1. Introduction Method Results Discussion
Resolving Control-Countercontrol Issues in an ABA Setting
Delainey Barkes
Indiana University South Bend
And
Partnership for Behavior Change
Miranda DePoy
Indiana University South Bend
And
Partnership for Behavior Change
Justin McCammon
Partnership for Behavior Change
Sorah Stein, MA, BCBA, CSE
Indiana University South Bend
And
Partnership for Behavior Change
Introduction
Method
In addition to daily data collection on hits, grabs, and slaps, we conducted an assessment using an ABABA design was used, changing conditions between verbal and gestural prompts every three minutes embedded within an ABACA design switching male to female staff every fifteen minutes across the session for a total of 75 minutes. These reversals were video recorded and reviewed by multiple observers to determine the antecedents eliciting countercontrol behaviors.
“Countercontrol is human operant behavior that occurs in response to social aversive control” (Delprato, 2002, p.192). A fourteen-year-old boy diagnosed with Autism demonstrated countercontrol in multiple therapy sessions over a period of a month at a local autism center. The boy first showed signs of countercontrol by engaging in aggression with one male therapist, which generalized to both male therapists at the center. The boy engaged in grabbing male therapists around the shoulders, slapping the back with open palm , and on one or two occasions hitting the initial male therapist with a closed fist in the arm, or a palm heel to the forehead. Investigation into antecedents showed the initial male therapist invaded the boy’s personal space to physically prompt most requests and transitions from room to room. During a showering program, the therapist engaged in physical contact for a long duration, the boy slapped the therapist, possibly as the boy’s means to get the male therapist to cease physical contact. When unsuccessful, slaps moved from the body to the face. On the one or two accounts of hitting, physical contact was longer than typical and slaps did not result in cessation of physical contact. We hypothesized both the male therapist and the boy were engaging in countercontrol; the male therapist for his safety from getting grabbed, slapped, or hit, and the boy from avoidance and escape from controlled physical contact.
Results
Analysis revealed countercontrol behaviors were maintained by escape from male staff who overused physical contact to reduce grab attempts. Data indicate that grabs accelerated from introduction of new male staff to the first severe incident and continued until male staff were removed. During analysis, male staff were grabbed and hit. After removal of both male staff, these behaviors dropped to zero.
Sidman (1999) defines coercion as “the control of a behavior through (a) punishment or threat of punishment, or (b) negative reinforcement” (79).
“Consequences do control our conduct but those consequences, although they are often coercive, ‘need not be. It is possible to learn, to enjoy, and to love without coercion, but all of the actions that we include in learning, enjoying, and loving are controlled by people and places…If we face up to the inevitability of control, we will find that where existing control is coercive, we can often substitute noncoercive methods” (Sidman 1999, p. 35 ).
Using the example above, the boy’s aggressive behaviors of grabbing, slapping, and hitting occurred to regain control in response to the aversive physical control of the male therapist. Once countercontrol was identified, implementation of noncoercive methods took place. Male therapists were withdrawn leaving only female therapists, and gestural prompts were used due to being less invasive than the verbal prompts initially used with the boy resulting in the decrease of aggressive behaviors. Personal space was increased for the safety of female therapists and of the boy, which also decreased aggressive behaviors. Delprato (2002) states, “One includes reference to aggression overt operant responses (counterattack) following emotional behavior elicited by aversive controlling conditions” (p.192). We taught the boy appropriate responses to invasion of personal space, such as the sentence “step back please” to replace the aggressive behavior. We also gave the boy choices of tasks to complete to reestablish a sense of control in the environment for, which not only decreased aggressive behaviors, but also increased his willingness to begin and complete tasks independently.
Rate per minute for hits, grabs, and kisses by staff member and by type of prompt
Daily data from July 22, 2013-December 6, 2013
Discussion
Male staff were informed of the assessment results, re-instructed in non-coercive methods, and reintroduced after two weeks. Follow up data indicate a return to below-baseline frequency for both grabs and hits. New male staff have been introduced successfully by pairing them with female staff for several sessions and gradually fading out the female staff. Countercontrol was identified, the source of control removed, then gradually reintroduced. This seems a promising approach to resolving control/countercontrol problems in a therapeutic setting.
Delprato, D. J. (2002). Countercontrol in behavior analysis. The Behavior Analyst, 25,
Sidman, M. (1999). Coercion in educational settings. Behavior Change, 16,