A comparison of reinforcement schedules to increase independent responding in individuals with intellectual disabilities.

Koegel et al. (2014) tested three adults with intellectual disabilities. They wanted to see which schedule would grow independent answers during simple tasks.

The team used an alternating-treatments design. One schedule paid only for answers given without any prompt. The other schedule paid for both prompted and unprompted answers.

When vocal prompts no longer earned rewards, two adults doubled their independent answers. The third adult showed little change.

The study found positive results. Differential reinforcement favoring independent responses worked for most participants.

Daly et al. (2024) extends this idea to a work setting. They used group contingencies to push on-task behavior above 80% for adults with ID. Both studies show that careful reward rules can build skills in the same population.

Byrd (1972) used differential reinforcement with pigeons and saw no change. The animal study reminds us that the schedule must match the learner and the goal.

Adkins et al. (1997) also used birds and found that past reward history still skewed later response speed. Their work warns us to check each adult’s reinforcement history before we start a new schedule.

You can lift independent responding by simply stopping rewards for prompted answers. Start with a brief probe to be sure the client has the skill. Then withhold reinforcement for any reply that follows your prompt while you keep praising the first, unaided response. Watch for history effects if past teaching used heavy prompting.