Noncontingent presentation of attention and alternative stimuli in the treatment of attention-maintained destructive behavior.
A favorite toy delivered on a timer can replace continuous adult attention to stop attention-kept destruction.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team worked with children who had intellectual disability. All showed destructive behavior that a quick test showed was kept going by adult attention.
The kids tried two kinds of noncontingent reinforcement on different days. One day they got steady adult attention no matter what. Another day they got a favorite toy or snack every few minutes instead of attention. The therapists counted how often the kids hit, bit, or threw things under each plan.
What they found
Both plans worked. Giving attention on a timer cut the bad acts. Giving a fun item on a timer cut the bad acts just as much.
The toy or snack worked even though it was not the thing that had been keeping the behavior alive.
How this fits with other research
Martin et al. (1997) ran a similar test and also saw big drops in self-injury when they gave random toys. Their key twist: the real reinforcer still came after the behavior, yet the arbitrary items still won.
Rasmussen et al. (2006) moved the same idea into a classroom. They gave brief teacher attention on a fixed-time schedule and quickly silenced loud talk. Together these studies show the trick works in clinics and at school.
McGrother et al. (1996) reminds us to check what kind of attention the child actually wants. In their study, reprimands beat neutral chat. So pick tangible items the child truly loves, not just any toy.
Why it matters
You now have two easy tools for attention-maintained destruction when you cannot stay beside the client. Set a timer and either drop in for quick praise or hand over a pre-chosen high-preference item. Both routes give you the same calm without an extinction burst. Try the tangible option during bus rides, group lessons, or any moment one-to-one time is impossible.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Run a 2-minute preference check, pick the top item, and deliver it every 3 minutes while you work with other clients.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Previous research has demonstrated that destructive behavior may be reduced through noncontingent presentation of attention when attention is identified as the stimulus responsible for behavioral maintenance. Because it may not always be possible to deliver attention in all situations, we examined the extent to which alternative stimuli that have been identified through a choice assessment would substitute for attention (the functional analysis-based reinforcer) in a noncontingent reinforcement procedure. Prior to treatment, functional analyses demonstrated that the destructive behavior of 2 clients with mental retardation was maintained by adult attention. Next, a stimulus choice assessment identified highly preferred tangible items for the 2 clients. Finally, we compared the effectiveness of two noncontingent reinforcement procedures: continuous noncontingent access to attention and continuous noncontingent access to the tangible item identified in the choice assessment. For both clients, these noncontingent reinforcement procedures reduced destructive behavior. The results are discussed in terms of the clinical implications for the treatment of destructive behavior using functional and alternative stimuli.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1997 · doi:10.1901/jaba.1997.30-229