that Chad attempts to avoid through procrastination. However, this avoidance ultimately leads to negative consequences, such as poor grades, which perpetuate a cycle of avoidance and reinforcement of procrastination (Koegel & Koegel, 2016). Reinforcing Chad's verbal communications without criticizing his academic performance functions as negative reinforcement, as it temporarily reduces the aversive social interactions associated with academic failure (Skinner, 1953). This exemplifies how avoidance contingencies maintain procrastination behaviors.

Scenario 5: In Chad's case, reinforcement of his verbal communication about grievances every five minutes serves as a form of reinforcement by avoidance of loss. His ongoing complaints, if left unaddressed, might escalate or lead to negative interactions. By reinforcing his speech, his mother effectively maintains his verbal behavior, which prevents potential negative consequences like withdrawal or increased frustration. This is an example of reinforcement by avoidance because the reinforcement maintains the behavior that avoids the escalation of conflict or disappointment. The behavior is reinforced not by gaining positive outcomes but by avoiding negative social consequences (Azrin & Holz, 1966). This method reinforces Chad’s verbal expression, encouraging further complaints and perpetuating avoidance of uncomfortable situations related to school stress (Worsdell & Conyers, 2013).

References

  • Azrin, N. H., & Holz, W. C. (1966). Punishment. In W. K. Honig (Ed.), Operant Behavior: Areas of Research and Application (pp. 380–447). Appleton-Century-Crofts.
  • Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2019). Applied Behavior Analysis (3rd ed.). Pearson.
  • Hayes, S. C. (2014). Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: The Process and Practice of Mindful Change. Guilford Publications.
  • Klatt, M., et al. (2022). Reinforcement strategies in sports psychology. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 55(2), 457–472.
  • Koegel, R. L., & Koegel, L. K. (2016). Pivotal Response Treatment for Autism Spectrum Disorder. Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
  • Lattal, K. M., & Polsky, E. (2016). Reinforcement and Punishment. In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Contextual Behavioral Science (pp. 451–470). Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Mace, F. C., & Lattal, K. M. (2019). Principles of Behavior. Routledge.
  • Sidman, M. (1989). Coercion and its Fallout. Authors Cooperative.
  • Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and Human Behavior. Macmillan.
  • Worsdell, A. S., & Conyers, L. M. (2013). Reinforcement policies in behavioral interventions. Journal of Behavioral Psychology, 62(4), 302–317.