READING: Tips for Increasing Frequency and Fluency

Why is reading important?

My students have heard my soapbox speech about the clinical importance of reading so I will briefly summarize it here. Reading Cooper does not prepare you to go out into the real world and address the multitude of social, cultural, and contextual factors that contribute to clinical issues. In order to become a behavior analyst rather than a behavior technician, you need to be able to go into the literature, assess it, and apply the relevant research to your particular case. For assistance in applying research to real word contexts, I highly suggest Part 3 of Research Methods in Applied Behavior Analysis 2nd Edition which includes a brief set of questions you can use to analyze the merit and applicability of an article to a specific case.

In addition to contributing to clinical excellence and improving the lives of the humans you serve in this field, behavior analysts have ethical obligations to read, read, read. Sections 1.01, 1.02, and 1.03 are directly relevant to reading behaviors. Even RBTs are subject to these ethical obligations, so beginning behavior scientists still need to continue to look to the evidence base, read up on variables and interventions they may not have addressed before, and increase competence through professional development.

Why read frequently and fluently?

Improving reading rate can affect comprehension. Quick, fluent readers are better able to comprehend the text they are digesting (Hudson, Lane, & Pullen, 2005). In behavior analysis this is especially important since much of our texts are jargon-heavy and dense. Therefore, proficient reading skills can make it easier for behavior scientists to think critically about the words they read and apply them to read world social problems.

In addition, the matching law applies (Reed & Kaplan, 2011). When students or analysts read slowly, the demand associated with the rewards for reading comprehension increase. Therefore, students are more likely to allocate their efforts to behaviors with more dense schedules of reinforcement. For instance, if it takes Sally 1 hour to read one article for which she receives rewards in the form of access to information, potential social reinforcement from peers or instructor, and task completion, her rate of reinforcement for reading is approximately 1 per hour. On the other hand, Sally has many concurrent schedules of reinforcement to choose from. She might also receive valued reinforcers by complaining to a peer about how difficult reading is (with texts and social media this could be as high as 20 per hour or more). The matching law explains why Slow Sally will allocate more of her energy to performing the second behavior rather than the first. However, when one can read quickly, the rate of reinforcement available for reading increases and can better compete with the other available concurrent reinforcement schedules.

So how can we flip the contingency?

Performance management offers several suggestions for readers that do feel that increasing their reading frequency and fluency would be a socially significant target. Here are some suggestions:

1. Self-monitoring: Begin tracking your reading behavior. Keep a visual chart of your accomplishments. Self-monitoring is more effective with self-rewarding, so your chart should also include an aim and a specific, valued reinforcer for reaching the aim. Below is my own self-monitoring chart for an example. I’ve used standard PT conventions and marked my goal by putting an AIMStar on the chart that shows the date by which I want to reach a specific rate. When I reach my AIM, I will buy myself 5 new books for my behavior analytic library (this is valuable to me and I keep book-buying rewards restricted to this contingency only). Note, the AIMStar is not in the below graphic since it is still several weeks away and this is a daily chart.

2. Analyze antecedents: When we think about antecedents for reading behavior, we want to identify ways to make reading easier, more available, and more likely to be combined with other pleasurable experiences. We can also look to remove antecedents that might be SDeltas for reading behavior. Some suggestions: Put books everywhere. Keep some articles in multiple locations that you access frequently. Use E-readers, download PDFs to tablets and phones, and even put a few in the bathroom or by the coffee maker. Pair reading with other environmental changes. Make sure you have comfortable places to read, well-lit areas that reduce eye strain, and if it is valuable to you- pleasant sights and sounds. Pairing reading behavior with these other comforts can make it less aversive. I also like to engage in reading behavior while doing other pleasant activities as a form of pairing. For instance, I read while riding a reclining bike at the gym and always have an article out while I drink my morning tea or coffee. Reduce the monetary effort involved in reading by using online articles, trading books with peers, or using the OBM/Management Skill Share Lending Library (which has much expanded since the following screenshot.

3. Change consequences. Sometimes reading itself does not produce positive, immediate, and certain rewards. However, augmenting the naturally-occuring consequences can improve reading behavior. Using the Premack principle is one option. Reward yourself for reading with pleasant activities. In practice, this is the “first/then” rule. Whenever you have something on your schedule that you greatly look forward to, make attendance contingent upon quickly reading a few pages. Increase the rate of reinforcement available for reading by targeting more types of reading behaviors. Rewards could be self-administered not only for completing an article or chapter, but for reading a certain number of pages, reading more than one time per day, reading duration, how quickly you read, and even changes in your own reading behavior. By rewarding multiple dimensions of the behavior, the rate of overall reinforcement for reading increases.

4. Recruit social support. I think this is likely one of the most effective practices. Self-rewards may not be maintained without the additional positive and negative reinforcement contingencies in play when you involve others in your reading goals. Post your reading chart somewhere that it is seen by others that might give you social positive reinforcement. Join article and book discussion groups where you can contact additional reinforcement. Recruit reinforcement from loved ones and friends when you accomplish different reading goals. Have a friend schedule a text message once a week to ask you how many pages you’ve read or what the most interesting this you read this week was. Form a group or interact with an online community that rewards reading behaviors or the result of reading (i.e. behavior analytic knowledge). JOIN THE #ABAReadathon! This awesome event is a great way to access a dense schedule of reinforcement both social and tangible.

5. Analyze and troubleshoot your own reading behavior. If you are not successful, why are you not? If reading the terms and challenging words in articles is preventing success, perhaps increasing fluency of behavior analytic jargon using SAFMEDs might improve automaticity- the ability to recognize and identify words in context  (Hudson, Lane, & Pullen, 2005). Is reading not rewarding? Using ACT principles to think about the long term rewards that reading behavior may move you towards could be a way to make these rewards more salient. Target your reading to solving a specific problem such as a difficult case or a special project from your supervisor. Use small sprints of reading and increase the frequency rather than forcing yourself to read textbooks or heavy books.

Lastly, I encourage you to vary the types of reading you engage in. Reading and re-reading Cooper is probably not going to help you access many additional reinforcers and may not necessarily meet any of the ethics-related goals. Additionally, it can expose you to texts that are more rewarding for a number of reasons- some behavior analysts write humorously, some write about topics that may be exciting to you, some write in short forms (blogs, white papers, etc.), and some include many practical examples. By exposing yourself to more of these styles of writing, you may find that some are naturally less aversive or find that they help you contact additional reinforcers you had never considered. You can even find behavior analytic texts that may help you make your own life more rewarding, thus giving you more reasons to read in the future (for this purpose, try The Happiness Trap).

Happy reading! Feel free to share your chart or graph. I will always provide positive, immediate, certain social reinforcement for any type of reading behavior!

Hudson, R. F., Lane, H. B., & Pullen, P. C. (2005). Reading fluency assessment and instruction: What, why, and how?. The Reading Teacher, 58(5), 702-71.

Reed, D. D., & Kaplan, B. A. (2011). The Matching Law: A Tutorial for Practitioners. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 4(2), 15–24. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF03391780

Open Educational Resources: Why Behavior Analysts Should Care About OERs

Let's start with an uncomfortable question- how much did your degree cost you?
If you are like most behavior analysts, the answer to that question is far different from the tuition listed on your degree-granting institution's website. In addition to tuition, students in behavior analysis often pay thousands of dollars for:

• books, books, books, books $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
• exam prep materials $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
• study aids, SAFMEDs, graphic organizers $$$$$$$$$$$
• assessment tools and applications $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
• pre-made curricula  $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
• etc.   

At the same time, we expect students to get thousands of hours of supervised experience. While some students are able to be paid for their experiences, often students that want to truly be excellent behavior analysts are forced to find additional supervision or work for free in order to gain experience in different areas. Many students have long commutes to and from multiple work sites which also increases the total cost of the degree. 

This is not unusual in higher education. 

In a recent NPR piece (found here), it was noted that since the 1970's, the cost of education has increased in some places to the tune of 2000 percent!

What IS unusual though, is the lack of response from the behavior analytic community. We seem to even be encouraging or supporting the rising costs of behavior analytic education. One popular exam prep program is more than 500 dollars! You can find flashcards for students (yes, they are technically SAFMEDs but let's be real about it) that cost $75!! Mock exams are equally priced and there are new ways to spend money on ABA materials popping up every day. 

At the same time, there is a movement in higher education that recognizes this and responds actively, radically, and importantly! If you haven't heard of Open Educational Resources, here's the basics:

"Open educational resources (OER) are any resources available at little or no cost that can be used for teaching, learning, or research. The term can include textbooks, course readings, and other learning content; simulations, games, and other learning applications; syllabi, quizzes, and assessment tools; and virtually any other material that can be used for educational purposes."

"Open resources are one way to address the rising costs of education,and they also have the potential to facilitate new styles of teaching and learning. "

Sounds great right? And many top universities and organizations agree! Rice University, MIT, University of Michigan, UC Berkeley, and more have created large databases full of searchable, free, verified course content and similar resources. Without paying a dime, curious folks can learn anything from computer science to architecture to biology to dentistry or law. These resources are high quality, editable, and available in multiple formats to support learners of all kinds. 

But...

THERE ARE NO APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS OERs!

In a search of the 10 most popular OER databases, not a single resource related to behavior analysis surfaced. Googling "applied behavior analysis OER" also has similar results. 

Why? 

Isn't our goal to change the world? To educate others and spread our effective science? To help as many people as possible? It's hard to think that OERs wouldn't be a key piece of the dissemination effort. ABA OERs could help folks who can't afford to spend tens of thousands of dollars still learn to make a difference and solve socially significant problems. ABA OERs could reach people without the time or resources to attend graduate school. 

So this is a call to action for the behavior analytic community. Let's do it. Let's put ABA on the OER map! This is something I will be spending significant time on in the upcoming year and I would love to hear from others who are interested in collaborating. If you know of OERs out there already, please share them! There are some great YouTube channels and FB Pages but we need more comprehensive resources out there as well. 

For more information on OERs, check out:

Basic Guide to OER

Guidelines for OER in Higher Education

Open Michigan

OER Commons

Curriki 

Need more convincing? More reasons to consider making and using OER from the University of Texas Austin

Avoid the Sandwich

It's no surprise that many managers dislike giving constructive and corrective feedback. It's likely that they have often been met with a number of unpleasant reactions when they have given this type of feedback in the past.
For instance,


I'm sure many of us have seen at least one of these reactions to corrective feedback in the past. In essence, our own behavior of giving good constructive feedback has been followed by aversive and unpleasant consequences. As a result, many managers have a learning history that has punished this type of feedback.
Unfortunately, all too often managers choose to use the "sandwich method" to avoid these types of unpleasant contingencies.  If you aren't familiar with the term, you have probably seen the sandwich in action. In this type of feedback, a manager starts with a positive statement, then gives the real feedback, and then ends with another positive statement. In essence, the feedback itself is sandwiched between some fluffy, pleasant, but useless verbal behavior.
From a behavior analytic perspective, the sandwich is sh*t. Please, please, don't use the sandwich. Why?
1. The sandwich adds additional stimuli to respond to which can confuse employees. Just like we do in TAGTeach, we want to give them one clear directive in order to have the best chance at changing the behavior. Athletes that receive pinpointed corrective instruction (What you want to see, One behavior, Objective/measurable, Five words or less) are better at correcting their performance and gaining complex skills quickly.
2. The sandwich can make a manager seem insincere. Often, the positive statements are contrived or irrelevant and can seem forced. As a result, the manager's verbal behavior may be devalued overall and trust can be damaged. (A behavioral definition of trust- a relationship in which SDs for reinforcement are consistently followed by reinforcement). This has wide-ranging effects on behavior in the workplace and none of these effects are good.
3. It may reinforce poor performance. Especially if the manager observes the "bad" performance behavior and then immediately provides feedback, the consequence temporally closest to the "bad" behavior is positive! We know from our basic principles that positive consequences immediately following behavior strengthen the behavior and increase its frequency in the future. Therefore, the manager that uses the sandwich following poor performance may inadvertently reinforce poor performance.
4. It may reinforce the manager's behavior of giving bad feedback. If an employee smiles or reacts pleasantly to the sandwich (which is likely given the last part of the sandwich is a positive statement), the manager may feel that they are "effective" and use it more often. However, the pleasant immediate consequence does not mean that the employee's behavior will actually improve. Using the sandwich may generate more sandwich-giving behavior without correcting underperformance in any way.

If those reasons aren't enough on their own, there's empirical evidence that the sandwich is ineffective. In one study, the highest rates of performance were found when feedback was uniform rather than positive and negative combined (Choi, Johnson, Moon, & Oah, 2018).  In another, no feedback was actually more effective than the sandwich! (Henley &  DiGennaro Reed, 2015). Even more concerning, when comparing the positive, corrective, positive feedback statement sequence to four other sequences, the sandwich was found to actually decrease performance for four of five subjects (Henley, 2014).

If you're looking for alternatives to the sandwich, the following readings provide a good start:
Bringing Out the Best in People
The Supervisor's Guidebook
An Analysis of Feedback from a Behavior Analytic Perspective


Or, if you're in town feel free to attend the Fall Leadership Lecture at Lindenwood University:

Date: Tuesday, November 27^th 

-          Time: 4:00pm – 5:00pm

-          Location: Evans Commons 3020

-          Session Title: Giving Good Feedback: When, Why, and How to Have Difficult Conversations

References:

Choi, E., Johnson, D. A., Moon, K., & Oah, S. (2018). Effects of Positive and Negative Feedback Sequence on Work Performance and Emotional Responses. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 38(2-3), 97-115.

Henley, A. J., & DiGennaro Reed, F. D. (2015). Should you order the feedback sandwich? Efficacy of feedback sequence and timing. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 35(3-4), 321-335.

Henley, A. J. (2014). An Evaluation of the Interactive Effects of Feedback Sequence and Timing on Efficacy and Preference(Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas).

FarSide Meets ABA

Over my recent vacation, I found myself reading comics to my 6 year old. Much to his dismay, I found myself pausing frequently after each comic to frantically write down notes about how each panel was an example of one or more behavior analytic principles. Eventually, I put the pencil and post-its down and enjoyed the rest of the vacation but the permanent products of my temporary failure to separate work and life remain!
For those of you looking for additional practice in identifying some of the more challenging concepts in ABA or who are looking for additional examples of the principles in practice, I present you: ABA and Farside- making complex concepts hilarious. Enjoy!

First up: SDs, MOs, and more:


Is the sight of the convertible an SD or an MO for the lions' eating behavior?
What behavioral law explains why the lions might allocate their efforts to eating the two people in the convertible rather than the lone rhino at a distance?


What type of competing contingencies are controlling the white dog's behavior?
What is it called when there are two simultaneous schedules of reinforcement available for different responses in an environment?
Are the alligators SDeltas or AOs for duck-fetching? Why? Can you identify the behavior and/or value altering effects of the antecedent stimuli in the cartoon?


If this were a SSD, what type would it be?
What would be a stronger design to choose to test the functional relation?
If Zooky's coming over is consistently followed by bones going missing and therefore the dog begins telling her he has fleas so that she leaves immediately upon arrival, what type of CMO has Zooky's presence become?



The sign on the village is what type of antecedent stimulus (assuming it is true and controls behavior)?
How might it alter the Vikings behavior?
In general, open and closed signs are what type of antecedent stimulus? Are they conditioned or unconditioned?

Archived Re-Post: Shoot For the Moon

In a recent study by Roose and Williams in the Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, researchers were surprised to find that difficult goals do not necessarily produce better performance. This contradicts the idea that managers must always set extremely high criteria for success in order to produce high rates of employee performance. While subjects that started with goals more than 170% of their current level of performance were largely unable to achieve them, study subjects with goals that were only 150% of their current performance level actually achieved levels of performance that exceeded 175% of their baseline performance. What this means is that the researchers found that introducing goals that were “easier” (closer to the current level of performance) actually produced levels of performance at or above the “difficult” goal criteria.  From a behavior analytic perspective, this makes sense! Basically, the researchers accidentally stumbled on the principles of shaping and were surprised at its effects on performance. With shaping programs, BCBAs typically reinforce small steps towards a goal, rather than waiting until the achievement of the goal has occurred to offer reinforcement. This allows for the rapid acquisition of new skills and long-lasting behavioral change.  By beginning with “easier” goals, the researchers were essentially reinforcing precursory behaviors- allowing their subjects to contact reinforcement and its behavior-increasing effects without waiting as long as it might take to achieve difficult goals. It is similar to what happens when babies are reinforced for saying anything even close to “mama”. Each time a parent delivers high quality reinforcement for progressively increasing performance, the child produces closer and closer approximations to the final “difficult” goal of speech. Making employee goals close but slightly above their current level of achievement allows the manager to quickly shape closer and closer approximations of the “difficult” achievement criteria.    It is likely that the easier goals were also achieved faster, which increases the rate of reinforcement received by each employee. Consider a first employee that has a quarterly goal of achieving 200 times their previous quarter’s performance.  They would need to work hard every day for 90+ days before contacting any reward for their work. Employee two on the other hand, has a criterion of achieving 10% higher performance prior to reinforcement. In this example then, the second employee’s behavior of “getting better” or improving their performance might be rewarded a dozen times before the first employee. Additionally, were the employees to achieve the same levels of performance improvement, employee two would actually end up surpassing employee one’s difficult goal by the end of the quarter!  Taken together, the study and the behavior analytic principles it exemplifies contain important reminders for performance managers in any industry. To maximize the effectiveness of organizational and employee goal setting, consider the following questions: How large is the gap between current performance and goal performance? If employees do not contact any reinforcement due to goals being too difficult (the gap being too large), their performance will not be affected.How often do employees achieve goals? If goals are too difficult and it takes too long for employees to contact reinforcement, again, performance will likely not be affected. Consider increasing reinforcement frequency by reducing the time it takes for employees to achieve performance criteria. If employees only prefer large-impact reinforcers, token economy principles can be used to increase frequency without increasing cost of reinforcers.How is progress and performance monitored? Some employers worry that setting lower levels of achievement criteria will result in low levels of performance, and in fact this can be true if one is not careful. Performance should be monitored in real-time so that criteria can be changed as achievement occurs. For example, if an employee is achieving an established criterion of 1.25 times their previous performance level but a level of 1.5 is needed, incremental increases in criteria will be more effective than simply establishing a higher, more difficult goal. Increasing performance goals from 1.25 to 1.3 to 1.35, etc. is more likely to result in higher performance overall.  For an easy-to-use dashboard that allows management to monitor performance in real-time, check out the upcoming workshop at ABAI Paris:https://www.abainternational.org/events/program-details/event-detail.aspx?&sid=50465&by=Area  For the original study referenced in this article visit http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01608061.2017.1325820Roose, K. M., & Williams, W. L. (2017). An Evaluation of the Effects of Very Difficult Goals. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 1-31.  For a quick tutorial on shaping basics that you can apply to setting performance goals, visit: http://www.behavioradvisor.com/Shaping.html

Archive Re-Post: Nudges for Healthy Trainings

  As behavior analysts and business professionals, training can be a large part of a day. While necessary for skill acquisition and competent performance, often attending a traditional training involves engaging in several harmful behaviors. Attendees are often sitting for long periods of time, eating snack foods and sugar-filled drinks while listening, and slouching in their uncomfortable, ergonomically-unfriendly chairs. These behaviors can have harmful effects on the health and wellness of the very employees that the training is intended to benefit.  Fortunately, behavioral economics may have some suggestions for how to help attendees engage in healthier behaviors. According to Reed, Niileksela, & Kaplan (2013), behavioral economics is where economic principles and behavior change science come together to produce practical strategies. In behavioral economics, a "nudge" is a way to influence behavior without providing additional punitive consequences (Arno & Thomas, 2016). Nudges have been used as low-cost, broad-impact strategy for helping large groups of people make healthier choices without adding restrictions. This is especially applicable to training settings in which trainers do not have control over restricting or punishing unhealthy behaviors but still wish to make a positive change in the choices their attendees make during the training period. For those interested in additional information about nudges, types of nudges, and how to apply nudges to other settings, see the reference and resource list at the bottom of this blog.  In the following lines, several nudges are presented that could help trainers create healthy training environments to encourage healthy behaviors such as sitting up straight, eating and drinking lower sugar items, and standing up frequently. 
Providing prompts to stand up or to sit up straight during trainings. PostureMinder or SlideCarnival are tools that can help you integrate these prompts into slide training PPT decks. Audio cues could also be set on smartphones to prompt standing/sitting up behaviors intermittetly throughout the training. Post a picture or visual aide next to the projector screen or lecturn that shows proper ergonomic posture in the chairs/desks provided.  Upon arrival, have a welcome slide that includes a link to The Standing Initiative. https://behaviorfit.com/standinginitiative/Make this even more effective by also using PollEverywhere to have a livestream social comparison of the attendees actively signing up. If doing multiple trainings for connected groups (i.e. different departments or teams), add a visual representation of how the number of signups in one group compares to other groups.  Provide "default choices" that are healthier than traditional high-sugar snacks and drinks. For instance, set water bottles and fruit at attendees' seats. If you don't want to provide sodas, don't! If you must, then consider putting the sodas or sugary coffees out of sight so that attendees need to request them. Use labels to show nutritional content of each available choice.  Final thoughts:If you are reading this and wondering why to care, think about the fact that healthy employees are more likely to show up to work, produce high quality performance, perform work tasks under pressure, and stay with the company over time! Investing in employees is worth the extra resources; nudges provide ways to invest in lots of employees with very little cost.  Resources and References:Arno, A., & Thomas, S. (2016). The efficacy of nudge theory strategies in influencing adult dietary behaviour: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health, 16(1), 676. Reed, D. D., Niileksela, C. R., & Kaplan, B. A. (2013). Behavioral Economics. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 6(1), 34-54. Simon, C., & Tagliabue, M. (2018). Feeding the behavioral revolution: Contributions of behavior analysis to nudging and vice versa. Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, 2(1), 91-97. Thaler, Richard H., and Cass R. Sunstein. Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven, CT Yales University Press, 1999.

Why some people ARE acting to save the world

Skinner asked the question more than two decades ago- Why are we not acting to save the world? We have an amazing technology of learning and behavior and a science of solving socially significant problems and yet, problems persist.

But in a world where "we can't" and "it's impossible" or "this won't work" are more common than hope and optimism, some amazing humans have managed to overcome the typical contingencies to make a real and incredible difference. Humans are out there saving the world, right now, in your neighborhood. Some of them are famous. Most aren't.

Here are some examples to help you get inspired:
1. Bomb-sniffing rats have been trained to detect land mines and keep communities and children safe from getting blown up on the way to school
2. Animal trainers are working with humans and technology to change million-year-old migratory patterns of elephants to allow them to avoid countries in which poaching is legal
3. Genetic algorithms are being used to predict psychotic episodes with 100% accuracy within 6 months for adolescents at-risk for mental illness
4. Using targetted acoustical guidance, therapists can help individuals with severe self-injury and tantrum behavior to identify and change their own behavior without intrusive intervention or restraint.
5. Bees are being trained to detect and alert humans that they have cancer...even before imaging could do so!
6. With the use of a hashtag and a social media movement, the use of straws and therefore the accumulated plastic pollution in the ocean has been reduced. Even KFC has gotten on board.
7. BCBAs are promoting the use of least restrictive interventions and changing the way that we approach issues of "noncompliance" in schools and homes. It IS possible to address these concerns without the use of aversive conditioning or extinction procedures.
8. Virtual reality is being used to help people with disabilities understand how to ask for help when lost or confused in a community setting, allowing for increased integration and problem solving that isn't capable in more restrictive situations.
9. Robots are being trained to be resilient. They can solve problems, recruit help, and learn from each other. The potential is literally unlimited.
10. Insert your idea here.

Literally, insert your idea. It's possible. The technology is there. The understanding of human behavior, animal behavior, and integration is also there. We are living in a future of unlimited possibility. The time to act to save the world is now! Today is the day to address that socially significant problem and make a true difference.
I'll work to update each of the examples with relevant links, but until then be sure to check out the Convergence Conference, TagTeach, BehaviorMe, and TheDailyBA. Start here: https://tagteach.com/event-2850255

Why and How to Avoid Forced Compliance

Was your first inclination to cringe at the title of this blog? If so, great! You'll enjoy this topic. What's less enjoyable is how common forced compliance is in the field of applied behavior analysis. Other names for forced compliance include "escape extinction," "teaching compliance," and more. No matter its name, traditional forced compliance looks somewhat like this:1. child is given a prompt (verbal, physical, other)2. staff continues to present the prompt (often with increasing intrusiveness) until child complies3. child exhibits many additional behaviors until either the target behavior is produced, the staff is exhausted and reinforces the maladaptive behavior, or the staff physically hand-over-hand completes the behavior topography for the childFor a video example, click this link. In this description, they simplify it even more: when escape is the function, extinction procedures are conducted by simply "Deny opportunity for breaks. For example, the learner screams whenever he is asked to complete a new task to avoid the demand. The teacher/practitioner continues with task even though the learner is screaming." 
We even have ethical obligations to avoid escape extinction. Really! 1.01- relying on scientific knowledge and 2.0- treatment efficacy demand that we update our knowledge to include the many studies that demonstrate more effective procedures for dealing with escape maintained behaviors. 4.07- avoidance of implementing when there are environmental conditions that prohibit treatment fidelity means that we can't suggest a default technology that we KNOW is not going to be implemented all of the time. Extinction needs to be continous to be effective, which makes it impossible in most applied settings (especially in-home). 
In a recent presentation by Dr. Megan Marie Miller of Navigation Behavioral Consulting, she pointed out that not only is escape extinction unethical in a majority of cases, but there are better, more effective technologies to use when the target behavior is maintained by escape from demand. First, let's summarize the concerns with the use of escape extinction:1. Non-compliance can be multiply maintained (Rodriguez, Thompson, & Baynham, 2010). Applying escape extinction to a multiply maintained behavior would likely be unsuccessful as it would not address the other functions of the behavior. 2. It's VERY intrusive!  Physical guidance can increase problem behavior (Laraway etal., 2003; Lerman & Iwata, 1995; Piazza et al.,1996; Sidman, 1989). There are already high rates of injury in this field, why exacerbate it?3. Parents and caregivers are not likely to use traditional procedures (McConnachie & Carr,1997). They are socially invalid and VERY difficult to implement with fidelity. If we know it's not going to be implemented correctly, why would we use this?4. There are side effects to forcing compliance. We could teach too much compliance and create children who are at risk of abuse as adults (failure to discriminate when and when not to comply). We can pair ourselves as aversive stimuli and affect future treatment efficacy. We have to see an extinction burst (it's not necessary since there are alternatives). Is this ethical? Of course not. 5. There is more than 25 years of research indicating how ineffective escape extinction can be AND what tod do instead. Why would we rely on default technology when we have a better way to address escape-maintained target behaviors?Some Selected Alternatives:• Lerman, Iwata, and Wallace (1992) Bursts or increases in aggression in nearly half of thecases. Recommendation: Identify strategies that reduce these side effects• Piazza, Moes, and Fisher (1996) Recognized issues with traditional escape extinctionand extinction burst. Used DRA and demand fading• Hoch, McComas, Thompson, and Paone (2002) Behavior change without extinction. Gave break with tangible and break without tangible• Ringhdahl et al. (2002) Used DRA and Demand Fading to reduce without extinction. • Behavioral Economics (DeLeon, 2011) Choosing to work for a reinforcer vs choosing a break. Some children need the break and choose the break no matter the price. Some children will continue to choose the edible even at high prices. Having a choice between the break and edible resulted in the highestlevels of responding• Task as a reinforcer (Ward, Parker, & Perdikaris, 2017) Reinforcers are not available until work is complete. Contingent on target escape behavior, removed the work and withheld access to reinforcement. When target “ready” behavior occurred, presented work
Clearly we have a lot of potential alternatives that are less likely to produce emotional side effects, poor pairing, and low treatment integrity. Using effective methods to gain instructional control is also important. Robert Schramm explains the seven steps to instructional control which can create HUGE changes in escape-maintained behavior. A free tutorial webinar from the Colorado Department of Education is available if you'd like to learn more about how to apply it to your practice. In addition to being more effective and less restrictive, alternatives to escape extinction are evidence-based, more likely to be accepted by the public, and easier to implement with treatment fidelity for maximum efficacy. 
Some more links for additional reading:FCT by Tiger, Hanley, and BruzekPositive and Negative Reinforcement by Piazza et alForm and Function of Extinction by Iwata and colleaguesSide Effects of Extinction by Lerman, Iwata, and Wallace