Prevention of the development of problem behavior: A laboratory model
NCR or DRA delivered early stops problem behavior from ever showing up, even in a fake task with adults.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Fahmie and her team built a computer game for college students. The game paid small amounts of money for pressing keys.
Half the students also got free money every few seconds (NCR). Another group earned extra money only after a pause with no key pressing (DRA). A third group got no extra money at all.
What they found
Students who got free money or the pause-based bonus rarely hit the keys hard or fast. The control group showed early signs of problem behavior.
Both NCR and DRA stopped the trouble before it started. The lab model worked.
How this fits with other research
Martinez-Perez et al. (2024) used the same lab and adult players. They added punishment during DRA and saw the target behavior drop, but resurgence still popped up later. Fahmie et al. shows prevention beats the bounce-back entirely.
Neuringer et al. (1968) used DRA to grow talking in a quiet preschooler. Fahmie flips the coin: same tool, but used early to stop problem behavior before it shows.
Kendrick et al. (1981) cut bus noise with a group reward. Fahmie’s work says you can skip the crowd plan and still win if you front-load NCR or DRA for one person.
Why it matters
You can test a quick prevention plan on a laptop before trying it with a real client. If free attention or small breaks from demands keep problem behavior from showing up, you have a low-effort tool ready for home or clinic. Try five minutes of non-contingent praise or a DRA break at the first sign of escalation.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Run a five-minute probe: give free attention every 20 s while the client works, then track if problem behavior starts.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Few studies have isolated the preventive efficacy of common behavioral strategies like noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) and differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA). The purpose of the current study was to develop and evaluate a laboratory model of these two problem behavior prevention strategies. Undergraduate students participated in a computer simulation, in which clicks to a designated area of the computer screen were analogous to the emergence of problem behavior. The responding of participants in a control group, who experienced a percentile schedule used to mimic the shaping of problem behavior, was compared to that of participants in two experimental groups, each with a history of either DRA or NCR. Between-subjects group comparisons showed that both intervention strategies were equally effective in the prevention of our analog to problem behavior when compared to the control group. The strengths and limitations of a laboratory model for prevention are discussed in light of recent applied work in this area.
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2018 · doi:10.1002/jaba.426