Implementing a differential reinforcement of low rates schedule to alter vocal stereotypy and task engagement in two adolescents with autism spectrum disorder
DRL with interval thinning can cut vocal stereotypy in half and lift engagement without aiming for total silence.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Two teens with autism kept making loud, repetitive sounds during class.
The team set up a DRL schedule. The boys could still talk, but only after a quiet gap got longer each day.
They also thinned the gap on a set plan so the rule stayed easy to follow.
What they found
Vocal stereotypy dropped by about half for both teens.
Time on task went up at the same time.
The kids did not need zero noise to learn better.
How this fits with other research
Carter et al. (2013) used DR to cut long, off-topic chats. Both studies show you can trim repetitive talk without banning it.
Chen et al. (2022) used motor RIRD to stop sounds in adults. DRL gives a softer, kid-friendly route that keeps some vocal play.
Charlop et al. (1990) looks like the opposite: they let kids earn short stereotypy breaks to boost work. The key gap is goal. H used the sound as a prize for correct responses. Mantzoros used DRL to lower the sound itself. Same tool, different aim. No fight between the papers.
Why it matters
You do not have to chase zero stereotypy. Let the client keep some sounds while you stretch the quiet gaps. Start with a short wait time, then grow it step-wise. You get more engagement and less push-back than with full extinction or redirection.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick a short quiet gap (e.g., 5 s). Reinforce the teen if no stereotypy ends the gap, then add 2 s every other session.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
AbstractVocal stereotypy (VS) is often observed in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) which at high rates can interfere with socialization or functioning in structured settings. There are multiple effective interventions available; yet, many procedures target the complete omission of the behavior or are only assessed at short intervals, making it unclear how they will generalize in applied settings. One intervention yet to be assessed as an individual intervention for automatically reinforced VS is differential reinforcement of low rates of behavior (DRL). In the present study, a functional analysis determined that the VS of two female adolescents with ASD was maintained by automatic reinforcement. A DRL procedure was implemented which incorporated: (a) a specified interval for reinforcement; (b) the behavioral expectations; (c) the permissible instances of VS within the interval; (d) learner feedback; and (e) the reset/non‐reset aspect of the schedule. As the targeted behavior decreased across sessions, the DRL interval was systematically increased in order to thin out the schedule of reinforcement. The intervention reduced VS and increased untargeted task engagement for both participants. Applied and theoretical implications of the study as well as social validity, limitations, and future research are discussed.
Behavioral Interventions, 2023 · doi:10.1002/bin.1948