ABA Fundamentals

Human observing: Maintained by stimuli correlated with reinforcement but not extinction.

Fantino et al. (1983) · Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior 1983
★ The Verdict

Cues that signal upcoming rewards become rewards themselves and keep people watching.

✓ Read this if BCBAs who use visual or auditory cues during teaching or token boards.
✗ Skip if Clinicians working solely with sensory reinforcement or automatic behavior.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

College students pressed a button to see colored lights.

Some lights always came before money wins. Other lights always came before no money.

The team ran four tests to see which lights the students chose to look at.

02

What they found

Students kept picking the lights that came before money.

They did this even when the lights gave no new information.

The money-linked lights worked like mini-rewards on their own.

03

How this fits with other research

Cooper (1997) used longer chains of lights and food. That study showed timing and the next light matter too.

Duker et al. (1996) found visual beats sound for keeping behavior strong. The 1983 paper adds that the link to reward, not the sense mode, is key.

Costa et al. (2025) showed rate, not size, keeps people going. Both papers say the same thing: how often reward shows up drives choice.

04

Why it matters

When you pick stimuli for clients, choose ones tied to quick wins. A praise word, token, or green light that always comes before a treat will keep kids looking, listening, and working. You don’t need fancy gear; just pair any simple cue with steady reinforcement and watch engagement grow.

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

Pair your “good job” light or sound with immediate points; skip it during errors to build a free conditioned reinforcer.

02At a glance

Intervention
other
Design
single case other
Population
neurotypical
Finding
positive

03Original abstract

College students received points exchangeable for money (reinforcement) on a variable-time 60-second schedule that alternated randomly with an extinction component. Subjects were informed that responding would not influence either the rate or distribution of reinforcement. Instead, presses on either of two levers ("observing responses") produced stimuli. In each of four experiments, stimuli positively correlated with reinforcement and/or stimuli uncorrelated with reinforcement were each chosen over stimuli correlated with extinction. These results are consistent with prior results from pigeons in supporting the conditioned-reinforcement hypothesis of observing and in not supporting the uncertainty-reduction hypothesis.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1983 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1983.40-193