An alternating treatments comparison of two intensive interventions for food refusal

W H Ahearn, M L Kerwin, P S Eicher, J Shantz, W Swearingin, W H Ahearn, M L Kerwin, P S Eicher, J Shantz, W Swearingin

Abstract

We compared two treatment packages involving negative reinforcement contingencies for 3 children with chronic food refusal. One involved physically guiding the child to accept food contingent on noncompliance, whereas the other involved nonremoval of the spoon until the child accepted the presented food. Subsequent to baseline, an alternating treatments comparison was implemented in a multiple baseline design across subjects. After each child had been exposed to at least nine sessions of each treatment condition and percentage of bites accepted had increased to at least 80%, the child's caregivers selected the preferred treatment package. The results indicated that both treatments were effective in establishing food acceptance. However, physical guidance was associated with fewer corollary behaviors, shorter meal durations, and parental preference.

References

    1. J Appl Behav Anal. 1979 Summer;12(2):199-210
    1. J Appl Behav Anal. 1980 Summer;13(2):259-73
    1. J Appl Behav Anal. 1984 Fall;17(3):327-41
    1. J Appl Behav Anal. 1985 Fall;18(3):249-55
    1. J Pediatr. 1987 Oct;111(4):558-62
    1. J Appl Behav Anal. 1995 Fall;28(3):245-60
    1. Behav Modif. 1993 Oct;17(4):510-21
    1. J Appl Behav Anal. 1994 Summer;27(2):197-209
    1. Res Dev Disabil. 1994 Mar-Apr;15(2):133-49
    1. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 1994 Aug;15(4):278-91
    1. J Appl Behav Anal. 1995 Summer;28(2):139-53
    1. Behav Modif. 1991 Jul;15(3):394-418

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnieren