Using Principles from Applied Behaviour Analysis to Address an Undesired Behaviour: Functional Analysis and Treatment of Jumping Up in Companion Dogs

The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of procedures successfully used in human related applied behaviour analysis practices to the field of clinical animal behaviour. Experiment 1 involved functional analyses to identify the reinforcement contingencies maintaining jumping up behaviour in five dogs. Experiment 2 comprised teaching dog owners a noncontingent reinforcement intervention (i.e., time-based reinforcement) via behavioural skills training. Single-case experimental methods were implemented in both experiments. The results of Experiment 1 showed that access to a tangible (dogs D01, D02, D03, and D04) and owner attention (dog D05) were reliably maintaining the jumping up behaviour. Experiment 2 demonstrated that noncontingent reinforcement effectively reduced jumping in three out of four dogs (Tau −0.59, CI 90% [−1–0.15], p = 0.026, Tau −1, CI 90% [−1–−0.55], p = 0.0003, and Tau −0.32, CI 90% [−0.76–0.11], p = 0.22 for dyads D01, D02, and D05, respectively), and that behavioural skills training was successful in teaching owners to perform a dog training intervention with high fidelity. Although the results are promising, more canine-related research into functional analysis and noncontingent reinforcement, as well as implementation of behavioural skills training with animal caregivers, is needed.

Applying Standards of Effectiveness to Noncontingent Reinforcement: A Systematic Literature Review

Noncontingent reinforcement is a time-based schedule of reinforcement that has been shown to decrease problem behavior. Although the intervention is considered well established, there exist concerns that much of the supporting research has been conducted under highly controlled experimental conditions that may lack ecological validity. That is, although the efficacy has been demonstrated, the effectiveness in less controlled settings has not. To evaluate this concern, we analyzed research on noncontingent reinforcement between 1993 and 2017. Standards of evidence for effectiveness were adapted from prevention science and applied to noncontingent reinforcement literature. We specifically focused on generalizability across populations and settings, the conditions under which the intervention was applied, specific treatment parameters, opportunity cost, and social validity. Our results indicate several areas where evidence of noncontingent reinforcement effectiveness in applied settings is limited. We identify these limitations and provide a range of recommendations for future research to promote more widespread dissemination of the procedure.