(6-28-21)
Consider: we never really know if a stimulus is going to function as a reinforcer; we only know that, in similar circumstances in the past, it has functioned as a reinforcer. This is one issue with the “functional” definition of reinforcer used by Skinner and many operant behavior therapists. We are isisa
One heuristic for selection of potential reinforcers is to consider two aspects of a potential reinforcer: potency and hassle. Potency refers to the “power” or “impact” of the stimulus on the individual; hassle refers to how difficult and complicated using the stimulus therapeutically will be. My experience is that these two aspects are inversely related. Choosing a reinforcer for therapeutic use involves selection the least powerful stimulus that will “get the job done” (and also be the easiest to manipulate). Consider the following rough hierarchy of classes of stimulus events:
- information (knowledge of results, interesting stuff)
- social events (praise, hugs, pats, smiles, vocalizations)
- verbal
- physical
- activities (doing things)
- material (stuff)
- consumable
- tangible
- generalized conditioned (tokens, money)
I would suggest that the power of these events increase as you go down the list, and also the difficulties and complications of you or a family employing these events (satiation, cost, availability, complexity, and other problems). You task will be easiest if you work at staying as close to the top of the list as possible and will still obtaining a therapeutic effect.
These are only rough (and not mutually exclusive) categories. Consider attention from a parent/teacher/adult. This could function both as an information event (I must be doing it right/wrong [depending on adult’s facial expression and body language]) and as a social event.