The Screw You Effect

A form of experimental sabotage where the research participant does not want to conform to the experiments' demands. When a participant is in an experiment you may not get accurate results because they are aware of the experiment and in turn go out of their way to do everything wrong or go against everything you ask them to, in essence, they may deliberately try to ruin the experiment (the "screw you effect"; Masling 1966).

In Psychology, demand characteristics refers to when a person changes his/her behaviour because he/she is in an unfamiliar situation, carrying out artificial tasks and tries to make sense of this by 'working out' what the researcher wants. After 'working out' what the researcher wants, he/she will either try to 'please' the researcher by doing what he/she thinks the researcher wants them to do (known as the please you effect) or go against what the researcher wants by doing the opposite of what he/she thinks the researcher wants them to do (known as the 'screw you' effect).

For example, the children in Bandura's (1966) study of TV violence and aggression may have punched and kicked 'bobo dolls' because they thought that the study was a 'game' and that this was what Bandura wanted them to do (please you effect), rather than because they'd previously watched an adult punching and kicking the dolls on a video, as Bandura argued (i.e. it wasn't the video that caused the aggression but the expectations of Bandura).

Delighted to get this published

Why?...Why Not?...Why Not Me?...Why Not Now!?!?

It’s a shame for a person

to grow old without ever

seeing what their body

was capable of.

 

Food Selectivity

Children who develop an unhealthy relationship with eating often experience short and long-term implications (Gale, Eikeseth, & Rudrud, 2010). Generally, children progress through a predictable sequence of feeding skills (Vaz, Volkert, & Piazza, 2011); however, children who are selective or picky eaters will only consume certain foods and no other variations (Ahearn, 2003). Feeding difficulties, such as food selectivity, are common among children with developmental disabilities (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2014, p. 317), and are estimated to develop in about one third of this population (Palmer, Thompson, & Linscheid, 1975). Bandini and colleagues (2010) noted that a standardised definition of food selectivity was absent in current literature. Consequently, they operationalised food selectivity to include three components: 1) food refusal; 2) limited food repertoire; and 3) high frequency single food intake (Bandini et al., 2010, p. 2).

Food selectivity is often exhibited by children with developmental disabilities and can be a major concern for caregivers (Bandini et al., 2010). Positively, research shows much promise in ameliorating parental concerns as well as improving the lives of those who exhibit such eating disorders. In children with ASDs, the literature suggests that food selectivity can be successfully treated with a multitude of intervention strategies such as: stimulus fading (Koegel et al., 2012), taste exposure and behavioural skills training (Seiverling et al., 2012), antecedent manipulations (Najdowski et al., 2012), differential reinforcement and non-contingent reinforcement (Allison et al., 2012), high-p request sequences (Penrod et al., 2012), modeling (Fu et al., 2015), and escape extinction (Allison et al., 2012; Fu et al., 2015). Escape extinction is not always a necessary supplement for positive outcomes (Najdowski et al., 2012; Penrod et al., 2012). Moreover, caution should be advised if utilising an escape extinction procedure as it can lead to extinction bursts (Najdowski et al., 2012) and aggression (Allison et al., 2012).

Food selectivity covers a wide range of problematic eating behaviours (Bandini et al., 2010). Therefore, the intervention strategies above could possibly be applied to client’s presenting with many topographies of feeding disorders. Considering that maladaptive feeding behaviours may be the product of environmental factors (Penrod et al., 2012), observing others (Bandura, 1965; Fu et al., 2015), or even sensory functions (Koegel et al., 2012), challenges lie in selecting interventions that best match the individual’s learning history. Despite these interventions showing promise for treating food selectivity, the literature is relatively recent and the subjects relatively young. Longitudinal follow-ups on such clients may ultimately be the illuminating factor on the efficacy of the current plethora of interventions available.

Selected readings:

Ahearn, W. H. (2003). Using simultaneous presentation to increase vegetable consumption in a mildly selective child with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36(3), 361–365.

Allison, J., Wilder, D. A., Chong, I., Lugo, A., Pike, J. & Rudy, N. (2012). A comparison of differential reinforcement and noncontingent reinforcement to treat food selectivity in a child with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45(3), 613-617.

Bandini, L. G., Anderson, S. E., Curtin C., Cermak, S., Evans, E. W., Scampini, R., Maslin, M., & Must, A. (2010). Food selectivity in children with autism spectrum disorders and typically developing children. The Journal of Pediatrics, 157(2), 259-264.

Bandura, A. (1965). Influence of models’ reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition of imitative responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1, 589-595.

Cooper, J., Heron, T., & Heward, W. (2014). Applied Behavior Analysis (Pearson New International Edition, 2nd Ed.) UK: Pearson Education.

Fu, S. B., Penrod, B., Fernand, J. K., Whelan, C. M., Griffith, K., & Medved, S. (2015). The Effects of Modeling Contingencies in the Treatment of Food Selectivity in Children With Autism. Behavior Modification, 39(6), 771-784.

Gale, C. M., Eikeseth, S., & Rudrud, E. (2011). Functional assessment and behavioural intervention for eating difficulties in children with autism: a study conducted in the natural environment using parents and ABA tutors as therapists. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 41(10), 1383-96.

Koegel, R. L., Bharoocha, A. A., Ribnick, C. B., Ribnick, R. C., Bucio, M. O., Fredeen, R. M., & Koegel, L. K. (2012). Using individualized reinforcers and hierarchical exposure to increase food flexibility in children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42(8), 1574-1581.

Najdowski, A. C., Tarbox, J., & Wilke, A. E. (2012). Utilizing antecedent manipulations and reinforcement in the treatment of food selectivity by texture. Education and Treatment of Children, 35(1), 101-110.

Palmer, S., Thompson, R. J., & Linscheid, T. R. (1975). Applied Behavior Analysis in the Treatment of Childhood Feeding Problems. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 17(3), 333.

Penrod, B., Gardella, L., Fernand, J. (2012). An evaluation of a progressive high-probability instructional sequence combined with low probability demand fading in the treatment of food selectivity. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45(3), 527-537.

Seiverling, L. Williams, K., Sturmey, P., & Hart, S. (2012). Effects of behavioral skills training on parental treatment of children’s food selectivity. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45(1), 197-203.

Vaz, P. C. M., Volkert, V. M., & Piazza, C. C. (2011). Using negative reinforcement to increase self-feeding in a child with food selectivity. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44(4), 915– 920.

The Formative Years of Life

All children develop at different speeds. Popcorn is prepared in the same pot, in the same heat, in the same oil, and yet the kernals do not pop at the same time. Don’t compare your child to other children. Their turn to pop is coming!