ABA Fundamentals

A comparison of synchronous and noncontingent stimulus delivery on task engagement

Hardesty et al. (2023) · Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2023
★ The Verdict

Delivering reinforcement right as the behavior happens beats giving the same items on a timer, even when kids say they like the timer method.

✓ Read this if BCBAs running academic sessions in elementary or preschool rooms
✗ Skip if Clinicians who only treat in 1:1 clinics with no time-based reinforcer plans

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Hardesty et al. (2023) compared two ways to give reinforcement. One group got it right when they were on task. The other group got the same items on a fixed timer, no matter what they did.

They used an alternating-treatments design. Kids saw both setups in mixed order. The team tracked on-task behavior and asked which way the kids liked best.

02

What they found

Synchronous reinforcement won. Kids stayed on task more when the reward came right with the behavior.

Surprise twist: the children liked the noncontingent schedule just as much. Task liking did not change in either condition.

03

How this fits with other research

Diaz de Villegas et al. (2024) ran a near copy with preschoolers and saw the same win for synchronous plus a clear kid preference for it. The 2023 study shows the effect holds even when kids do not prefer the better schedule.

Gomes et al. (2025) moved the idea to a whole-class game. A quick group contingency still beat noncontingent goodies for rule-following and cut disruption.

Chou et al. (2010) showed most kids like earning their treats until the schedule gets very lean, then they switch to free stuff. Hardesty’s data fit this pattern: kids picked the easier, noncontingent option even though it worked less well.

04

Why it matters

You can boost attention without needing extra rewards—just time them right. Keep the delivery synced to the behavior you want, even if the learner says they like the free-goodie version. Preference and performance can split; follow the data, not the smile. Try a quick 30-second check: if the child is on task, hand over the token or praise right then. If not, skip and wait for the next chance.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Set a 30-second momentary time sample; if the learner is on task, deliver praise or a token on the spot.

02At a glance

Intervention
noncontingent reinforcement
Design
alternating treatments
Population
not specified
Finding
positive

03Original abstract

Synchronous schedules of reinforcement are those in which the onset and offset of a reinforcer are synchronized with the onset and offset of a target behavior. The current study replicated and extended Diaz de Villegas et al. (2020) by comparing synchronous reinforcement to noncontingent stimulus delivery while evaluating on-task behavior of school-age children. A concurrent-chains preference assessment was then used to determine the preferred schedule. Results indicated that the synchronous schedule was more effective than the continuous, noncontingent delivery of the stimulus at increasing on-task behavior but that the children preferred noncontingent delivery. Additionally, the use of synchronous and noncontingent delivery did not alter the children's preference for the task.

Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2023 · doi:10.1002/jaba.986