Conduct a search for information on one of the following aversive procedures: guided (forced) compliance, attention extinction, and escape extinction. Cite the source and describe the treatment.
Discuss 3–4 pro statements that might be given to support the use of the treatment. Also, discuss 3–4 con statements that might be given to oppose the treatment.
Evaluate your findings. Discuss at least four relevant BACB ethics codes.
Sample Answer
Sample Answer
A Comprehensive Examination of Escape Extinction
Introduction
Escape extinction is a behavioral treatment technique often utilized in the field of applied behavior analysis (ABA). It focuses on eliminating the reinforcing consequences associated with a behavior that is maintained by escape from aversive stimuli. In this essay, we will explore the mechanics of escape extinction, present arguments both in favor of and against its implementation, and evaluate its ethical implications according to Behavior Analyst Certification Board (BACB) guidelines.
Description of Escape Extinction
Escape extinction involves preventing an individual from escaping or avoiding an aversive situation that they typically try to evade through maladaptive behaviors. For example, if a child throws a tantrum to avoid doing homework, the procedure would entail ensuring that the child must complete the homework regardless of their tantrum. This technique is grounded in the principles of operant conditioning, where the removal of reinforcement (in this case, escape) leads to a decrease in the frequency of the undesired behavior over time.
Source
– Miltenberger, R. G. (2016). Behavior Modification: Principles and Procedures (6th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Supporting Arguments for Escape Extinction
1. Reduction of Maladaptive Behaviors: Proponents argue that escape extinction effectively reduces behaviors that are harmful or disruptive. By removing the escape function, the behavior is less likely to be repeated, promoting more appropriate responses.
2. Promotes Skill Acquisition: When individuals are prevented from escaping tasks, they are encouraged to develop coping skills and learn to tolerate aversive situations. This can lead to enhanced resilience and adaptive functioning in challenging environments.
3. Evidence-Based Practice: Numerous studies support the efficacy of escape extinction as an evidence-based strategy in ABA. Its use has been validated in various settings, including schools and therapeutic contexts, demonstrating its effectiveness across diverse populations.
4. Facilitates Behavioral Change: Escape extinction can be a stepping stone toward more comprehensive behavioral change plans. By addressing escape-maintained behaviors, practitioners can create a foundation for further interventions that promote positive behavior and emotional regulation.
Opposing Arguments Against Escape Extinction
1. Emotional Distress: Critics argue that escape extinction can lead to increased emotional distress or frustration in individuals, particularly when they are forced to confront aversive stimuli without a means of escape. This can negatively impact their mental health and well-being.
2. Risk of Reinforcement Magnification: There is a concern that if not implemented correctly, escape extinction might inadvertently reinforce the behavior it aims to eliminate. For instance, if an individual escalates their tantrum to an even more severe state, it may attract attention or concern from caregivers, thus reinforcing the maladaptive behavior.
3. Ethical Concerns: Many professionals express apprehension regarding the ethical implications of using aversive procedures like escape extinction without considering alternative approaches. The potential for harm or trauma raises questions about the appropriateness of such interventions.
4. Limited Generalization: Critics also point out that skills learned in an escape extinction context may not generalize to other settings. If individuals are only taught to tolerate one specific aversive task, they may struggle with similar tasks in different environments.
Evaluation of Findings
In evaluating the arguments for and against escape extinction, it becomes evident that while the procedure can be effective in reducing certain maladaptive behaviors, it is not without its ethical dilemmas and potential risks. The implementation of this treatment should be carefully considered with respect to individual needs and circumstances.
Relevant BACB Ethics Codes
1. Code 2.09 – Treatment Efficacy: Behavior analysts are required to evaluate the efficacy of their treatments continuously. This code emphasizes the need for evidence-based practices, ensuring that escape extinction is only employed when its benefits outweigh potential harms.
2. Code 3.01 – Behavior-Change Program: Behavior analysts must create programs that are respectful and considerate of clients’ dignity and welfare. Escape extinction must be executed with sensitivity to its potential emotional impacts on individuals.
3. Code 4.05 – Describing Behavior-Change Programs: This code mandates transparency regarding the procedures being used. Clients must be informed about escape extinction’s nature and its possible risks and benefits.
4. Code 4.06 – Consent for Treatment: Informed consent is essential when implementing any treatment strategy, including escape extinction. Clients should be made aware of their options and actively participate in decisions related to their treatment plan.
Conclusion
While escape extinction can be a useful tool within the framework of applied behavior analysis, it necessitates careful consideration and ethical oversight. Balancing its potential benefits against its risks is crucial in ensuring that the well-being and dignity of individuals receiving treatment remain paramount. Adhering to BACB ethics codes helps guide practitioners in making informed and responsible decisions regarding this often-controversial procedure.
