Operant <scp>ABA</scp> renewal during dense and lean schedules of differential reinforcement
Even dense DRA schedules can't prevent renewal when contexts shift back.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Kimball's team worked with neurotypical adults in a lab. They taught a simple button-press response using food rewards.
Then they moved the adults to a new room and stopped the rewards. This made the button pressing stop.
Finally they brought everyone back to the first room. They tested two reward schedules: rich (every 3 seconds) and lean (every 12 seconds). They wanted to see if rich rewards would stop the old behavior from coming back.
What they found
The old button pressing came roaring back in both groups. Lean rewards let slightly more responses return, but both schedules failed to prevent renewal.
Even the best DRA schedule couldn't stop relapse when the room changed back.
How this fits with other research
This finding extends Protopopova et al. (2016) who showed DRO works for dog barking at home. Kimball shows the same tool fails when contexts shift back.
Baum (2025) explains why lean schedules struggle: ratio schedules break down when rewards get scarce. Kimball's data matches this theory.
Jessel et al. (2016) reviewed many DRA studies but didn't test renewal. Kimball fills that gap by showing context changes can undo even good DRA programs.
Why it matters
Don't assume your DRA program will stick when clients return home from clinic. Plan for renewal by teaching clients to contact rewards in the natural setting. Add context probes to your maintenance checks.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Probe for renewal by briefly returning to the original training context after DRA mastery
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Renewal is a type of relapse that occurs due to a change in context. Previous research has demonstrated that renewal of target responding may occur despite the availability of differential reinforcement for an alternative response (DRA). Nevertheless, the current literature on renewal presents mixed findings regarding the effects of dense and lean schedules of DRA on the magnitude of renewal. We used a translational approach with undergraduate college students and a task on a touchscreen tablet device to study the effects of dense and lean schedules of DRA during repeated renewal tests. All participants experienced two, three-phase ABA renewal arrangements. In the dense and lean renewal arrangements, we differentially reinforced alternative behavior in Context B and the renewal test in Context A on a VI 3-s or a VI 12-s schedule, respectively. Overall, we observed renewal in 31/36 (86%) renewal tests regardless of the density of reinforcement for the alternative response. Furthermore, the results showed that although renewal occurred in both arrangements, we found slightly higher magnitudes of renewal during DRA with lean schedules of reinforcement relative to dense schedules. We discuss the implications of these findings as they relate to the treatment of problem behavior.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 2023 · doi:10.1002/jeab.840