The effects of fixed versus escalating reinforcement schedules on smoking abstinence.
Start small and raise the reward only after each success to keep people on track longer.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Paul and his team ran a 12-week clinic study with the adult smokers.
Half got the same cash each time their breath CO read clean.
The other half started small but the cash grew with each clean test.
What they found
The growing-pay group stayed smoke-free almost twice as long.
More of them hit the full 12 weeks without a single dirty test.
Same total money was spent, but the shape of the pay mattered.
How this fits with other research
Geurts et al. (2008) first showed prize rewards beat usual care in a rehab setting.
Paul’s 2015 study builds on that by proving escalating beats fixed pay in clinics.
Redner et al. (2018) later shrank the idea to a 3-week burst plus counseling.
Fisher (1979) warned big rewards might kill later interest, but Paul saw no drop-off after the cash ended.
Why it matters
If you run a token system for any behavior, start small and raise the prize only after success. You keep costs flat while boosting staying power. Try it next time a client stalls at the same step.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Next session, raise the token cost for the same behavior only after the client hits the goal three times in a row.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Studies indicate that when abstinence is initiated, escalating reinforcement schedules maintain continuous abstinence longer than fixed reinforcement schedules. However, these studies were conducted for shorter durations than most clinical trials and also resulted in larger reinforcer value for escalating participants during the 1st week of the experiment. We tested whether escalating reinforcement schedules maintained abstinence longer than fixed reinforcement schedules in a 12-week clinical trial. Smokers (146) were randomized to an escalating reinforcement schedule, a fixed reinforcement schedule, or a control condition. Escalating reinforcement participants received $5.00 for their first breath carbon monoxide (CO) sample <3 ppm, with a $0.50 increase for each consecutive sample. Fixed reinforcement participants received $19.75 for each breath CO sample <3 ppm. Control participants received payments only for delivering a breath CO sample. Similar proportions of escalating and fixed reinforcement participants met the breath CO criterion at least once. Escalating reinforcement participants maintained criterion breath CO levels longer than fixed reinforcement and control participants. Similar to previous short-term studies, escalating reinforcement schedules maintained longer durations of abstinence than fixed reinforcement schedules during a clinical trial.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 2015 · doi:10.1002/jaba.185