Contextual control of problem behavior in students with severe disabilities.
Use DRO during tasks and time-out during leisure—context picks the winner.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team worked with three students who had severe disabilities.
They compared two common tools: DRO (rewarding the absence of problem behavior) and time-out.
Sessions alternated between task time and free-play time to see if the setting changed which tool worked.
What they found
During work tasks, DRO cut problem behavior and kids finished more work.
Time-out did almost nothing in the work area.
Flip to the leisure corner and the results reversed: time-out now helped while DRO lost its punch.
How this fits with other research
Catania et al. (1974) showed that a DRO-plus-time-out package tamed aggression in a hospital ward.
White et al. (1990) split the package and proved the parts work best in different contexts, updating the older advice.
Steinhauser et al. (2021) later echoed the same theme: classrooms need context-specific tweaks, not one-size-fits-all DR plans.
Layton et al. (2022) added that teaching the new skill in a separate context helps the gain stick when the scene later changes.
Why it matters
You no longer have to pick a favorite procedure.
Just match the tool to the context you are in.
Run DRO during desk work and save time-out for the break corner.
This simple switch can give you faster gains with less effort and fewer side effects.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Split your session: run a 2-min DRO clock while the student works, then switch to a brief time-out contingency when he moves to the play table.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
We investigated the impact of contextual variation on the effectiveness of two interventions. The problem behavior of 2 students with severe disabilities was analyzed across two contexts (task and leisure). Effects of differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) and time-out procedures were examined in the two contexts. Results indicated that in the task context the DRO procedure effectively reduced the problem behavior and increased task performance, whereas the time-out procedure was ineffective. In addition, rate of correct task performance increased during DRO relative to baseline and time-out. In contrast, in the leisure context, the time-out procedure effectively reduced the same problem behavior and the DRO procedure was ineffective. The results are discussed in terms of contextual control of problem behavior and alternative strategies for the design of DRO procedures.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1990 · doi:10.1901/jaba.1990.23-235